Gaetz files for divorce

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

22 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Thats all well and dandy except for the fact they only control the congress by the slimiest of margins.  They can send legislation to the senate but democrats have the majority. Then it would have to get past the President Biden . You know he will be TOLD to veto it. It seems like if you want to get anything accomplished you may want to first get a few more Republican Senators, a few more congressman ( to override the wacho ones} and get a Republican President.

The G.O.P. controlled all 3 branches of government in 2001 (for a few years) and later back around 2016 (for a while).   I didn't see the national debt decline like I had thought would consequently happened.   Since then I've become increasingly intrigued with the topic of secession (http://www.Seceder.com ).   

 

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

 

This is lively and spot on...   

[Paul158]

Just now, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

Changes can be made at the state level, at least in some states, regarding the creation of term limits for their states' federal representatives.   Many state reps. would like to get rid of the people occupying seats in Washington D.C. that they, themselves, want to occupy.    May I suggest that you subscribe to their free newsletter(s)?   

Thanks .I will. 

[mspart]

Term limiting Congress folks has been tried and found unconstitutional.   The Constitution does not specify how many terms a person in Congress can serve.   It does however specify only 2 terms for a President and this by amendment.   That is the only way to get this done. 

https://www.termlimits.com/term-limits-amendment/

The year was 1995, and the case was U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton. With assistance from USTL, the citizens of 23 states had just passed laws putting term limits on their members of Congress. That meant just under half of all congressmen were term-limited, and Congress would soon be forced to propose a term limits amendment applying to everyone.

But it was not to be. A self-interested politician in Arkansas and his donors made a court challenge to void that state’s law. Others followed. After the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled against us, we took it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS).

SCOTUS opined that since the Constitution sets forth the criteria that determines the requirements for Senators and Congressional Representatives, only the Constitution can limit the terms of Congress members.

The Court decided, in a 5-4 split decision, that citizens are not allowed to term limit their own members of Congress using state laws. They threw out 23 states’ term limits laws in one day.

So you have to do this by amendment or the court could vacate the state laws again like in 1995.   Now with the current court it might not happen, but it will be an expensive experiment.   But future courts might look like the one in 1995 and call something similar unconstitutional. 

mspart

 

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

Periodically http://www.USTermLimits.org sends messages to its (free) subscribers regarding breakthroughs achieved in particular, individual U.S. states.   There are angles to discover and pursue, as with the sport of wrestling.  I am glad that fellow wrestlers are taking an interest in this topic.   You folks truly inspire me.   Please keep at it.   And thanks to the Intermat for creating and maintaining these terrific forums.        

[Offthemat]

56 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Thats all well and dandy except for the fact they only control the congress by the slimiest of margins.  They can send legislation to the senate but democrats have the majority. Then it would have to get past the President Biden . You know he will be TOLD to veto it. It seems like if you want to get anything accomplished you may want to first get a few more Republican Senators, a few more congressman ( to override the wacho ones} and get a Republican President.

I hope you meant “slimmest.”  I heard one of my senators saying something about the republicans only being one half of one third of the government.  That means nothing, even with the slimmest of margins, they control half of Congress.   They control the branch that controls government spending.  All spending is supposed to originate in the House.   As to how to deal with a Senate and President of a different party, they first need to stay together, and then appeal to the people.  Right now, the majority is for cutting spending and against sending money to Ukraine.  And they don’t care if a few national parks get temporarily closed in the process.  We need leadership that does the will of the people and utilizes the authority they were elected to. 

[Plasmodium]

1 hour ago, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

The G.O.P. controlled all 3 branches of government in 2001 (for a few years) and later back around 2016 (for a while).   I didn't see the national debt decline like I had thought would consequently happened.   Since then I've become increasingly intrigued with the topic of secession (http://www.Seceder.com ).   

 

Sadly and pathetically, the judicial branch is indeed controlled by one of the political parties.  You say it so casually because it is true.   It should be appalling.

[Paul158]

14 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

I hope you meant “slimmest.”  I heard one of my senators saying something about the republicans only being one half of one third of the government.  That means nothing, even with the slimmest of margins, they control half of Congress.   They control the branch that controls government spending.  All spending is supposed to originate in the House.   As to how to deal with a Senate and President of a different party, they first need to stay together, and then appeal to the people.  Right now, the majority is for cutting spending and against sending money to Ukraine.  And they don’t care if a few national parks get temporarily closed in the process.  We need leadership that does the will of the people and utilizes the authority they were elected to. 

Spell check gave me slimiest as an option so I took it. As far all spending is supposed to originate in the congress. Maybe someone in the congress could remind Joe Biden and his cronies that is how its supposed to be done.  This vote buying scheme he is using by forgiving student loan debt is getting real old. Yes we need to stick together. But for some reason we are good at shooting off our own foot every chance we get.

[nick]

3 hours ago, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

The more longstanding members of Congress typically have more seniority & contacts with which to get more "pork" (i.e. gubmint grants & contracts) allocated to their electoral districts.   Committee chairpersonships are helpful, as are committee assignments.   That's a significant part of why so many folks keep voting unsatisfactory elected officials back in each term.   Such voters want some of their (involuntarily extracted) federal tax dollars returned by the feds.   If there are term limits enacted across the board, though,  there's less disincentive against voting out elected officials who aren't performing as well as their voting constituents would like.    
  
