ELECTIONS: ARE THEY CLEAN?
ANALYSIS AND APPRAISAL
It is very difficult, in our very capitalistic political environment,(Republicans as well as Democrats)to believe that when someone donates millions of dollars to a political campaign, such donor or organization will NOT REQUEST A PAYBACK OR A FAVOR from the candidate.
I remember, not long ago, during an election for councilmen for the City of McLean, Virginia, a very honest and well-liked by almost the whole community hardware store owner, lost the election due to the lack of funds. He decided that if the voting public was going to elect him to the City Council, they would do it as a matter of principle. It did not happen and he did not get elected. The excuses were numerous and none of them valid with regard to POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS.
Such election, for a CITY, NOT EVEN A COUNTY, position at that time, cost more than 100 thousand dollars. The salary of the Councilman was $8,000 per year. Now, how in a devil can the elected Councilman pay for the contributions?. . . Your answer, whatever is it has to be true, because it will be paid by improving the City, it will be paid by building more football fields, to ADVANCE EDUCATION, or it will be paid by . . . Let's say small favors.
In this present elections GAME, every time that it is published that millions, I repeat millions, not thousands, but millions of dollars contributed to each one of the candidates, such contributors are doing it because of principles or because they really believe in the cause that the candidates are fighting for.
There are no great differences between the candidates from one party or the other; obviously the two stronger parties, Democrats and Republicans, when it comes to money and it so patent that our elections are directly related to money, much more than principle.
We are directed to believe that one candidate or the other has in their hearts and minds the welfare of the general population, not a special group. Then how do we explain that big donors CONTRIBUTE JUST AS WELL TO THE DEMOCRATS AS TO THE REPUBLICANS, IN A SIMILAR WAY THAT ATHLETES CHANGE FROM, LET'S SAY THE REDSKINS TO THE DALLAS COWBOYS. Is it for love or loyalty, come on . . . For MONEY.
I have no great complaints regarding our CAPITALISTIC way of life. I live here and enjoy the fruits of capitalism. However, I never forget our SOCIALISTIC traits also, despite the fact that the word SOCIALISM is a dirty word among the majority of red blooded Americans.
Nevertheless, we have to remember that our Social Security, which in many cases supports our economy paying for wars and other NON-SOCIAL SECURITY ISSUES is a very clear part of what we have decided not to call SOCIALISM. Welfare, food stamps, some parts of education, and the little that is left of health assistance is Socialism, as are our libraries, post office, police and fire protection. Our Armed Forces are organized in a Socialistic general way. But we are so afraid to call our America a partly Socialistic country, that we totally ignore the word "Socialism" and its meaning.
We are appalled when we receive news from other countries and their ways regarding elections. If any one has the guts to explain HOW our elections are being run and when are the citizen's majority votes counted more than the famous/infamous delegates' votes I will have no reason to consult with a psychologist. Otherwise, we have made the elections game a joke and a great confusion that is so that when most of us approach the voting booths, our blood pressure raises and A LOT OF VOTERS try to GET THE HELL OUT THE BOOTHS to avoid confusion and stress.
There are explanations, of course. The delegates represent each state and there are as many delegates as the number of voters in such a State . . . So where is the confusion? It appears to be a clear issue that follows ELECTORAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, but does it happen as it is so clearly explained? . . . Give me a break! I have not found a single person who is clear regarding our election maneuvers or the way that we make such a mess out of something that should be SIMPLE and INEXPENSIVE . . . Do we really need such a large number of voting machines that many people dislike and cannot work? In states such as Florida, well known for IRREGULARITIES in almost every way of life, what an issue is related to regulations and authorities, voting is the most complicated pile of vulgarities and irregularities.
To start with, we, or I, will bet that perhaps we as a country hold more elections than any other country in the world. In my particular case, the great metropolitan area of MIAMI/DADE has more municipalities than any other part of the civilized world that I know. Almost every ten mills there is a Municipality with a Mayor, Councilmen, a Police Force and Bureaucrats receiving salaries, pensions and benefits. Hell, the Directors of the University HAVE A GREATER SALARY THAN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. In the end, we the voters have to VOTE MANY TIMES EVERY YEAR and most of the time there is no time to learn which of the candidates will be more irregular than the previously elected one. But we pay and pay with poor benefits.
I should not complain because it also happened in THE CAPITAL OF THE WORLD (as far as the power of the country goes) Washington D.C., where its elected Mayor created a colorful panorama because of "SOME IRREGULARITIES" but then "THEY WERE ALSO ELECTED BY OUR FAMOUS POPULAR VOTE". . . I HAVE NOT MENTIONED Chicago or New Orleans . . . forget TEXAS . . .
NO, there is something definitely wrong with our system and the ones who were sacrificed are people such poor Al Gore (I am not a Democrat, thus please do not think that I am trying to favor either party). As far as I know, Al Gore was elected by the majority of the American voters, but he is not in the White House, is he?
