“Fight Against Stupidity And Bureaucracy”
The Sunday Sermon
Don’t worry the title of this post doesn’t mean that you’re back at school again. This ‘term talk’ in the title refers to politics and politicians.
President Obama takes a lot of stick because of his headstrong insistence in implementing his Obamacare legislation. As I’ve said before, it’s a laudable goal, but the country can’t afford it. But on he goes anyway.
Love him or hate him, or neither, he’s limited to two terms of four years in office, then he has to go and make way for the next person who wants the job.
To begin with that’s a stupid system because the main thrust of the first Presidency about half way or so in office isn’t governing the country but instead trying to ensure election for a second term and wasting billions of dollars doing it.
It doesn’t take a genius to work out that the present system sucks. Nor do you have to be a professor of politics to suggest an alternative – for example a single term of five or six years, which still leaves plenty of time to settle into the job and implement whatever policies you have promised the electorate.
So that’s the first problem solved.
However, there is another term problem that infests American politics (and many other countries too).
What about the rest of the elected politicians?
Well, why not introduce the same system for them? Elected for a five or six year term after which they have to start to earn a living again?
Sounds good to me.
According to Wikipedia John Dingell has managed 58 years in the House and still going. John Conyers has been there for 49 years. Coincidentally both these politicians are Democrats and both represent Michigan, so another problem that these ‘lifers’ cause is that there is no incentive for new blood to enter politics when they have little or no chance of being selected for election.
I’m not picking on these guys in particular. They just happen to be the two longest serving examples. There were others of similar longevity but they had the good grace to eventually retire, or die after half a century or so. Amazingly more than one hundred members of Congress have been allowed to serve for at least 36 years.
When I say “serve” I am just using the normal expression for these jobs. Whether they realize it or not, career politicians are nothing more than parasites living a cozy life off the money provided by the rest of us through our taxes. When an elected representative is entrenched in his or her position for a very long period of time they are not serving their people, they are simply relying on their people to provide them with a good living, premier health care and generous pension benefits (assuming they retire eventually!).
“Ah,” I hear someone say. “But what about the ‘experience’ that these long serving members bring?”
“Oh,” I reply. “What about it? Have we not seen in recent years and months that whatever experience they bring is not worth a hell of a lot. Just look at the mess the country is in and tell me if fresh faces could do any worse.”
So the solution to the two worst political problems that face America are easily solved.
The next question is will they be solved?
And the answer to that is probably ‘NO’. And it is probably ‘NO’ because the people who have the power to change the law are the very people that that law would affect.
They say turkeys wouldn’t vote for Thanksgiving or Christmas.
Asses and elephants probably wouldn’t vote for this idea either.
What a pity.
2 thoughts on “Term Talk”
I’m strictly non-political. I think that puts me a better position to recognize the folly in all this. Experience is what one brings to the job from the private sector. A person skilled in something as useless as politics couldn’t make change at cash register. The founding fathers had in mind everyday citizens (farmers, businessmen, tradesmen, etc.) running the legislation of the country. Rather than revolutions every now and then, elect a whole new set of farmers, businessmen, tradesmen, etc . No one living at that time would dare stick around more that a few terms. Such thinking would have returned them to concepts of a ruling class which is what they left in Europe and most particular England.
As for the folly of electing lawyers as a part of the legislative process to assure legislation was legal, that’s what the judiciary was for.
The executive branch was there to execute or carry out the will of the legislative bodies. I think the founding fathers had in mind that the president would be kept so busy signing papers and running the government that the only time we would her his name is the declaration of war, peace, and election time. Presidents have become nothing more than figureheads or dictators and it started early in our history.
Thanks for your comment. We are indeed a long way from the ideals of the Founding Fathers.