The Independent voter

[johnnyrodgers20]

If you ask teachers what the most damaging thing to our nation's schools has been they'll tell you it's No Child Left Behind - a Republican initiative. Not sure what you think the Democrats have done to damage the school systems. The article you cited is from 2010, and cites a three-year AFP study, meaning the bulk of the study you're pinning on Democrats came from George Bush's legislation.

 

The Federal Budget issues you're bringing up include pork from both parties, including George Bush's many wars.

 

You are vastly misrepresenting the position of the Occupy crowd by calling them lazy deadbeats. I'm certain there are lazy people in the crowd, but the majority of them work for a living.

 

 

Most teachers I know don't agree with No Child left behind because it is very unrealistic. But if you ask them it isn't the most damaging, the most damaging are the parents to our nation's schools. If you look at any child you will be able to predict the outcome very accurately based on the child's home life. Those parents who take an interest in their child's education tend to flourish, those who are left to their own devices flounder. Those children who are neglected and come to school dirty and hungry; very seldom do you see them succeed. Those children who are verbally/physically abused or see their parents shoot drugs rarely care about school. They much bigger worries in their lives. Parents from what I have heard are the biggest indicator of success or failure of a student.

 

That's really nice, Johnny. We're talking about the damage that government has caused to schools, though.

 

Thanks, Knapplcy, but your both wrong then govt. damaged schools by NCLB but the left just throwing money at some schools are not the answer either. Neither party has a clue how to fix the schools and that is why they are just crumbling before our eyes. Ok, Knapplcy, you guys can go back to your little spat. I am enjoying the comedy!!

[knapplc]

Thanks for your contribution to the conversation, Johnny.

['SkersRule]

What changes do you see within the Democratic Party? That isn't a loaded question. I'm interested.

 

The Democrats have:

 

1. Embraced the lunatic fringe green movement. It's not that I think we should pollute the environment for kicks and giggles, it's just that in the 4.6 billion years of this planet our climate has shifted from hot to cold multiple times without any contributions from humans ala the internal combustion engine.

 

2. Worked to abolish the 2nd Amendment entirely and have ever so slowly chipped away at our rights to even own firearms.

 

3. Sought to remove "god" from every aspect of our society and culture. I'm not religious and I think praying to "god" is a waste of time but it doesn't bother in the least to walk into city hall or a school and see a copy of the ten commandants. I simply ignore such displays because my freedom from religion does not trump anyone else's right to practice. And if a majority of people want those ten commandments displayed then that's okay with me.

 

4. Ensured that the federal budget has increased every year, more social welfare programs are added, more people are covered with the goal, at least from where I'm sitting, to get every single person sucking on at least one governmental teat. I'm not against helping people but welfare should be a helping hand up not a permanent way of life.

 

5. Ruined our education system. Every year our kids seem to get dumber, test scores, graduation rates, and overall scholastic achievement especially in critical subjects like math and science is on a downward spiral.

 

http://www.huffingto...s_n_793185.html

 

6. Created a system where lazy deadbeats, and by this I mean the occupy crowd and those who have similar attitudes, think that they are owed a high paying job with a high six to seven figure salary with benefits. And if they don't get it then it is not their fault. It's because of the "evil" 1% who aren't taxed enough.

 

That's just a start of why I feel that the Democrats have left me.

I see. I don't think much of that is correct but if you believe it then your choice doesn't surprise me.

 

I have questions for you. Which party:

 

1. Openly supports and caters to every wacko "green" initiative?

2. Has members advocating nearly all "gun control" laws?

3. Actively works in conjunction with the ACLU to remove any mention of god from our culture?

4. Has the most members who want to increase the federal budget every year?

5. Owns the NEA/teacher's union? And our education system was well on the decline before No Child Left Behind.

6. Makes excuses for the occupiers? If most of the occupiers have jobs how do they camp out for months at a time?

 

I'm not saying there are not exceptions which go both ways, but clearly the bullet points I mentioned are far more applicable to people on the left than they ever are to those on the right.

['SkersRule]

Look, you asked why I think the Democratic party left me.

[johnnyrodgers20]

Thanks for your contribution to the conversation, Johnny.

 

You're welcome, Knapplcy!!

[Hingle McCringleberry]

Yes, at the end of July, as the fight over the Debt ceiling was spiraling, and many Dems were themselves against raising taxes on the "rich". This was a political move, much in the same vain of passing a budget through the house that has zero chance of passing the Senate...