Hilary Clinton confirms that her campaign cost her or her family or someone (usually unknown in such cases) millions of dollars. That, of course, she will not have to pay, someone else will of course do it. And Obama has a record of "CONTRIBUTIONS" in millions of dollars. It is being announced that such money, I repeat, Obama's campaign, millions of dollars are "THE DOLLAR CONTRIBUTION OF REGULAR PEOPLE WHO PERHAPS ARE USING THEIR FOOD MONEY FOR A RIGHT CAUSE" . . . I SAY, RIGHT CAUSE, MY FOOT. IT IS SO CLEAR THAT EACH ONE OF THE CANDIDATES COMPROMISES himself/herself by receiving big amounts of money from people or corporations or whatever, that IN THE END WILL HAVE TO ASK FOR FAVORS, SPECIAL LEGISLATION, OR OTHER NOT VERY CLEAR ISSUES THAT, PERHAPS GO UNDER THE TABLE.
McCain is also receiving great amounts of money and all of the donors claim that such LARGE AMOUNTS OF DOLLARS ARE BEING USED FOR CAMPAIGN EXPENSES. Expenses, who are they kidding?
A proper election is supposed to be run with limited funds. It was so ruled: BUT WHO OBEYS REGULATIONS? Not the poor hard working John or Jane or the rich industrialist. Rules are made to be broken, and broken they are.
SO WHAT IS IT THAT I AM TRYING SO DESPERATELY TO CONVEY TO YOU?
I SAY, LET'S STOP THIS SILLY PSUEDO PURITANISTIC GAME AND ADMIT THAT:
WE ARE A CAPITALISTIC COUNTRY AND WE ENJOY BEING ONE. AT LEAST I DO AND I WILL DEFEND
THAT WE HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SOCIALISM THAT HAS TO BE ADMITTED AS SUCH
AND THAT OUR ELECTIONS COULD BE BETTER RUN WHEN CONTRIBUTIONS ARE ACCEPTED WITH THE PROMISE THAT THEY HAVE TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR AND ACCOMPANIED WITH A SWORN STATEMENT THAT THE CANDIDATE PROMISES THAT HE/SHE WILL NOT GIVE SPECIAL FAVORS TO THE BIG CONTRIBUTORS, HIS FAMILY, OR HIS FRIENDS.
THEN PERHAPS WE WILL BE A TRUE DEMOCRATIC, CAPITALISTIC, SOCIALISTIC SOCIETY AND ANY OTHER ISTIC COUNTRY WHERE THE TRUTH IS HONORED AND WHERE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE DECIDED TO STOP DECEIVING THEMSELVES AND HONORING TRUTH, HONESTY, AND HONORABILITY.
Alejandro "ElCondor' Arce
A bona fide American citizen and a voting taxpayer
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
Supreme Court. Could it be Reformed?
OUR SUPREME COURT/LEGAL SYSTEM
Our legal system is perhaps one of the best in the world. Will it be possible that some changes could turn it into an even better system?
Let's say that the Judges of the Supreme Court are elected or appointed by a system that would offer equal rights and opportunities to the majority of the American people. What will it take to achieve such results?
Bearing in mind that America at the present is composed of a very rich and enormous variety of people, to the point that in most of the populated areas one cannot identify who is an American or who is just "VISITING," just by judging with an open eye. We are country that has changed from a fairly uniform group of people in which the aims were also uniform, according to the social or economic position of the citizens which resulted in a fair government that offered contentment to the great majority. At the present, such is almost nonexistent and a great number of Americans are dissatisfied.
We do not have an idea regarding the aims of most people, but we learn of their individual needs; such as . . . "How much I will get." and "How little do I have or will contribute." The patriotic idea of a country in which all of us work for the same goal is almost gone. It is more the "Work for my benefit forgetting the country."
A system that will contain a selected group of high caliber people to represent all of our interests on the Supreme Court and who will interpret laws in a manner that will benefit the country as a whole rather than one special group or the other, would be very beneficial for all of us and hopefully will unite us.
It may sound like a UTOPIA, but it could work.
How will the system be established?
The Supreme Court could be made of citizens that will represent the aims and the most important desires of the majority group of individuals. I will say that the selection could be as follows:
The selected or elected Judges of the Supreme Court, nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress would have to recuse themselves from any political affiliation and show a clean, ethical, moral, and educational background. Thus, the group could be composed of:
A Law Professor of reputable background, known for his or her abilities to be impartial, ethical, and to follow what is known as "COMMON SENSE" rather than to have to follow laws that most citizens do not understand or comprehend, including lawyers who in many cases cannot interpret the law or the many addendums and regulations. In other words, the Law of The Land should be clear, concise and without obscurity.
A Medical Doctor who understands the needs of the citizens to live a healthy life using GOVERNMENT ADMINISTERED HEALTH PLANS "NOT FOR PROFIT." Such health plans could be offered to the many HMOs or Health Plans BUT WITH UNBROKERABLE GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS THAT WILL FAVOR THE CITIZENS RATHER THAN THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.
