What To Do To Stop Back-room Dealing In Politics

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Meta777, Jul 9, 2018.

  1. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now that's thinking outside of the box! :thumbsup:
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  2. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What specific parts of the government would you suggest need to be 'depowered'?
    The government is a large and complex animal, so saying that the whole thing needs to be cut back is a bit too vague.

    Derideo remarks that the areas of government which are most likely to become corrupt or fall victim to bribery are the parts involving anything that would positively and or negatively affect the private sector. Do you agree with that? And if so, what exactly could we do to limit the powers of those particular parts of government such that they would be less susceptible to corruption and bribery while still being able to function towards the purpose or purposes they were originally set up for? Or would it just be better to completely rid ourselves of those governmental entities entirely? If we're going to go that route, we'd definitely want to identify and know the individual names of the entities first.

    -Meta
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  3. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Whether or not a resolution can be found for immigration, that issue is definitely complex regardless.
    No two ways about it, especially if one is trying to come up with a comprehensive solution for it.

    As for backroom dealing, maybe you're right, and it cannot be stopped, but certainly there must be things we can do to
    reduce its likelihood or curtail some of the negative effects that come from it.

    Both are part of the same overarching kettle of fish.
    A comprehensive approach would address both the immigrants themselves and the security and enforcement mechanisms.

    If you want to talk about it more though, since this thread is about backroom dealing,
    we should move the immigration discussion over to one of these other threads, and actually,
    you might even want to check them all out. They are voting threads, and the voting is underway now.

    What is the Most Important Immigration Category Needing to be Dealt With?
    How To Enact Immigration Reform? (Undocumented Immigrants & Visa Overstays)
    How To Enact Immigration Reform? (Immigrants Wishing to Immigrate Legally)
    How To Enact Immigration Reform? (Immigrants Who've Already Achieved Legal Status)
    How To Enact Immigration Reform? (Immigration Systems, Security, & Enforcement)
    How To Enact Immigration Reform? (Foreign Outreach/Other)

    -Meta
     
  4. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i think every part as even the military had private contractors during the last war.

    when it is that far up it is not considered bribery or corruption, but part of doing business.
     
  5. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Believe what you wish...but if so-called solutions have little chance of implementation, logically they cannot be considered viable solutions. Example; someone very poor believing one solution for them is winning Powerball. While the odds are a zillion:1 that they can win...they might continue to believe it's a solution to being poor. Obviously...winning Powerball IS NOT a viable solution. Anything on your list that does not have 'high' odds for implementation cannot be considered solutions...
     
  6. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Chances of implementation will of course be increased for any proposed solutions which gain in popularity.
    But that can't happen unless people are willing to actually share, discuss, and think about those solutions.
    Anyways, if you can think of something better than what's in the list right now, feel free to let us know what it is.
    If not, I think we'll just continue on considering and discussing what's there.

    -Meta
     
  7. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I added this to the list. Written as "Remove Spin From Press Reporting".
    Assuming the idea here would be that by getting press to do more fact-based and less opinion-oriented reporting,
    politicians wouldn't have to worry so much about getting beat up and dragged through the mud by political pundits?
    If the stations simply reported on what a politician votes for ect. and simply left it at that, leaving the voters themselves
    to decide on their own how they felt about it, then the politician might be more inclined to do things like compromise out in the open?
    Is that the thinking here?

    -Meta
     
  8. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I really like that idea a lot. Take some of the power of congress and give it back to the common people.
    Have the people oversee the way congress folk conduct themselves rather than relying on congress to self-police.
    This one almost seems like a no-brainier and I can't really think of any downsides to it assuming it is well implemented.

    -Meta
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  9. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you suggesting that politicians are infallible? That they are incapable of unethical behavior?
    That they would never put personal self-interests before the interests of the American people??

    Lol!

    -Meta
     
  10. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,133
    Likes Received:
    16,080
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Glad you see the potential clearly- that would be vital to actually bringing it to reality.
    Of course this concept would meet with intense resistance by our congress, but as you state properly implemented, it is totally non-partisan. Such a group would have zero influence over how members voted or what they sponsored, the sole purpose would be to insure they do their job as it should be done- honorably and in the best interests of the nation first.

    Our original concept in terms of how to get it moving was that in some fashion, we would need to publicize the concept, make it widely known. Somewhere along the way, find a Representative in congress willing to introduce it, and get so much public support behind it that stalling it or voting against the bill would be political suicide. The term for support like that is "super-majority", meaning support in the range of 2/3 or more of the voters in both major parties. That would be impossible with conventional legislation, but the non-partisan aspect and nature of the bill makes this a completely unique situation. Because such a bill would probably put an end to a lot of lucrative activity that congress has enjoyed as a privilege and perk for many decades, you could be sure that there would be objections of every kind coming from congress. Of course they couldn't really object to the concept of honoring their oath and good ethics, so the objections would be very creative and evasive. Still, if the public pressure was there, it would eventually prevail.

    The special interests and large business might also see it as highly desirable. The expense of lobbying- buying influence lobbyists and contributions is not something that large business wants to do; more something they must do. Influence is for sale only because congress allows it. If it were not for sale, there would be no buyers. There are 20 lobbyists in Washington for every member of congress, and most of them make a lot more money than the members of congress do. That's a lot of expense they would love to eliminate.

