I find myself in complete agreement with Obama

[makattak]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-maybe-i-should-just-pack-and-go-home-golly_720259.html

Yes. Please do. Today. I'll help.

[birdman]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-maybe-i-should-just-pack-and-go-home-golly_720259.html

Yes. Please do. Today. I'll help.

What a whiny POTUS.  Less than 4 months into his second term and he's whining about not being able to do what he wants.  Darn.  Clinton had the same thing, and pivoted to center.

[makattak]

What a whiny POTUS.  Less than 4 months into his second term and he's whining about not being able to do what he wants.  Darn.  Clinton had the same thing, and pivoted to center.

He pivoted in his first term after losing the midterms rather spectacularly.

I never thought I'd be impressed by Bill Clinton's ability to govern.

[AZRedhawk44]

I don't care what party POTUS is from.  If he's ineffective, he's my guy.

Tired of the 51% vote making major swings in this country one way or another.  We can unite and manage to tally a 75% or higher vote for things that actually matter when they come up.  Shouldn't be so easy for a slim majority to take so much from the populace.

[Tallpine]

I don't care what party POTUS is from.  If he's ineffective, he's my guy.

Tired of the 51% vote making major swings in this country one way or another.  We can unite and manage to tally a 75% or higher vote for things that actually matter when they come up.  Shouldn't be so easy for a slim majority to take so much from the populace.

Considering how many people don't even bother to vote, the majority is even slimmer than you think.

If I was writing a new constitution, I'd require 75% of eligible voters/members of congress to elect or pass anything.

If nobody wins start over until somebody does.

[zahc]

Require a 75% majority to pass a law and a 25% minority to repeal a law.

[makattak]

Require a 75% majority to pass a law and a 25% minority to repeal a law.

No. Simply mandate every federal law not part of the constitution has a 10 year lifespan. You like the law? Get 75% of the people to care enough, again, to pass it. 

[Tallpine]

No. Simply mandate every federal law not part of the constitution has a 10 year lifespan. You like the law? Get 75% of the people to care enough, again, to pass it. 

Make it a 1 year lifespan and I'll support your plan 

[Scout26]

No. Simply mandate every federal law not part of the constitution has a 10 year lifespan. You like the law? Get 75% of the people to care enough, again, to pass it. 

7 years and automatic repeal/termination unless passed again.

[AZRedhawk44]

We seem to float this auto-die of legislation here on APS pretty frequently.

Imagine yourself a seething, slinking, spiteful, bile-filled, commie-sympathizing nazi warmongering Statist of the worst order... with an auto-sunset clause in the Constitution you have to pay lip service to.  Take the worst bits of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama and wrap them up in Pelosi's ego and call it POTUS.

How would you go about abusing this?  7 year sunset, 10 year sunset, whatever period.

#1 - I think we would see LOTS of apathy towards passing legislation.  You think it's bad now?  Just wait until social experimenters take advantage of the marketing potential of a 7 year "oops, that didn't work out so well, but hey at least now we know!" automatic forgiveness of any mistakes made.  You'll have a half dozen experiments running all together with your tax dollars, civil liberties, or childrens' lives overseas in various military entanglements.

#2 - ? ? ?

#3 - Profit!


I think the AWB gave us this idea of auto-expiration.  We got damned lucky there.  They won't make that mistake again.  And if they did, they'd be sure to find a way to omnibus-renew in a megabill each year or term, or something like that.

[Perd Hapley]

We seem to float this auto-die of legislation here on APS pretty frequently.

Imagine yourself a seething, slinking, spiteful, bile-filled, commie-sympathizing nazi warmongering Statist of the worst order... with an auto-sunset clause in the Constitution you have to pay lip service to.  Take the worst bits of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama and wrap them up in Pelosi's ego and call it POTUS.

How would you go about abusing this?  7 year sunset, 10 year sunset, whatever period.

#1 - I think we would see LOTS of apathy towards passing legislation.  You think it's bad now?  Just wait until social experimenters take advantage of the marketing potential of a 7 year "oops, that didn't work out so well, but hey at least now we know!" automatic forgiveness of any mistakes made.  You'll have a half dozen experiments running all together with your tax dollars, civil liberties, or childrens' lives overseas in various military entanglements.

#2 - ? ? ?

#3 - Profit!

How is that different than now?

"We have to pass the healthcare bill, so that we can see what's in it."

"I'll go ahead and sign this campaign finance bill. It's probably not quite constitutional, but that's the Supreme Court's problem."

[TommyGunn]

Require a 75% majority to pass a law and a 25% minority to repeal a law.

No just pass an amendment to the Constitution that makes kongresskritters subject to every law they pass.
I think it will be surprising what THAT fixes!!!!

[Perd Hapley]

What a whiny POTUS.  Less than 4 months into his second term and he's whining about not being able to do what he wants. 

You must have watched a different video than I did. Some reporter gave him a list of all the things that have gone wrong for him lately, and he responded with a little dry humor.

Meh.

[makattak]

You must have watched a different video than I did. Some reporter gave him a list of all the things that have gone wrong for him lately, and he responded with a little dry humor.

Meh.

The dry humor can be interpreted as passive aggressive,  though.

[DustinD]

Having to repass a law is an opportunity to make it bigger, or worse. I do like the idea of super majority to do things, with different bars for different actions.

[Azrael256]

No just pass an amendment to the Constitution that makes kongresskritters subject to every law they pass.
I think it will be surprising what THAT fixes!!!!

I always thought that congress should actually serve the people.  Like one serves in the Army.  It should be a sacrifice somehow, but I can't come up with how to do it.  Having to pay to serve excludes people.  Making it a non-paying job seems pointless. 

Maybe the Sergeant-At-Arms pops each rep in the mouth each morning?  A month of community service cleaning up public bathrooms each year?  Something should make it more work and less play.

[Scout26]

#1 - I think we would see LOTS of apathy towards passing legislation.  You think it's bad now?  Just wait until social experimenters take advantage of the marketing potential of a 7 year "oops, that didn't work out so well, but hey at least now we know!" automatic forgiveness of any mistakes made.  You'll have a half dozen experiments running all together with your tax dollars, civil liberties, or childrens' lives overseas in various military entanglements.

They already do that when the re-authorize spending and the like, only they lump it all toghether, so you get 51% (or more) crap and 49% (or less) good stuff.  The other thing is single subject bills  (We actually have that in Illinois), you can't tack extraneous crap if it has nothing to do with the original bill.