"The Committee!" Because the Republicans took the debt ceiling hostage by attaching it to the budget, and because of the intransigence of both parties, we now have the real possibly that all the hard choices will be made, not by Congress, and not by the President, but a committee. Talk about passing the buck, and moving even one step further from a representative government. I don't know about all of you, but if this goes down, it could ultimately mean the end of our government as we know it.
-- Modified on 7/23/2011 9:12:58 PM
In this case plenty will be done, and the voting public has no recourse in the results. Taxes can go up, Social security, medicare, Veteran's benefits can all be reduced, budget items can be cut. Those are all things we count on having a say in through our elected representatives.
-- Modified on 7/23/2011 9:22:21 PM
think you are overreacting just a tad . . . . .
But, you're right! I was quite concerned about the possible long-term ramifications. I think the so call safe congressional districts are one of the steps taken away from a more representational form of government. I still think this Super Congress could be another.
-- Modified on 7/23/2011 10:08:12 PM
First of all, they tried everything else and need to come up with something fast in order to pass it by Aug. 2. You are also ignoring that committees like this have long played a role in the Congress. In "How a bill becomes a law," once each house passes its version of a bill, a Conference Committee is established that conforms the two bills and sends them for a quick vote. I know this isn't the same situation but the solution is the same. And given the extraordinary circumstances, I don't think it's so terrible. Certainly not a scary precedent.
Also to the point, what in the world does this do to "representative government?" We the people only get to vote on our representatives every two years, or every six. How does this affect that?
Obama Care was cobbled together behind closed doors with an amazingly small number (if any) public, legislative hearings.
BUT THAT IS JUST THE START
There are hundreds of provisions that have the full effect of law that Congress will never enact. They are all the provisions that read, "in the discretion of...." "As X, Y, or Z shall determine....."
If it goes passes the courts, in 10 years the vast majority of specific laws affecting health care will be decided by administrators or departments.
And none of these enactments will have to go back to congress. They will all take effect when the adminstrator decides.
-- Modified on 7/23/2011 9:12:58 PM
As corrupt and broken our representative democracy is, it still has some vague semblance of a representative democracy.
Recently, the Turtle-in-Chief, Mitch McConnell had the termerity to say that "elections don't work", and apparently, this is his solution. The only purpose of this is to make it easier to get rid of Social Security. It is now impossible because of the democratic process. In other words, the People, who this government is supposed to be by, of, and for, are getting in his way of his wetdream to put seniors on a catfood budget.
Wake up and smell the coffee. We now have a defacto fascist government in the state of Michigan. And I don't use that word lightly. It is the text-book definition of Mussolinian fascism. It is the direct replacement of rule by elected officials who are responsible to the People to representation by corporate entities who have no responsibilities to the People they are supposed to represent.
You see this all over the country where "free market" and "libertarian" rhetoric is being used as a cover to, inch by inch, establish fascist rule.
You see this in Congress with the attempt to eliminate majoritarian rule solely when it comes to raising taxes. And now you see this attempt to replace the democratic process is this so-called Super Committee. What's worse, is that this committee will be made up of equal numbers of each House, regardless of who holds the majority of the seats in each House.
I have said for years that the Republican party is not the conservative party. That's the Democrats. The Republican party has gone from flirting with fascism to attempting to replace our democracy with fascism. This is the first step at the national level.
Milton Mayer, after interviewing Germans after WW2, wrote a book called, "They Thought They Were Free". If anyone here hasn't read it, you should. In it, an interviewee said,
"Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, everyone is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there will be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, 'It's not so bad' or 'You're seeing things' or 'You're an alarmist.'
"And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can't prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don't know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic.
"But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and the smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked - if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in '43 had come immediately after the 'German Firm' stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in '33. But of course this isn't the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.
"And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying 'Jew swine,' collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in - your nation, your people - is not the world you were in at all."
