Perry's book

[sjt18]

Have not read it but here's an article drawing from it.

I'd give Perry a 4.5 or 5.5 out of 7. #6... marriage is definitely a state issue. #7... either pass an amendment legally defining "a living citizen" or else give it back to the states.

I am not sure I like changing judge tenure either. While I agree the effect has been bad after judges started overreaching... you don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Seven ways Rick Perry wants to change the Constitution | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

 

[CSVol]

Not sure about allowing state legislatures to choose reps. and taking the people's voice out of it. Also, it seems he has decided abortion is too important of an issue to be left to the states regardless.

 

[sjt18]

Not sure about allowing state legislatures to choose reps. and taking the people's voice out of it. Also, it seems he has decided abortion is too important of an issue to be left to the states regardless.

You expressed the idea behind direct election of Senators but the effect has been the complete opposite. Senators are very insulated from the voices of their constituents. More than Reps, they are susceptable to the influence of big money interests.

The Senate was designed to be the "states' house". In that role, they were beholden to state legislators... who were very close to the "people". Ask yourself, do you have more influence with your senator now than you would if you could go to your state rep and senator and get them to influence the senator? Legislatures are not usually all that large. Each member would have tremendous influence with the Senator. For monied interests to have a big influence in the Senate.... they'd have to buy off 3000 or so legislators.

If you want big money out of Congressional politics, this is one of the best places to start. Increasing the membership of the House by a factor of 3X or 4X would be the next.

 

[CSVol]

I understand and agree with the notion of removing undue influence on Senators. Just not sure how eliminating my direct ability to remove Senators would be a good idea. My fear, possibly irrational, is that dominance by a party on both state and federal levels is possible. I have begun to warm to the idea of increasing representative numbers.

BTW, what was the rationale behind the initial change?

 

[sjt18]

You pretty much gave it. It was thought that direct election of Senators would make them accountable to the people rather than the state and city "machines" that dominated party politics 100 years ago. The long term effect has been a trade of party machines for PAC's, unions, corporations, etc.

IMO, now with the access we have to info, the "machines" would have a very difficult time attaining or maintaining power.

Do you find it interesting that the House stopped being expanded at the same time? That is the era when the Progressives finally took over politically. They've held ultimate power in both parties since then... that's why Dems and the GOP establishment both attack the TP.

 

[CSVol]

I do find it interesting and swear fealty to no party. It is disheartening that, during my lifetime, every attempt at expanding the political arena with multiple parties has been attacked and destroyed by the status quo.

 

[TennesseeOrange]

Like #5, okay with #4, #3 is not feasible right now, but absolutely hate the rest of them.

 

[VOLatile]

Perry's communication director already trying to distance Perry from his book:

[Perry's] communications director, Ray Sullivan, said Thursday that he had “never heard” the governor suggest [Social Security] was unconstitutional. Not only that, Mr. Sullivan said, but “Fed Up!” is not meant to reflect the governor’s current views on how to fix the program. [...]

In an interview, Mr. Sullivan acknowledged that many passages in Mr. Perry’s “Fed Up!” could dog his presidential campaign. The book, Mr. Sullivan said, “is a look back, not a path forward.” It was written “as a review and critique of 50 years of federal excesses, not in any way as a 2012 campaign blueprint or manifesto,” Mr. Sullivan said.

The campaign’s disavowal of “Fed Up!” is itself very new. On Sunday evening, at Mr. Perry’s first campaign stop in Iowa, a questioner asked the governor to talk about how he would fix the country’s rickety entitlement programs. Mr. Perry shot back: “Have you read my book, ‘Fed Up!’ Get a copy and read it.”

 

[sjt18]

If true... that's sad. I am looking for a guy who will lead... say what he means, explain it, stand by it.

What would be the Constitutional authority for SSI? Have we really fallen so far and become so weak as a society that we cannot ask questions?

I am not saying we cannot or should not have it... just asking where Congress gets the authority to do it without a Constitutional Amendment.

 

[n_huffhines]

Have not read it but here's an article drawing from it.

I'd give Perry a 4.5 or 5.5 out of 7. #6... marriage is definitely a state issue. #7... either pass an amendment legally defining "a living citizen" or else give it back to the states.

I am not sure I like changing judge tenure either. While I agree the effect has been bad after judges started overreaching... you don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Seven ways Rick Perry wants to change the Constitution | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Or not a government issue at all.

 

[lawgator1]

If true... that's sad. I am looking for a guy who will lead... say what he means, explain it, stand by it.

What would be the Constitutional authority for SSI? Have we really fallen so far and become so weak as a society that we cannot ask questions?

I am not saying we cannot or should not have it... just asking where Congress gets the authority to do it without a Constitutional Amendment.

I actually like your logic here. I think it perfectly valid to debate some of the "big ideas" we have about the role of government in our society. I see nothing wrong with Perry challenging the rationale for Social Security or Medicare. The sooner we have that debate the faster we can evolve the social safety net, as it were, into something more efficient.