This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Why Things Never Change
Submitted by Doug Ross of Director Blue blog,
Historical chart illustrates the biggest problem in America today: Congressional Recidivism
Many fine writers have observed that there exists a de facto Ruling Class in Washington. Once men and women get to Congress, no matter how inept, inane, or diabolical they prove to be, the power of incumbency makes dislodging them akin to prying a Reese's Cup from Michael Moore's pudgy fingers.
An exhaustive study -- "Reelection Rates of Incumbents in the U.S. House" (PDF) -- performed in 2006 illustrates the dramatic changes in reelection rates since America's founding. It aggregates the results of every House election cycle between the years 1790 and 2006.
Over the years, the reelection rate of incumbents has increased steadily, likely the results of pork, quid pro quo funding to campaign contributors, and legislative skulduggery (the McCain-Feingold bill, for instance, could have been called The Incumbent Protection Act):
Until the Woodrow Wilson era, incumbent reelection rates hovered between 70 and 80 percent. Since then, however, massive wealth redistribution programs at the federal level -- the New Deal, the Square Deal, the Fair Deal, Great Society, etc. -- began cementing incumbents in place. Constituents dependent upon federal largesse became permanently addicted to these programs and the incumbents who fueled them.
Had the various branches of government shown fidelity to the Constitution, none of these programs would have come to be.
Term limits are one option to resisting incessant federal power grabs, but so too would be leveling the playing field for challengers.
Only a return to Constitutional government will solve the Congressional Recidivism problem.
»
- 13875 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Term limits. I say one and done.
and this: http://vimeo.com/15056028
Voting has become utterly useless. The Democrats and Republicans have been co-opted by TPTB and there is only one true agenda, no matter which party is in power. Seriously, how many multi-millionaires are there in the U.S. Congress? And how many have attained that wealth while "serving" their constituents? Do you really think they care one iota for the common man? Do you really believe that they are in Congress for any altruistic and high moral purpose? Do they have courage and honor? Do they have any sentiments of patriotism? Realistically, the fact is that the political elites have only their own self interest to pursue and they do not give a damn about you or I.
OT a little...
Want a good laugh? This should give you all the hilarity you can stand for one evening...
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b586044e-874c-11e2-bde6-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2NC4dot00
DaddyO
the evidence of the graph shown doesn't look (to me) like one state before w. wilson (fascist tool) and another after. it looks like a decline from an early (1790-1810) state of incumbent reelection like current rates to a low in 1873-1893 followed by a rise to current levels.
The assumption that this is mostly due to patronage is misguided.
It's mostly due to Gerrymandering: the redrawing of electoral districts to make them safe seats.
Gerrymandering has been made easier in modern times thanks to computers and databases of socio-economical status, voting preferences and registered voters. Why do you think the majority of electoral districts in the US have shapes which ressemble abstract works of art, which such shapes that they bring together distant yet similar neighbourhoods while avoiding other areas on the way?
That politicians get to draw their own electoral districts in most states is maybe the single biggest failure of the US voting system (which is probably why the original poster didn't mention it).
Gerrymandering - Just look at what the California expats did to Colorado.
Colorado - Turn in your shotguns and defend yourself with an extra sharp No. 2 pencil.
and gerrymandering has it's own political poison: because the Republican party is generally more fragmented in purpose, it profits more from gerrymandering, which leads it to pursuit defend it more strongly
the net effect is that any split or any new party rising is made more unlikely, in the short term
in the long term, it weakens the legitimacy of both major US parties, two rotten beams holding the roof
A few do; it's up to us to find more like them.
Voting itself is a great prerogative of the democratic system. Voting within the double-jester paradigm has become utterly useless yet nearly everyone is still supporting it. Voting for a third party is almost beyond comprehension of average American, even of most intellectually capable people, which is perfectly normal in many European countries. No wonder that America is led by corrupt traitors who are just submissively following the donor's agenda. If people don't care or are not willing to face the trivial truth they don't deserve liberty. So far so good.
