The response has been big and astounding. Keep it coming. We have just begun to fight to change American politics.
One concern raised by some needs to be addressed head on: Some experienced bloggers expect/want Unity08 to arrive with a specific platform position on every issue.
We repeat what we said in our statement of purpose: We will have an agenda, not a platform. Our agenda is the list of issues that the public feels are crucial that Washington is not addressing – energy independence, quality education, affordable health care, rising national debt and many more.
But we don’t come to this with a platform. We invite you to debate and offer solutions – and ultimately we invite candidates to run for President on the Unity08 banner with their own platform on the crucial issues.
We would stifle the debate if the web site has pre-determined answers. And most American voters know that the crucial issues are very complex, don’t have simple answers, and progress will require debate, discussion and maybe even consensus or compromise.
What’s sad and interesting is that in Washington none of those things are happening on any of the crucial issues. No debate, no discussion, no consensus and no compromise. Washington is polarized and paralyzed.
So to all who expect Unity08 to have all the answers and to be certain of everything, we may disappoint you. To those who relish debate, serious discussion, and finding candidates for leadership ready to discuss crucial issues seriously, we hope to excite you.
Spending a lot of time in Washington is dangerous for your mental health, apparently. But spending a lot of time watching Washington causes you to be very wary of two types: Those who need to read the polls before they know what they think – and those who seem certain of every answer even before the questions are asked.
At Unity08 our forum and our minds are open. Blog on!
Subscribe
Keeps coming up -- when is it ok for government to interfere with "my life"
or "my property."
Like most independent voters, I tend towards an anti-authoritarian, somewhat libertarian point of view -- sort of a Bill Maher who doesn't hate children.
But I think we are a crossroads and we must put our finger on the most important issue of all for America: practical equality of opportunity for all citizens.
That is the question TR put in 1910 and it is as relevant now as then.
So my answer is the same one and in the same words -- a positive message and a vision of America too long delayed --
I stand as an unabashed Bullmoose and herewith present what that means:
America stands for nothing unless it stands for the triumph of a real democracy, the triumph of popular government, and, in the long run, of an economic system under which every person shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in them.
Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens, when we achieve it, will have two great results. First, everyone will have a fair chance to make of themself all that in them lies; to reach the highest point to which their capacities, unassisted by special privilege of their own and unhampered by the special privilege of others, can carry them, and to get for themself and their family substantially what they have earned.
Second, equality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which they are capable.
No one who carries the burden of the special privileges of another can give to the commonwealth that service to which it is fairly entitled.
We have lost, forgotten the very concept of what I mean by service to the commonwealth. Many of us, and most of those who whine and complain about "illegals" among us, don't really know what citizenship means.
It is easy to agree that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Much harder to map out how to do this.
The true friends of property, the true conservatives, are they who insist that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insist that the creature of our making shall be our servant and not our master.
Combinations in industry are the result of an imperative economic law which cannot be repealed by political legislation.
The effort at prohibiting all combination has substantially failed. The way out lies, not in attempting to prevent such combinations, but in completely controlling them in the interest of the public welfare.
So here is the answer to the Big Question:
We should grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used.
However, it ought to be a principle of our new resolve here that it is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community.
We should here agree on the principle that private property rights are not sacred above all things.
We therefore should permit private fortunes to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community.
This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.
When I speak of fortunes, I mean that segment of the population with incomes above $1 million per year.
When I talk about an increase in government control, I mean restoration of a truly just, progressive taxation system -- simple and fair.
No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned.
Every dollar received should represent a dollar's worth of service rendered-not gambling in stocks, but service rendered.
The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means.
Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes.
We are face to face with new conceptions of the relations of property to human welfare, chiefly because certain advocates of the rights of property as against human rights have been pushing their claims too far.
The person who wrongly holds that every human right is secondary to their profit must now give way to the advocate of human welfare, who rightly maintains that every person holds their property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it.
But I think we may go still further.
The right to regulate the use of wealth in the public interest must be universally admitted.
