The Strategy To End Corruption In Congress

[PoliTalker]

Politicians are supposed to represent us. But most Americans have a near-zero impact on public policy.

America's corrupt political system is a complex problem. The American Anti-Corruption Act is a comprehensive solution.

The American Anti-Corruption Act sets a standard for city, state, and federal laws that break big money's grip on politics. It will:

Stop political bribery by making it illegal for lobbyists to lobby a politician and donate to their campaign. You can lobby, or you can donate, but you can't do both.
End secret money so Americans know who is buying political power.
Fix our broken elections so the people, not the political establishment, are the ones in control.

Bring conservatives and progressives together to pass Anti-Corruption laws in cities and states across America.

In communities across America, RepresentUs members – conservatives, progressives, and everyone in between – are working together to pass local Anti-Corruption Acts. Member-led RepresentUs chapters are leading the fight to protect our communities from the corruption that plagues Congress. Every town, city, state, and county has a unique political makeup, so every Anti-Corruption Act is uniquely tailored to the needs of each community.

In 2018, RepresentUs members helped to pass 23 anti-corruption reforms across the nation—that's more than at any other time in history.

By 2022, we'll pass dozens more, in pursuit of a tipping point where 'a rush of state activity leads to a change in federal law.'

STUDY: Passing state laws leads to federal reform.

The biggest changes in America almost always start in the states. From Women's Suffrage to Interracial Marriage, states led the way to federal reform. And it still works today.

Every municipal and state Anti-Corruption Act creates common-sense ethics, conflict-of-interest, transparency, and campaign finance laws. State Acts create the opportunity for federal candidates from that state to campaign on the anti-corruption platform – accountable to their constituents, not special interests.

Candidates who win election on this platform have a built-in incentive to champion Anti-Corruption laws in Washington, D.C. (because that's what got them elected). Every state we win gets us one crucial step closer to passing the American Anti-Corruption Act in the federal government.

The Strategy To End Corruption In Congress

 

[PoliTalker]

This is how we save America.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I read their proposal.

https://represent.us/anticorruption-act/?source=homepage

Term limits are a great idea, the rest of what they propose is either ineffective, or unrelated to corruption in office by officials.

Ranked voting: How's that working out for NYC? It's a shitty idea at best.

Gerrymandering: Right now the biggest problem isn't gerrymandering but both parties setting districts friendly to them, and then there's "minority" majority districts to consider. Arizona already has an independent districting commission and all of the above still happens. The proposed solution won't work base on actual attempts to use it.

Open primaries: Why not 2 round voting instead? The first round eliminates all but the top 2 or 3 for an office with the largest 2 parties having a candidate included. Then there's a second round of voting for a winner. No primaries necessary.

Vote by mail and automatic voter registration: These do nothing to stop corruption or collusion in office by politicians

Public funding of elections: Highly unpopular and usually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme court.

As for lobbying and such:

If you make it illegal for lobbyists to donate they will just work in parallel with organizations that can donate. The donations might get laundered through several hands to ensure there's no provable link between lobbyist efforts and the money but the end result will be the same as it is now.

As for politicians getting cushy jobs post office, that too is virtually unenforceable.

Instead, severely limit terms in office. Give little or no perks or benefits when the individual ends their term of service. No retirement, no other benefits. They have to get a job like the rest of us, thank you for your service. This is the best way to ensure minimal corruption. Politicians simply don't have the time to get corrupt in office and even if they do the damage is limited because they're soon gone by term limits.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello T. A. Gardner,

I read their proposal.

https://represent.us/anticorruption-act/?source=homepage

Term limits are a great idea, the rest of what they propose is either ineffective, or unrelated to corruption in office by officials.

Ranked voting: How's that working out for NYC? It's a shitty idea at best.

Gerrymandering: Right now the biggest problem isn't gerrymandering but both parties setting districts friendly to them, and then there's "minority" majority districts to consider. Arizona already has an independent districting commission and all of the above still happens. The proposed solution won't work base on actual attempts to use it.