Not the voting system itself but the inability or disinterest of Americans to treat it properly and responsibly is what makes America a degenerating society.
why is it so? is it inability or disinterest? or is it just the effect of endless propaganda?
I find in discussions here in ZH a generally quite low level of interest on how constitutions and nations work in general, coupled with an understanding that the US constitution is somewhat the pinnacle of creation - without realization that it's a quite old model among others
It's inability of many as well as disinterest of many. And, of course, the endless propaganda takes part. But it seems history has little understanding for any sort of logical reasoning or explanation why it is so. We were given brain, will, ethical perception and ability to act in order to effectively resist the propaganda. Most take liberty rights for granted but they aren't. It took wars and a lot of struggle to win through.
The US constitution is perhaps one of the best ever written. The ideas mentioned out there emphasize freedom, equality and the same opportunities for all members of the US society. I don't understand what can be old in such a model; it's an ideal, a key societal attitude upon which the society was built. And that's why America is/was so attractive and successful. In fact, I rather see those allegedly new concepts being promoted these days the very old collectivist and monarchical relics hidden in deceptive modern clothing.
perhaps it's one of the best ever written, but may I point out that it allows for the election of one man that holds the whole immense power of what Americans call Administration (and we europeans call government)? even the Romans felt that you need at least two in that position
further, it has no more advanced voting systems than the very, very, old one of first-round-the-post and no provisions against gerrymandering
and don't forget that as a constitution it was designed at a time where the single states had their own militias, collected most taxes and were way more powerful than today, particularly after the amendments of 1913
Odd that the rest of the world is so thrilled to copy most of our ways of life, but our constitution has so few interested in imitation:
http://www.nationofchange.org/losing-constitutional-competition-1331397521
Calling the constitution "old" so as to infer that it is obsolete is akin to calling trigonometry antiquated. Particular applications and techniques may change, but certain principles transcend age.
"One Man" is not the problem. it is a symptom. Just as the other things you mention. The constitution must be taken in its entirety to function. The "one man" was to be balanced against the checks and balance system of the legislature and the judicial, and the individual States. At its height, the system worked very well. At this point, all of them can be considered compromised.
The constitution has provisions for changes for what society considered fundamental and critical issues, to be carried out only after careful and protracted reflection. Instead much past hundred years has been the abandonment, distortion, and end running, of the many subtle but important features that made the Con function reasonably well.
The failures of today are not the failures of the Constitution, it is the failure of politicians and special interests to adhere to it, and the failure of the electorate to demand its implementation.
Ok, I got the point. As regards the one man's show model, you're perhaps right.
But... the problem goes deeper. Even this wouldn't guarantee anything. If the parties that should normally control each other (and thus balance the concentration of power) unite upon a hidden agreement of common crony interests fueled by donor's money, every constitution would turn out to be a shred of paper. The problem is the lack of constitutional spirit presented by both the American leaders and the citizens. The leaders have no problems to be, step by step, screwing the constitution and the citizens don't care. It seems that both sides have no problem to give up the rights in exchange for seemingly comfortable life and materialistic way of living... until there is neither comfortable life nor liberty rights.
Don't get Chris Matthews started on 3rd Parties:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNBQ86nU0js
This. So this. You win the internet for a day.
Only those who don't want to be elected can run for office.
And ban all political parties.
how?
Grillo in Italy is trying: movements like his don't have a party structure, just an... internet blog
Agreed. To go a further, set the term appropriately. Give both houses' members a 1-2 year period to learn the job, then give them 2 more years to really contribute. That would put the term for both houses at ~4 years.
Stagger the terms appropriately so that there's always continuity in knowledge/know-how.
Thus, beginning with the end in mind: create a system where continuity of knowledge is ensured and maximum contribution capabilitiy is achieved without tipping into a 'gaming the system' death spiral.
Not perfect, but it's a start.
Of course, this would have the same effect of destroying a horcrux in the eyes of Wall Street and Big Business.
The neighbor's kid says he wants to go into gubbermint work. Asked why he says,"then I never have to work again, can never be fired and I'll get lifetime health benefits and a fat pension."