Political move or no . . . can you provide a similar example from the right?

 

 

 

Sure...

• To keep a balanced budget, President Dwight Eisenhower, a five-star Army general and lifelong Republican, slashed defense spending by 27 percent after the armistice ended the Korean War.
  
• Richard Nixon, also a Republican and Eisenhower’s vice president, cut the budget by 29 percent as he withdrew from Vietnam.
  
• Between 1987 and 1998 the defense budget fell for 11 straight years as Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton—two Republicans and a Democrat—brought spending down to more sustainable levels as the Cold War wound down.
  

[carlfense]

Yes, at the end of July, as the fight over the Debt ceiling was spiraling, and many Dems were themselves against raising taxes on the "rich". This was a political move, much in the same vain of passing a budget through the house that has zero chance of passing the Senate...

Political move or no . . . can you provide a similar example from the right?

 

 

 

Sure...

• To keep a balanced budget, President Dwight Eisenhower, a five-star Army general and lifelong Republican, slashed defense spending by 27 percent after the armistice ended the Korean War.
  
• Richard Nixon, also a Republican and Eisenhower’s vice president, cut the budget by 29 percent as he withdrew from Vietnam.
  
• Between 1987 and 1998 the defense budget fell for 11 straight years as Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton—two Republicans and a Democrat—brought spending down to more sustainable levels as the Cold War wound down.
  

 

Hey! We agree. That's when the GOP was still sane. I think a few posts up you will find knapplc (not trying to put words in his mouth) and I saying some version of that.

 

How about since the GOP went full Tea Party/Palin/Bachmann/West/Etc?

[rawhide]

Independent voter's Yay We be losers but we can point fingers both ways. Just sayin' I could vote either party if there was a moderate sustainable viewpoint without all the partisanship in all facets of the government.

 

.02

 

GBR

[Whistlebritches]

What changes do you see within the Democratic Party? That isn't a loaded question. I'm interested.

 

The Democrats have:

 

1. Embraced the lunatic fringe green movement. It's not that I think we should pollute the environment for kicks and giggles, it's just that in the 4.6 billion years of this planet our climate has shifted from hot to cold multiple times without any contributions from humans ala the internal combustion engine.

 

2. Worked to abolish the 2nd Amendment entirely and have ever so slowly chipped away at our rights to even own firearms.

 

3. Sought to remove "god" from every aspect of our society and culture. I'm not religious and I think praying to "god" is a waste of time but it doesn't bother in the least to walk into city hall or a school and see a copy of the ten commandants. I simply ignore such displays because my freedom from religion does not trump anyone else's right to practice. And if a majority of people want those ten commandments displayed then that's okay with me.

 

4. Ensured that the federal budget has increased every year, more social welfare programs are added, more people are covered with the goal, at least from where I'm sitting, to get every single person sucking on at least one governmental teat. I'm not against helping people but welfare should be a helping hand up not a permanent way of life.

 

5. Ruined our education system. Every year our kids seem to get dumber, test scores, graduation rates, and overall scholastic achievement especially in critical subjects like math and science is on a downward spiral.

 

http://www.huffingto...s_n_793185.html

 

6. Created a system where lazy deadbeats, and by this I mean the occupy crowd and those who have similar attitudes, think that they are owed a high paying job with a high six to seven figure salary with benefits. And if they don't get it then it is not their fault. It's because of the "evil" 1% who aren't taxed enough.

 

That's just a start of why I feel that the Democrats have left me.

I see. I don't think much of that is correct but if you believe it then your choice doesn't surprise me.

 

I have questions for you. Which party:

 

1. Openly supports and caters to every wacko "green" initiative?

2. Has members advocating nearly all "gun control" laws?

3. Actively works in conjunction with the ACLU to remove any mention of god from our culture?

4. Has the most members who want to increase the federal budget every year?

5. Owns the NEA/teacher's union? And our education system was well on the decline before No Child Left Behind.

6. Makes excuses for the occupiers? If most of the occupiers have jobs how do they camp out for months at a time?

 

I'm not saying there are not exceptions which go both ways, but clearly the bullet points I mentioned are far more applicable to people on the left than they ever are to those on the right.