Open primaries: Why not 2 round voting instead? The first round eliminates all but the top 2 or 3 for an office with the largest 2 parties having a candidate included. Then there's a second round of voting for a winner. No primaries necessary.

Vote by mail and automatic voter registration: These do nothing to stop corruption or collusion in office by politicians

Public funding of elections: Highly unpopular and usually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme court.

As for lobbying and such:

If you make it illegal for lobbyists to donate they will just work in parallel with organizations that can donate. The donations might get laundered through several hands to ensure there's no provable link between lobbyist efforts and the money but the end result will be the same as it is now.

As for politicians getting cushy jobs post office, that too is virtually unenforceable.

Instead, severely limit terms in office. Give little or no perks or benefits when the individual ends their term of service. No retirement, no other benefits. They have to get a job like the rest of us, thank you for your service. This is the best way to ensure minimal corruption. Politicians simply don't have the time to get corrupt in office and even if they do the damage is limited because they're soon gone by term limits.

Thanks for reading it. You are very well read, and often cause me to learn more.

I have not been following the NYC race. Ranked voting is already in use all over the world. It is logical. Not using it causes people to vote against candidates instead of for candidates; and thus we don't find out who they really want. Ranked voting allows us to discover who is really preferred, while still allowing people to not feel like they are throwing away their vote if they vote for their true best choice. Why is it suddenly unworkable because NYC adopted it?

Do you think Arizona would be 5-4 Democrats/Republicans in the House if it was gerrymandered?

Closed primaries discourage voting.

Vote by mail is already used 100% in several states with no problems. It allows more people to vote, which fortifies and preserves our democracy. We need to open it up.

And we need to have automatic voter registration upon achieving voting age. Every American needs their chance to have a say in who runs our government.

Don't say rules and laws can't be created to address the revolving door of Congress and Lobbying until we actually try. Unless, of course, you LIKE having big money have such an influence on Congress.

Agreed on term limits, but retiring legislators should be properly compensated so they are less likely to accept post government big money offers.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Hello T. A. Gardner,
Thanks for reading it. You are very well read, and often cause me to learn more.

You're welcome.

I have not been following the NYC race. Ranked voting is already in use all over the world. It is logical. Not using it causes people to vote against candidates instead of for candidates; and thus we don't find out who they really want. Ranked voting allows us to discover who is really preferred, while still allowing people to not feel like they are throwing away their vote if they vote for their true best choice. Why is it suddenly unworkable because NYC adopted it?

An irrelevant appeal to popularity. Just because it is used doesn't mean it's useful or a good way to do things. I see it as a disaster for numerous reasons. Better two round voting.

Do you think Arizona would be 5-4 Democrats/Republicans in the House if it was gerrymandered?

It'd be more like 7-2 Republicans to Democrats if it was Gerrymandered.

Closed primaries discourage voting.

Closed primaries are about the voters in a particular party selecting their candidate to run on the election ticket. Again, that's why 2 round voting works better.

Vote by mail is already used 100% in several states with no problems. It allows more people to vote, which fortifies and preserves our democracy. We need to open it up.

Vote by mail is rife with potential for fraud. Again, an appeal to popularity doesn't mean we should.

And we need to have automatic voter registration upon achieving voting age. Every American needs their chance to have a say in who runs our government.

Registering to vote is the same as choosing to vote. Each person should be able to choose, not be forced to.

Don't say rules and laws can't be created to address the revolving door of Congress and Lobbying until we actually try. Unless, of course, you LIKE having big money have such an influence on Congress.

