Ron Paul was wise. Wisdom is what we need.
Most people are not wise until their sixties.
A mental acuity test maybe—limits shrink. We need WISDOM. Not limits. Wisdom is timeless.
It would be wise to spend a year repealing unconstitutional “Acts”. Statesmen ARE statesmen because they have character AND WISDOM. Do you think Trump is wise?
1 Like
Trump was wise to finally seek an endorsenent from Ron Paul, even if it was on the literal last day of his campaign.
I was ambivalent about Trump through most of the campaign, and had my sights on RFK. I was disappointed when RFK dropped out and endorsed Trump. I was a little bit impressed when Ramaswami gave Trump his endorsement, but it didn’t sway me. It was seeing the inclusion of Ron Paul into Trump’s cabinet that got me on board.
With that said, I’m cautious and open-eyed towards Trump and have noted one big red flag- Alexander Acosta. That man deserves a seat next to Epstein in whichever hell those types go to as far as im concerned. At least he’s not on the current roster but the fact that he was on Trumps team last time is a stain for sure.
See US Term Limits v Thornton 1994. SCOTUS. Sadly Arkansas and 21 other states attempts to limit terms of House and Senate lost 5-4. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a very thoughtful DISSENT.
What that was about was to get an ART V CONVENTION. All electors have plenipotentiary powers—-they can change or re write anything in the constitution. They didn’t care about term limits—-there is no such thing as a LIMITED CONVENTION. The last thing you want is a convention. Read in federalist papers what James Madison said about another convention. He “trembled” at the thought of it.
congress 6 term 12 yrs.
senate 2 term
They will buy off the next one probably with less money. You have to remove the influence of lobbyists somehow.
any public servant is not allowed to Lobby for at least 10 years after their last year in office.
8 years max
Once in office, the clock of being a government employee in one of the three branches starts. Once that time comes, a person may not continue in any other of the 3 branches. They may either transfer into the front line ops of the military or private sector, non-governmental position.
ART V IS SOMETHING YOU NEVER WANT TO PURSUE! COS of all people, KNOW a convention cannot be “limited.”. you also know delegates to a convention have plenipotentiary powers—meaning ALL power. Just get your foot in that now tightly closed convention door and all hell will break loose. We prefer to KEEP our Constitution intact.
I feel most Americans would want this implemented!
Yep. Most Americans wanted the 17th amendment too! how is that working out for ya?
CONGRESSIONAL TERM LIMITS will never work. It is a manipulation and distraction to make Americans think they have solved political corruption. Politicians know they have nothing to lose if their time is limited and will rig things in their favor. Remember when Obama was caught on a hot mic speaking with then Russian president Medvedev? Obama asked Medvedev to pass a message to incoming president Putin, stating once the 2012 election was over for Obama’s 2nd term, he (Obama) would have more flexibility since he couldn’t run for a 3rd term, so didn’t have to worry about making the voters mad. It was during Obama’s 2nd term that Putin invaded Crimea and annexed it through a fake vote.
Then there is McConnell, who rushed a vote to push his clone, Senator John Thune as his replacement as the new Majority Senate Leader. McConnell is already stating his replacement will not allow Trump to make recess appointments.
The real dangers are the unConstitutional agencies in the executive branch. Congress shifted their duties to unelected bureaucrats they control so they wouldn’t have to vote on record for voters to see. The other danger is the out of control use of Executive Orders. They were never meant to allow the president to write his own laws. They were to be used for the day-to-day running of the executive branch, not anything that affected the entire nation.
The two biggest dangers of all are the gov’t using the “confidential” status to hide their corruption or mistakes from the American people, and the ignorance of Americans regarding U.S. history, world history, Constitution, Declaration of Independence and WHY the Founders designed the federal gov’t as they did. That ignorance has allowed Democrats and RINOs (undercover Democrats pretending to be Republicans) to systematically dismantle the Constitution. Every part of the 1st Amendment has been dismantled. The federal gov’t is trying to dismantle the 2nd amendment. The 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th amendments are ignored by the legal system everyday. The 9th and 10th amendments have been dismantled. The 16th amendment gives the federal gov’t a limitless bank account to push their illegal actions and tyranny on the American people and other countries. The 17th Amendment has taken away the voice and power of the States, allowing Senators to put themselves first and their States and the U.S. last. States were to be a bulwark against overreach by the federal gov’t.
