Plots and Thoughts

Congress: Term vs Age Limits

Posted in Analysis, Observations, Strategy by Captain Optimistic on January 10, 2010

I find myself disagreeing – strongly – with Amanda Marcotte.  This of course has me a bit startled.  At issue is the question of term and age limits.  Amanda is upset about old out of touch white men in public office.  Which is understandable.  It isn’t like our generation will be any better when we find ourselves in power.  These men – across both parties – represent positions and hold perceptions that are way out of whack with the rest of the country.  Her solution is to avoid term limits and their associated problems and instead institute a mandatory retirement age.  There are a number of problems with this solution.

  • Medicine and Technology are turning 65 into 75, and 75 into 85.  At what point is a citizen no longer allowed to hold office because their world view is no longer relevant?  Should we instead of a citizenship test of sorts – a litmus test – to ensure aged political hopefuls are with the times?
  • Is there any premium at all on differing perceptions?  Do we want to make our governing body more homogeneous?

What we ought to be doing is removing age limits.  There is no reason a 20 year old cannot run for the highest office in the land.  Part of the problem is that congress is dominated by entrenched power, and entrenched power and age go hand in hand.

I’m hesitant to suggest term limits.  I think they’re a bad idea for a lot of reasons, starting with the fact that the existence of senior politicians is often a good thing—experience and stature helps them get things done. While we were talking about this last night, Marc also pointed out to me that term limits encourage corruption by encouraging the Dick Cheney-style revolving door between holding office and working for corporations.

We therefore need to couple term limits with strong and effective anti-corruption laws.  Encouraging the ageism in our political system does not strike me as an effective way to gain allies or improve our representation.

What if, instead of encouraging politicians to hang onto their seats as long as humanly possible, we created an incentive for politicians to groom and root for their successors?  One reason we’re all so scared to see someone like Ted Kennedy or Robert Byrd leave office is we’re afraid of who will take their place, but I think if these politicians were looking forward to retirement instead of waiting for death, that might not be so.  They would have much more of a reason to groom someone suitable for their seat, and help get them elected while they still had the energy to do so.

These incentives would increase the stranglehold of entrenched politicians even further, so they could continue to exert their influence after they leave through their successors.  Take a good hard look at Putin and Medvedev.  Do we really to encourage that here?

To strengthen our representation in Congress we need to increase diversity of representation and freedom of choice while simultaneously restricting entrenched power and corruption.  Here is what we need to agitate for:

  • Removing age limits
  • Instituting term limits
  • Selecting a new system of voting (along the lines of instant runoff) that allows people to rank their choices
  • Make elections entirely publicly financed, outlawing the spending of any private funds

It would be a start, a small step forward.  Age limits would be a step backwards, an act that legitimizes existing age limits when we need to do what we can to remove them entirely.

Comments Off on Congress: Term vs Age Limits

Hawaii vs DC: Taxation Without Representation

Posted in Observations by Captain Optimistic on January 10, 2010

The AP notices that:

Cash-strapped Hawaii can’t afford to pay for an election to replace a congressman who is planning to step down next month to run for governor, potentially leaving 600,000 urban Honolulu residents without representation in Washington.

Funny, 600,000 is roughly the population of the District of Columbia.  Hawaii will have to wait at worst until next fall’s elections.  DC will have to wait until hell freezes over, or Congress decides having one more urban district really won’t be that awful a tragedy.

Comments Off on Hawaii vs DC: Taxation Without Representation

Strategy – Letting Health Reform Fail

Posted in Analysis, Observations, Strategy by Captain Optimistic on December 22, 2009

We have three options going forward.  Agitate for meaningful change in the health care reform bill, allow it to fail in Congress and pin that failure firmly on right wingers in both parties, or allow it to pass as is.  If we allow this bill to pass, it will fail to contain costs, fail to reform industry practices, and serve only as a precedent for corporations using government to force a noncompetitive market on the public.  Such a failure will appear to validate conservatives and be disastrous for midterm elections.

The third option isn’t viable for liberals, Democrats and supporters of meaningful healthcare reform.  The first two options are both the fruit of the same essential strategy:  Pushing as hard as we can against the misogynist and corporatist forces aligned against reform.  It is a true win-win strategy.  If we succeed we will have decimated Stupak-Pitts and Nelson – attempts to use the urgency of the health care debate to force the abortion issue and religious inspired law into an unrelated bill.  If we succeed we’ll have created real competition for the private insurance industry, offered reforms that curtail abuses and protect consumers, and stood up against corporate lobbyist controlled legislation*.

If on the other hand we fail, we walk into the midterm elections strong and fierce.  Our campaign language is written for us.  Vote for reformers, vote against the Congress critters beholden to Bibles and corporate donations.

If we take the advice of our adversaries and shut the fuck up we will lose.  We will lose health care reform, and we will lose power in both bodies of Congress come midterms.  If we want power we must win this battle, and the only way to do so is to dig in and fight.  Anything less than a ferocious commitment to an authentic reform effort will end in our loss.

*All things our President promised fervently to do during the campaign.

Comments Off on Strategy – Letting Health Reform Fail