 

1 - I'm not sure what is 'wacko' about the green movement when damn near every scientist agrees that something needs to be done. There could be a lot of jobs created with the innovations in the green energy field but that window is closing. Other countries are doing what we should have started 10 years ago. Some of those crazy green initiatives could get us away from oil and the $4/gallon gas we have now. It's the same argument used about drilling in the US; the longer you put it off the longer it takes to get to market.

2 - You're right

3 - You're right again but I guess I don't really see members of government pushing this agenda.

4 - Excluding the Tea Partiers, nobody in congress has any interest in cutting back the federal budget. The only reason it looked better when GWB was President was because he kept the wars off the books.

5 - NCLB is a horrible idea and I don't know of any teacher that likes it. Because of limits on how many 'special students' can avoid taking the standardized test, my wife will be forced to give it to a mentally retarded 4th grader that will probably never be able to read or write much less understand the questions on the test. I agree with complaints about the teachers unions but how do you fairly evaluate teachers?

Johnny is right about the parents being a huge problem but that wasn't really the discussion.

6 - Yeah I guess. Plenty of them have jobs or go to school but some don't. They all don't camp out in the parks.

 

I'm certainly not trying to get you to vote D because I think they're equally as bad as the R's.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Okay, this may be a long post, this may be a short post (I don't know how long what I have to say is going to be) and it could just be rantings or there could actually be some legitimate claims, but nonetheless here it goes.

 

The political system of the United States, democracy, was once a finely tuned machine. If people disagreed on something, they disagreed because they morally thought that it was the wrong thing to do. Politicians today, I honestly don't think they care about that at all, I think what they care about the most is the $$ they get from the special interest groups. I don't know, certainly its unfair for me to say that the representative from Alaska or Hawai'i buy into special interest groups, but then again, those guys don't hold a whole lot of power within Congress. The representatives who hold the most power, guess what states they represent? New York, California, Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the rest of the "big" states. So as long as the special interest groups continue to garner the monetary power that they have, and as long as politicians are free to take the money from special interest groups, this system will continually be broken. This is supposed to be a government for the people, by the people. The interests of a few should not represent the interests of many.

 

But it doesn't stop there. What is the salary of a representative? $174,000 (as well as being able to take increases in pay) a year along with: retirement and health benefits, being eligible to receive their pension at age 50 (while the average age of pension eligibility for everyone else is on average 12.5 years older, at 62.5), and their pensions can not exceed 80% of their salary (so no more than $139,200) And that's just for representatives, the peons of Congress.

 

What about the Senators? Well, basically it is the same song different verse, but instead of just two year terms, they get six year terms. I don't know about you guys, but if I were in the House or the Senate, I would definitely not have a whole lot of motivation to give a damn about anything because I have all my bases covered.

 

Maybe if we lowered the salary of Congress members and in fact anyone in politics at all, maybe then we would see them to start to care about what they do because they would have more at stake.

 

But then again, the problems do not just stop with Congressional salaries and benefits. No, problems go even deeper than that; deeper than the special interest groups, deeper than the Congress; the problems also involve the United States voters. The average United States voter is uneducated about what actually goes into making a bill, and even in fact some of the literature that is tied to a bill. Instead, they look at the political ads (which over-dramatize EVERYTHING) and make an uneducated vote, which is one of the most dangerous things to happen.

 

The United States' political system didn't use to produce such terrible results. Maybe it was because times were simpler. If that's the case, then the question has to be, when did we start the slippery slope to where we are now? What got us here? And why did it get us here? Those questions don't have simple answers, but I think answering them can lead us back out of the giant grave we have dug ourselves. Otherwise, it will be too deep for us to even think about digging it out.

 

As for this election, none of the things I want to vote for are on the ballot. No candidate will represent a desire to remove special interest groups from having any pull on the government, no candidate will represent cutting down on Congressional and Presidential salaries, and no candidate will represent an open source idea to bring all the details of a bill to the people so that at least they know what is going on.

 

Ron Paul is the closest thing to that. But because of those views, he won't be on the ballot. America is too unwilling to try something different. Instead, we are content to just act like ostriches and bury our heads under the sand. Maybe, if we do that, nothing bad will happen. We have lost our common sense, and I hope I am around to see it change, or not around to see us crumble.

[husker_99]

Why are you surprised at what the Republicans have become after enveloping christianity? Actually what they are now is pretty reasonable outcome. Notice how most atheists or nonchristians vote for Democrats or Ind because both of those groups don't embrace religion as much.

 

Because I don't share the ZZZZZZZOMG TEH CHRISTUNS R TEH SUXXORZZ!!!! opinion. While I acknowledge the wealth of bad that has been done in the name of Christianity (and Islam, and other religions), I am not of the opinion that Christianity is the root of the problem. Man is the root of the problem. Some men just happen to use religion as a tool for bad.

 

I never said Christianity was bad just saying that after the Republicans embraced Christianity and then being surprised at how the party is now you were a fool to believe it would never lead to this.

[husker_99]

Okay, this may be a long post, this may be a short post (I don't know how long what I have to say is going to be) and it could just be rantings or there could actually be some legitimate claims, but nonetheless here it goes.

 

The political system of the United States, democracy, was once a finely tuned machine. If people disagreed on something, they disagreed because they morally thought that it was the wrong thing to do. Politicians today, I honestly don't think they care about that at all, I think what they care about the most is the $$ they get from the special interest groups. I don't know, certainly its unfair for me to say that the representative from Alaska or Hawai'i buy into special interest groups, but then again, those guys don't hold a whole lot of power within Congress. The representatives who hold the most power, guess what states they represent? New York, California, Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the rest of the "big" states. So as long as the special interest groups continue to garner the monetary power that they have, and as long as politicians are free to take the money from special interest groups, this system will continually be broken. This is supposed to be a government for the people, by the people. The interests of a few should not represent the interests of many.

 

But it doesn't stop there. What is the salary of a representative? $174,000 (as well as being able to take increases in pay) a year along with: retirement and health benefits, being eligible to receive their pension at age 50 (while the average age of pension eligibility for everyone else is on average 12.5 years older, at 62.5), and their pensions can not exceed 80% of their salary (so no more than $139,200) And that's just for representatives, the peons of Congress.

 

What about the Senators? Well, basically it is the same song different verse, but instead of just two year terms, they get six year terms. I don't know about you guys, but if I were in the House or the Senate, I would definitely not have a whole lot of motivation to give a damn about anything because I have all my bases covered.

 

Maybe if we lowered the salary of Congress members and in fact anyone in politics at all, maybe then we would see them to start to care about what they do because they would have more at stake.

 

But then again, the problems do not just stop with Congressional salaries and benefits. No, problems go even deeper than that; deeper than the special interest groups, deeper than the Congress; the problems also involve the United States voters. The average United States voter is uneducated about what actually goes into making a bill, and even in fact some of the literature that is tied to a bill. Instead, they look at the political ads (which over-dramatize EVERYTHING) and make an uneducated vote, which is one of the most dangerous things to happen.

 

The United States' political system didn't use to produce such terrible results. Maybe it was because times were simpler. If that's the case, then the question has to be, when did we start the slippery slope to where we are now? What got us here? And why did it get us here? Those questions don't have simple answers, but I think answering them can lead us back out of the giant grave we have dug ourselves. Otherwise, it will be too deep for us to even think about digging it out.

 

As for this election, none of the things I want to vote for are on the ballot. No candidate will represent a desire to remove special interest groups from having any pull on the government, no candidate will represent cutting down on Congressional and Presidential salaries, and no candidate will represent an open source idea to bring all the details of a bill to the people so that at least they know what is going on.

 

Ron Paul is the closest thing to that. But because of those views, he won't be on the ballot. America is too unwilling to try something different. Instead, we are content to just act like ostriches and bury our heads under the sand. Maybe, if we do that, nothing bad will happen. We have lost our common sense, and I hope I am around to see it change, or not around to see us crumble.

 

The biggest problem people don't care as much for politics anymore as they use to. Also i know this would never happen but if Congressmen/women had term limits like the President you would see a lot of corruption going away seeing how it wouldn't be a life job anymore.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Okay, this may be a long post, this may be a short post (I don't know how long what I have to say is going to be) and it could just be rantings or there could actually be some legitimate claims, but nonetheless here it goes.

