During
a campaign speech in 1932, in response to the Great Depression and
its high unemployment and associated problems, Franklin D. Roosevelt
promised that he would create a “new deal for the American people.”
Today, Americans are ruled by a government which has lost sight of
the reason why it exists. It is time for another deal, except this
deal is from the people to the government.
Recently
we have heard about programs at the NSA that have been brought into
the public knowledge by information from ex-contractor Edward
Snowden. The government has attempted to downplay the workings and
impact of these programs, but published documents have shown that the
government is lying to the public about the nature and extent of what
the NSA is doing. It is clear that the NSA is able to intercept and
store the vast majority of electronic communication in the US,
including the private communications of Americans not suspected of a
crime.
This
activity, and the justification for it, seems unconstitutional
(Amendment
IV) although
the government tries to argue otherwise. Even though the government
may be able to offer a rationale for why the NSA's programs do not
technically fall afoul of the Constitution, it should be obvious that
these programs run counter to the ideals upon which the US was
founded. The government might not be violating the letter of the
Constitution (although I think that they are), but they are certainly
violating the spirit of it.
However,
this essay is not about the NSA's programs. The fact of the matter
is that the NSA's un-American programs and their enormous
budget,
or the TSA's abuse of travelers, or America's ongoing involvement in
military exercises at great expense to both human life and our
economy, are not the problems. They are only symptoms of the
problem. The problem is more fundamental to how our government is
currently set up and how it operates.
If
I try to state it succinctly, then the problem is that the government
no longer works to serve the people.
Instead, it works to serve corporate and special interests and, most
of all, itself. The politicians that we have elected are in power to
make sure that they and people like them stay in power. For many of
them, being a politician is not a service to the greater public, it
is a career.
Rep.
John Dingell has been in office for almost 58 years, in the same seat
that his father also held. Rep. Dingell is the longest-serving
member of Congress in the history of the United States, and he is
currently in office. Rep. John Conyers has almost 49 years, Rep.
Charlie Rangel has almost 43, and Rep. Dan Young has over 40 years in
office. In the Senate, Patrick Leahy has been there for almost 39
years, Orrin Hatch almost 37 years, and Senators Thad Cochran and Max
Baucus have been in Congress for over 40 and 38 years, respectively.
These
are not terms of public service, these are careers.
Another
example of the attitudes in Congress is the recent shutdown of the
federal government. Congress decided that it would be a better
course of action to shut down the government of the largest economy
in the world, an economy that is twice as large as the next
contender, because of political reasons.
The
shutdown had not even begun before members of Congress began blaming
each other, pointing across the aisle or at anyone other than
themselves and their friends. They were not fighting for the good of
the country as a whole, because if that was their major concern then
they would not have allowed the government to shut down. They were
fighting for control, for the opportunity to blame their enemies
(with whom they are supposed to be cooperating) and retain their own
power or
pursue a personal agenda.
This
type of behavior is seen among members of both major parties. The
attitude that members of Congress have towards their jobs was
perfectly summed-up by Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, when
he said “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for
President Obama to be a one-term president.” The goal is not to
help the people, or to reach common ground, the goal is to
consolidate power.
The
American people deserve better than this. I think that the time has
come to change how our political system works, and to shift the
balance of power in this country away from the government and towards
the public. If we fail, then the government will continue to
consolidate its power until the public has no power at all, and we
will not realize that it is happening until it has already happened.
We
have enabled the government to act this way because Americans display
a shocking level of apathy towards what the government is doing and
how it conducts itself. Americans do not care what the government
does as long as it doesn't do it to them. Unfortunately, once the
government does actually act against its people then it might be too
late to start caring.
People
seem content to vote for one of two options for President, or
Senator, or Representative, when the fact is that those two options
are far more similar than they are different. The first step in
taking our power back is to reform our election and campaign process,
and the easiest way to do that is to put control of the process back
with the people.
From
1976 to 1984 the League of Women Voters, founded in 1920, was
responsible for sponsoring and moderating the televised US
presidential debates. During the 1988 campaign season the League
voted unanimously to pull out of the debates. The campaigns of
George H. W. Bush and Michael Dukakis secretly agreed to a
“memorandum of understanding,” which allowed the campaigns to
decide which candidates get to debate and who gets to ask the
questions. The League of Women Voters responded by releasing this
statement:
The
League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential
debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would
perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us
that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list
of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and
answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming
an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.