Our country's problem is more then economic; it has deep-rooted cultural and political problems.
To heck with term limits. Lamp posts.
One and done.
naaah one isn't enough, they should get one in congress and one in prison.
but seriously, we need to repeal the 17th amendment and restore the selection of senators to their respective state legislative bodies instead of the currennt regime, which amounts to six year term popularly elected representatives.
Fundamentally, I agree, but the Republicrats will find a way around it.
Putin already has, and never left office after assuming it in 2000.
This article doesn't address the real issue at all; they are all sock puppets. The invisible hand, the ones who control everything ( congress, media, schools, commerce etc ) have no limits term or otherwise. Until the proles rise up, nothing will change.
I say they get two terms. One in office and one in prison.
FORWARD SOVIET!
"Term limits. I say one and done."
Yes, and no benefits that add up to more than 50% of Americans (choose your own figure) get in private sector. They pay for their own healthcare 100%. Since the average wage is so low now, probably less than$10 per hour, that ought to make "pubic service" less attractive. A shot to the head if they try to sneak back in.
Cycles. We are stuck in the endless paradigm of cycles and too collectively dumbed down to be adventurous enough to quest for real change. Welcome to the TV mind-control generation where it is easier to be lacktoast, than to be a pioneer of real changes for the greater of the whole.
Now hear this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsD1R1rUXLo
Parole Board chairman: They've got a name for people like you H.I. That name is called "recidivism."
Parole Board member: Repeat offender!
Parole Board chairman: Not a pretty name, is it H.I.?
H.I.: No, sir. That's one bonehead name, but that ain't me any more.
Parole Board chairman: You're not just telling us what we want to hear?
H.I.: No, sir, no way.
Parole Board member: 'Cause we just want to hear the truth.
H.I.: Well, then I guess I am telling you what you want to hear.
Parole Board chairman: Boy, didn't we just tell you not to do that?
H.I.: Yes, sir.
Parole Board chairman: Okay, then.
Francis, you may want to check out my new scope.
I like to keep an eye on things on behalf of my neighbors.
http://www.boatingaccidentnews.com/the-eyes-of-truth/
I hope you are ranked sharpshooter or better. I don't want to end up listed as collateral damage on the incident report.
;-)
The only answer ... "The Sum of All Fears"
I am with you Bear.....blow it up.
Clark
.
I think you are thinking of the Clancy novel where the Japanese pilot dives his jumbo jet into the ongoing state of the union speech, making Jack Ryan president, and deleting all branches of govt....except the fourth branch, the gigantic unfirable administrative state. The sum of all fears just puts an Islamic bomb into the Super Bowl, which does not get the president, nor shorten many terms in incumbentistan, which seems to be what we are on about. Note we speak here of the books, not the movie, and also of a book published well before 9-11 as to the use of commercial jets for mass murder.
American people can be convinced to vote these funking wankers back into office time after time after time! CLearly the American people are stupid! How else can you explain them voting for proven crooks, liars and war mongering assholes!
Election fraud and happy birthday Citizen Murdoch.
Jack, you explain it by voter fraud. Do you really think when everything else is built on fraud, the voting process is legit?
What part of it don't you understand? They show up to vote, they cast their ballots. They play the game. They go along with it no matter who wins. They really are THAT stupid. Did you see the DNC and RNC? Those are real human beings. There are millions of them. The fact that they don't think like you and don't agree with you doesn't mean they don't exist.
i don't get why we ought to expect EXCELLENT governence by people who were elected to office by DUMB and IGNORANT voters. something is very flawed with this thing we call democracy.
It's past time we throw out the incumbents. We need real capitalist with morals based off of judao christian values that understand the importance of property rights. Time to take out the trash.
What about the evil episcopalians?
"Parasitism is a non-mutual relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the other, the host...Parasites increase their fitness by exploiting hosts for resources necessary for their survival."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism
aka: 'Virus'
One of the coolest parasites.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1386717/Why-zombie-ants-i...
The role of government played by the fungus and the ants, well, they are played by collectivist humans.
There's a fungus among us.
