Tag Archives: term limits

Economics, Elections, Governance, Politics 2022, Representation, Taxation

“with Liberty and Corruption for all.”

Leave a comment

There are always consequences to corruption in government agencies… and officials… and it’s not always mere dollars.  Simple graft is bad enough for it demonstrates the willingness to lie more or less directly to the people an official or “representative” has sworn to serve while in office.  Typically, we, the foolish voters in either party, see our “humble” servants gain ever more comfortable styles of living, but those gaining the increased comforts are usually careful to hide the actual scale of thefts from which they benefit, and we re-elect them.  We tell ourselves that the problems facing government are the fault of other or previous representatives or senators, mayors, city councilors, governors or, ultimately, presidents, not the ones for whom WE voted.  Our civil society is breaking down, it seems, in every way we contemplate, and yet we only shake our heads when trying to explain what is happening.  The scale of American civil failure disturbs us and we try our best to isolate the one thing we would change if we ran the zoo, but it’s not really clear that our ideas would really cause the change we think we want.  Besides, we’re busy and, fortunately, there’s an election on the horizon and we’ll be able to change the party holding power – or most of it – and “things” will get straightened out.

Except they rarely do get straightened out, or even “change” very much.  Over the past, say 70 years, America’s direction has not been toward strength or toward moral purity, but toward weakness and moral decline.  Still, there appears to be a majority in the country that prefers moral straightness and traditional American honesty and trustworthiness.  Why have “things” declined – lately quite dramatically, in the past 30 years in particular – when most people want the direction to be otherwise?  It’s a damned good question.

The Prudent thing to do, as our erstwhile Vice-President, Kamala Harris, likes to say, is look for a “root cause.”

Prudence offers a theory of the root cause based on extensive evidence: official corruption.  We are in decline not because “the times” are changing.  In fact, we have purposefully caused our own decline by electing corrupt people, and then re-electing them over and over.  The effects of this simple process are very complex – for good, purposeful reasons – and far-reaching to, now, threatening the survival of our nation.  While this sounds like there’s a single “thing” we could change to correct our decline, if this theory is true, we are so far gone that no election or piece of legislation can do it.  But Prudence is committed to never leaving her readers without a solution, or a host of them, so fasten your seatbelts.

Fifty thinkers studying the problem would have 150 opinions about what should be our FIRST move, and in truth, it is the largest conundrum.  So, we have to look for some of those root causes so that beloved corrupt politicians can’t make things worse.  Although its strictures are being eroded as quickly as the left (it’s always “the left”) can chip away at them, our remarkable Constitution is still the fundament of our laws and means of governance.  However, it cannot speak to our modern, sophisticated ways and means of subversion and corruption.  It needs some upgrading via amendment, and via an amendment process that cannot be corrupted by our “deep state” or current elected officials and representatives.  It won’t be easy, but Article V. of the constitution provides the mechanisms for proposing and adopting Amendments.  One such mechanism is for 34 states to apply to Congress for the calling of a Convention for the purpose of proposing amendments.  The Congress must issue the call for such a convention, and then step aside, as the Constitution allows for no further role for the Congress in this mode of proposing amendments.  Ratification is performed by the states, too: three quarters, or 38 of them.

The key to saving our nation, then, is the nature of those who actually attend the Convention, and there is the crux of the matter.  It seems obvious to Prudence that “the left” should have no role in such a Convention.  How can this be ascertained?  Could there be a test of philosophies to select each state’s delegates, like Supreme Court nominees?  State legislatures are going to control who represents their states.  One can hope that the 34 states that ultimately make Application to the Congress to call the Convention, will be the more conservative states, but there is no certainty to that.  Many resolutions over the decades have been passed by one state legislature only to be rescinded by a later legislature.  Most had specified one or two purposes for the Convention to form into amendments.  In many cases, the nature of those reasons to call for the Convention were the reasons for recission, later.

