What if congress worked and voted from a town hall meeting EVERYDAY?
Submitted by Ralph Waldo on Wed, 08/12/2009 - 08:22
With current communications technology, congressmen could telecommute from their home districts and never have to travel to DC.
Instead of being surrounded by lobbyists they would be surrounded by their constituents. Think what a difference that would make!
»
They might well then declare a Congressional holiday
-everyday- Then The Victory IS Ours!
_______________________
We are whipping folks back into shape, we are going to get this done!" Barack Obama,in reference to Blue Dog Opposition to the Health (S)care Bill.
-
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.'" Ronald Reagan
But that man should play the tyrant over God, and find Him a better man than himself, is astonishing drama indeed!~~D. Sayers
There is no difference between an authoritarian government from the right or the left...F. A.Schaeffer
But first...
Wouldnt you have to get rid of the lobbyist?
And would you really be willing to trust the Senate in DC be themselves?
I wouldnt.
Freedom is another way to God...A corrupt government is a straight way to hell.
I believe in Hope & Change..I Hope the government will Change
Spindale-Rutherford County-North Carolina
Pull The Lobbyists Teeth
For a relatively small amount lobbyists can affect elections in small states.
REFORMS
1) A citizen may only make a campaign contribution to a candidate he can vote for. This stops putting all elections for sale to the highest bidders. All lobbyists are local.
2) Only individuals may donate with their own money, no groups of any kind. For example, unions would not be able to give members money to candidates they don't support.
3) No limit on donating. Any freedom of speech issue is solved.
4) No playing the field, donate to only one candidate on the ballot for that office.
EXAMPLE
A citizen of the First Congressional District of Indiana, in both the primary and general elections, could donate to one candidate for Congress, one candidate for the Senate, and one candidate for President of the United States.
K Street as we know it would end. Lobbyists centered in Washington D.C. would have great difficulty legally affecting elections across America.
All of those are good ideas as well.
Having to work in front of his voters everyday would probably make all of that stuff unnecessary!
A long time ago
a congressman from Illinois (forgotten his name) who represented a farm district was beaten with massive outside money donated to his opponent.
A small rich ethnic minority (he probably didn't have any in his district) didn't like his voting record on their issues. They got rid of him because he represented his constituents instead of them. Members of Congress notice this sort of thing and are intimidated. If we're ever to have government that represents the people, this sort of thing must stop.
I understand and agree with what you are saying.
If telecommunting became the standard then the next guy would have to do the same and it would be hard to vote for special interest if the congressman is surrounded by 150 of his constituents everyday. How could he explain a vote against his own people?
If your represenative is working from a home office the people
can see every thing he does, who he talks to, does his research and votes, so it really doesn't matter what the lobbyist do, they become irrelevant!
Just because Senators go to DC, that certainly doesn't provide any basis for trust, in fact it's just the opposite.
The people are not there to watch them and hold them accountable, which leaves them open to being bribed and seduced!
How would you
get a plan like that into action? Where do you start? Present it to the general assembly in each state? Get someone in congress or the senate to author a bill? I'm going to ask the nice fellow that presented the bill in my state to fight real ID He is running for attorney general in my state.
Great Guy! Ken Cuccinneli
Research, plan, execute
and hard work.
We have PROJECT 2010 in New York State to abolish and replace the NYS government and Constitution. We are now executing. www.PrimaryChallenge.com
www.LibertyPursuit.com
Be at Valley Forge for the Don't Tread On Me regional conference.I will be discussing it there for those that care to listen.
Ron Paul T-Shirts at www.BuffaloLiberty.com
$10 FREE Shipping
I think it may be easier than that,
just have the candidate pledge to telecommute from their home district as well as actively support the idea. People will quickly see how many problems it would solve, it will become immensely popular with the voters and therefore these candidates will start winning elections left and right.
(They can also pledge to support legislation that will make it easier for all government officials to do the same thing - even on the state level).
Now that is an excellent OP Ralph ...
And an excellent idea!!!
Bump.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
That would fit in well logistically with Article The First
If you aren't aware - google "30,000" and the "First Amendment" or "Article the First" and have fun.