John Adams said the design of the country would only work for a moral people. The many writings of the Founding Fathers can be summarized with the statement: “An educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people”.
This education has been destroyed by the government-controlled schools, but also by the fact too much gov’t action is buried… such as former Speaker Paul Ryan (who falsely claimed to be a Republican) had gotten his hands on the Steele Dossier and buried it for months as the FBI worked with Hillary Clinton to falsely charge Trump with colluding with Russia to steal the 2016 election. With the help of the Democrat-controlled media and social media, essential information is not only withheld from the public, but is too often, twisted out of recognition while lies are pushed. AG Merrick Garland is withholding the video / audio of Biden testifying over the gov’t documents he stole as a Senator and VP… denying a citizenry to be educated.
Shutdown those unConstitutional agencies and force the politicians to expose their true selves. For the Constitutional agencies, remove any authority to write “rules and regulations”. Per the Constitution, only Congress can write laws… not bureaucrats, not lobbyists. Restrict executive orders to the day-to-day running of the executive branch and cannot apply to those not working for the executive branch. Have the Sergeant-at-Arms arrest Garland and other agency heads for ignoring a subpoena. Open the doors to all areas of the federal gov’t so the American people can see what is really happening.
Term limits are a distraction to make the people think the problem has been solved. The real solution is to educate the public on our founding documents, history of our country and the world since the 1770s, what the Founding Fathers were trying to stop in the new country. The people must also be made to understand, the ONLY way they will keep their rights and freedoms is to become political and to pay attention. Force the media to report the truth and stop allowing them to cover-up political crimes.
If the people think they have solved the problem with “term limits”, they will pay even less attention as the politicians grab more wealth and power.
Oh, and throw out the case against Assange. He was doing exactly what the Founding Fathers wanted… informing the people of gov’t corruption.
Nothing at the convention will change anything if 3/4ths of the States do not agree to it, which means, only the best solutions will get through.
STATES CONVENTION, FULL STEAM AHEAD!
1 Like
Good luck with that! Before the constitution, our constitution (articles of con-when we were really free). It took 100% of the states!!! They can change the mode of ratification to by executive proclamation. Which the NewStates constitution, lying on the shelf, calls for!!! Look it up! I think it is Art. 12–if memory serves. But it is in there. People just don’t know how all this works. Apparently you do not.
God bless you! Someone who is INFORMED! Thank you.strong text
Derek, I despise pork barrel spending as much as - or more than - any man; however, I would ask you to explain how you think that will balance the budget. I contend that it will not and cannot do so despite the sums pork barrell spending runs to. If all pork were eliminated, you would still see the national debt increase.
From what I read, only about 30% of the federal budget is discretionary; the rest is mandated by acts of congress already passed and signed into law. Eliminating pork would be a start but not a solution.
There can be no doubt that funding obtained by congressmen that benefit their districts or states can be wasted, but sometimes they result in improvements benefitting their constituencies and the whole country, indirectly. We must not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Instead, why not set up an arrangement wherein federal spending obtained by congressmen for their constituencies become loans that must be repaid according to a schedule - exactly as the public does for any loan - with a limited payback period and appropriate interest rates. This would include all public, private and quasi-public expenditures, IOW, all pork.
Balancing the budget must address entitlements. That’s akin to touching the 3rd rail.
Even if ALL other ‘entitlements’ and benefits were eliminated, to balance the budget must address, first and foremost, Social Security and Medicare. When it was established, Social Security was meant to be a meager subsistence payment. It has been expanded by politicians (to gain votes for themselves) without readdressing the fundamental economics of the program. The same is true for Medicare.