The likelihood of actually convening an “Article V. Convention of the States” appears remote.  A more likely possibility is that during Republican control of both houses of congress, an amendment could be proposed and submitted to the states for ratification.  Such an action requires a two-thirds vote in both houses, but no approval from a President.  Still, there will be a problem obtaining even that much cooperation when one of the key elements of an amendment is to impose term limits on Senators and Representatives.  Could the case be made that the time had come for courage and sacrifice?  It all depends on how corrupt the Congress is at the time.  But let’s assume that a clean, traditionalist, pro-American delegate body could be filtered out and assembled.  What are the “TOP 12” fixes the amendment should include?

Term limits for federal offices keeps coming up as of prime importance.  With our longer lifespans, instant communications and unbridled budgeting with perpetual debt, the opportunities for becoming wealthy in Congressional “service,” are legion.  All that is required is a tingle of corrupt aggrandizement.  One need only pick apart any budget legislation or any “emergency” spending bill – often an “omnibus” bill – that is more than 20 or 30 pages long, and numerous “earmarks” can be found.  These happy “gifts” to Rep’s and Senator’s districts and, often, key supporters, are the price we pay to keep our elected “representatives in office for 20, 40 or more years.  During those decades the motivation to represent the constituents who elect a 2-year or 6-year representative, is twisted into the overarching motivation to keep a cushy, well-paid job in which lots of people treat the lucky “seat-holder” as if he or she were very important.  News media seek out the elected and ask for their unique and oh-so-important thoughts about whatever is “hot” at the moment.  Before too many months have passed since taking office, the elected begin to think that they are wise, not just smart.  After the first re-election, they also begin to accept that they occupy their “seat” because they are one of the uniquely capable humans who can understand the positions to which they have been elected, and understand, at the same time, the incredibly complex and arcane workings of government and legislation.  How fortunate are the ordinary people who are represented by any one of these august creatures.

We have a “system” of election and “representation” that corrupts men and women, alike.  Their jobs are too comfortable and too permanent.  We pay them too well no matter how poor or sloppy a job they do, and no matter how poorly the country and their constituents are doing.  There are too many “perks” and advantages built into their job descriptions and, with the exquisite tools available for twisting news and social media, there is virtually no oversight of their performance.  We re-elect them so that they might “fight for us” in Washington, or, at least, so that they can keep the scurrilous bastards and bitches in the other party from taking away our Medicare, 401k’s or Social Security, or from raising taxes and fees and imposing onerous regulations.

Helping to grease the skids toward illicit wealth are an army of lobbyists – more than we can imagine.  Many of them represent not only business and hand-out interests, but also foreign countries who all, it turns out, have their hands out, too.

The whole corrupted enterprise depends in large part on long-term relationships with those lobbyists and the abiding motivation to be re-elected.  What makes it work is repetitive re-election.  The first article of the new Amendment should be Term Limits on consecutive terms of service.  It doesn’t seem proper to create a group of people who cannot run for certain offices.  Forcing them to remain out of particular offices for a period of 4, 6, 8 or 12 years will open up representation to people who are NOT compromised by lobbyists and re-election corruption.

The second article should pertain to the budget, but not simply that it be balanced.  It should force Congress to manage budget legislation while forcing oversight of the administrative state and the flood of regulations that emanates from it.  So, the “A” paragraph will force the congress to budget no more revenue than that collected in the previous 12 months, and that it shall have 4 budgetary cycles to accomplish this goal.  The “B” paragraph will require that every Cabinet Department’s budget and planned regulatory effort for the next budget year, shall be analyzed and approved or modified separately from other departments.  A sub-committee shall also be charged to review existing regulations and to recommend changes to or “sunsetting of” regulatory regimes.  Finally, the “C” paragraph shall require a date-certain for completion of budgeting and oversight that is prior to the beginning of the next fiscal 1-year or 2-year period.

A third article would simply state that the Congress may, by law, change federal budgeting to be bi-annual rather than annual, should the work of review described in Article 2 take longer than will allow for annual budgeting.

