Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Political Reform a Must



November 07, 2012 – Comments (4) | RELATED TICKERS: NOW

I wonder if a record was made on the total amount of money spent on campaigning.  I think I heard around 2 and a half billion was spent.

Right now I believe the Congressional branch is a "broken" institution.  With the advent of Super Pacs and a good portion of one political party making an allegiance to an outside individual, the system is inundated with excessive lobbying and control.

The concept of "what is best for the country" has been replaced with "what is best for a specific agenda."

This Country has been clawing its way out of one of the greatest financial crashes in our history.  While things have been slowly improving it could have been improving faster but for the gridlock in Congress.  The burden has been pretty much on the shoulders of Ben Bernanke. But we need a fiscal response as well, which is not forthcoming.

Because of the two party system, this gridlock can always occur if either party controls the House or the Senate.  Most Americans do believe in the concept of compromise.  And as long as all sides agreed with that concept deals could usually be made.  But once one side abandons that concept the system freezes.

That has happened now.  Both Republican party leaders in the House and Senate don't believe in compromise.  Boehner outright said that on Kudlow and McConnell on 60 minutes.  This is basically a parroting of Grover Norquist.  Watch the link in comment 23 here:

The new term being used by them is common ground which is not the same as compromise.  The kicker is they don't really mean common ground either since there is a bill pending before the House that both sides agree with, but the House still won't pass it.

In my opinion several things need to happen: 

First and utmost, Grover Norquist needs to get booted out of Washington.  When a political party takes its orders from an outsider instead of acting in the best interests of the Country that belittles the institution.

Second, Super Pacs need to be reigned in.  It can be done several ways which should pass Constitutional muster, mainly by making detailed and onerous regulations which Congress is always free to do.

Third, we really do need term limits. 


4 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On November 07, 2012 at 1:03 PM, edwjm (99.88) wrote:

The trouble with term limits is that they require throwing out the good with the bad.  Furthermore, the replacements may be worse.

Report this comment
#2) On November 07, 2012 at 1:42 PM, awallejr (35.58) wrote:

I don't think it can get any worse than it is now. 

Report this comment
#3) On November 07, 2012 at 6:16 PM, somrh (81.16) wrote:

You may find this piece interesting:

"One of their strong points was politicking and voting. Australia didn’t, and I hope still does not, permit paid TV ads. Each party (or was it candidate? I never was clear on the mechanics) who scored above a very low threshold got a certain amount of free air time. This took the big reason for fundraising out of the picture. And the result, a limit on how much TV advertising their was in total, seemed to have the effect that people got proportionately more of their information about politics via print, which allows for longer form discussion."



Report this comment
#4) On November 07, 2012 at 7:20 PM, awallejr (35.58) wrote:

Unfortunately I don't see that happening here.  But there really should be limitations.

I will make this prediction, if the Republican Party continues to march to the orders of Norquist and continue to refuse to compromise and continue the gridlock they WILL lose the House next election.  

There is talk about Boehner's speech today but people really aren't LISTENENING to what he said.  He again used the term "common ground" (which means NO COMPROMISE) and he would look at revenue increases but depending on where they come from. Yo Republicans, Norquist's agenda will kill your party over time. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners