At a pivotal crossroads, a nation contemplates its future between the pursuit of wealth and industry or the call to civic duty and democratic engagement.

I turn 57 this month, and with everything going on in the world, it almost feels like an afterthought. This year feels worse, more doom and gloom than others. I am not entirely sure why, but it is not just politics. The economy has been rough too, with gas prices staying high, in my case over $4.25 a gallon, along with rising costs across the board and ongoing tech hardware shortages. It all adds to the sense that things are off.

I have never seen as much upheaval as I have this past year. I have also never witnessed in my adult life companies and wealthy individuals fawn over a President to this extent, while much of the media seems complicit. Then they wonder why their trustworthiness is at an all-time low. I believe in a neutral, fact-based media, but in reality we have never truly had one in this country except when it suited particular interests.

What do I mean by that? Yellow journalism is a term that emerged in the late 1800s, around the time of the Spanish-American War. It was fueled in part by sensationalized reporting about the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor in 1898. At the time, many blamed Spain, though the exact cause of the explosion has never been definitively determined. That kind of reporting helped push the country toward war. Personally, I think we probably should have kept control of Cuba at that time and eventually made it a state or states.

I also know corruption has existed across parties. The Watergate scandal during the Nixon presidency is one clear example. At the same time, leaders from other parties have had their own issues. Franklin D. Roosevelt had people around him who benefited from proximity and influence, a kind of cronyism that shows up in different forms across administrations, including more recent ones.

The real root of the problem, in my view, is something I do not think the Founders fully anticipated or addressed well, and that is political parties. They formed quickly after the Constitution was ratified, but there were early warnings. George Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned about the dangers of political factions and how they could divide the country and put party loyalty above the public good. That warning feels more relevant now than ever.

Now it feels like everything is driven by one party trying to outdo the other. In the United States, this seems more ingrained and entrenched than in many other countries.

I foresee, and I could be wrong, a large Democratic wave coming if elections are conducted fairly. But if that happens, Democrats need to be cautious. People are tired of endless investigations and political theater. They want action. They want real solutions, not lip service.

That means actually addressing things like immigration reform in a lasting way and strengthening Social Security. Some issues may even require constitutional amendments to address structural weaknesses that recent events have brought into focus.

At the same time, do not spend all the energy trying to impeach Trump again. Focus on limiting his power through legislation, oversight, and where possible, overriding vetoes. Hold members of his administration accountable where appropriate, using every lawful tool available, and where warranted, pursue impeachment in cases where it clearly applies. There should be real consequences, including barring individuals from future federal service when justified. That kind of accountability would act as a genuine deterrent. If people know the long-term consequences outweigh any short-term gain, they are less likely to go along with wrongdoing, regardless of pressure or job security.

The broader goal, to me, is making Trump politically irrelevant by not allowing him to dominate every moment or control every outcome. That would likely be more effective than impeachment, because it removes the attention and influence he relies on.

I am hoping this year ends better than it has started. I am usually upbeat during my birth month, but so far this year I am just not feeling it. Here is hoping things turn around.

Luckily, I do not rely on politics or economics for my ultimate happiness. We are just sojourners on this planet, and Easter reminds me of that. Time to shake off the doom and gloom and focus on what actually matters.

#personal #politics #currentevents

💬 Discuss... ✉️ Email 🦣 Reply on Mastodon

⚠️ Warning: Political Rant

Okay, this is one of the few politically related posts I make each year because politics are so divisive. So here’s your warning: if you’d rather not read political commentary, feel free to stop here.

The recent armed action against Iran has me conflicted. I believe it's more of a distraction and a pretext than a genuine strategic necessity. While the issues we face in America come from the neglect of both parties, Trump seems to be using these problems to his advantage. This situation should have been addressed years ago when Iran first began developing its nuclear program. The United States is skilled at acting as a global police force and solving immediate problems but not at handling long-term challenges such as nation building. We have never successfully created a functioning foreign democracy.

Historically, outside powers that try to build nations in their own image often fail in the long run. They either cannot fully erase local culture, or they create deep resentment in the process. The British Empire tried to project its institutions and values onto places like India and large parts of the Middle East, disrupting older political and cultural systems. When the British Empire withdrew, it left behind borders and governments that did not always match local realities, which helped fuel instability that continues today.

While I don't completely disagree with action against Iran, it should have happened years ago, just like with Cuba. The situation in Cuba also should have been resolved long ago. I believe the United States should help guide Cuba until it becomes a stable modern democracy, intervening firmly if it begins to stray.

What concerns me most now are the costs in lives, money, and timing. I fear this situation might serve as a pretext to interfere with the upcoming elections or to distract from other issues such as the release of the Epstein files and broader corruption. If this administration were honest, I might believe the urgency. But after so much misdirection, self-dealing, and falsehoods, I can't give this president the benefit of the doubt anymore. That ended with January 6th.

On top of that, he hasn't delivered on most of his campaign promises. My bills keep rising, and while a few prices have gone down, those savings are offset elsewhere. Every time it seems the economy might recover, he makes comments that hurt it further. Tariffs are taxes, and the public ultimately pays them. If any other president behaved this way, there would be outrage in Congress. Yet for some reason, this one is treated differently from any president I've seen in my lifetime.

I only hope Congress learns from this experience. And I don't want to hear any Republican complain if a future Democratic president takes similar actions. Our political system has several deep problems. One of the largest is the lack of adequate representation. I've said it for years: 435 Representatives and 100 Senators for over 330 million people isn't right. We should have at least one representative for every 50,000 citizens. There are certainly aspects of our own Constitution that could be improved, and Trump has exploited some of its weaknesses.

We also need new constitutional amendments; term limits, stronger limits on presidential power, and real consequences for any president who forgets that they are a steward of the people, not a monarch. Congress itself must also move away from party dominance. Partisan politics are destroying this country. I'm glad I left both parties and now consider myself a proud independent.

End of rant.

#opinion #politics

💬 Discuss... ✉️ Email 🦣 Reply on Mastodon

Flexing the power of Article I, this bold graphic underscores the enduring strength and influence of legislative authority across diverse global arenas.

Where is Congress while Trump talks like a king? I am going to let everyone in on a little secret. Congress, the Article I institution, is supposed to be the most powerful branch because it is closest to the people. Article I comes first in the Constitution and is the longest. The Founders had just fought a war against a king and were deeply wary of executive power. Alexander Hamilton called the judiciary the “least dangerous branch” in Federalist 78.

Think about it: the Judicial Branch is unelected and can be constrained by Congress. Both Article II (the President) and Article III (federal judges) can be impeached and removed by Congress. The only way to get rid of a member of Congress is expulsion by their own chamber or being voted out by the people. And “high crimes and misdemeanors”? That's whatever Congress decides it is. Gerald Ford said it best: an impeachable offense is whatever the House considers it to be. Congress holds the power to remove, and that is not an accident.

Congress is the only branch allowed to impeach, override vetoes, make laws, tax and spend, declare war, and issue letters of marque (government licenses authorizing private ships to attack enemy vessels, essentially legalized piracy. Famous examples include Sir Francis Drake, who raided Spanish ships for Queen Elizabeth I, and Jean Lafitte, whose privateers helped Andrew Jackson defend New Orleans in the War of 1812). But when I see and hear Trump say that the only thing that can stop him is his “own morality” and his “own mind,” that makes me so mad. That is the talk of a king, not a president. He is going to take on this country and that country. The military is not his personal henchmen.

At what point is he going to get us involved in something that Congress and We the People are going to regret for generations? Russia thought they could roll into Ukraine in a matter of days. They were the number two military in the world. Look what that got them: a meat grinder with no end in sight. And now Trump wants to play empire?

And by what authority is he running Venezuela? I don't remember them surrendering. I don't remember them electing him. There is nothing in the Constitution or any law that lets a president run another country. He can call himself whatever he wants, but proclaiming yourself the virtual president of a sovereign nation is not how any of this is supposed to work. And I don't care what he says about drugs or criminals or national security. This was about oil and money. It was always about oil and money.

The same Congress that tells us we can't afford healthcare or infrastructure suddenly has money for buying islands and invading countries? Why is he going after a fellow country that has done nothing but support the US throughout history? Leave Greenland alone. If we need to defend it, we will as part of NATO; otherwise, we don't need it. If he wants to buy it, where is that money coming from? Kings buy territories. Presidents serve the people. I am more interested in spending money on this country. If we have money to buy Greenland, we have money to properly fund health insurance and do needed infrastructure.

At what point do we run out of ammunition, ships, planes, and troops to take on all these things he wants to do? I read an article the other day that military recruiters were having trouble getting younger men and women to join the military, and frankly, with this president who acts more like a mafioso than a president, I wouldn't join right now. It is one thing to protect our nation; it is a whole other thing to help a bully.

I can't wait to hear the excuses for what Republicans are going to say other than “Trump wasn't on the ballot.” A lot of his supporters are turning on him, and they should. Most of this economic mess is self-inflicted by the stable genius.

#opinion #politics

💬 Discuss... ✉️ Email 🦣 Reply on Mastodon

I have a multifaceted plan to restore integrity to the U.S. representative governing system. While I am not naive enough to believe this could happen through Congress alone, I think it is high time the states called for a Constitutional Convention. Such conventions should likely occur regularly, perhaps every 150 to 200 years.

Many argue that calling a Constitutional Convention could lead to states going off the rails—a runaway convention. That is why, before convening, the convention should be limited in scope, and its representatives should pledge not to deviate from the established agenda unless three-fourths of the state legislatures agree to any new items once the convention has started.

Legislative Branch

For Congress, this is how I propose fixing it, starting with the House of Representatives. The House was designed to be the branch of government closest to the people—not to political parties—but to the constituents they represent. With the U.S. population exceeding 330 million, the current representation ratio does not favor adequate representation. Each representative in the House currently serves, on average, 747,000^[1] people.

We are fast approaching an oligarchy if we do not improve this ratio. Increasing the number of representatives would reduce the concentration of power among a few individuals or corporations. Currently, corporations can influence or buy off 435 representatives relatively easily. If the number of representatives increased to 11,000, this would be far less feasible. Additionally, many representatives would serve districts without large corporations, focusing instead on small businesses and local constituents, making them more responsive to the people they represent.

Adding this number of representatives all at once would be impractical, so I propose a staggered approach. This ties into my next proposal to improve the House: extending representatives' terms to six years. An amendment should require Congress to maintain a representative-to-population ratio of 1:50,000 and enforce term limits of two terms. These limits would apply to both chambers of Congress, allowing for a maximum of two terms in either the House or Senate, or one in each chamber—but not exceeding a total of two terms, whether served consecutively or not.

There should also be a maximum age limit of 74. A person could run for Congress and serve up to age 74. If they turn 74 while serving, they could complete their full term but would not be eligible for re-election. No one over the age of 74 could run. This age limit could be changed by Constitutional Amendment and Ratification by three-fourths of the states. Such an amendment would have only one calendar year to pass; if not ratified within this time frame, it would become null and void.

The staggered implementation would work as follows: the current 435 representatives would serve six-year terms. During the first election after the amendment, 4,500 additional representatives would be added. Two years later, another 4,500 would be added. Finally, in the next election cycle, the remaining seats required to meet the new ratio would be added. This phased approach allows for gradual adjustment while ensuring that representatives have time to focus on serving their constituents instead of campaigning constantly.

This expanded House would also allow Congress to reclaim powers that have been delegated to independent agencies like the SEC, FCC, and FTC. By hiring talent from these agencies as staffers, representatives would have the time and expertise to draft legislation directly. This approach would nullify Supreme Court decisions that allow bureaucrats to make laws and rules instead of Congress^[2]. With representatives serving smaller constituencies of 50,000 people, the voices of individual citizens would be amplified, and representatives would be more accountable to their communities.

For the Senate, I propose increasing its size to 500 members but with a key distinction: term limits would mirror those outlined for the House. Of these 500 members, 300 would be elected by direct election as they are now, while the remaining 200 would be appointed by state legislatures, similar to the system before the Seventeenth Amendment. The original method of legislative appointment had merit, as it was intended to create a more measured and insulated institution.

Direct elections have blurred the Senate's unique purpose, making it feel like a smaller, longer-serving version of the House. To address this, the 300 elected Senators would serve for the first three years, and three years later, the 200 appointed Senators would take office and be designated as Senior Senators. Both groups—elected and appointed—would adhere to the same term limits, ensuring that no member could serve more than two terms. This structure helps prevent the entrenchment of career politicians, many of whom today remain in office until death or incapacity.

By adopting these reforms, we can restore balance and integrity to our representative governing system, making it more responsive to the needs of the American people.

Executive Branch

There are also Executive Branch reforms needed. The President and the Vice President should remain as is. However, the age limit of 74 shall also apply to the President and Vice President. If the President or Vice President turns 74 while serving their first term, they shall not run again but may finish their term. This can only be changed by the same Constitutional Amendment process as for Congress.

Further changes to the Executive Branch via Constitutional Amendments include ensuring that the President is not immune from the Laws of the Land. Operational decisions directly related to the President's job and within the guidelines of established law shall not be reviewed for legality for criminal or civil purposes and shall not be examined by Courts or Congress once the serving President’s term ends. However, any actions taken outside of these operational necessities may be investigated post-term only if they are criminal and violated the existing laws of the United States at the time they were executed.

The President's Pardon Power is revoked. Instead, a Pardon Board shall be established, consisting of 1 member appointed by each Chamber of Congress, 1 member by the Supreme Court, 1 member by the President, 1 member by the Vice President, and 1 member from each state. This board shall be appointed by the second month of a President's term and shall meet quarterly to submit names for pardons or commutations to the President and Congress. Only this board may grant pardons or commutations, and Congress shall establish statutory guidelines for its operation. The Supreme Court shall have one month to review or state plainly why an individual recommendation is denied. A simple majority vote will suffice for approval or denial. There will be no appeals, and decisions shall be final. Crimes related to the Death Penalty, Insurrection, and Treason shall be ineligible for pardon or commutation.