It's called teachers unions. It will destroy itself soon enough once its school district hosts are all dead.
Then the cycle will repeat.
But first we need to kill property rights and then give everyone a fair chance at their share under a fair system.
This will end badly. Very few will willingly give up power.
<You'll have to pry my Congressional seat from my cold dead fingers.>
This will end badly. Very few will willingly give up power.
<You'll have to pry my Congressional seat from my cold dead fingers.>
Works for me.
Deeemockraceee!!!
FreeeeeDummmmmb!
Egggzactly.
Anyone catch the "80% recidivism rate" for government educated NYC kids before being accepted into a community college?
Oh this is going just splendidly.
Accepted into a community college? You mean their checks clear? Ok, not to worry nmewn, obama has a solution for that.
lol...yes.
This calls for still more "government investment"...its for the chiiiiiildren dontcha know...and who could possibly be against educating children? That would be almost criminal!!! Why...its right up there with keeping them safe from murderous, right-wing gun toters who want to steal their school lunches!!!
Anyways...linking RT...so my leftist friends will actually TRY and read it, if they're older than 40 and didn't graduate from NYC public schools of course ;-)
Shocker: 80% of NYC graduates unable to read
http://rt.com/usa/nyc-graduates-unable-to-read-011/
Don't knock free lunches man, I got it all through highschool, filled out the application form myself and never told my parents. So not only did I get free lunch every day, I also got lunch money. You should have seen the application form I filled out, talk about gov bureaucracy, no way a human approved it unless they were laughing their ass off.
Priorities man, priorities! We have more important things to worry about like banning large soft-drinks and styrofoam containers. Besides, I'm sure the teacher's unions are on top of it.
Thats right, Bloombergs got em right where he wants em, fat & stupid.
I fully expect some asinine edict from him mandating Tuesday & Thursday jogging and what color kicks to buy when doing it...and they will comply ;-)
Since we're at it: Human intelligence is declining according to Stanford geneticist
***Since then, however, massive wealth redistribution programs at the federal level -- the New Deal, the Square Deal, the Fair Deal, Great Society, etc. -- began cementing incumbents in place.***
I won't argue with you facts, but I will argue with your conclusions. It's not the New Deal, etc. that cemented incumbents, but rather the multinational corporations and their money and lobbyists that have done so. Since Woodrow Wilson, it is the power of corporate money that is keeping these corporate toadies in Congress.
Without governments there wouldn't be incumbents beholden to corporations.
It is in the nature of most people to give government a pass even though it is actually the root cause.
Exactly.
Where the hell does the money to reward crony capitalists (and crony citizenry) come from but the budget!?
Hangings would go a long way towards reducing recidivism........
Are you talking about our hangings or theirs? Because it appears that short of a revolution the probability of their hangings is significantly less than ours.
<What if they televised the revolution and no one came, preferring the better camera angles and play by play commentary offered on TV?>
I'm revolting...........Are you?
Maybe going that way sooner than most think:
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/16378-focus-elizabet...
Reagan proved that deficits dont matter
Bush proved that foreign policy mistakes don't matter either
... and Obama proved (and Hilary confirmed) that nothing matters.
Throw them all out.
A libertarian for president!
Since Woodrow Wilson, aka the advent of the Federal Reserve.
WW was a statist, explicitly opposed to the Constitution. He wrote a thick time about his ideals called "The State" if memory serves. An academic. Remind you of anyone?
The dynamics which led us to this place are simple,
and the only palatable solutions are simple, too.
Assuming there is not the collective desire to redefine the mission...
those in control who do not care about the mission need to be escorted out to pasture.
This saturation of pathologically Self-Absorbed persons in leadership roles was to be expected.
Left unchecked, that's the way it goes. Shame on us.
Regarding the mission, they do not have the wherewithal to understand that they are standing in the way.
Particularly when the going gets tough, they are consumed by entitlement, hang on each other and their sycophants for validation and to temper their fear...
and as little boys, they are now quite frustrated that noboby outside their pathetic circle likes them.
Abolish voting machines, go back to paper ballots and carefully screen those that count the ballots.
couldn't agree more.