Let us admit also the right to regulate the terms and conditions of labor, which is the chief element of wealth, directly in the interest of the common good.
The fundamental thing to do for every person is to give them a chance to reach a place in which they will make the greatest possible contribution to the public welfare.
No one can be a good citizen unless they have a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living, and hours of labor short enough so that after their day's work is done they will have time and energy to bear their share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load.
We keep countless people from being good citizens by the conditions of life with which we surround them.
If the reactionary man, who thinks of nothing but the rights of property, could have his way, he would bring about a revolution; and one of my chief fears in connection with progress comes because I do not want to see our people, for lack of proper leadership, compelled to follow men whose intentions are excellent, but whose eyes are a little too wild to make it really safe to trust them.
Let us unite as Americans and demand reform; let us declare a New American Nationalism.
We are all Americans. Our common interests are as broad as the continent.
The most vital problems are those which affect us all alike. The Federal Government belongs to the whole American people, and where the whole American people are interested, that interest can be guarded effectively only by the Federal Government.
And the Federal Government has been rendered corrupt and incompetent by corrupt and incompetent, self-interested leadership.
The betterment which we seek must be accomplished, I believe, mainly through the reform of Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the Federal Government.
We Americans would be right in demanding that our New American Nationalism put the national need before sectional or personal advantage.
The New American Nationalism is impatient of the utter confusion that results from local legislatures attempting to treat national issues as local issues.
It is still more impatient of the impotence which springs from over-division of governmental powers, the impotence which makes it possible for local selfishness, legal cunning, hired by wealthy special interests, or the subtle corruption of political contributions to bring national activities to a deadlock.
This New American Nationalism should regard the executive power as the steward of the public welfare.
It demands of the judiciary that it shall be interested primarily in human welfare rather than in property, just as it demands that the representative body shall represent all the people rather than any one class or section of the people.
I believe in shaping the ends of government to protect property as well as human welfare.
Normally, and in the long run, the ends are the same; but whenever the alternative must be faced, I am for humanity and not for property.
Those who oppose all reform will do well to remember that ruin in its worst form is inevitable if our national life brings us nothing better than swollen fortunes for the few and the triumph in both politics and business of a sordid and selfish materialism.
If our political institutions were perfect, they would absolutely prevent the political domination of money in any part of our affairs.
We need to make our political representatives more quickly and sensitively responsive to the people whose servants they are.
More direct action by the people in their own affairs under proper safeguards is vitally necessary.
Publicly financed campaigns is a step in this direction, if they are associated with a corrupt-practices act effective to prevent the advantage of those willing recklessly and unscrupulously to spend money over a more honest competitor.
It is particularly important that all moneys received or expended for campaign purposes should be publicly accounted for, not only after election, but before election as well.
Political action must be made simpler, easier, and freer from confusion for every citizen.
One of the fundamental necessities in a representative government such as ours is to make certain that those to whom the people delegate their power shall serve the people by whom they are elected, and not the special interests.
I believe that every national officer, elected or appointed, should be forbidden to perform any service or receive any compensation, directly or indirectly, from corporations; and a similar provision could not fail to be useful within the States.
The object of government is the welfare of the people. The material progress and prosperity of a nation are desirable chiefly so far as they lead to the moral and material welfare of all good citizens.
The prime problem of our nation is to get the right type of good citizenship, and, to get it, we must have progress, and our public men and women must be genuinely progressive.
If unity 08 is to be suscesful I think it must give Republicans as well as Democracts, and Independants a place to share ideas and bewilling to accept each others opinions. weill not ALL agree on all issues that must be ok. We do believe the system is now completely owned by a minority and WE must change that. 08 with the internet is a great possibility.
So many words to describe an implementation of social ingineering ander Josef Stalin.
Parties are based on creating a platform that the party decides it wants to persue. By deciding that Unity08 will not have a "platform", but rather an agenda of things to focus on, it throws a curveball into the entire idea of parties in general.