-League
President Nancy M. Neuman, LWV October 03, 1988
The
Commission on Presidential Debates was formed by the Democratic and
Republican parties, and from 1988 until today the Democratic and
Republican parties have solely decided which candidates get to appear
on televised debates, and who the debate moderators are. It should
come as no surprise then that the candidates that we are faced with
are Democratic and Republican candidates. The major exception to
that rule is the 1992 election where billionaire Ross Perot was
allowed to debate, and he ended up getting nearly 20% of the popular
vote. The following election, in 1996, Perot ran again but he was
not allowed to debate, and only received 8% of the popular vote.
Voters in this country are presented with limited representation
during the crucial debates, and as a result we have limited options
from which to choose.
The
first step in solving the problem is to remove political control from
the presidential debates.
Any political party should be banned from sponsoring or organizing a
presidential debate, and control of the debate format and system
should be restored to a non-political entity such as the League of
Women Voters. We are not all red or blue in this country, some of us
are green or yellow or purple or anything else, and we deserve to
have more voices broadcast across the country in prime time to make
their ideas heard.
Corporate
and lobbyist money needs to be removed from the political system.
I believe that all elected officials, candidates, political parties,
and campaigns should be barred from receiving anything of value from
any lobbyist organization or corporation. Individuals (American or
foreign) should be allowed to donate whatever they want, but those
donations should be made public so that everyone can see who is
influencing the elections and politicians. If an elected official or
candidate receives anything of value from a corporation or lobbyist
organization or political action committee, then they should be
disqualified or removed from office and the organization that
attempted to influence them should be fined proportionally to the
value of the donation (e.g. 10 times the value). Lobbyists can still
exist, but they need to lobby with words and rationality and not
money or services or other gifts or bribes.
We
need term limits for all members of Congress.
Members of Congress are supposed to be private citizens that leave
the private sector in order to serve the public, and once their
service is finished they return to the private sector. Congress
should have a term limit across both the House and Senate. A person
should be eligible to serve at most 4 terms in the House and 2 in the
Senate, for a total of 20 years. The notion of a career politician
needs to be eliminated. Politicians are there to serve the public,
not themselves. Within recent months, polls have shown the
Congressional approval rating to be as low as 9%, and the disapproval
as high as 83%. Americans do not like Congress, and it is time that
we make changes to ensure that they are working for us and not each
other. Congress must be held accountable.
Elected
officials should be prohibited from participating in any stock market
or speculative trading while they are in office.
Exceptions could be made for certain types of physical assets, such
as real estate, but not for assets like commodity futures or
corporate stock. Again, they are in office to serve us, not to
enrich themselves. Serving the public should be a position of
sacrifice, not a position of prestige and wealth. They should be in
office to serve the public, not to remain there until they can
retire.
The
problems with government start with the election process and the
legislative branch. We cannot achieve real reform unless the
legislative branch is truly working for the people. However, this is
easier said than done. Is revolution actually necessary to achieve
this? Are amendments to the Constitution necessary to correct these
problems? I don't think I'm the one who can answer those questions,
I think these are questions that we need to figure out as a nation.
The problem is compounded by the fact that we have a federal
government that asserts the right to kill anyone across the globe for
reasons that are secret; that has the capability of spying on
virtually anyone they want to target; that actively lies to the
public about the nature and capability of its programs; and that can
redefine the word “terrorist” to make it mean whatever they want
it to mean. This is a difficult problem to address when we have a
legislative branch that wants things to stay more or less as they are
– with them in power.
The
problem is further compounded by the fact that a lot of Americans
just don't care. If people don't start demanding that their
government works for them then nothing is going to change. I believe
that restoring control of the presidential debates to a non-political
entity, removing corporate and lobbyist money from the political
system, limiting members of Congress in how long they can serve, and
limiting all elected officials in how they are allowed to earn money
while in office are the best steps that we can take to regain control
of our government.
Like
during the Great Depression, it is time for a new deal. Not a deal
from the government to the people, but a deal from the people to the
government. The government is accountable to us, so we need to set
the rules. Roosevelt's words are as true today as they were in 1932:
Throughout
the nation men and women, forgotten in the political philosophy of
the Government, look to us here for guidance and for more equitable
opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth... I
pledge myself to a new deal for the American people. This is more
than a political campaign. It is a call to arms.
-Franklin
D. Roosevelt, 1932
Please
visit and sign the
petition on change.org to show your support for these ideals.