A Professor of Philosophy and Ethics with a background in the every day life needs of the citizen THAT WILL OFFER SERIOUS ETHICAL AND MORAL POINTS TO THE OTHER JUDGES.
A Scientist versed in the fields of Engineering, Physics, and Environmental issues.
An Economist with no ties to big industry or other groups aiming to pass laws that will be able to establish rules related to the housing for citizens following GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES, rather than industry self-made rulings.
A Religious Person from any creed popular and respected by the majority of citizens.
A member of a Workers Association that is able to represent not only his syndicate or union, but who is able to look for the interests of the regular working citizen.
An Educator from a University, College, or High School or any other learning institution that will conclude that education is not necessarily related to playing with a ball or to graduate with a pink carnation, but to learn a task that will make the student WHOLE upon graduation from High School, College, or University. Placing importance on subjects such as morals, ethics, and honesty.
A person representing the UNEMPLOYED who knows the hardships of the poor and also knows their limitations. Thus, providing that the incapacitated, for whatever reason, will become the burden of the Federal Government rather than the burden of the cities and/or their citizens.
A Military Man, from any military rank including the troops, who has had experience in combat and with the foresight for determining when we should or should not enter into conflict.
I believe that a well balanced Supreme Court that does not have to necessarily be composed of lawyers, will be very beneficial for our country.
Our legal system is perhaps one of the best in the world. Will it be possible that some changes could turn it into an even better system?
Let's say that the Judges of the Supreme Court are elected or appointed by a system that would offer equal rights and opportunities to the majority of the American people. What will it take to achieve such results?
Bearing in mind that America at the present is composed of a very rich and enormous variety of people, to the point that in most of the populated areas one cannot identify who is an American or who is just "VISITING," just by judging with an open eye. We are country that has changed from a fairly uniform group of people in which the aims were also uniform, according to the social or economic position of the citizens which resulted in a fair government that offered contentment to the great majority. At the present, such is almost nonexistent and a great number of Americans are dissatisfied.
We do not have an idea regarding the aims of most people, but we learn of their individual needs; such as . . . "How much I will get." and "How little do I have or will contribute." The patriotic idea of a country in which all of us work for the same goal is almost gone. It is more the "Work for my benefit forgetting the country."
A system that will contain a selected group of high caliber people to represent all of our interests on the Supreme Court and who will interpret laws in a manner that will benefit the country as a whole rather than one special group or the other, would be very beneficial for all of us and hopefully will unite us.
It may sound like a UTOPIA, but it could work.
How will the system be established?
The Supreme Court could be made of citizens that will represent the aims and the most important desires of the majority group of individuals. I will say that the selection could be as follows:
The selected or elected Judges of the Supreme Court, nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress would have to recuse themselves from any political affiliation and show a clean, ethical, moral, and educational background. Thus, the group could be composed of:
A Law Professor of reputable background, known for his or her abilities to be impartial, ethical, and to follow what is known as "COMMON SENSE" rather than to have to follow laws that most citizens do not understand or comprehend, including lawyers who in many cases cannot interpret the law or the many addendums and regulations. In other words, the Law of The Land should be clear, concise and without obscurity.
A Medical Doctor who understands the needs of the citizens to live a healthy life using GOVERNMENT ADMINISTERED HEALTH PLANS "NOT FOR PROFIT." Such health plans could be offered to the many HMOs or Health Plans BUT WITH UNBROKERABLE GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS THAT WILL FAVOR THE CITIZENS RATHER THAN THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.
A Professor of Philosophy and Ethics with a background in the every day life needs of the citizen THAT WILL OFFER SERIOUS ETHICAL AND MORAL POINTS TO THE OTHER JUDGES.
A Scientist versed in the fields of Engineering, Physics, and Environmental issues.
An Economist with no ties to big industry or other groups aiming to pass laws that will be able to establish rules related to the housing for citizens following GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES, rather than industry self-made rulings.
A Religious Person from any creed popular and respected by the majority of citizens.
A member of a Workers Association that is able to represent not only his syndicate or union, but who is able to look for the interests of the regular working citizen.
An Educator from a University, College, or High School or any other learning institution that will conclude that education is not necessarily related to playing with a ball or to graduate with a pink carnation, but to learn a task that will make the student WHOLE upon graduation from High School, College, or University. Placing importance on subjects such as morals, ethics, and honesty.
A person representing the UNEMPLOYED who knows the hardships of the poor and also knows their limitations. Thus, providing that the incapacitated, for whatever reason, will become the burden of the Federal Government rather than the burden of the cities and/or their citizens.
A Military Man, from any military rank including the troops, who has had experience in combat and with the foresight for determining when we should or should not enter into conflict.
I believe that a well balanced Supreme Court that does not have to necessarily be composed of lawyers, will be very beneficial for our country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