It seems that Unity08 wants to find a candidate that will focus on the issues presented in the Agenda. However, how will we decide which candidate to pick? It is still going to come down to a platform. Candidates will have to take stands on these issues, and not all of the people involved in Unity08 will agree on the correct course of action for these Agenda issues.
So, if only one candidate is chosen, will we not fall into the same problems the Two Party System has? The members of Unity08 with the majority opinion on issues will be the side that picks the candidate for the party.
How are we to deal with this kind of issue?
For me after watching the Newshour last night, I was hopeful again. A chance for reason and focus for the future. A chance to find common ground and not devisive pandering to obscure extremists. Seriously, how can a country like Brazil achieve Oil Independence and the United States is still bickering about lands better left untouched. Has any debate within the last few years been within reason? Or offered a better future? Hasn't the scapegoating of a large class (mind you, acknowledged and adored by the advertising world) become scary and oddly reminiscent of 1933? And the purpose has been blatently to rally votes. The focus MUST return to the good of the Nation and the Nation's future, otherwise we are doomed. Let's begin talking about making compromises, about dropping issues that bring us nothing of value in return. If we as a Nation can show the true value of "compromise", perhaps then, we can offer a true definition for a word that supposedly doesn't exist in Arabic.
Seneca your philosphy to limit or have government judge one mans wealth is taxation into which an apparent element of arbitrary bureaucratic discretion is to be thrown.
If there was ever a proposal guaranteed to breed abuse, and bribery this is it.
Let us build more opportunity and wealth into our world but keep the relentless bureaucrat as small a part of our lives as is possible.
Now maybe you can come up with actual proposals or guidelines for a proposal rather then a laundry list of pc platitudes like:
"More direct action by the people in their own affairs under proper safeguards is vitally necessary."
???? Whew now there is stinker....
what safeguards? What direct action tax revolts, minutemen at the border?
Our founding fathers got a lot right and one of those things was people are what they are. Any system or political party that seeks to change the nature of man is doomed to failure and disgrace (as communism has so clearly demonstrated in the last 80 years).
What is it Seneca? Never actually been in politics or with a group of people? You are only 18 years old and thus too naive to know better?
Democracy requires more than the right to vote. It also requires an electorate with an adequate grasp of the issues and the policy alternatives to address them. The electorate has been so thoroughly misinformed for so long that it is insufficient for Unity 08 to content itself with an agenda. For me personally, new books, such as Jeff Faux's "The Global Class War" and Michael Poland's "The Omnivore's Agenda" have revolutionized my grasp of trade and farm policy, respectively.
Blog discussions are wildly and wonderfully unpredictable, but the ideas they develop can nevertheless be organized around the topics they address. The first business of Unity 08 should be to provide this service to its public. The simplest possible format would divide a topic into statements of the problem and descriptions of the solution. Unity 08's members should then at some point vote on their preferred problem-solution pair for each topic. This would become the party's platform and their candidates governing strategy.
Seneca, you contradict yourself. You start off saying that people have a right to property and to keep what they earn, and that we should have an equality of opprotunity.
Then you say that those who have too much property, regardless if you earned it, should be punished with a graduated tax system and, "We should here agree on the principle that private property rights are not sacred above all things".
Yet who decides who has to much? Who in government decides if people are "equal" enough or what is "socially just" or in the best interest of the "welfare" of the people?
Sorry, the Founding Fathers based the entire Constitution on individualism and private property. What you propose seems to me nothing more than Marxism wrapped in different rhetoric.
Wydok would you rather a minority makes the rules like it is today in the two parties?
The agenda or platform with planks will be abattle of MEMEs and the majority will define the winner which is as it should be.
I have Voted in every election since I was 18 years old. Very few times did I like the candidate, most of the time it was for the lesser of two evils. The apathy of the non voting public is sickening. It is nice to have HOPE again. Thanks Joel
I was so incredibly interested to read about this. I have talked with friends for the past year about how 2024 really is different in terms of the possibility of electing an independent who is centrist. The core group of the Democratic party is far left of the electorate. The core group of the Republican party is far right of the electorate. The American people are not particularly ideological. They just want a problem solver. I'd love to see this happen. Good luck. Count me in.
