Chris Hedges on 'The Pathology of the Rich'
The Economics of Wage Slavery
Why Republicans Can't Address Rising Inequality
Jon Stewart Proves Corporations Are Not People, Once and for All
Money's Triumph Over Art
Left, Right & Center: ‘The Meaning of Mandela and Income Inequality’
Why Republicans Can’t Address Rising Inequality
Nelson Mandela, the Conscience of the World
Raise the Minimum Wage
Eating Like There’s No Tomorrow
Dig led by Mike Rose
Dig led by Truthdig Staff
By Reinhold Niebuhr; Robin W. Lovin (Introduction by)
By Baratunde Thurston $24.99
By Mike Luckovich
More Below the Ad
Email to a friend
Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
By Samson, January 28, 2010 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment
Everyone uses ATM machines.
A lot of people use on-line-banking.
The financial industry itself moves billions around ‘electronically’ every day.
The security needed for a secure online government system is basically what’s already been developed for the banking industry.
By Hulk2008, January 27, 2010 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment
Since we are now out of the horse-and-buggy era and into the Internet Age, that would be the appropriate vehicle for all political action including voting. Correct ?
So what would happen ?
The Russian, Chinese, Irish, Indian, and Bengladeshi hackers would immediately overwhelm the voting process and install someone from Baliwood as President. Congress would be comprised of bogus web site vendors that currently sell phony Viagra, Extenze, and Girls Gone Wild videos. Hanging paper chad would be eliminated in favor of counting Nutrisystem ads. And the Supreme Court would be replaced by the Oracle from The Matrix.
Come to think of it, maybe we would be better off.
By Samson, January 27, 2010 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment
One more simple reform that I’d suggest would be to say that only registered voters who can vote in an election can donate to candidates in an election.
If an election is to pick the ‘representative’ of a district, then why is money from outside that district allowed to influence the election.
If you try to contact a congresscritter on say a key committee about an issue you are concerned about, you quickly get a message saying that since you don’t live in the district that the congresscritter doesn’t want to hear from you.
But, you know if you had $10,000 to give to a politician, that they’d gladly talk to someone outside their district.
A simple rule. Only registered voters in a race can make contributions to that race. Its their district after all.
By Samson, January 27, 2010 at 12:10 pm Link to this comment
Another thought on what we could do if writing the Constitution today ....
In the late 1700’s, the only ‘democracy’ that they had to emulate was the strange winner-take-all parlimentary elections in England. This of course was implemented there more to block democracy and to keep the landed gentry in power.
But of course, the rest of the world has moved on and improved and refined democracy since then. One key innovation was ‘proportional’ representation.
If the Greens and the Libertarians make up roughly 5% of the vote each, why shouldn’t each party have around 20 seats each in the House? That would be 5% of that body.
Our winner-take-all system is not ‘democratic’. Instead, it is designed to make sure the most powerful person in each region gets elected, thus ensuring a ‘congress’ of only the rich and the powerful.
If the Constitution was written today, surely we’d take advantage of the improvements in democracy in the last 200 years and not use a ‘winner-take-all’ legislature.
By Samson, January 27, 2010 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment
Nice title, nice cartoon.
The title made me think. What if the Constitution was written today.
For one thing, this Constitution was written for a horse and buggy era where it might take a month to travel to the capital. Thus, the only way a national democracy could take place is through elected representatives.
Today, we live in a communications era. There’s no reason why today we could not have a direct democracy with the participation of citizens.
Why not a two-house congress, but one where we get rid of the Senate, promote the current House to that role, and then put in a true ‘People’s House’ where everyone can participate in a direct democracy?
By bozh, January 27, 2010 at 11:36 am Link to this comment
Does one think that US constitution wld have been written by Them if it cld be understood or understood but only by Them; i.e., their judges?
Does one think that schooling wld be permitted if it offereed an elucidation of how US system works?
How ab polls and balloting? While same judges judge all that happens in US!tnx
By bozhidar, January 27, 2010 at 9:02 am Link to this comment
A constitution comprises of a set of ‘laws’. However, until just last century we have lived everywhere and everywhen in lawlesness.
‘Laws’ means that only Them wrote them: modern and ancient owners of land or means of production or control of money [money, since ca 3.5 k yrs ago].
Money, in principle of course, being an extremely useful tool. tnx
By johnnyfarout, January 27, 2010 at 8:31 am Link to this comment
The “root cause” is right there on the TV for us all to see and hear. I heard an interview on NPR with a Chinese student, a few months back, who was asked what he thought Americans did in their daily lives. He said, in flawless conversational English, “Americans wake up in the morning by a radio alarm clock that broadcasts commercials to them for 20 minutes of every half hour while they drink coffee, then they get in their cars and join a massive traffic jam on their way to work, all the while listening to commercials on their radios. Then they arrive at work where they lie, cheat, and scheme all day, while listening to commercials on their breaks. After work they drive to a pub, listening to commercials all the while. They have a couple of cocktails with their friends, talk about commerce and the sports commercials, and then they drive home listening to commercials; once home they eat dinner while listening to the news and more commercials. The next day they do it all over again.” What else is there in life, eh? What other way is there to live? If this is “god’s plan”, I wonder which corporations he/she’d advise us to invest in so we can continue this forever, but in an even bigger way, huh? Ad nauseum. Am I cynical and bitter? Why hell yeah, it took me a long time to get this way… and I’m there now baby! Let’s get logos tattooed on each of us so we can walk around stamped in truth like the slavering manacled creatures we are anymore nowadays anyway.
By samosamo, January 27, 2010 at 7:01 am Link to this comment
It is called lobbying which was, somewhere back when,
criminal bribery now turned to a cozy sounding activity that
would allow access to our elected officials who could not
stand to do ‘town hall’ meetings and listen to who they
consider ‘inferiors’ but now are greeted in back offices with
suitcases of cash to pass pre-written bills as legislation that
will benefit a few over the many who elect these bastards, and
all the while we wonder what is going on when all we have to
do is stop watching the goddamn stupidizing tv for a couple
of seconds and to go look in the mirror to see the root cause.
By RAE, January 27, 2010 at 6:20 am Link to this comment
One person. One vote.
And anyone or any corporation that makes any attempt to influence that vote or any voter with anything but rational, demonstrably factual, and above all, civil argument, should be subject to open censure and legal action.
Somehow laws need to be put in place that completely prohibit all this backroom dealing and corporate bribery. The people’s business MUST be conducted in a manner accessible by all citizens and MUST be the “truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”
Those concerns of “of national security” that must be kept secret may ONLY be designated as such by a judicial tribunal that is completely independent of government or other influence.
That reminds me… I must move to Waldon Pond.
By mcthorogood, January 26, 2010 at 10:53 pm Link to this comment
The U.S. Federal Reserve is a private corporation. Today the third largest line item in the federal budget, behind military and social expenditures, is interest paid on the national debt. We are taxed to pay that interest, and the profit made by the Federal Reserve can be used to influence elections because corporations are entitled to free speech? Something is wrong.
By Virginia777, January 26, 2010 at 10:19 pm Link to this comment
so freaking true!!
By redspades, January 26, 2010 at 7:53 pm Link to this comment
By samosamo, January 26, 2010 at 4:10 pm Link to this comment
More like Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ where the ‘rules’ are adjusted as
sign up to get updates
Get Our Feed