Re: Matt Damon hits it on the head; politicans of both parties don't care about anything long term....
posted at 12/27/2012 3:36 PM EST
In response to tvoter's comment:
That's true and exactly why I say we must hold our representatives accountible and NOT just let them sit back and blame the other party!
The trouble is how to go about doing that.
2010 was supposedly about holding congress accountable and we certainly saw a number of incumbents get the boot.
But what did we end up with? Hard liners who created this fiscal cliff situation. People who refuse to compromise at all.
So what to do? Sit with our fingers crossed and hope some stoic Bruti (brutus-es) run for congress, even though they hate the idea of being politicians, and miraculously get enough money together to win.
(That's another major problem: Wayyyyyy too much money in politics. The only ones who can get elected are people who are willing to shed values for money, which is converted into votes. Then we're suprised when they turn out to be full of sh!t ?!?)
Now it's not just representatives. This is why I bring up administrative agencies. Even when congress does (gasp) pass a law that a strong majority of voters behind, the actual enforcement goes to the President....who cannot possibly "enforce" any one law. So it really just goes to his appointees and many layers of underlings.
But when it comes to the agency actually implementing the law, there's this circuitous rulemaking procedure...... and special interests who don't like what's happening get to rope the courts into it by suing the agency.
So long as they have a viable claim that the rulemaking process is insufficient and harms them unfairly, the court has to deal with the suit even if the suit is just about stopping something the interest group doesn't like.
Because that's our court system: If there's a viable legal basis for the suit, the court is not concerned with asking "why is this suit really being brought?" Or in other words, the trouble with objectivity.
It's a whole 'nother layer of gridlock that the founders apparently did not foresee.
"Factions" was about the TP battling hard core progressives, with centrists on both side left unable to get enough votes for a basic common sense deal. In congress.
The only way out of the administrative mess is to bite the bullet and remove the many protections for review before rulemaking.
See the whole idea is that they need to force agencies to be as objective and fair and all-considering as possible, so that government doesn't get corrupt and favor specific businesses (procurement, contracting, etc).
It worked. The agencies aren't "corrupt" in that sense. But they're horribly inefficient and all the review creates this arena where selfish special interests can come in and stop an agency from enforcing the law.
At this point, it seems better to risk the corruption, massively shrink the amount of review before rulemaking, and free agencies up to act quickly. Let individuals make decisions and take responsibility. Of course, that "responsibility" bit then puts the ones on the President and his cabinet to be much more aware of agency minituae so they can fire the bad guys.