The platform is very simple. "We will not be run by who has the most money".
"Seneca your philosphy to limit or have government judge one mans wealth is taxation into which an apparent element of arbitrary bureaucratic discretion is to be thrown."
Where comes this unwarranted assumption? The tax code of not that many decades ago did the job - congress knows how to write it but prefers to find as many ways for the wealthiest among us to escape paying their fair share.
Your ad hominem approach speaks louder than your arguments, were you aware of that?
"Seneca, you contradict yourself. You start off saying that people have a right to property and to keep what they earn, and that we should have an equality of opprotunity.
"Then you say that those who have too much property, regardless if you earned it, should be punished with a graduated tax system and, "We should here agree on the principle that private property rights are not sacred above all things".
This is not even inconsistent, let alone a contradiction. Property rights are not absolute nor inalienable, not even under current law.
All I am saying is we've lost the common sense we had decades ago to distribute the burden of financing our country fairly.
This position has no negative effect whatever on people who make less than $1 million per year.
"Yet who decides who has to much? "
The elected representatives of the American people decide thru the tax code, as they did in other times.
It isn't a question of who has too much -- it is a question of basic equity.
Tell me about your concept of equitable burden sharing. Do you have one?
I congratulate and thank the founders of Unity08. It is my fervent hope that this will begin the rescuing of our politics and policy from the idealogues in both parties. I believe that the vast majority of us want and can achieve solutions to the crucial problems we face in a civil and intelligent manner. Count me in!
I am going to leave a clue here to a puzzle.
I deliberately set out a some principles, a political agenda in broad brush terms to see what kind of reaction I'd get.
The puzzle is how we have come so far in 96 years and learned so little in the interim.
The clue is the fact that nothing I said comes from a foreign concept, person, or ideology.
Everything was verbatim the words of a previous President of the United States of America and one of the three or four very best, at that.
How then should one approach these words?
Certainly with more care, education and deeper insights than I have seen thus far.
Come, now, we can do better.
Start by looking at whether these proposals were ever enacted into American law or adopted as political principles and by which party.
Then see if any of them were tried and if so how they worked out in practice.
Time for something besides top of the head, seat of the pants name calling and ignorant categorization.
Try thinking, not feeling, for a change.
I'm just now finding out about this interesting movement, and I can honestly say I hope it is successful. One of the things that should be in the forefront of the development of the agenda for the 2024 candidates should be a return to the ideal of separation of church and state. It is important to recognize the existence of religion and the values that it can help to instill in people that they might not get elsewhere, but it's CRITICAL to realize that the people in this country aren't all of one religion or even part of a religion at all. Too many of the "important" issues that plague our country are fought over because of religious views rather than the practical view of what best benefits the American citizens. Religious government can also easily alienate the international community, where religion becomes even more diverse and can cause deeper tensions. Focus instead on finding practical solutions that benefit the most American citizens without regard for their religious beliefs and America will be a great country again. Become bogged down debating values between religious views and we’ll remain in our current quagmire, no matter who is in office.
I'd like to suggest those who join the Unity discussion agree to give up the labels Liberal and Conservative since most of us hold a mixture of so-called liberal and conservative opinions. Let's decide what's crucial,what's important and what's unimportant. Then we will try to decide what's possible. The decisions will have nothing to do with Liberalism or Conservatism.
The comments that I have read here so far sound like so much of the other two parties. Exclusivity and personal agendas color the thread of communication.
America needs a visionary with no personal agendas. Not another talking head saying the things we think we want to hear or spouting moral judgements. America needs action that includes everyone and does not exclude the many. I see neither party taking a middle way, an inclusive way, a non-violent way. I see neither party looking for a way to address American values without excluding Americans.
I can only hope that this Unity08 organization can find America's center, a resonant core that we all share in America that is not based on fear, such as global terrorism.
I would like to participate in a government and political party that focuses on the best for all, not the best for some. I would like to hear a campaign message that isn't full of violent rhetoric and clever dispatches of one liners.