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court shall be expanded to 1 Justice for every 2 States, plus 1 extra Justice and 1 Chief Justice, ensuring an odd number of Justices including the Chief Justice. The Court shall be expanded by 2 Justices every 4 years until the maximum is reached. Supreme Court Justices shall be selected by a non-partisan board, which shall maintain a list of 25 names each year, ordered alphabetically. The President may only nominate Justices from this list, subject to Congressional confirmation.

The same age restriction for Congress, the President, and the Vice President shall apply to the Supreme Court and the Federal Judiciary. Additionally, a Federal Judge at any level may serve for either 28 years or until they reach 74 years of age, whichever comes first.

Miscellaneous Constitutional Amendments

Congress shall not fund any laws without fully funding them and is prohibited from transferring federal mandates and the costs of federal laws to the states.

A constitutional amendment shall prohibit gerrymandering of congressional districts. Districts must be drawn to form contiguous blocks. A non-partisan board, appointed by representatives from all three branches of government and consisting of 15 members, shall be established two years before any election to review any changes to congressional districts. Any challenge to this board’s decision shall be heard immediately by the Supreme Court and must be resolved within two months before an election. If the challenge arises too close to an election, the Supreme Court shall resolve it within three days of the hearing.

All independent agencies not under the Executive Branch shall remain outside of its purview. Only Congress shall have the authority to reduce, expand, or fund these agencies appropriately. The Executive Branch shall have no power or authority over independent agencies. The House and Senate must pass, by a two-thirds vote, any measure to create or eliminate an independent agency. The heads of these agencies shall be appointed by Congress and shall be subject to removal through Congress’s impeachment power.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall be removed from the Executive Branch and established as an independent agency with the authority to conduct investigations free from political influence. The DOJ shall be headed by the Attorney General, who shall serve a five-year term. This term may be renewed once by Congress, but shall not exceed ten years, whether consecutive or not. The DOJ shall have an oversight board consisting of 11 members, nominated as follows: two by the President, two by the Vice President, two by the House, two by the Senate, and three by the Supreme Court. The oversight board shall act on concerns and recommendations from a non-partisan Inspector General, who shall be appointed by Congress. Both the oversight board members and the Inspector General shall serve a single 11-year term. The Attorney General, oversight board members, and the Inspector General shall be subject to removal through Congress’s impeachment power.

The DOJ shall have the authority to investigate the Executive Branch for treason, insurrection, and criminal violations committed by any individual within the Executive Branch. If the investigation involves a sitting President or Vice President, the DOJ must complete its inquiry within six to nine months and submit its findings to the House for impeachment proceedings. If the House votes to impeach, the Senate must conduct a trial no later than one week after receiving the articles of impeachment. If the House votes not to impeach, the DOJ’s full report shall be made public, unredacted, within 120 days—except for information that pertains to individuals not involved in criminality or that could pose a national security risk.

Balanced Budget Amendment

A constitutional amendment shall mandate a balanced budget, with trust-funded activities exempted. The President shall have line-item veto power, which Congress may override with a two-thirds vote.

The national debt shall be eliminated within 75 years, after which the measures used to achieve debt elimination shall remain in effect for an additional 10 years to create a budget surplus. After this surplus period, these extraordinary fiscal measures shall expire, and standard budgetary practices shall resume.

Congress may suspend the national debt elimination plan at any time during a national emergency, war, or economic crisis with a two-thirds vote in both chambers. Such a suspension shall be valid for a maximum of two years per vote. If the crisis persists, Congress must vote again to extend the suspension for another two-year period, ensuring regular accountability and preventing indefinite postponements.

Closing thoughts

This is my comprehensive plan to refine the federal government and further our Founding Fathers’ vision of a living Constitution. Since past and present Congresses lack the political will to implement these reforms, the states should call for a constitutional amendment. By limiting the scope of their convention, concerns about a runaway convention could be alleviated.

Notably, I have avoided addressing social issues. While social issues are important, they should always be handled through legislation, as societal views shift over time. What may be one person’s passionate cause could be another’s “over my dead body” moment.

1. Pew Research Center. U.S. population keeps growing, but House of Representatives is same size as in Taft era. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/05/31/u-s-population-keeps-growing-but-house-of-representatives-is-same-size-as-in-taft-era/

   ↩

2. SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies. Retrieved from https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-chevron-curtailing-power-of-federal-agencies/

   ↩

#government #opinion #politics

💬 Discuss... ✉️ Email 🦣 Reply on Mastodon