Turning public anger into political reform
Political rage is a terrible thing to waste. And after forcing through a government takeover of the healthcare industry that most people passionately oppose, Congress seems to be a worthy target for public wrath. Of course, death threats and vandalism are not only counterproductive, they’re also uncivilized and evil. There is a more politic way, a more American way.
It was the securely rooted, career politicians—the old “liberal bulls” of Congress—who commanded this assault on the collective judgment of the American people. Consider how long the most prominent champions of Obamacare have been sitting in the House. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has been in office for almost 23 years. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), 29 years. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and George Miller (D-Calif.), 35 years. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), 39 years. In a fantastically talented nation of 300 million people, why should the same 535 people govern us from the two houses of Congress decade after decade? Once you are elected to Congress, you have a greater chance of dying in office than of being voted out. The Gerrymander has produced a Leviathan.
Consider a proposal that has been circulating on the internet for a Congressional Reform Act of 2010. Think of it as healthcare for our politics. Clearly, that’s where we are most in need of reform. Here it is (edited for clarity and grammar):
- Term limits: 12 years only, with one of the possible options below:
A. Two six-year Senate terms.
B. Six two-year House terms.
C. One six-year Senate term and three two-year House terms.- No tenure and no pension:
A member of Congress collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when he or she is out of office.- Members of Congress (past, present, and future) participate in Social Security:
All funds in the congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system; members of Congress participate with the American people.- Members of Congress can purchase their own retirement plans just like all other Americans.
- Members of Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of the Consumer Price Index or 3 percent.
- Members of Congress lose their current healthcare system and participate in the same healthcare system as the American people.
- Members of Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American people.
- All contracts with past and present members of Congress are void effective one year after passage of the bill. The American people did not make contracts with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
I don’t know where this originated or who authored it. A quick Google search turns up postings as early as November 19, 2009. It has a Facebook page. And you can sign it as an online petition.
As to its substance, one point or another is debatable, but I will comment on two points.
First, term limits (which, by the way, would require a constitutional amendment) are undemocratic, yes, but they’re republican like our Constitution. That is, like so many provisions in the Constitution, they are a correction to our democracy designed to bring out the people’s better judgment, and to guard them against manipulation by political gamers. Gerrymandering has, to a large extent, made a farce out of popular election. This is a method of redrawing the boundaries of a congressional district in a way that maximizes the likelihood that an incumbent or his or her party will remain in power. In essence, the people get to choose the politicians only after the politicians have first chosen the people who will choose them. Do you see a problem?
Second, it is a gross conflict of interest for Members of congress to have the liberty of voting themselves a pay increase. Only business owners should be able to serve themselves in that way. But too many congressmen see themselves as business owners, or perhaps as cattlemen. They are certainly not good shepherds.
Given how self-serving most people are who get themselves elected to office, or perhaps how self-serving they become, it would seem unlikely that any of these provisions would make its way into law, especially the term limits. But perhaps it all depends on how angry the people become over congressional corruption, how focused that anger is, and how sustained it is from one election to the next.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top43 Comments to “Turning public anger into political reform”
So, how snarky would it be to say: never let a good crisis go to waste.
Report comment to moderator
That so-called Congress Reform Act is so misleading I’m disappointed you posted it without much clarification. Term limits and pay raises may be legitimate issues to review, but as Federal employees Congressmen have contributed to Social Security for decades and have had the same health care insurance choices as other Federal employees.
Even with term limits there’s the issue of the remaining unelected career bureaucrats. Gingrich made the best simple change when he created term limits for committee chairmen.
I don’t understand #8 at all. The whole thing is a disservice for knowledgable citizens.
Report comment to moderator
#1 NJL I had that some recollection of Rahm Emmanuel’s quote as I began reading this article
In academia and in the military senior leaders often times proudly mentor subordinates knowing full well in the not too distant future the underlings will be “large and in charge”.
You just dont see that loyalty extended in politics.
The senior office-holders just have such a strong sense of entitlement.
Term limits is the single BEST campaign finance reform the USA could ever enact. Who knows? Maybe if you were freed up from having to campaign for donations then perhaps you’d focus on the real problems you were elected to address. One can hope!
Report comment to moderator
Would folks be willing to forego the chance of having another Strom Thurmond or Teddy Kennedy?
Report comment to moderator
#4 Sawgunner
“Would folks be willing to forego the chance of having another Strom Thurmond or Teddy Kennedy?”
Yes!
Spec 5 E-5 Robert T. Buckles USA(Ret.
I guess getting out of the Army after two years of service is retired.
Report comment to moderator
The question should be posed: What would you do if you found yourself in Nazi Germany? We are finding ourselves in extremely similar circumstances now in the US. The Democrats are the new Nazis. Ten “death threats” were supposedly received by ten Democrats. Just ten? Considering that the real death threat is the legislation they rammed through against the will of the American people ten threats would be a lame amount. What is one brick bouncing off of one window when the Democrats have wrecked many homes literally and figuratively by their policies?
Democrats just like Nazis have to view themselves and portray themselves as innocent victims. When that is not the case at all.
