We are our brother's killer - 06/16/2007

Mankind can't get along.

This is a relatively sweeping statement, but in essence it's true. Oh, sure, various groups can get along most of the time, and the majority tend to go about their business without resorting to lethal levels of violence, but on the whole, Mankind will never get along.

Why do I say this? Because Mankind is made up of individuals and individuals don't always get along with everyone else. Any group of individuals (defined as three or more people) will sub-divide into another, smaller group in SOME way. Ultimately, someone will be left standing alone, either by preference or by group design. This doesn't necessarily mean that these sub-divided groups are all mutually hostile to each other - after all, they ARE part of a larger group - but the fact that they do sub-divide into groups with non mutual views shows the inherent fragmentation that is a natural instinct of Humanity.

Even if you can find someone who gets alone with EVERYONE, not everyone else will get along with them. Hence the problem persists.

Insofar as mutual cooperation goes, people CAN get together for short times to cooperate toward a mutually desired goal. But after that, things always fall apart. And given the wide range of human behaviors, it's inevitable that some will resort to violence. The question is, WHY?

No one will ever get along with everyone else all of the time. This means that no matter how much violence you apply toward one group to get them to cooperate, there will be individuals in that group who violently oppose mutual cooperation. But since it's much easier to be violent than it is to find the ways and means of mutual cooperation (including tolerating one another's non-violent, but differing behaviors), violence will persist as the first choice of action for those who oppose mutual cooperation.

Now, the key word here is 'mutual'. Mutual cooperation. This doesn't mean that one side wins and another side must cooperate with the first side. This means both sides (or all sides, regardless of numbers) find common ground in which their differences can be tolerated. But that takes too much effort and even if it's found, some swinging dick in some group is going to find something intolerable about it and do something violent about it.

So the fact is, that though the vast majority of us can actually find something upon which we can mutually agree, there will always be fringe groups who can't, and will express their displeasure over the situation violently. Will it change the situation? No. Governments can be swayed. People can't. And until we all learn that people hold the power, and learn how to deal with people, we are all going to be our brother's killer.

Put the damn politicians on a leash - 06/12/2007

I love the illusion of American democracy. But it's just that: An illusion. In America (For those of you who flunked Government 101), we elect everything by popular vote, except the President. There, we cast votes. A majority in any one state gives 'electoral votes' to the particular candidate. The theory is that if the majority in one state voted for the person, they deserve to win that state in total. The fact of the matter is that because the populations of states vary, the number of electoral votes vary and they are NOT proportionate. This allows a candidate to win the popular vote but lose the electoral vote and the election. In fact, they could win by one vote in about five or six of the most populous states, lose the rest of the states and STILL be elected President. We've had 2 presidents who lost the popular vote but won the electoral votes (Kennedy and Bush).

Something's wrong with this picture.

Add to this the outrageous amounts of money wasted in campaigns and you have pretty much a good picture of what it takes to win in America: Money and a bit of corruption.

What we need is some serious election and campaign finance reform.

There are two major things wrong with campaigns: They last too long and they cost too much. We are utterly bombarded on a daily basis by political office wannabes telling us why they're the best person for the job or (more often than not) why someone else isn't right for the job. And all of them are going to have some stupid lobbyist name like "Citizens for the advancement of our candidate", or "Citizens united against so-and-so". You never know who funded these rogue groups. You don't know how much collaboration they have with the campaigns of the candidates their ads benefit. You don't know how much the candidate is indebted to them - which makes for large influence once the candidate wins.

Here's my take on the whole campaign finance and election reform:

1. Shorten the whole election process to ninety days. No candidate may do one bit of campaigning until 90 days before the general election. Having candidates throw their hats into the ring a year and a half or more before a general election is ludicrous. If there is a primary election before the general election, it occurs within 60 days. The general election will be held 30 days later. No bout of campaigning will last more than a total of 90 days within any one year period regardless of where one starts and ends the year. Special elections are exempt from the total, but must be held within 30 days of the announcement of the election. There may be no more than one special election per calendar year for any one location in the United States.

2. No more fund raising until 90 days before the election. And ALL campaign contributions go into one pot, regardless of candidate, party or affiliation. All campaigns are placed on a strict budget which shall not be exceeded (the amounts to be determined but probably no more than about 50 million for President for the primary and 25 million for the general election, 10 million for senator, 5 million for representative and the amounts go down from there) by that campaign. No personal fortunes AND/OR resources may be used to augment the total amount. It may be adjusted for inflation for each election - but NO MORE THAN the rate of inflation for the services. This may be reviewed every six years to allow for including new mass media and communication technology. An audit will be made of every candidate - win or lose - and any monies spent on non-campaigning items are to be repaid to the collective pot. Any candidate found intentionally abusing this system will be jailed for twice the length of the term of office for which they were campaigning, fined twice the amount they received and be barred for life from any form of civil service.

3. All ads for or against a candidate and for or against a measure must have accountability. Financial disclosures of ALL specific individuals, business and groups involved in the making of these ads must be freely available in readily understandable terms to anyone on the Internet (included in the ad in readable type). Who paid what to whom is mandatory. If for or against a measure, the individuals and non-living entities who contributed to that campaign must disclose who they are and how much they paid. Any advertisement for or against a candidate, in addition to having financial disclosure, must include candidate accountability in the form of an endorsement or rejection by the candidate of that ad at the beginning AND the end of the ad. Their picture must appear and their voice must say, "I'm (candidate name) and I approve (or disapprove) of this ad."

4. An independent commission will track, for statistical purposes, the overall and total amounts of money spent, including each candidate's budget and the money spent above the budgets for each campaign by outside influences and report these statistics starting three days before every general election so the people know how much each candidate and ballot measure advocate or protester spent in total for their campaigns.

5. The electoral college system of elections will be abolished and our President will be elected based on the popular vote.

It's a simple 5-step plan to start bringing American politics back to the realm of understandability and accountability to the American people. They seem to forget, we're the ones who elected these doofuses. And if they, in their ivory towers and elitist views can't reconnect with being put on a budget, being accountable to US as to who's paying what to whom and make sure they can say it in concise, precise and understandable terms, then screw the lot of them and let's find a group of people who actually want to represent the people of the United States. We've had it with the egregious inflating their own damn egos and striving to fulfill a lust for power and a place (be it good or bad) in American history. We need a government responsible, accountable and credible to US for a change.

The drawback is that in order to get the criminals out of office, we need to have these criminals sign onto this reform. And I believe ice water will be served in hell before that ever happens.

In America politics, crime pays - handsomely.