Appoint Congress

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by Seacowboys, Apr 27, 2010.


  1. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    It is my contention that we eliminate congress as an elected office and remove the politician from the entire equation. This could be done by a process much like jury selection, where a qualifying criteria is established:
    1. Citizen
    2. Land Owner
    3. Registered voter
    4. Tax Payer
    Lottery could be taken from each district's tax records to randomly select a number of suitable candidates that are put into the Congress pool where a committee decides which would be best qualified to be drafted for ONE term.
    This function might be tasked to the Electoral College, after we de-fang them and return the Presidential election to popular vote.
     
  2. tacmotusn

    tacmotusn Mosquito Sailor

    Interesting concept. and I would certainly support it. Odds of it happening peacefully in todays environment? Probably zero. A real revolution or complete collapse will be neccessary before we see any significant change to the status quo that exists today. We are close however so who knows.
    .
    Next major change would need to be revision of government funding. I like the concept of the "Fair Tax". It puts the power back into the hands of the people. Ie; you don't like where the government is going or doing... just quit spending except for neccessities and you close your wallet or purse to government. That's just one point. There are many many more. I would love to discuss "Fair Tax" rationally with anyone here.
     
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    There is a case to be made for selling the office to the highest bidder. At the end of the limited term, let the electorate decide if the office was filled honorably or not. If honorable, then the office holder can keep the ill gotten gains he made in office and award him 40 acres and a horse. If not honorable, strip him of all wealth and award him a sheet of cardboard under the NYT loading dock. If egregiously dishonorable (such as bowing to some third world "leader") death by booga-booga at Leavenworth.
     
  4. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    Not required if the meaning is directed toward tax on "income", which is unconstitutional and illegal, unless specifically noted as a state tax and NOT a tax on property owned (also illegal). Why would a sane person ever pay "tax" on land that they already own? Answer: because they do not own it and they are paying rent to the state.

    I also like Ghrit's reply.
     
  5. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    I am looking at a means to take out the politician, the lobbyist and special interest groups with one shot. Put Congress back as being a civic responsibility rather than a career opportunity. My justification of 4. Tax Payer, is to exclude those that do not and have not worked for a living, nothing more. I do not believe that those that sell god, crack, and advice should be placed in a position to write laws that concern the rest of us.
     
  6. Ivan

    Ivan Monkey++

    who staffs such a committee? i have some recommendations...[winkthumb]

    also, Land Owners? why do you wanna bring that one back?

     
  7. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    That's all well and good, but it's a dangerous slope, especially when it rests upon the unconstitutionality of taxation without representation and harbors the illegal and independently owned IRS, which serves only to embolden class envy and the redistribution of wealth (communist tenet). I think that it further doesn't apply since some states do not even have taxes (Texas and Florida to name 2), and taxation itself should not be used as a reference to the working class since one of the foundations of a strong republic is for the People to keep their wages (rather than fund socialist programs and private banking interests).

    To incorporate your wishes to only have "working" citizens vote, I can only suggest that the limitation you already listed (land owner) be substantial. Even this point is worthy of argument since the current day political establishment has all but erased private property, replacing "Homeowners" as renters to the state (state property tax is rent being paid to the state -why pay tax on land you already own?) Additionally, the "poor" citizens are treated like serfs who are not regarded as free simply because they can not afford land as a result of corrupt government; I believe that the founders would frown upon any citizen left out simply because they are not wealthy. The same applies to the criminalization of drug users -a product of a modern day police state and government sponsored drug smuggling. What better way to make a vast number of citizens "obsolete" than to criminalize them?

    I know that you hold resentment toward the genre of citizen who would rather vote for corporate sponsored politicians simply because they offer that crowd promises to attain the reigns of "power", but limiting the voter base will not provide a solution -it will only grant corrupt government a 'wild card' to automatically disregard a percentage of the voters. All it will take is for the few to classify YOU as one of the "forbidden" voters, and their problem has been solved, and we will be right back where we started.

    The problem lies at the heart of our three-branched government itself and the monetary system. As long as we continue on the path of "Democracy" and give way to corporate-sponsored campaigns, the voting base, no matter how restrictive, will always be irrelevant.

    If we are talking about limiting Congress, I think that term limits and holding them to be actual citizens will help, but we must also look at the two-party political system as well. Somehow, the People need to enforce that their representatives are AMERICANS first, who uphold the constitution and the republic instead of becoming the puppets of corporatism and banking.
     
  8. tacmotusn

    tacmotusn Mosquito Sailor

    [beat]It's called having a vested interest. One only has to open one's eyes to see the difference between something given and the care it receives, compared to something earned and the care it receives.
     
  9. Seawolf1090

    Seawolf1090 Adventure Riding Monkey Founding Member

    The worst thing we ever did in this nation was allowing political office to become a paid profession. It becomes too much akin to "The world's oldest profession", but the "John" does NOT go away satisfied....... [yukface]
     
  10. Ivan

    Ivan Monkey++

     
  11. tacmotusn

    tacmotusn Mosquito Sailor

     
  12. Tracy

    Tracy Insatiably Curious Moderator Founding Member

    What about having to go to the polls and having to show your ID to the little lady at the door, where she checks your name prior to receiving your ballot to vote? I miss that.
     
  13. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    You don't have that? Sure do here, and they balk at passports, want to see a driver's license.
     
  14. Tracy

    Tracy Insatiably Curious Moderator Founding Member

    Not any more. :(

    Mail in ballots. Every election.

    I don't like it. Not one little bit.
     
  15. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    I refuse to mail one in, just ain't gonna do it. I want to see who is taking it, and where it's counted.
     
  16. Tracy

    Tracy Insatiably Curious Moderator Founding Member

    I used to be able to refuse, when we had a choice.

    I still won't drop them in the blue USPS box, but will make the extra effort to drive to a ballot drop. It's not the same. :(
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7