The fourth article will require that: A. No legislation may include items of appropriation or law that are not listed in the title of the bill; B. No bill that raises or lowers taxes may be more than 40 pages long, printed in 8 point or larger type; C. Any bill that appropriates funds for projects or support for any cause or construction that impacts a single District or two or more Districts in a single state must be presented as a single bill to be voted upon separately from any other matter; and, D. Any “continuing resolution” deemed necessary for continued operation of any agency or department of the Federal Government shall include spending at a rate equal to that of the budget cycle preceding that which is just ending, whether a 1-year or 2-year budget cycle.

Finally, the fifth article will replace Social Security with a mandated private investment plan at the same rate of payroll contributions as currently required, with restrictions on dates of retirement similar to those now enforced.  A period of years would be required to completely phase out the current federal “piggy-bank” structure of Social Security so that once privatized – carefully overseen and regulated – the funds will build wealth for taxpayers and cease being a drain on the Federal budget.

There are a hundred other ideas for cleansing our federal spending and taxation and limiting opportunities for self-enrichment while in office.  With more frequent turnover of elected personnel the expectation will be that more Congress-people will employ statesmanship more often, and not fear fighting the bad habits of others.  The same will limit the amount of damage a bad-apple can do in his or her limited period in office.

Meanwhile, let us stop electing career politicians.  Let’s impose our own term limits, particularly at the caucus and primary levels.  The office-holders who have participated in expanding the debt to, now, more than $30 TRILLION, do not deserve re-election.  Remain Prudent.

Economics, Governance, Representation, Taxation

ARTICLE v. AMENDMENT

Leave a comment

If there were, finally, a convention of the States under article 5 of the Constitution, there are many concerns that people across the political spectrum would like to “fix,” and some of these are appropriately “Constitutional.”  Care must be taken to control the content of the hundreds of proposals that will likely inundate the convention.  Still, here are a few problem areas that are the result of either inadequate institutional structure for today’s technologies (communication, globalism, trade and warfare), or the result of the infusion into federal responsibility dozens if not hundreds of matters that are the appropriate business of sovereign states within a federal system.  Here is a list as seems Prudent:

Lifetime Sinecures – Senators and Representatives are in office too long.  The basic mechanism of election and re-election has become anachronistic in the age of, first, widespread and rapid communication, and, now, virtually instant and digitized communication and data analysis.  The control of data and virtual control of news/information, results in mostly “safe” seats, quantified as 94+% re-election rates.   If each were motivated by purity of public service and statesmanship, longevity in office might be laudable.  Unfortunately, we see over recent decades, that federal office-holders not only tend to ignore their constituents, preferring to deal with and respond to their confederates at the next Senate or House desk, but they become wealthy while in office, leading them to focus on pleasing those Congressional associates so that re-election is made more likely.  Once the first re-election is accomplished, relationships with lobbyists and interest-group advocates of all stripes become more and more crucial and consuming.

This means that change #1 should be Term Limits which, most Prudently, should be stated in terms of continuous service.  That is, being a past Senator or Representative should not preclude running for that office at some future date.  The issue is: How many terms must pass before an individual can run again?  Prudence suggests that one full Senate term and two House terms are appropriate periods.

Administrative Statism – For many reasons we are devolving into a national, rules-based control system, rather than a willing federation of semi-sovereign states, based on laws and shared cultural mores.  Since the Great Depression, the many Congresses and 13 more or less feckless Presidents have overseen massive growth in administrative departments and programs.  Erstwhile “representatives” have successfully divested themselves of most of their governing responsibilities, save two critical ones: Expanding the scope of issues that must be federalized, and Debt Creation.  This massive, unelected, regulatory bloat must be reversed, and the only way to do so is to regain control over federal budgeting.