I gave an example of how lobbyists would get around what was proposed. The lobbyists go to their congress critter and tell them what they want. Then an "independent" / "non-profit" group hands the congress critter a pile of money. Everybody involved knows what the score there is. It just changes the rules of the game.
Better that ALL donations have to be made publicly and no group can shield donors. That is everything is out in the open. The only other rule is that groups with involuntary membership by employment or other reason (like union membership) must by law first get the permission of the members as public record, for each donation they want to make. Groups with voluntary membership don't have to do that since the members joined on their own volition.
That means a big corporation wants to donate a pile of money to congress critter X then they have to get the shareholders to vote to do that since they are the ones that are really making that donation being the owners of the company.

Agreed on term limits, but retiring legislators should be properly compensated so they are less likely to accept post government big money offers.

Term limits limit corruption to that term of service, can't go wrong with that.

 

[floridafan]

I read their proposal.

https://represent.us/anticorruption-act/?source=homepage

Term limits are a great idea, the rest of what they propose is either ineffective, or unrelated to corruption in office by officials.

Ranked voting: How's that working out for NYC? It's a shitty idea at best.

Gerrymandering: Right now the biggest problem isn't gerrymandering but both parties setting districts friendly to them, and then there's "minority" majority districts to consider. Arizona already has an independent districting commission and all of the above still happens. The proposed solution won't work base on actual attempts to use it.

Open primaries: Why not 2 round voting instead? The first round eliminates all but the top 2 or 3 for an office with the largest 2 parties having a candidate included. Then there's a second round of voting for a winner. No primaries necessary.

Vote by mail and automatic voter registration: These do nothing to stop corruption or collusion in office by politicians

Public funding of elections: Highly unpopular and usually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme court.

As for lobbying and such:

If you make it illegal for lobbyists to donate they will just work in parallel with organizations that can donate. The donations might get laundered through several hands to ensure there's no provable link between lobbyist efforts and the money but the end result will be the same as it is now.

As for politicians getting cushy jobs post office, that too is virtually unenforceable.

Instead, severely limit terms in office. Give little or no perks or benefits when the individual ends their term of service. No retirement, no other benefits. They have to get a job like the rest of us, thank you for your service. This is the best way to ensure minimal corruption. Politicians simply don't have the time to get corrupt in office and even if they do the damage is limited because they're soon gone by term limits.

"Public funding of elections: Highly unpopular and usually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme court."

You are wrong again!! Its habitual from the bitch who thinks she knows everything.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

"Public funding of elections: Highly unpopular and usually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme court."

You are wrong again!! Its habitual from the bitch who thinks she knows everything.

Explaining the unpopularity of public funding for congressional elections

https://www.researchgate.net/public...of_public_funding_for_congressional_elections

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...idates-turned-down-292-million-in-free-money/

How Barack Obama Spurred the End of America’s Public Presidential Election Funding System

https://promarket.org/2020/04/27/ho...-public-presidential-election-funding-system/

Yep, Barack Obama was the first presidential candidate since public funding for Presidential elections was put in place to opt out of using it, it was so popular...

 

[floridafan]

https://www.researchgate.net/public...of_public_funding_for_congressional_elections

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...idates-turned-down-292-million-in-free-money/

https://promarket.org/2020/04/27/ho...-public-presidential-election-funding-system/

Yep, Barack Obama was the first presidential candidate since public funding for Presidential elections was put in place to opt out of using it, it was so popular...

Come on sweetie, this is a pathetic attempt to cover up your complete ignorance on the subject. No where does it say anything about the Supreme Court decision you referred to.
Your handlers must do better than this

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Come on sweetie, this is a pathetic attempt to cover up your complete ignorance on the subject. No where does it say anything about the Supreme Court decision you referred to.
Your handlers must do better than this

Hey, I offered evidence. You offer ad hominem.

But, if you want more of a drubbing

Communications Workers of America v. Beck
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/487/735.html

Brnovich v. DNC
https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/07...des-a-win-for-common-sense-election-measures/

Supreme Court curbs Arizona public funding in elections
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-jun-08-la-na-court-arizona-20100609-story.html

Supreme Court Strikes Down Limits On Campaign Spending
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/supreme-court-strikes-down-limits-on-campaign-spending/

 

[floridafan]

Hey, I offered evidence. You offer ad hominem.

