Problem being that it it is a too fractured system and people get apathetic when things don't go their way and stop participating. Term limits, in my opinion are the only way to truly instigate change. Knowing you only have so much time to "solve" problems, etc maybe the will of the people would take forefront instead of padding ones pockets or playing the "power" game. That and making all elected officials have the same benefits you and I must deal with would go a long way to correcting the political situation in this country.
I should write carefully about term limits, as it is becoming a more popular proposal. Like all "tweaks" to a system I would suggest both caution (unintended consequences) and promising too much. My point in the blog is that the professional politician is our best hope over the long haul, if, and it is a big if, he or she is part of a team (a party) that is committed to a progressive agenda, i.e. represents my interest (as I see it) and the interest of the country (again as I and my fellow partisans see it). Through the Party we shape a vision and depend upon the professional lawmakers we elect (not the Washington lobbyists, representing more narrow interests) to control the government. It takes time to become a real expert in both lawmaking and in finding common ground through trade-offs in a complex legislative assembly.
Do you really feel(believe) politicians are serving in our best interests? Lobbyists seem to get their wishes whereas general Joe Public seems to still be left behind. Money talks, and I don't have enough to influence my future.
Your points are well made and essentially I agree. Our challenge, it seems to me, is to replace as far as possible "interest group" politics with party politics. That is, lobbyists will continue to "control" many legislators and they will vote the limited interests of the constituencies that employ the lobbyists, not primarily because they accept bribes, but because they accept campaign contributions and they likely agree with the ideologies and ideas of their patrons. The answer to this is for people like us to take back the government through the only means available, a strong party system, where progressives win majorities in Congress and enact policies that people like us believe are in the best interests of the majority of the country. There will be hundreds of other issues that probably need the fine hand of professional advocates to insure that the details are right and negative unintended consequences are avoided, and for which open debate (that falls outside of the party framework) is desirable. But then Party leaders will not necessarily be mere "politicians" and their tenure in government desirable because of their expertise with a knowledge base equal to that of the best lobbyists.
Then they become "statesmen" and we have a steady hand on the throttle and wheels of government.,
Problem being that it it is a too fractured system and people get apathetic when things don't go their way and stop participating. Term limits, in my opinion are the only way to truly instigate change. Knowing you only have so much time to "solve" problems, etc maybe the will of the people would take forefront instead of padding ones pockets or playing the "power" game. That and making all elected officials have the same benefits you and I must deal with would go a long way to correcting the political situation in this country.
I should write carefully about term limits, as it is becoming a more popular proposal. Like all "tweaks" to a system I would suggest both caution (unintended consequences) and promising too much. My point in the blog is that the professional politician is our best hope over the long haul, if, and it is a big if, he or she is part of a team (a party) that is committed to a progressive agenda, i.e. represents my interest (as I see it) and the interest of the country (again as I and my fellow partisans see it). Through the Party we shape a vision and depend upon the professional lawmakers we elect (not the Washington lobbyists, representing more narrow interests) to control the government. It takes time to become a real expert in both lawmaking and in finding common ground through trade-offs in a complex legislative assembly.
Do you really feel(believe) politicians are serving in our best interests? Lobbyists seem to get their wishes whereas general Joe Public seems to still be left behind. Money talks, and I don't have enough to influence my future.
Your points are well made and essentially I agree. Our challenge, it seems to me, is to replace as far as possible "interest group" politics with party politics. That is, lobbyists will continue to "control" many legislators and they will vote the limited interests of the constituencies that employ the lobbyists, not primarily because they accept bribes, but because they accept campaign contributions and they likely agree with the ideologies and ideas of their patrons. The answer to this is for people like us to take back the government through the only means available, a strong party system, where progressives win majorities in Congress and enact policies that people like us believe are in the best interests of the majority of the country. There will be hundreds of other issues that probably need the fine hand of professional advocates to insure that the details are right and negative unintended consequences are avoided, and for which open debate (that falls outside of the party framework) is desirable. But then Party leaders will not necessarily be mere "politicians" and their tenure in government desirable because of their expertise with a knowledge base equal to that of the best lobbyists.
Then they become "statesmen" and we have a steady hand on the throttle and wheels of government.,