Federal Budgeting – Of the three key covenants the federal government holds with the citizens of the several states and with the states, themselves, how tax monies are spent is the one that affects everyone, every day.  For the past 50 years, or so, there has not been a “budget,” in fact, for a budget would limit expenditures to match, virtually, the revenues raised.  Moreover, the revenues raised would, in an honest federal system, be expended only by vote of the two houses of Congress and agreement of the President.  We are told this is the case, still, but in truth, most of the budget is “entitlements,” and these are rarely, if ever, considered as manageable by Congress, and if some slight study of them is attempted, the result is generally to increase them by increasing the indebtedness of the United States.  That is, we have outlived our means for decades – a most mendacious process.

By itself, the failure of a string of Congresses to debate, analyze and produce an expenditure plan that is honest with the citizenry, and affordable through taxation, is proof of the utter failure of political leadership since the inception of the Great Society.  These failed potentates of promiscuous promises get re-elected at a 90+% rate, while their “work” product becomes smaller and smaller.  They receive automatic pay raises.

So, correcting the budget process will solve multiple losses of freedom.  There should be an amendment that requires that the “budget” of EVERY Department, Agency, Program and Title within them, shall be approved separately by the Congress through legislation.  In short order this will be seen as “impossible,” and the impossibility of financing more “line items” than can be understood or even counted, should become clear.  The redundancy and overlap of purposes for the thousands of expensive programs, must be cleared away and reduced to fewer than one hundred.  The federal government must get out of much of the peoples’ business that it is in.  Some of it is best managed by States with overarching direction by federal laws that ARE APPROVED by Congress, not by relatively hidden agencies and functionaries.  Americans deserve REPRESENTATION in all matters lawful and budgetary.  This brings us to another section of this amendment.

Legislation – There shall be no “omnibus” bills or laws.  That is, no bill shall be brought forth the content of which is not directly related to a single purpose clearly described in its title, nor should the text of any section be longer than 250 words, with budgetary supporting statements of account allowed, nor should any bill in its entirety contain more than 2,000 words.  Prudence would dictate that unrelated attachments to “must-pass” legislation should be banned.

Further, no new policies or expenditures may be included in any “budget” or taxation legislation without a separate bill that shall be studied and approved by committee and brought to a vote by the whole Congress.  Legislation for such “new” federal activities must contain provisions for financing said actions or policies WITHOUT causing any increase in the indebtedness of the United States.

Balanced Budget – Having established over many decades that Congress is incapable of limiting or cutting virtually ANY expenses other than by shifting expenses from the Defense Department toward domestic expenditures, elected Representatives and Senators shall establish a balanced budget.  However, a limit must be set as a percentage of, what?  Gross Domestic Product?  Some percentage of all taxable income?  Can any “federal” metrics be even trusted?  Some clear standard of measure must be set, else the habitual connivance of re-election interests will modify and obfuscate the intention of this amendment.  Further, no budget shall be passed that increases the indebtedness of the United States except in times of national emergency  or declared war.

Citizenship – No person shall be counted among the census, nor be part of any apportionment of Congressional representation except he or she be a naturally born or legally naturalized citizen of the United States.  No person may be considered a naturally born citizen unless one or both parents shall be a legal citizen at the time of birth.

Sanctuary – No state may interfere with legitimate and proper execution of federal laws, nor with the proper functions and procedures of federal law enforcement personnel.  No law passed by any state or subdivision thereof shall be deemed enforceable if it shall interfere with execution of federal laws or attempt any form of nullification of federal laws.  Federal law enforcement agencies may withhold financial support from those state or local law enforcement agencies that attempt to inhibit, delay or interfere with proper federal law enforcement procedures and personnel.  Interference with proper and appropriate federal law enforcement and personnel shall be adjudicated in federal courts.

Prudence tells us that once a Convention of the States has come to pass, the prospects of another are much greater.  The actions of the organizers and participants of the first such convocation will form crucial precedents that may, one hopes, set a pattern similar to the traditions of the supreme Court, the membership of which has been only discussed, never changed.  Consideration might be given to yet another amendment that limits the frequency  of Article V. conventions.