The people who indulge in threats and acts of violence have always been on the left. They are the ‘experts’. And the media are co conspirators.
Report comment to moderator
And the mdia are co-conspirators . Just like in Nazi Germany.
Report comment to moderator
Oooook, Monty. Keep up the level-headed debate.
Report comment to moderator
“Nazis! You’re all Nazis! Obama wants to kill my grandma! Socialism! Communism! Whatever! I don’t know the difference anyway!” Rubbish.
Report comment to moderator
For once I party agree with PS (yikes). The “NAZIS!!!!” cry is so counterproductive, even if there are legit comparisons.
As to term limits – I’m trying to think of somebody with more than 12 years in DC who is worthwhile having there… the list is short. If it is only voluntary – only the good ones will follow term limits (which is the opposite of what it is designed for). I’ve never seen somebody become less corrupt over time in Washington.
Pay limits are less of an issue to me – though Congress voting itself a pay raise sure doesn’t look good.
Corruption is a REAL problem – some of those reforms would take a bite out of it.
Report comment to moderator
My mother came home to the US from Nazi Germany. Those people never thought what was going to happen there would happen. They were disabused bigtime. I’m not looking forward to being China’s lackey. There was a time when the British had an empire. They no longer do. So, if you are stupid enough to think that the US will avoid that fate, think twice.
Report comment to moderator
Even during Vietnam, there wasn’t this kind of discontent in the country. There’s something brewing here. If the Dems are stupid enough to think the voters will be appeased by the few good things that are kicking in now (i.e., pre-existing conditions), then they deserve their fate. They have misread this whole thing. This is about the size of the government, not just healthcare.
Report comment to moderator
NJL – the vast public isn’t able to understand what you posted in #11 – they can’t see it, nor do they want to.
We can only hope and pray that the elections will end up dismissing the SOCIALISTS from the House and Senate, and the guy in the Oval Office -
Report comment to moderator
The great unwashed, economic-and-constitutionally-ILLITERATE, mind-numbed Lemming-like wingnut Lefties will eagerly rally to whatever else BHO dangles before them: bread and circuses!! Peace and Land!!
Watch this space
Watch your freedoms disappear without a whimper raised in oppo.
Report comment to moderator
#5 Bob Buckles,
Bob its the quality not the quantity of your years in uniform. There are many young men who did Uncle Sam a HUGE FAVOR by ETSing out of the military or never joining up in the first place
Lotsa Nam vets are glad Dead-Eye Dick Cheney never held an m16 lest they had wound up fratricides!
Report comment to moderator
So, you guys are looking for a constitutional amendment?
Report comment to moderator
Don’t forget that a shot was fired into Cantor’s office. He’s a Republican.
Report comment to moderator
I shall definitely think about the ramifications of such an amendment. It seems quite reasonable.
Monty, the Nazis portrayed themselves as saviors, promising economic reform, restoring German pride, etc. They did not claim to the victims, they claimed that Germany was mad a victim by other nations , especially France. They mixed truth with lies to get into power, as yes, Germany was heavily abused after WWI, and the Nazis did solve all of Germany’s economic woes including radically reducing unemployment. And then, with the peoples’ approval or submission, they carried out their overarching goals, of which all of you know.
Obama is not a Nazi, and he is the farthest thing from a fascist, as socialism is the opposite of fascism.
On becoming China’s lacky, that is possible if our debt continues to explode and China maintains bargaining power with our debt. They would then have the power to obliterate our economy and the worth of the dollar by eliminating the peg on the US dollar. Economic warfare is just as destructive as normal warfare.
#1 Sawgunner
I think the phrase that should be said is never let voter outrage go to waste.
Report comment to moderator
“Term Limits” seem to work really well in Russia, where Putin no longer exercises any influence …. oh wait …. never mind …
Report comment to moderator
#17 Yes – a JEWISH Republican …
Report comment to moderator
#15 Too True …
Report comment to moderator
And you capitalized JEWISH because why, Spinny?
Report comment to moderator
The Congress was set up with the different terms for a specific reason. The House has elections every two years for the very reason we want elections now: so you don’t have to wait, you can throw the bums out quickly. The Senate is every six years. The idea was to keep throwing the bums out from happening too quickly. This gives time for hotheads to calm down. So term limits were in the heads of the Founders in a sense.
What you really want to outlaw is gerrymandering. Gerrymandering gives the edge to the incumbent.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with NJL and have to add that we can’t blame our representatives for staying in office. Every election offers a term limit. Gerrymandering is the province of state legislatures, so citizens better get busy there, too.
The oposition never quits.
Report comment to moderator
I had a thought that amused me — that in WWII, it took a long time for the US to get it together, but once they did, they took care of business. People have been polled for so long on the question: is the country going in the right/wrong direction, and they’ve been answering WRONG for so long, they’ve been ignored, but maybe now our reps have awakened the sleeping giant.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, I hope so, in fact a column by Walter Williams pointed out the silver lining that this little mess has at least gotten ordinary citizens more interested in our Constitution.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with much that has been written here. I think something is wrong when people can some how be re-elected for such long stays. “Political Career” should be an oxymoron.