I want to hear solutions to the problems that plague us generation to generation; like education (other countries are passing us in education), poverty 9we send moneies all over the world to help stomp out poverty in other countries; but not our own), disease (HIV-AIDs still takes many Americans lives and devastate families), health care availability (Pharmaceutical prices should be regulated so all can afford them), a livable wage for all. America needs to take care of herself and keep that as our focus for the next several decades until we are again a unified people.
How about Bill Weld as a candidate?
All I hope for in a political candidate is one who will evaluate an idea or an issue independant of a party line. Virtually every piece of legislation either passes or fails by a party line vote. If our representatives would only cast their votes based on what is good for the country rather than the party agenda we would all be living in a beter country. I beleive our representatives are capable of this if they only had the courage and the will. Hopefully an indepndant candidate woudl do this.
The top issue facing the country is that we are no longer using the Constitution to govern the country--and the elites don't think it's important enough to acknowledge.
The Bush administration has secretly given itself powers not authorized by the Constitution, Congress or courts. The Bush administration--abetted by Congress in some cases--has made it impossible for these usurptations to be challenged in the courts.
If you have the guts to call the game for what it is, I'm with you.
But if you are going to pretend that the truth is halfways between the Dems and GOP, you're just a few minor players with delusions of grandeur.
Contrary to his web name, Wacky has the right idea. The press gives way too much time to the extremes in both parties but I guess it is obvious "the squeaky wheel gets the grease".
BTW, are you willing to say that Israel has far too much influence over U.S. Middle East policy?
Unity08 is a great idea... I've already signed up to be a Founder and get my bumper sticker! I'm a registered Republican up in Maine, and I'll use my right of center views (much like our moderate republican Senators) to keep this from becoming another liberal blog.
I can't agree more with Unity08's principles, its time to UNITE as a people for the good of the country - and take the divisive partisan social issues out of the formation of political agendas... Come on people - let's work to build an agenda we can ALL live with, and take the bickering elsewhere.
If you think the Left Wing of the Dems gets an unfair amount of media attention I suggest you review who the networks invite to speak on Iraq.
Anti-Iraq War voices are underrepresented to the point of being shut out of the debate.
Health care, education and national debt. Increased expenditures and debt can be attributed to the massive ILLEGAL ALIEN INVASION going on in this nation from our extremely porous borders. WHY is illegals not on your list. It is the most critical item facing us at this time. Terrorists are being caught coming in through mexico. over 80 hospital emergency rooms have been closed - bankrupted by services to illegals. Schools MUST teach students in their own (spanish) language! Since when does a very loud minority illegal group dictate the immigration and security policy of our country? The borders need to be secured now.
Then work on the other problem.
Also, anchor babies - WRONG. 14th Amendment is being abused there.It is meant for people under the Jurisdiction of the United States. People here illegally are still under the jurisdiction of whatever country they sneaked in here from.
I'll use my right of center views (much like our moderate republican Senators) to keep this from becoming another liberal blog.--Right of Center
I'll bite. On what issue has the Right been right about since Bush was elected?
The people who say "illegal immigration is the top issue facing the country" are racist fools.
By what measure is illegal immigration more important than the Iraq War, deficit, Constitution/civil liberties, economic globalization, global warming, etc?
The reason to be concerned about illegal immigration is that the workers are abused and used to degrade the wages and working conditions of others. Anyone screaming about immigration without a comprehensive plan to improve wages and working conditions is just a klansman without a hood.
C'mon UNity08! If there's one thing that we Americans are tired of hearing more than the partisan bickering, its so-called unity/independent movements that promise us a panacea alternative.
Have we not learned via John Anderson, Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader that such movements simply aren't viable, and are frequently nothing more than the means by which marginal candidates (who should have been weeded out in the primaries...and some actually were!) continue to get their bully pulpit in the press all the way to election day?
If you really want change in Washington..it's easy. Just vote for the guys who aren't in power.
There are fringe Right Wingers that fancy themselves party of the minor party movement that won't budge on their wack-job policy ideas.