But, if you want more of a drubbing

Communications Workers of America v. Beck
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/487/735.html

Brnovich v. DNC
https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/07...des-a-win-for-common-sense-election-measures/

Supreme Court curbs Arizona public funding in elections
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-jun-08-la-na-court-arizona-20100609-story.html

Supreme Court Strikes Down Limits On Campaign Spending
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/supreme-court-strikes-down-limits-on-campaign-spending/

Every attempt makes you look more pathetic and ignorant. Read the links posted for you auntie.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Every attempt makes you look more pathetic and ignorant. Read the links posted for you auntie.

I did. That's why I posted them. You obviously didn't read them.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

This is how we save America.

Corruption is what goody-two-shoes Pollyannas talk about.

It's not good, we agree. We can do what we can---NEVER including term limits. That's what elections are for.
We can better regulate the lobbyists.

But compared to bad policy, it's barely a paper cut. Less than that.

Corruption costs us millions.

Bad policy costs us billions.

A sticky-fingered politician who votes correctly on the floor of congress
is worth ten times more than an honest idiot who votes incorrectly in terms of policy.

It should be obvious, but few people see it.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

Best Strategy- VOTE DEMOCRAT!

But, that's always the best strategy for everything!

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Best Strategy- VOTE DEMOCRAT!

But, that's always the best strategy for everything!

The best strategy is Don't vote! It only encourages them! What if they held an election and nobody showed up to vote in it?

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Corruption is what goody-two-shoes Pollyannas talk about.

It's not good, we agree. We can do what we can---NEVER including term limits. That's what elections are for.
We can better regulate the lobbyists.

But compared to bad policy, it's barely a paper cut. Less than that.

Corruption costs us millions.

Bad policy costs us billions.

A sticky-fingered politician who votes correctly on the floor of congress
is worth ten times more than an honest idiot who votes incorrectly in terms of policy.

It should be obvious, but few people see it.

bad policy is often from corruption.

for instance, health officials having a stake in vaccines is a corruption contributing bad policy.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

we live in complete state capture.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

The best strategy is Don't vote! It only encourages them! What if they held an election and nobody showed up to vote in it?

That is exactly what most non-Republicans have always done. Leave the election up to hopes and dreams and everybody else to go and vote, I suppose

But then, DING! DING! The Democrats and all other non-Republicans figured out that the only way to keep a Republican- that went off the rails like Trump from being the president again- WAS TO GET UP OFF OF THEIR ASSES AND GO VOTE- or at least, mail in their votes!

Please get this message to Donald Trump!

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Geeko Sportivo,

Best Strategy- VOTE DEMOCRAT!

But, that's always the best strategy for everything!

I would disagree that one party is always better than the other, but I do believe that in these current times the Democratic Party is absolutely THE party that Promotes The General Welfare better.

That's why I vote Democrat.

And really: when more people are thriving and have money to spend, the economy is going to do better.

The Republican Party is the party that currently promotes the oligarchy and big money corporate power.

I can't support that.

But the problem is that: big big money works to keep the two sides at each other's throats. And it's not very hard to do.

I watched a documentary called: "Hacking Your Mind" on PBS.

It's a three-part series. Each of the episodes is an hour long. The one I linked above is the 2nd of the series. It focuses on why we get into a we/they rut and become so firmly stuck in it. This episode begins with a scene that went viral on U Tube, where a Biden supporter is surrounded by Trump supporters and, though there is thankfully no violence, there is also no productive communication. The people in the scene have been reduced to absurdly screaming and glaring at one another.

The documentary explores how people get to the point that they act so ridiculously. I found it quite fascinating. We humans appear to be totally instinctive about falling into a we/they rut where individuals identify with one group or another, and find individuals of opposing groups to be 'horrible people.'