 

The political system of the United States, democracy, was once a finely tuned machine. If people disagreed on something, they disagreed because they morally thought that it was the wrong thing to do. Politicians today, I honestly don't think they care about that at all, I think what they care about the most is the $$ they get from the special interest groups. I don't know, certainly its unfair for me to say that the representative from Alaska or Hawai'i buy into special interest groups, but then again, those guys don't hold a whole lot of power within Congress. The representatives who hold the most power, guess what states they represent? New York, California, Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the rest of the "big" states. So as long as the special interest groups continue to garner the monetary power that they have, and as long as politicians are free to take the money from special interest groups, this system will continually be broken. This is supposed to be a government for the people, by the people. The interests of a few should not represent the interests of many.

 

But it doesn't stop there. What is the salary of a representative? $174,000 (as well as being able to take increases in pay) a year along with: retirement and health benefits, being eligible to receive their pension at age 50 (while the average age of pension eligibility for everyone else is on average 12.5 years older, at 62.5), and their pensions can not exceed 80% of their salary (so no more than $139,200) And that's just for representatives, the peons of Congress.

 

What about the Senators? Well, basically it is the same song different verse, but instead of just two year terms, they get six year terms. I don't know about you guys, but if I were in the House or the Senate, I would definitely not have a whole lot of motivation to give a damn about anything because I have all my bases covered.

 

Maybe if we lowered the salary of Congress members and in fact anyone in politics at all, maybe then we would see them to start to care about what they do because they would have more at stake.

 

But then again, the problems do not just stop with Congressional salaries and benefits. No, problems go even deeper than that; deeper than the special interest groups, deeper than the Congress; the problems also involve the United States voters. The average United States voter is uneducated about what actually goes into making a bill, and even in fact some of the literature that is tied to a bill. Instead, they look at the political ads (which over-dramatize EVERYTHING) and make an uneducated vote, which is one of the most dangerous things to happen.

 

The United States' political system didn't use to produce such terrible results. Maybe it was because times were simpler. If that's the case, then the question has to be, when did we start the slippery slope to where we are now? What got us here? And why did it get us here? Those questions don't have simple answers, but I think answering them can lead us back out of the giant grave we have dug ourselves. Otherwise, it will be too deep for us to even think about digging it out.

 

As for this election, none of the things I want to vote for are on the ballot. No candidate will represent a desire to remove special interest groups from having any pull on the government, no candidate will represent cutting down on Congressional and Presidential salaries, and no candidate will represent an open source idea to bring all the details of a bill to the people so that at least they know what is going on.

 

Ron Paul is the closest thing to that. But because of those views, he won't be on the ballot. America is too unwilling to try something different. Instead, we are content to just act like ostriches and bury our heads under the sand. Maybe, if we do that, nothing bad will happen. We have lost our common sense, and I hope I am around to see it change, or not around to see us crumble.

 

The biggest problem people don't care as much for politics anymore as they use to. Also i know this would never happen but if Congressmen/women had term limits like the President you would see a lot of corruption going away seeing how it wouldn't be a life job anymore.

 

But Congress doesn't have life terms. They have terms and have to be re-elected like the President. Unless of course you're talking about having an FDR-esque Amendment for Congress. And it's not just one thing that is the problem with government, something this complexly messed up needs more than one solution.

[krc1995]

If you ask teachers what the most damaging thing to our nation's schools has been they'll tell you it's No Child Left Behind - a Republican initiative. Not sure what you think the Democrats have done to damage the school systems. The article you cited is from 2010, and cites a three-year AFP study, meaning the bulk of the study you're pinning on Democrats came from George Bush's legislation.

 

The Federal Budget issues you're bringing up include pork from both parties, including George Bush's many wars.

 

You are vastly misrepresenting the position of the Occupy crowd by calling them lazy deadbeats. I'm certain there are lazy people in the crowd, but the majority of them work for a living.

 

 

Most teachers I know don't agree with No Child left behind because it is very unrealistic. But if you ask them it isn't the most damaging, the most damaging are the parents to our nation's schools. If you look at any child you will be able to predict the outcome very accurately based on the child's home life. Those parents who take an interest in their child's education tend to flourish, those who are left to their own devices flounder. Those children who are neglected and come to school dirty and hungry; very seldom do you see them succeed. Those children who are verbally/physically abused or see their parents shoot drugs rarely care about school. They much bigger worries in their lives. Parents from what I have heard are the biggest indicator of success or failure of a student.