Stay awake
HUH??
You're telling me that Maxine Waters is still with us NOT because of her sterling intellect, but BECAUSE of her incumbency??
Good luck getting anyone to believe that!!
I bet if you compared the incumbency rate of the US to the former Soviet Union, you'd find the US has a higher one.
You can look back at the data and try to draw some conclusions as to why this is the case, but it's actually just voter theorem playing itself out. The incumbent wins more often than not because what is the choice the voter can make? You can go with the evil you know versus someone who tells you what exactly? They would have done a better job (the Monday morning quarterbacking) or that they're going to do a better job (but have no record to back it up). Ask people why they voted for Obama this past election. It usually goes something like "He hasn't done a horrible job. And I'm not convinced Mitt Romney would have been any better." and that's really the point of these re-election campaigns: just play to a tie and as the incumbent, you win.
BTW, term limits solve nothing. They just make the politicians even MORE short-termist. You get no credit for making good on someone else's promises. You have to write your owns laws or start your own department or your own war or your own social welfare program. Obamacare? Fuvk that, let's tweak it and make it Republicare.
"You get no credit for making good on someone else's promises"
That's the whole point of term limits. Service to the people should not be done so that you can get credit for it. That is what career politicians are worried about and what is wrong with the current paradigm. It's more about fame and wealth than pointing the country in the right direction.
And none of that changes with a term limit. You just shrink the window of time for a politician to achieve fame and wealth. In this regard, a term limit would only make the situation worse.
Correlation is so causation.
Ugh. Causation is so pre-Lehman! Where have you been the lafood our and a half years?
Fed and a fractional reserve fiat based monetary system give ample money for a politician to pay for his promises.
Electorate will always vote itself a free lunch.
Politician gets re elected as long as he can pay for his promises.
Politician becomes established, and becomes a magnet for corporate influence money.
The politican gets rich thanks to his corporate "sponsors" , and the corporations get favorable laws in return to allow them to get richer.
Voila! Facism. Not so difficult to understand.
Lessson: It's not about getting term limits. That is like violating the first law of thermodynamics. You have to find a way to shut off the money from the 3 F's: Fiat, FED, and Fractional reserve.
You can't get the 3 F's gone until you get rid of career politicians. Ultimately it is the 3F's that get them elected.
As I see it, term limits are another chasing of symptoms rather than causes. I also worry that it seems a big problem we have is a lack of choices to vote for and I blame the political party machines that attempt to preselect our candidates. Term limits would put even more power in the hands of the "deciders" as these relative invisible men behind the curtain still make all the choices. I think the real problem is lack of choice, and political machines that are not interested in a debate of ideas but only personal destruction.
Yes but the only, "not so small" obstacle to reform is that those in charge and who benefit from the system must vote themselves out of it (by changing laws in the US). It simply cannot happen. We have the same problem with non elected public servants in Japan. They spend a lifetime to reach the top and once there, at last enjoy the fruits of their labor. What is the chance that these people will change the system at that stage?
Talk about rearranging the deck-chairs. Elect horseshit "representatives" then whine when they stick around. Yes, if only we could increase the turnover rate of our abominable elected officials. Then they'd have even less of an incentive to plan for the future (something the government can never do efficiently, no ifs, ands, or buts).
Stop electing morons, thieves, liars, crooks, cronies, etc. If you think they're all elected by fraud, stop tolerating fraudelent elections. It doesn't matter. The whole thing is a sideshow and always was. If a great proportion of the people are willing to tolerate or even encourage a bad government, then a bad government ye shall have, democratic or otherwise. Democracy just legitimizes it, and removes some of the truth of the objection that "the people" lack political power.
Do we have a democracy? Do the people really have power? Should they? If not, why not. If the people can let the democratic republic practically handed to them on a silver platter be so completely perverted and destroyed, why should you or I trust them to better next time, or ever?
Why should we strive for a system that has already failed us, or that has already been failed by us?
Who wants to rule? Who will run for office? Why should we believe that such people will be good leaders, simply because they volunteer for it?