-- Modified on 7/24/2011 10:08:45 AM
I know you're passionate about all this, but you're also playing fast and loose with the facts. To wit:
1) "A de facto fascist government in Michigan?" Wait a minute! Weren't you just touting how well the recall elections were going? I don't recall any recall elections in HItler's Germany or Mussulini's Italy.
2) Eliminate majoritarian rule? How? Our problem right now is the Republicans have a majority in Congress. They earned it. The Dems problem is that, when they controlled both houses they didn't get enough done.
3) The Super Committee. How is this anti-democratic? It's similar to a conference committee. And why shouldn't representation be equal between the parties? The Dems control one house and the Reps the other.
As to the rest, I sympathize with what Mayer's saying about the incremental slide into fascism. But I don't think that's what happening here, although The Patriot Act is a rather unsettling reality.
Look at what is going on in Michigan. Governor Synder has eliminated local representation, stripped them of their power and replaced it with corporate managers. THAT IS FASCISM. In 1938, Mussolini dissolved the Italian Parliament and replaced it with the "Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni" - the Chamber of the Fascist Corporations. That representative to government was, in fact, a corporation. That is what has happened in Michigan. It is, by definition, Mussolinian Fascism. Whether a stop gap such as a recall election process exists has nothing to do with this fact.
Our nation's legislative process is based upon majoritarian rule. 50% of the votes plus 1, and a bill is passed. It does not matter if it's in a committee or a full house. The Republicans want to do away with majoritarian rule by demanding that supermajority rules be imposed in order to pass higher taxes.
This Super-Committee is anti-democratic because it prevents anyone in Congress not in that committee from writing or amending anything that comes out of that committee. Representation should NOT be equal between the two parties with this anti-democratic idea because the representation in each House is not 50/50. Similarly, during the health care debate, the Dems controled 60% of each House, and yet the GOP sat on a committee with the Dems to write that bill with 50% representation for each side. That too, is anti-democratic and anti-representative.
Look, Nicky I like you, and think you're a good guy, but the next time you accuse me of playing fast and loose with the facts, you should first have an understanding of the facts.
In the mean time, I have a book to recommend.
You failed to rebut my point about Wisconsin but threw up a different "example." I assume that means you can't rebut my statement. Besides, the people will vote, in all states just as they have, to keep or throw out their representatives. Is the system flawed? Sure. Is it jeopardized by corporate campaign contributions facilitated by the Supreme Court? Yep. But so far our government hasn't turned fascist, as you allege.
Also, our government does not, and never has, practiced strict majoritarian rule. Viz. that the Senate used to be an appointed body. That women weren't allowed to vote. That men needed to be property owners. The Senate has been hobbled by its cloture rule, that the Republicans abused to force the Dems to have a supermajority to pass anything.
Last, the Super-Committee doesn't prevent any member from voting on the final bill, in the same way that the Conference Committee always has.
-- Modified on 7/24/2011 5:02:41 PM
Nicky, I refuted each of your points. I didn't even mention Wisconsin. I was talking about Michigan. Walker may be running the state of Wisconsin as a bit of a tyrant, but so far, I haven't seen anything to indicate that he's trying to eliminate local representation in the state.
I have not claimed that our federal government has turned fascist. I said that this Super Committee proposal is an attempt to inch us a little closer to fascism.
You're quite right that the Senate has quite a few backwards rules, but as Article 1, Section 5, clause 2 states: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings". They can fix those rules with a simple majority vote whenever they like.
The Senate was for a time appointed, but it was appointed by state legislatures, who themselves were elected by the People. Whether we didn't allow certain groups of classes of people to vote didn't change the fact that majoritarian rules determined the outcomes in those chambers.
The GOP abuse of filibusters I think is anti-democratic, but it still doesn't change the fact that majoritarian rules are used to pass laws. A filibuster is just used to prevent closing off debate early.
It's one thing to use a committee to fix differences between two bills, it's quite another to strip lawmaking ability from members of Congress.