We need to undo the damage done by fixing the House at 435 members. Going back to smaller districts will accomplish several goals:
1) smaller districts allow for better representation of the people
2) smaller districts MAY allow for more than two parties to serve in government
3) more representatives makes it harder to pass B.S. laws.
4) more representatives with diluted votes, makes lobbying too expensive for the return on investment.
5) more representatives allows for better division of labor and deliberations over bills
6) more representatives would fit better in the current scheme of legislation by subcommittees, rather than dirty work on the house floor.
Even without modern technology, this is still logistically possible. There is no need for a ten thousand seat building for the House. Congressmen can just stay home for most of the year, and only go into session to vote one or two months out of the year. This would cut down on legislation, and allow for more deliberation. Of course, their pay would have to be cut, as it would no longer be necessary to pay them to live in expensive D.C. suburbs.
We could also fix it so they get paid the median wage in their district - an added incentive to leave things the F*&k alone and let the free market engine create wealth and prosperity like it is supposed to when you don't tamper with it.
Yeap
Solving so many problems at one time, it's an idea whose time has come!
great idea - their
great idea - their constituents should have their ear, not the lobbyists in DC. Is it possible to make a bill for videoconferencing / telecommuniting of Congresspeople. There is no good reason anymore for them to be away from their districts.
The white house had live video conferencing with
Iraq, half way around the world.
That's very close to Direct
That's very close to Direct Democracy.
Why cant we just do away with the federal government and go back to local law (counties) and States, with the Fed for general defense and solving disputes between the states, as originally intended by some of the founders...
Heh. That would be a kinda cool idea...
though I wouldn't advocate it.
If you're into more direct representation why stop at forcing them to vote in the same room as you? Why not just cut the middle man out entirely, and have direct democracy where everyone votes via ye olde internet?
I know why I'm leery of it-- but the question is are you?
Well currently you only get one vote per district
so some one has to push the button. However I get the drift of what you are saying and certainly there would be a much greater input from the people themselves. However the greatest initial advantage would be in removing them for the corrupt environment of DC and keeping them at home!
I imagine the pool of people
I imagine the pool of people to run for office would be greater, since there are many qualified men and women who do not want to move to Washington or commute.
grant
I am sure that a true
I am sure that a true representative of the people would want to be closer to their constituents then off in Washington.
It could win a lot of elections
!
Congress's idea of a town hall meeting
is a conference room filled with their top-contributing lobbyists, and the head of the DNC.
That's their constituency.
The people are a thorn in their sides.
If people started running with telecommuting from their district
as part of their platform and winning, pretty soon that would become the norm. The fact is technology would make even communication with other members more efficient. Instead of having to schedule a room and traveling to and fro, if every one had a video station they could set the schedule then talk and discuss with more people every day.
The congressmen could work
The congressmen could work out of an office and never need to travel by plane. Imagine how much it would save in travel expenses. They would have more time to read what they are voting for and wouldn't be interrupted by having to go to some cockamamie ceremony.
grant
My guess is many constituents would show up
and volunteer to read bills, answer phones, run errands and do research, plus people could walk in and out to see what is going on just like any other public forum. Just think how that type of forum could restore the power to the people!
Great idea.
Great idea.
Oh, I agree with the sentiment
and that it "could" be done.
And that the technology is there for it.
I only question the underlying desire of the congress-critters to avoid that like the plague, because they are much more interested in serving a different set of "constituents".
What I am saying is that voters can quickly see it
would be to their advantage so if they are given a choice between voting for a traditional congressmen vs one who was going to telecommute, then in short order the telecommuters are going to win and take over.
Great idea
I see very little reason why not. Instead of one month cameo appearances in their states, they can meet 1 month out of the year in DC, use the rest of the time working with the people of their state. Turn the capital building into a museum!
Questions for further exploration of this idea:
-How would they debate? Realtime? youtube style? video, response, response, etc.. would everyone be heard or just ignored by not clicking on their video response? VR?
-Committee meetings with guests, experts, and witnesses from across the country, how do they all patch into the video feed and from where. The congressman will have a set up but what about the others? What do they use? webcam and a browser?
-High security/closed door meetings, could they be held securely online or necesitate a return to dc?
Good questions
I believe the technology is currently available to handle any and all of those scenarios.!