NJL, your post at 12 was spot on. There is unrest that is growing by leaps and bounds. People are contributing to campaigns and the NRC for the first time in their lives. I will become one soon. I am actually looking to join a local Tea Party group.
I do have a concern: 7 months till November. I’m not concerned that the anger will subside. Just the opposite, I’m concerned that it will grow to dire consequences.
Report comment to moderator
Mr. Innes, to be fair about your list of pols., I didn’t notice any Rs in it. There should be.
Other than that, I personally would like to see much of that list enacted.
Report comment to moderator
As the WSJ noted yesterday, this bill passed for two reasons: (1) the GOP got thrashed in two consecutive election cycles; and (2) the GOP decided not to address moderate health-care reform when they had the opportunity in 2005.
Had the GOP provided for moderate health-care reform in 2005, they would have undercut most of the Dems’ legitimate arguments for health-care reform. But by passing up this issue in 2005, the GOP voluntarily handed the pen to the Dems.
Report comment to moderator
RSD, I don’t recall the 2005 opportunity for health care reform. Fill me in and I’ll also look it up.
Report comment to moderator
Isn’t it time for term limits for God and Jesus and the Holy Ghost?
No reason imaginary beings can’t be replaced like real ones.
Report comment to moderator
Well, BrotherDan, I agree with you about the anger growing, especially if they try to work on immigration.
A full 80% of New Jerseyans according to an Eagleton Poll were against passage of the bill and only one of our reps voted against it. The people here are angry, and if today’s front page doesn’t keep that going I don’t know what will. One Dem from our assembly has suggested that we let each town have its own sales tax to pay for property taxes. People reading the paper will say, here comes another tax. I’m thinking my purple state is changing color. Anger is red.
Report comment to moderator
“Gerrymandering has, to a large extent, made a farce out of popular election.”
I’ve always had a problem with this as well. I wouldn’t mind a federal law forcing states to draw congressional district lines in some objective, algorithmic fashion.
Report comment to moderator
BuddyGlass, a couple states do have a more objective method for redrawing their election districts, but the federal government has no say in that and never should since it is a creation of the states.
State legislatures will eventually listen to their constituents if they speak up loud enough and long enough.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, I think you’re misreading the Eagleton poll, The Poll that finds 81 percent of residents say the health care system needs to be changed. While it’s true that the poll also shows that 66% want to Start over, that number includes a majority of Democrats who think the bill doesn’t go far enough. Nobody likes a compromise.
Report comment to moderator
And then comes the National ID card.
Report comment to moderator
KWatson, I never looked at the poll, I just “resaid” the sentence in an article.
Report comment to moderator
Here’s the article:
http://news.rutgers.edu/medrel/news-releases/2009/12/rutgers-eagleton-pol-20091202
Report comment to moderator
If we had term limits, we wouldn’t be able to mock Sens. Grassley and Hatch for introducing legislation in 1993 to mandate health insurance and then for objecting, in 2010, that mandates are the end of freedom. Term limits would deprive voters of valuable windows into the cognitive dissonance of politics.
Report comment to moderator
Random Name (31): For a self-professed agnostic/narcissist/atheist you recognize the existence of the trinitarian Deity by capitalizing the names.
I used to read the American Atheist magazine once in while to see what the opposition was up to (mischief, mostly) and the editor or publisher and feature writers unfailingly referred to God as “gawd.”
You may be asked to surrender your freethinker membership card if you cannot follow the rules.
Report comment to moderator
Term limits is a bad idea. Experience is a commodity one shouldn’t be so quick to waste. Furthermore, lame duck congressman will be susceptible to corruption, after all they don’t need to be worried about the voters.
Gerrymandering is a problem. The distortions on a US congressional district map are incredible. Reforming the districts and creating boundaries that reflect historical, civic and natural divisions will make the districts more competitive.
By all means insist on politicians carrying the same public health and pension plans as the rest of the population — health care and social security will be better funded.
Report comment to moderator
One bill is not like another, Scroopy, and you know it. 1993 and 2010 are different.
Report comment to moderator
My comments regard points 2,5 & 7:
2. A member of Congress collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when out of office. No pension.
5. Members of Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of the Consumer Price Index or 3 percent.
#2: Yes, no possibility of earning a pension while in Congress or the White House, for that matter. Never. (They can do things like funding an IRA just like the rest of us.)
We all know that too many politicians at state and national levels use office to line their pockets. We need to say “Despicable!” (and with conviction) This is real; it is not hyperbole.
We used to have elected officials who had to still hold onto their real jobs; you only went to Washington D.C. for part of the year. Many state legislatures still operate this way. Why do we think that U.S. Senator = 300+ days per year job? (if they work)
It is supposed to be public service. With emphasis on the word ’service’ to others NOT self-service.
So let me alter point #5: Not more than ONE increase per decade.
(Base annual salary for my district’s freshman congressman: $184,000. This places him in the top 1% of earners who call my district home.)
Further, point #7: No more legislation where we have to openly debate whether the contents of the bill / law apply to members of Congress. Does the new Health Care law apply to the them? If not, why not?
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!