The problem is less the leaders than the followers, as usual.
We are not supposed to be a democracy. The word does not appear in the founding documents, for the very good reasons the founders had for limiting the democratic nature of the republic they created. Democracies always become tyrannical and always collapse.
Ya. What the hell good is a constitution without a government. Why not make our own with the same constitution. Have those crooks arrested. Or rather have the military do it.
Term limits, for both elected officials and government employees, would seem to be prudent.
Term limits, for both elected officials and government employees, would seem to be prudent.
The two party system is a bigger culprit than the lack of having term limits. We should have a thousand different parties (wouldn't that be a lobbyist's nightmare?), or have no parties at all. Both the Republican and Democrat Parties are completely controlled by lobbyists, so, those who are elected, either must do what they are told to do, or run the risk of not being re-elected.
Sadly, this phenomena is not unique to America.
In the UK, both major parties -- the socialist Labour Party is by far the worst -- have been pouring largesse into the pockets of constituents for decades. New lines of welfare, more spending on the State health system (NHS), more on this, more on that, tax-breaks for focused groups etc etc. It's no wonder State spending is out of control and cannot be brought down without serious cutbacks & losses at the polls by the same old same old cronies.
The political parties deny it to a person, but the real reason for this is not to improve "fairness" "justice" "equality" as they'd have us believe. It's for two and only two reasons: to buy votes and to justify increases in State power/control. At the expense of taxpayers' money and freedoms.
And you will rarely find a single British politician who ever uses the term "taxpayers money" when talking about spending money on this or that. Their preferred term is "public money" because it conveys the idea to punters that once money is taken thru taxation, the money then becomes the property of The State and thus is now public money for them to spend as they see fit. THEY do not see themselves as guardians of taxpayers money to spend wisely and carefully, and WE the voter are not supposed to question any of this.
off-topic, but can't resist.
Look ma, al-Qaeda is actually a subdivision of CIA.
Karzai accuses U.S. of collaborating with Taliban
the hyper corrupt warlord Pax Americana shill is getting cold feet as USA now bypasses him?
The horse tells his jockey what is what?
Lol, the kettle is telling pot you are as black as that smoke coming out of the Vatican!
Talibans are just fabricated sons of Wahhabism...now that is like belling the cat! If you want to squash that you have to go to Riyadh and start reneging the deal, right in heart of hearts of the great handshake of FDR days; become petrodollar nirvana.
Ouch, those oil pangs are so belly churning for first world, "I'll do anything to keep that pipe line flowing, even sleep with the devil or Allah's Kaba protector!"
The Taliban is not al Qaeda.
wake up people of USA and become responsible citizens; as the greatest democracy its time to take action and election new blood outisde the mainstream of Dem/REP crony combines. Its the people that define the Republic via democratic actions at the ballot pole booth. Vote out these shills by creating a true popular groundswell.
Responsible government and balanced budgetry action with entrepreneurial civil society freedom under a regulated economy that is voted into law after debate and definition of paradigm change, societal direction. Open society and transparent action. Justice and living memory, sanctions and reset; not hanky panky behind the curtain to appease corpo lobby shills on Capitol Hill.
Trying to guess the timing of the mkt I see. Don't hold your breath.
What, no gerrymandering??
If we had a free press re-election rates would be about 5% today.
Don't vote, do whatever you want, and then laugh when the place becomes ungovernable...
It is really laughable that people had such a low approval of congress before the election, then voted those wsame people back into office, so they could maintain their low approval of congress.
I suppose it is only a coincidence that the inflection point of the visually smoothed trend of the curve is focused on the War to Prevent Southern Independence, which, as everyone knows, was actually fought to free the slaves (sarc - or enlarge the pool of potential slaves of the elites). It is also interesting to note that, despite the inflection point, the absolute lowest incumbency rate occurs during the grand corruption of the RE-CONstruction. Clearly, there have been plenty of "keepers" since that time. Come to think of it, I'd like to strip some from that crowd for "wall-hangers".
Let me guess, you have never done anything resembling quantitative analysis....