    Currently, when the nature of a legislation or a political position can influence the future of a particular business, the affected companies are placed in a competitive situation. For example, one knows that if they don't buy enough consideration in congress, their competitor will and as a result they will gain advantage. IF influence was simply not for sale, neither of them would be buying. This of course affects the funds available for politicians to campaign with- so that goes directly to the pocketbook of every politician. However, if everyone is in the same boat, none of them are the worse for it.... the bottom line is more honest legislation and a reduction in the barrage of election ads and calls the voters have to deal with.

    I'd like to hear the opinions of others regarding ways this could be put into action. Comments and suggestions welcome!
     
    Meta777 likes this.
  11. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't see any problem with so-called back room deals? There's actually no such thing since it requires approval of Congress to pass anything. If there is any problem, as I stated earlier, it's that our representatives no longer vote for the best interests of the USA, and, the same applies to voters. As long as no one is creating policy that is in the best interest of the USA, for the long term, we will have the status quo of zero consensus and do-nothing government. IMO this is a cultural phenomenon so make a list of 'ideas' how to change the culture...
     
  12. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
  13. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the self interests of politicians are the interests of the American people, they are bought and paid for by Americans who have earned their way to the top of the ladder on both sides of the republic.
     
    OldManOnFire likes this.
  14. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,588
    Likes Received:
    16,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The only countries that don't have back room deals of the sort you are talking about also aren't democracies. Most back room deals in the US have to do with infrastructure projects. It goes back to the old saying that one man's wasteful pork barrel project is another man's desperately needed Highway improvement project.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2018
  15. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
  16. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
  17. stratego

    stratego Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,411
    Likes Received:
    973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No need for back room deals when everything is discussed out in the open on the golf course.
     
  18. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So the golf-courses have replaced the back-rooms?
    But we can still call them back-room deals (figuratively) if prying eyes and ears are kept away, right? :)

    -Meta
     
  19. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
  20. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with everything you wrote here. Educating our neighbors on the politicians and the issues is definitely going to be an important factor. But it'll be difficult if people aren't interested in the issues,... Back Room Dealing was actually up there with immigration as the number one issues facing the country, and yet right now it seems that not that many people are interested in it (see the voting thread). What sorts of things can we who know the importance of the issues do to get more of fellow citizens to take an interest?

    -Meta
     
  21. Loving91390

    Loving91390 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2017
    Messages:
    559
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    43
    How about .... Just grow up !

    It is what it is .... And it's never going away .
     
  22. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Probably not very long at all!

    A lot of the ideas and stuff we've been discussing in this thread just seem so common sense its a wonder we as a country haven't already gotten around to implementing them. Also, a bit surprised that there's any opposition at all on tamping down on those kinds of behaviors. Makes me wonder...

    -Meta
     
    Seth Bullock likes this.
  23. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's the thing though, Ranked Voting actually makes voters more likely to research the particular views of politicians.
    As it is under our current Plurality system with there generally being only up to two candidates with any fair chance of winning,
    a lot of voters don't bother closely comparing the policy views of the candidates,... instead simply voting for which ever one runs under their party banner. And while Ranked Voting wouldn't get everyone to think more about their votes, it would at least get some of them, particularly those with more moderate views, to do more than just mindlessly vote for a party rather than a policy set.

    Of course.

    -Meta
     
  24. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We shouldn't be treating voters like children here... and we especially should not be treating them like children when doing so comes at the expense of good outcomes which are actually accurately reflective of what the voters desire. You say that our current Plurality system is superior to Ranked Voters because it simplifies the choices for voters?... that they are comfortable with the current two-party duopoly?... that they really and truly only either like Democrats or Republicans and nothing else??? That couldn't be any further from the truth; the reality is that most voters are fed up with the two major parties and would love to replace them with someone, almost anyone, else if only our election system would give independents, moderates, and third parties a fair shot.

    Opinion of the Republican Party falls to all-time low
    Views of Democratic Party hit lowest mark in 25 years


    [​IMG]

    So no... clearly people are not satisfied with the way things are now, and their confidence in things has been declining over time. The entrenched two-party duopoly is to blame here. It both precludes voters from being able to put into office politicians who accurately represent the country as a whole and contributes to division. It also contributes to harmful binary thinking, pigeonholing, false-dichotomies, and partisan tribalism which over time stifles our collective ability to find and implement compromise on important issues.

    Ranked Voting can reverse those trends. If some people find considering more than two options a bother, then it should be noted that Ranked Voting in no way requires them to, and for that reason, we should not limit the options of those more engaged in things on the behalf of the less engaged. I'd also again add that Ranked Voting encourages people to become more engaged in the first place simply by granting them the option to consider more choices without having to worry so much about things like spoilers.

    So again, let's not treat voters like children by continuing to unnecessarily limit their choices.

    -Meta
     
  25. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,618
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well I definitely wouldn't object to that approach. Though I think in going that route, some sort of clear distinctions would need to be made as to what would count as personal vs official. I'm sure some would try to skirt around the rules regardless (they always do), how we deal with that though would depend upon the exact method(s) we decided upon for enforcing that 100% disclosure.

    -Meta
     

Share This Page