I predict you will try to court these people and lose everyone. When the Wingnuts don't get everything they want on immigration and taxes they will bolt for the GOP. But in the meantime, but playing footsy with these crazy people you will alienate the more serious people considering suport of Unity08.
"WHY is illegals not on your list. It is the most critical item facing us at this time."
Danged good question. On my first visit to the Unity08 site I noticed that glaring omission.
Best, wes
Its people like Carl who don't fit Unity08's founding principles...
Because this website has had a lot of press with its recent launch, he's merely using it as a sounding board for the very "white noise" that pollutes politics. Definitely a liberal troll sent here as an attempt to sabatoge a movement that is being created to get rid of the gridlock people like him create...
For those that continue to harp on the "have we not learned" bandwagon, about the viability of the movement, I encourage you to watch the Newshour interview.
That specific question is asked and addressed, and it seems pretty clear there are some differences with this idea (e.g. starting the effort well in advance of the election) vs. the Perots, Buchanans etc from the past.
Plus, it's up to *us* to help choose those individuals, they're not pre-selected rich guys with a "bully pulpit" mentality if we don't want it that way.
This party sounded like a good idea until I read the platform "Crucial" issue of 'health care for all'...what an idiotic premise...that somehow the Government should be responsible for people's health care...this is what is wrong with both parties right now and Unity doesn't sound any different.
Unity... means people united, regardless of political leanings, ideas, etc. Carl, or anyone is not big enough to stop this from happening. Lets not get so scared about this movement being sabotoged, this thing will work. At the very least, as I mentioned before, it will send a message to Washington to wake up, your days are numbered!
We've only just begun! Great idea, good luck. I think (hope!) there will be alot of voters behind you. I will be.
Unity08,
While I do not see much future for this movement, I would, in the meantime, encourage the people who respond on this site to have clearly articulated and thoughtful opinions.
Dooger is a great example of the kind of response you don't want. He/she uses all caps to make his/her point, poses a question without using a question mark, and speaks in hyperbole (while I think that most of us would agree that immigration is a "danged good question," do any of really think that "it is the most critical item facing us at this time"?).
Dooger, American democracy does, in fact, protect your right to express your opinion. It does not, however, make your opinion meaningful, thoughtful, important, or valid to anyone but yourself.
For years I've been saying this is the way we need to go, and I'm so glad to see folks with experience, credibility, and some clout finally putting this into the political arena. I think this has a really strong chance of being successful.
I wish there was a system by which every American could get unbiased, comprehensive information on major issues, and then vote on policy, rather than electing people to act on their behalf. I wish politicians were responsive to the people's wishes, not to money.
But for that we need to divorce democracy from capitalism.
I wish that all political campaigns were financed out of a general fund designated for solely that purpose, and that everyone in a given race was allocated exactly the same amount of money. This would eliminate the need for seeking sponsorships & donations, and allow candidates to concentrate on the quality of their message. Once elected, their office would not then be tainted by obligation to past big donors.
But until then, this sounds like a great way to go.
Forget partisan politics; let's have the courage to make some changes!
Get America out of debt; we need a better business model!
Stop trashing the environment because it's the ONLY ONE WE HAVE and we do NOT have the technology to fix it after a certain point (which I fear has already come & gone, but it will be our kids who find out for sure...)
Make EDUCATION and HEALTH CARE and CHILD CARE central to the policy of a functional nation (and to foreign policy, for that matter!). Crime and war and agression are born out of economic hardship & the feeling of political disenfranchisement. Give people the power to better their circumstances and they *will*. TEACH people hope and compassion and courage, and give them the opportunity to live peaceful lives--only peace will bring peace.
DEMAND CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY!!! Revoke that ridiculous assertion that corporations have equal rights with natural persons!! Corporations have been hiding under the cloak of the Constitution for over a century now. These behemoths with near-infinite lifespans and financial resources would claim the same rights as the retired farmer down the street, then abuse those rights and happily spend millions of dollars and decades upon decades in the courtroom fighting their case. THIS IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!
