Bills you'd actually like to see Congress debate

[B-Fly]

Filibuster rule reform in the Senate, and I've been consistent in my opposition to the use of the filibuster to block legislation across parties. I still would love to see the DREAM Act get passed, but I don't think it's realistic. I do have some hope for a reauthorization of No Child Left Behind that eliminates expensive mandates that aren't doing kids any good and increases the flexibility of states and municipalities in their use of federal education dollars.

[Mithrandir]

There's a running joke in computer programming circles that if you structure your code in a manner such that it is too complicated for anyone else to figure out, you can code yourself a lifetime of job security.

When you say "two terms is just barely enough to find out where the bathrooms are," I assume you mean that Congressional procedure is so laborious and arcane and convoluted that it takes years for Congressional noobs to learn how to work all the levers and switches, right? I'm suggesting that term limits might make it untenable for noobs to spend years figuring it all out, and therefore force Congress to simplify procedure so that the fresh faces are more able to hit the ground running.
I have no proof that it would work out that way, I'm just speculating.

that's what i said.

[Lucky]

Once again, Kevin Seitzer is a clarion call for reason and morality, and my personal respect for him continues to grow.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Campaign reform. Make every candidate use the same amount of money, remove the ability for corporations and lobbyists to donate. Give em say- $1,000,000.00 to get the job done-- let's see who can really budget their money.

[Erik]

Campaign reform. Make every candidate use the same amount of money, remove the ability for corporations and lobbyists to donate. Give em say- $1,000,000.00 to get the job done-- let's see who can really budget their money.

That's going to take a Constitutional Amendment to override Buckley vs. Valeo (1976), which held that campaign contributions are a form of free speech -- and Congress has no interest in doing its part for that.

[GwynnInTheHall]

That's going to take a Constitutional Amendment to override Buckley vs. Valeo (1976), which held that campaign contributions are a form of free speech -- and Congress has no interest in doing its part for that.

We should tie it to the balanced Budget Amendment

BTW I don't buy that giving money is a form of free speech BS, to me it sounds like they found an actual way to make Money Talk!

[Judge Jude]

Bipartisan bill that declares that given the devastation in the stock market, both sides agree to tax hikes on millionaires (the compromise is that the $250K threshold, which distracts from the issue, is raised to $1M) AND increased spending cuts and mostly a withdrawal from the foreign wars.

The game theory is that even those who are opposed to these ideas say that the mean old ratings services like S & P and Moody's are creating a panic that can - fair or not - only be solved by these measures. So for the good of the country, pass the bill, watch the stock market make a big rise, and note that this benefits both the poor and the rich as the streamlining and revenue hikes stimulate the economy once business decides it's safe to wade back in.

Or maybe I just wrote a speech that Obama should have made today...

[Kevin Seitzer]

i guess the root of suggesting a tax on illegals was mostly prompted to slowing down the number of illegals into our nation, because i don't see steps to solving a problem. But if we have laws, we need to enforce them. i guess that is one of my frustrations, we don't enforce our laws enough. As stated before, i'm have to look into this more.

I appreciate the humility and honesty of your response.

I don't know what to do about illegal immigration, either. In general I see immigration as a huge plus for our nation. What the correct level for it is, and how to administer it and enforce regulations for it, I don't know. In my personal experience with illegal immigrants, I have seen them give far much more than they take. That apparently is not everyone's experience.

I particularly don't know what to do with the colonias in south Texas. I wish there was a way to bring the developers who created them to justice, but like you, I'm skeptical there's a way to do that fairly at this point. However, I do think the state of Texas could work at establishing better local infrastructure and work with the counties to bring housing and facilities up to code over time. There doesn't seem to be much concern at the state level for that. Also, education is certainly a problem, but with the migrant nature of the farm workers and the language barrier, that's not a simple problem to solve either. I wish the state were more dedicated to solving it, though. It's one of the most pressing problems this state has.

I am aware of a number of churches who are doing good work helping people in the colonias or also on the other side of the border. The churches are particularly good at letting these people know that Americans care about them and their fortunes. However, there are things the churches cannot do, and I would like to see the state government step in there.

[PaleoMan]

(1) A National Right To Work Bill offering employees the choice of withholding their hard earned income from an organization that doesn't necessarily represent them.

(2) A bill authorizing the United States' detachment from the United Nations. The UN headquarters is basically a glorified hotel for pampered diplomats who refuse to confront the tyranny in their own native countries. Maybe they can auction off that valuable parcel of land on the East Side or turn it into a park.

[Wonderboy]

Once again, Kevin Seitzer is a clarion call for reason and morality, and my personal respect for him continues to grow.

It's almost embarrassing but we have two guys right here on this forum who could do a far better job than 99% of our politicians -- B-Fly and Kevin Seitzer.

[Lucky]

Bipartisan bill that declares that given the devastation in the stock market, both sides agree to tax hikes on millionaires (the compromise is that the $250K threshold, which distracts from the issue, is raised to $1M) AND increased spending cuts and mostly a withdrawal from the foreign wars.

The game theory is that even those who are opposed to these ideas say that the mean old ratings services like S & P and Moody's are creating a panic that can - fair or not - only be solved by these measures. So for the good of the country, pass the bill, watch the stock market make a big rise, and note that this benefits both the poor and the rich as the streamlining and revenue hikes stimulate the economy once business decides it's safe to wade back in.

Or maybe I just wrote a speech that Obama should have made today...

Excellent points, if only people would listen to that speech if it were made.

[Lucky]

Campaign reform. Make every candidate use the same amount of money, remove the ability for corporations and lobbyists to donate. Give em say- $1,000,000.00 to get the job done-- let's see who can really budget their money.

On the surface, a good idea, but there should be some mechanism whereby a relatively unknown candidate can put himself or herself our there in front of the voters. So, in addition to your $1 Million Dollars, there might need to be a provision to require the networks to provide X amount of air time to each serious candidate. They might scream bloody murder, but I still think back to the tremendously valuable government commodity they enjoy every year...broadcast rights and protections.

[Erik]

We should tie it to the balanced Budget Amendment

BTW I don't buy that giving money is a form of free speech BS, to me it sounds like they found an actual way to make Money Talk!

Interestingly, the Supreme Court took that position in 1976, when it had far more liberals than it does now.