First, as to Wisconsin/Michigan, I was the one who brought up the Wisconsin recall efforts you have cited recently as an example of popular power at the voting booth. So you changed the subject to Michigan. And you still have not responded to the point: if we are such a fascist-tending society, how is it that people were demonstrating in the capitol building there and now are recalling legislators?
Second, it defies logic for you to claim that the Senate was "majoritarian" when it was appointed by state legislators elected by only males. Talk about bending reality...not to mention your usual populist leanings. Anything to "win" an argument, I guess.
Third, a filibuster is not simply "used to prevent closing off debate early." It is a way of preventing debate entirely and making it impossible for the majority to bring a bill to the floor. What planet were you on when the Republicans used this tactic to frustrate passage of the health care bill (not to mention many others). That's why the Dems needed their supermajority to do anything, but it was frustrated by right-wing Dems like Ben Nelson. This, in turn, forced the Dems to drop the single-payer alternative from the bill. All the result of the cloture rules. How did you miss this?
Fourth, as to the Super Committee stripping lawmaking ability from members of Congress, they still get to vote on the bill. With health care, don't you recall it was passed so quickly many members didn't have time to read what was in the bill before voting? How is that different?
You are sounding more and more like a Talmudic scholar, Willy. But not a very good one.
The only people who think that we are anywhere near a fascists, totalitarian, or any other form of state controlled society are people who never spent serious time in that type of society talking to the people.
In the alternative, they are people who never spent serious time in the communites of immigrants to the US from that type of nation.
Having done both, I will sum it up with one story.
A few years ago I was at the gym, shaving after my morning workout. They have a TV in the dressing room, and someone was commenting about some trend that he perceived as dictatorial in the US. The person next to me looked at the TV and in a heavy Russian accent he has, "How do people get so stupid in this country?"
Yes, it is anecdotal. But as I say, I spent a lot of time in totalitarian states and with emigres from those states. When the editor of the NY Times is jailed for an editorial, you know we are there.
How many editorials were there on all the forms of the media in Wisconsin, and how many were critical of the Gov? How many of those editorial writers had their computers smashed, their children beaten up, or their arms broken? I would place a bet it was under 100. (Sarcasm.)
Recently, the Turtle-in-Chief, Mitch McConnell had the termerity to say that "elections don't work", and apparently, this is his solution. The only purpose of this is to make it easier to get rid of Social Security. It is now impossible because of the democratic process. In other words, the People, who this government is supposed to be by, of, and for, are getting in his way of his wetdream to put seniors on a catfood budget.
Wake up and smell the coffee. We now have a defacto fascist government in the state of Michigan. And I don't use that word lightly. It is the text-book definition of Mussolinian fascism. It is the direct replacement of rule by elected officials who are responsible to the People to representation by corporate entities who have no responsibilities to the People they are supposed to represent.
You see this all over the country where "free market" and "libertarian" rhetoric is being used as a cover to, inch by inch, establish fascist rule.
You see this in Congress with the attempt to eliminate majoritarian rule solely when it comes to raising taxes. And now you see this attempt to replace the democratic process is this so-called Super Committee. What's worse, is that this committee will be made up of equal numbers of each House, regardless of who holds the majority of the seats in each House.
I have said for years that the Republican party is not the conservative party. That's the Democrats. The Republican party has gone from flirting with fascism to attempting to replace our democracy with fascism. This is the first step at the national level.
Milton Mayer, after interviewing Germans after WW2, wrote a book called, "They Thought They Were Free". If anyone here hasn't read it, you should. In it, an interviewee said,
"Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, everyone is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there will be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, 'It's not so bad' or 'You're seeing things' or 'You're an alarmist.'
"And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can't prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don't know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic.
"But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and the smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked - if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in '43 had come immediately after the 'German Firm' stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in '33. But of course this isn't the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.
"And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying 'Jew swine,' collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in - your nation, your people - is not the world you were in at all."
-- Modified on 7/24/2011 10:08:45 AM