Corporations were designed to serve people, NOT the other way around!! And we HAVE the power to do something about it, IF politicians would take some responsibility for their actions and quit bending over to these money-hungry power-mad giants!
Above all this, remember: Political office is an office of SERVICE to THOSE WHO ELECTED YOU, NOT the opportunity to ride fat & high on curried favors and the back-slapping camaraderie of the good ol boys club.
You may talk pretty and get folks excited, but in the end, the only thing that will count will be your actions.
Please do not let us down again. You have a chance to make a real difference in the lives and hearts of millions of people who are worn numb by the corruption and ineptitude and self-serving grandiosity of the past several administrations. Please do what is right, for once...please...
Seneca
That your list of revised human behaivor is naive, is not an attack ad hominem or otherwise, it is an observation.
Your unwillingness to reveal your years does give truth to my mere guess about your youth.
Lets get to things we can actually measure and control.
List the changes that can make a difference and on which our government can be measured in a series of planks.
Plank 1
Build a lossless power distribution (superconducting power line) from a North Canadian (or Alaskan location) to Panama.
While we are at it lets include a high speed levitated train system along side of the powerline. Such a 1000 passenger and freight, train would use no fossil fuels, travel at up to 5000 mph, and use less energy in the process then a single private automobile making the same journey.
Instead of just slamming an idea, try posting a possible solution if its that important to you, like health care for all.
Plank 1
Build a lossless power distribution (superconducting power line) from a North Canadian (or Alaskan location) to Panama.
Don't assume that a desire for Health Care for All is necessarily a call for socialized national medicine. In a sense we already have a socialized medicine program with local taxes picking up the tab for the indigent. We have a free market system of health care choice for those who can afford it. What we need is something that takes the INEFFICIENCY out of both. Forget about what is "fair" or "right" and focus simply on what is "efficient" in the delivery of health care. We dont need class warfare from the Left or scare tactics about "creeping socialism" from the Right. What Would the Middle Do to solve this problem without resort to Left/Right wing ideology?
BUTEO
Single payer health care would promote small business.
I asked Right of Center what issues that Right has been right about and he responded by calling me a liberal troll.
Good luck building a coalition with people like Right of Center.
You make a good point...maybe we could start with Tort reform so the the cost of Health insurance can come down to affordable levels...
How do you measure efficiency?
I came across this site today after hearing about it on Lehrer and reading Noonan's article. I have decided to join the effort because I am dismayed by the false choices passing for public policy. The middle ground of reason, discourse, accountability, compassion, optimism and humility must assert itself to protect our nation from falling victim to the narrow self-serving agenda of idealogues. We must stand up NOW!
BUTEO
Health care for all is impossible. Especially given the sad state of health of Americans. How can we possibly expect people to pay for the poor health of those who abuse it, the obesity, the smoking, other dangerous health habits cannot be funded by the pockets of others. However! Kids don't have a lot of these habits, stress on low to middle income folks comes from things like worry about health care for their kids. Why don't we start someplace and cover the legal children of legal citizens.? We don't have to ever cover adults - they need to be responsible for themselves in some things. But kids immunizations, injuries, major health complications - the healthier and more loved our kids are, the better our future is. We could try it for awhile with a "renewal" option that the population votes directly upon (not the politicians who seem to be making a mess of things).
This would give us experience with health care for multitudes. There should, however, be something about limiting population in the bill. We cannot have families having 10 kids while others are conscious of the limits of our planet and work with reasonable numbers. Perhaps your first three kids get the coverage?
If you really want to generate buzz all across the world, quickly... add the Unity08 banner to your email as a signature. Everytime you send an email, the Unity08 logo will be included along with your name, job title etc.
Have you read any of the research on insurance costs for health care?
Do you know why premiums have increased recently? B/c the stock market is weak.
Do you think more people get money from courts that didn't experience malpractice? Or do more people fail to get money who were really victims of malpractice?
At some level our discussions of public policy have to be grounded in facts. Check your personal ideology at the door.