Coming from a high school teacher, this is true. NCLB only punishes schools, with no consideration for parental (or lack of) involvement. What sense does it make to take money away from schools that are struggling? And schools are getting around it by being creative at your child's, and the community's, expense. Our school is a B rated school, that is showing progress towards standards. We are "showing progress" because we implemented a procedure called Grade Recovery. In a nut shell, if your student doesn't get a good score on a test, they get as many tries as they need to pass. The same test, until they get a satisfactory grade. I also don't think homework is graded anymore. A teacher can give out homework, but it's completion is not required by the student. Does this sound like a child learning?

 

Personally, I think 1/4 of the students are too much of a displine problem and should not be allowed in the high schools. They can complete their education on-line and at home, with their parent's assistance. They only distract the other kids that may want to learn. A possibility of sending the behaviorially challenged kids back to their houses for on-line classes, is that the parents probably don't want him at home.

[husker_99]

Okay, this may be a long post, this may be a short post (I don't know how long what I have to say is going to be) and it could just be rantings or there could actually be some legitimate claims, but nonetheless here it goes.

 

The political system of the United States, democracy, was once a finely tuned machine. If people disagreed on something, they disagreed because they morally thought that it was the wrong thing to do. Politicians today, I honestly don't think they care about that at all, I think what they care about the most is the $$ they get from the special interest groups. I don't know, certainly its unfair for me to say that the representative from Alaska or Hawai'i buy into special interest groups, but then again, those guys don't hold a whole lot of power within Congress. The representatives who hold the most power, guess what states they represent? New York, California, Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the rest of the "big" states. So as long as the special interest groups continue to garner the monetary power that they have, and as long as politicians are free to take the money from special interest groups, this system will continually be broken. This is supposed to be a government for the people, by the people. The interests of a few should not represent the interests of many.

 

But it doesn't stop there. What is the salary of a representative? $174,000 (as well as being able to take increases in pay) a year along with: retirement and health benefits, being eligible to receive their pension at age 50 (while the average age of pension eligibility for everyone else is on average 12.5 years older, at 62.5), and their pensions can not exceed 80% of their salary (so no more than $139,200) And that's just for representatives, the peons of Congress.

 

What about the Senators? Well, basically it is the same song different verse, but instead of just two year terms, they get six year terms. I don't know about you guys, but if I were in the House or the Senate, I would definitely not have a whole lot of motivation to give a damn about anything because I have all my bases covered.

 

Maybe if we lowered the salary of Congress members and in fact anyone in politics at all, maybe then we would see them to start to care about what they do because they would have more at stake.

 

But then again, the problems do not just stop with Congressional salaries and benefits. No, problems go even deeper than that; deeper than the special interest groups, deeper than the Congress; the problems also involve the United States voters. The average United States voter is uneducated about what actually goes into making a bill, and even in fact some of the literature that is tied to a bill. Instead, they look at the political ads (which over-dramatize EVERYTHING) and make an uneducated vote, which is one of the most dangerous things to happen.

 

The United States' political system didn't use to produce such terrible results. Maybe it was because times were simpler. If that's the case, then the question has to be, when did we start the slippery slope to where we are now? What got us here? And why did it get us here? Those questions don't have simple answers, but I think answering them can lead us back out of the giant grave we have dug ourselves. Otherwise, it will be too deep for us to even think about digging it out.

 

As for this election, none of the things I want to vote for are on the ballot. No candidate will represent a desire to remove special interest groups from having any pull on the government, no candidate will represent cutting down on Congressional and Presidential salaries, and no candidate will represent an open source idea to bring all the details of a bill to the people so that at least they know what is going on.

 

Ron Paul is the closest thing to that. But because of those views, he won't be on the ballot. America is too unwilling to try something different. Instead, we are content to just act like ostriches and bury our heads under the sand. Maybe, if we do that, nothing bad will happen. We have lost our common sense, and I hope I am around to see it change, or not around to see us crumble.

 

The biggest problem people don't care as much for politics anymore as they use to. Also i know this would never happen but if Congressmen/women had term limits like the President you would see a lot of corruption going away seeing how it wouldn't be a life job anymore.

 

But Congress doesn't have life terms. They have terms and have to be re-elected like the President. Unless of course you're talking about having an FDR-esque Amendment for Congress. And it's not just one thing that is the problem with government, something this complexly messed up needs more than one solution.

 

I am talking about the FDR-esque Amendment. Currently if you can keep getting re-elected you always have a life job. It's not that hard if your party always has majority since they get to redraw the voting lines. The President can only serve two terms then he can no longer run.