To start, if the nation agrees that those programs are essential, federal statutes should give those payments first claim against revenues, dispelling forever the notion that other acts of government will mean not making those distributions. Social Security and Medicare must be fiscally sound. There must be revenues for all expenses. By giving those distributions first claim against assets, congress must be constrained to provide revenue for them using sound underwriting principles, not political hot air.
A balanced budget is one in which revenues match payments and savings. It is directly equivalent to the accounting equation: Assets = Liabilities + Equity. In balancing the federal budget, we must take care to constrain congress from raising taxes to balance the equation; so some legal contraints on taxing must be addressed. Perhaps limiting tax increases to some smaller percentage of GDP growth could be made to work; although the devil would be in the details of defining the metrics to determine GDP growth.
To balance the federal government, borrowing must also be constrained and its costs must be included on the expense side of the equation. The government - including all three branches - must be held to the rule that income and expenses (including costs of borrowing and whatever rainy-day funds are created) be equal. Any income derived from borrowing must also entail a properly underwritten program for retiring the specific debt incurred within constrained periods of time, the shorter the better.
Provisions for emergency borrowing must also be codified. That requires defining what constitutes a national emergency. Because it is impossible to foresee what might occur from what causes, that decision must be made in the moment; therefore, the law should allow either the POTUS or the COTUS to declare a national emergency, naming its cause. If originated in congress it must require a super majority (at least 2/3rds, perhaps even 3/4ths) to succeed and must require presidential acquiesence. If originated by the POTUS, the COTUS must concur with a super majority. In any case both the congress and the president should have to agree and approve deficit spending and it must be limited to national emergencies. It should not be possible for a colluding congress and president to declare national emergencies and borrow funds for such things as foreign aid, of any kind; therefore, the states must act as a check and balance by also concurring on the emergency and to invoke debt to pay for it. A super majority (either 2/3rds or 3/4ths, the same as required of congress) of states must approve any such borrowing. Because time is of the essence in most emergencies, time limits for debate and ratification or rejection must be established.
Rigorous scrutiny, investigation and prosecution must be in place to prevent those serving in public office - whether elected, appointed, employed, or otherwise engaged - from profiting in any manner not also available to any member of the general public, including using early access to information about regulation or legislation that would affect stock and bond prices or the value of business entities. There are laws in place already, but they are not well enough defined nor are they scrutinized or rigorously prosecuted. Those laws must be replaced with better ones. Under those new laws, power to invoke charges must reside with legal authorities (law enforcement at all levels) and must also be given to public petition through state legislatures and through independent citizen inititiatives. Punishment must include immediate removal from office upon being charged, for all but the POTUS. Upon conviction, there must be confiscatory fines - to include property held personally or jointly in common with others (to give those to whom they may be married or otherwise connection incentive to oppose such behavior) and imprisonment for lngthy terms immune to parole, commutation, and pardon. IOW, do the crime then you must pay the fine and do the time. PERIOD - FULL STOP!
Agree, there should be term limits
Term limits without first addressing graft would be non productive.
We have term limits it called voting them out of office. What has happened ever since we have become more reliable on technology the voting public has gotten lazy. The Founding Fathers designed the system to work great as long as the public was involved in the government. Instead the public overtime just kept voting for the same people because they never got involved in seeing what their politicians were actually doing. The public because of this non-involvement was just voting for the most familiar name on the ballot. These politicians had a hand in making the public lazy by convincing the public by giving the government more power (regulations and laws) you would be safer and not have to worry about anything. Well after almost a century of growing the government the country is close to bankruptcy, WWIII, out of control crime, and a party trying to gain control for itself and to destroy one of the best forms of government that can work for the people if they are willing to get involved. To get term limits you would have to change the Constitution and the process would take decades and the current voting public is not ready for that change, especially when you have 13 states that wouldn’t go along with the Amendment to have change the terms for Congress.
Agree! With blockchain voting the BALLOT BOX would be term limits—the true will of the people!
I agree but we could address graft and all kinds of abuses of office from nonfeasance to misfeasance to malfeasance along with punishments to include removal from office upon conviction, fines and even imprisonment while simultaneously setting term limits.