That effect affects our politics greatly. As we all know here at JPP, in a Democracy we have to compromise with the other side, but we can't do that because we can't even agree on what the basic facts are, much less what the best thing to do about our challenges might be.

Science is studying why we cannot agree. It appears to be instinctive. The very same dynamic is present in other animals. Many animals including humans, divide themselves into groups which oppose one another, sometimes to death.

There is an interesting scientific experiment described at timestamp 3:13 of the linked video above. It only lasts a few minutes, but it says a lot about why there is this we/they thing about each side thinking they are the good side and the other is bad:

Children are randomly divided into two groups merely be the color of the shirts they wear.

Very quickly, each group comes up with reasons why their group is good and the other group is bad.

Without any actual facts to go on, the mind creates possibilities and then, with nothing further to go on, begins to believe these assumptions are facts. More assumptions are created to support the original ones, which solidifies the often erroneous beliefs.

These dynamics are naturally occurring.

Logically, this implies that the only way to rise above this trap is for people to be far better educated so they are aware of all of this and better able to overcome it.

That's what we need to get our nation unstuck from our current dilemma and inability to make good decisions as a Democratic Republic.

We've lost the ability to have the give and take necessary for meaningful and functional compromise.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The problem today is one party has become Leftist. Things worked when both parties weren't Leftist. They could be Liberal, Conservative, middle-of-the-road, and it wasn't a problem. The political spectrum outside of the Left could work together and come to compromises. That isn't how the Left rolls. For them it's What's ours is ours, what's yours is negotable. It's My way or the highway. There is no compromising with the Left.

I've seen it repeatedly over my lifetime. The Left wants something politically. They make a public show of wanting a 'democratic vote' on it. They'll tell you they will honor the results of that vote. Then, when the vote smacks down their proposal, votes it out, won't let it happen, their tune changes to one of The public doesn't know what the hell's good for them! We're not going to stop pushing for this until we get it! Fuck that vote! The voters were morons! This is when the Left now tries to use the legal system to get their way, or they seek alternate means to get around having to have their proposal voted into law. They stack the courts, shop judges, use bureaucratic subterfuge, and refuse to compromise in any way.

Look at gay marriage for example. They did the above EXACTLY. In 35 states they put gay marriage on the ballot. In 35 states voters voted it down. Hell, in California a state constitutional amendment was passed by nearly 60% of the vote to make gay marriage illegal.
What'd the Left do in response? They went to court, shopped judges, and sued to get gay marriage bans overturned. The entirety of this now in law was made up by a relative handful of judges across the US through the courts.
Didn't matter one iota to the Left that their proposal was publicly unpopular. They wanted what they wanted and nobody was going to stop them. No compromise. No respecting the will of the people. They rammed what they and they alone wanted down everybody's throat.
Try and have a discussion about this topic now with a Leftist. Hell, I'm betting in short order here on this thread I'll get massive pushback from the Lefties on the board about what I just posted. There will be no rational discussion. Instead, it'll be The courts decided and that's that! STFU you troll! No civil discourse with the Left. Either you are with them or you go to the gulag.

 

[Flash]

Public funding of elections: Highly unpopular and usually struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme court.

I'm not familiar with any public funding laws ruled unconstitutional (could you provide information)?

As a matter of fact, we have had public funding of presidential nominations and elections since 1976. All candidates accepted public funding for the general election until Obama. Now, candidates do not use it because it limits spending too much and candidates can raise and spend much more if they do not accept the funding.

I agree most of these measures would accomplish little. The most powerful group in the U. S. (AARP) lobbies Congress but is a non-profit and cannot give campaign contributions.

Some states have term limits for legislators and the result has been power shifting to lobbyists, staff, and the executive branch because of inexperienced legislators.

Fiddling with mechanics does not change human nature.

What do the American people want that politicians are not giving them? The public seems very split about what they want.

Most laws regulating campaign finance, etc. do not work because they are based on false assumptions.