    Encouragingly enough, Term Limits are making some (but not yet enough) progress:

http://www.USTermLimits.org

Getting them enacted is like becoming a better wrestler, though.   Patience & persistence are needed.    

See Mitch McConnell

It would be tough to find anybody in the Louisville metro who actually likes the dude, but he gets elected time and time again because it puts the small state of Kentucky on the national stage 

Ex, getting almost half a billion for a new VA hospital (https://www.lanereport.com/119958/2019/12/mcconnell-secures-funds-for-louisvilles-va-medical-center/)

(which is a huge boondoggle - don't get me started, a complete waste of money... we have a perfectly good hospital in downtown Louisville, Jewish Hospital, that was being sold at the same time... could have bought that, did upgrades to the facility and surrounding infrastructure, and still spent less money... https://www.courier-journal.com/story/life/wellness/health/2017/07/14/could-jewish-hospital-become-va-medical-center/476136001/)

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

That reminds me of the fairly new high school football stadiums that keep getting replaced with even newer (and of course expensive) ones, especially in Texas.   Elected officials and their allies are enriching campaign donors and other sources of perk$ & benefit$ by mandating the construction of such boondoggles.   

Perhaps Matt Gaetz really is serious about clamping down on such theft...   If so, hopefully voters will renew his contract(s).    

[Ban Basketball]

2 hours ago, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

Periodically http://www.USTermLimits.org sends messages to its (free) subscribers regarding breakthroughs achieved in particular, individual U.S. states.   There are angles to discover and pursue, as with the sport of wrestling.  I am glad that fellow wrestlers are taking an interest in this topic.   You folks truly inspire me.   Please keep at it.   And thanks to the Intermat for creating and maintaining these terrific forums.        

I appreciate your posts. 

[Ban Basketball]

2 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Sadly and pathetically, the judicial branch is indeed controlled by one of the political parties.  You say it so casually because it is true.   It should be appalling.

And not designed as such. 

[Plasmodium]

31 minutes ago, Ban Basketball said:

And not designed as such. 

It is either a corrupt obstruction or a corrupt extension but never a check or balance.

[Ban Basketball]

7 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

It is either a corrupt obstruction or a corrupt extension but never a check or balance.

Any idealized concept of "checks and balances" today has nothing to do with three branches.  It's all about one party checking another party.  

That's why Republican Congresspeople protect Republican Presidents/"presidenrts," regardless how outside the bounds of the Constitution and/or law one or the other is. 

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

Can these folks someday open up the presidential debates to third party candidates?   They have a free newsletter to which one can subscribe, below, at:

https://independentvoterproject.org/work/opening-the-presidential-debates

[Plasmodium]

3 minutes ago, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

Can these folks someday open up the presidential debates to third party candidates?   They have a free newsletter to which one can subscribe, below, at:

https://independentvoterproject.org/work/opening-the-presidential-debates

If a 3rd party candidate garnered enough support, they'd be in.  I remember Ross Perot being on a debate stage.

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

Ross Perot won 19% of the vote in 1992.   He needed 15% of the popular support to qualify for presidential debate participation that year.   In 1996, though, he did not have 15% of the popular support, so he didn't get to debate that year, either.   His participation would have been helpful to the analysis, though, and it's our loss that he didn't get to participate.   His participation may very well have enabled him to surmount the 15% hurdle.  It's a cart-before-the-horse problem.   

 

[Ban Basketball]

Perot ran with James Stockdale as his VP.

If you have an hour for some of the most entertaining bumbling on a debate stage, including Dan Potatoe Quayle, this is your baby. He was such a laughing stock that Homer Simpson wore the "Stockdale for Veep" shirt. 

 

[Ban Basketball]

[jross]

Ro!  Make it So!
 

 

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

But what if Congress enacts the change but Biden vetoes it?   Has Gaetz thereby lost his control over the motion to vacate threshold?    Hopefully he'll not be short-changed like that. 

[Ban Basketball]

23 hours ago, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

The G.O.P. controlled all 3 branches of government in 2001 (for a few years) and later back around 2016 (for a while).   I didn't see the national debt decline like I had thought would consequently happened.   Since then I've become increasingly intrigued with the topic of secession (http://www.Seceder.com ).   

 

Particularly in the past 40 years,  the GOP has outspent, added to the debt, and had poorer economic performance than Democrats by wide margins. 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Ban Basketball

[Offthemat]

The uniparty is what you’re speaking of.  The lobbyists have so much power and influence over congress.  Gaetz spoke about it today:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709400930482000060.html

[GreatWhiteNorth]

On 10/4/2023 at 3:27 PM, Paul158 said:

Unfortunately there will never be any action. You would have to completely change the system to fix this huge mess. Those who have the responsibility to fix things are AWOL.

You, of course, mean the voters. After all, we are the ones with both the power and responsibility.

And I don't think that we are AWOL as much as that, in large part, our party allegiance often overrides our common sense. (And also, in no small part, that so many politicians keep lying to us. Which we should endeavor to see through.)

Crazy but true. As we look around trying to lay blame... it's actually us that are the primary problem.

[Plasmodium]

19 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

You, of course, mean the voters. After all, we are the ones with both the power and responsibility.

And I don't think that we are AWOL as much as that, in large part, our party allegiance often overrides our common sense. (And also, in no small part, that so many politicians keep lying to us. Which we should endeavor to see through.)

Crazy but true. As we look around trying to lay blame... it's actually us that are the primary problem.

There are definitely some people on the wrong side of history.