The Next Four Years

[carlfense]

Random thoughts about what should happen now:

 

First: Pass a grand bargain that reduces the deficit through a combination of spending cuts, closing of loopholes, and the expiration of the Bush tax cut for the highest earners. The GOP will absolutely howl about the latter . . . but despite their bluster they really don't have any leverage. The rate will go up automatically. Filibuster away . . . and it will still happen.

 

Second: Immigration reform. Do it now! If possible, avoid demagoguery and actually get something done. This demographic is killing the GOP's electoral hopes and their best option is to remove it as a wedge issue. A lot of people don't want to hear this . . . but some form of amnesty must be part of the package. There is just no other feasible option. (And yes, I do understand the argument about how it in some instances rewards criminal behavior.)

 

Third: Obamacare is here to stay. Period. Let's get together and make it work.

 

Fourth: The GOP really needs to do something about their Tea Party problem. It's killing their credibility and probably cost them control of the Senate.

 

Fifth: Let's get out of Afghanistan, eh?

 

Sixth: As a matter of fact . . . how about we don't invade Iran, either? (Unless absolutely and truly necessary of course.)

 

Seventh: Let's fix the war on drugs. (Outlined further in a different thread in this forum.)

 

Eighth: Let's fix our national elections. Eliminate the electoral college. Standardize poll hours and early voting. Make sure that no one has to wait hours to exercise their right to vote. Standardize voter registration and voter identification. Make registering to vote simple, secure, and free.

 

 

 

What am I missing? And yes . . . I'd put the line at things that we will actually accomplish from this list at about 2.5.

[Husker_x]

1. Yep. Should happen. GOP is reeling right now, or they should be. If not, doesn't matter. Inevitable.

2. If I'm a GOP strategist I'm coming out swinging on this one. In true Orwellian doublespeak fashion, I would as of today make the GOP the party of immigration reform, amnesty included. Let the Tea Party wail. You're doomed if you don't broaden your demographic base.

3. I suppose. In retrospect I wish he would have waited until now to do healthcare, but whatever. We're here.

4. I think time is the solution to that problem. Not sure what real, moderate republicans can do except vote intelligently on issues that matter. Find consensus where consensus is possible.

5. Yes.

6. Yes, although that one's probably not our choice.

7. I'd put this higher. It's an ongoing human rights travesty. Our country should set the example of liberty on the drugs issue. If we spent half the money treating drug addicts (and yes, addiction is a disease) as we do locking them up, this issue would probably solve itself. The cannabis thing is making itself an issue now. Won't have to wait long on that one, I don't think.

8. Unless I missed something you'd have to amend the constitution. If that's the case, best let that one go.

 

Missing: Heavy investments in science, technology, and research. Personally I want to see NASA's budget expanded and a manned mission to mars by the early 2020s. This also feeds into education, which we're lagging behind in continually. The future of our economy more or less depends on it, so we might consider fighting less wars and educating more people and doing it better.

[carlfense]

8. Unless I missed something you'd have to amend the constitution. If that's the case, best let that one go.

You're not missing anything. I'm aiming high.

 

Missing: Heavy investments in science, technology, and research. Personally I want to see NASA's budget expanded and a manned mission to mars by the early 2020s. This also feeds into education, which we're lagging behind in continually. The future of our economy more or less depends on it, so we might consider fighting less wars and educating more people and doing it better.

Excellent idea.

[Whistlebritches]

What am I missing? And yes . . . I'd put the line at things that we will actually accomplish from this list at about 2.5.

 

Citizens United. I realize it's more for the Supreme Court than the President but something has to be done about it.

[sd'sker]

8. Unless I missed something you'd have to amend the constitution. If that's the case, best let that one go.

You're not missing anything. I'm aiming high.

federal elections are in the control of the federal gov't, right?

[carlfense]

8. Unless I missed something you'd have to amend the constitution. If that's the case, best let that one go.

You're not missing anything. I'm aiming high.

federal elections are in the control of the federal gov't, right?

Yes, but the electoral college is in the Constitution.

[carlfense]

What am I missing? And yes . . . I'd put the line at things that we will actually accomplish from this list at about 2.5.

 

Citizens United. I realize it's more for the Supreme Court than the President but something has to be done about it.

Definitely. +1

[sd'sker]

8. Unless I missed something you'd have to amend the constitution. If that's the case, best let that one go.

You're not missing anything. I'm aiming high.

federal elections are in the control of the federal gov't, right?

Yes, but the electoral college is in the Constitution.

right, i was referring more to standardizing elections. the federal gov't could set up guidelines that the states would invariably have to adopt. also, we should be registered when we turn 18 and whenever we move. you fill out a change of address, just attach a registration to that. everyone should almost always be registered to vote.

[carlfense]

right, i was referring more to standardizing elections. the federal gov't could set up guidelines that the states would invariably have to adopt. also, we should be registered when we turn 18 and whenever we move. you fill out a change of address, just attach a registration to that. everyone should almost always be registered to vote.

Agreed.

[JJ Husker]

Surprisingly, I agree with most of this. the amendments I would make;

 

#3- Modify Obamacare to make it better. Not repeal it but tweak it to accomplish the number one problem; out of control healthcare and insurance costs. they glossed over that most critical issue when they originally rammed it through in haste.

 

#4- Is not really an issue that anything concrete can be done about. I don't think that is major and, if it is a problem, it only takes a little distancing from the extreme elements. Dealing with #2 would go a long way in that regard.

 

#7- Not something that needs to be dealt with urgently. the war on drugs will shift and go away naturally given time and changing attitudes. Not convinced ignoring things like heroine or meth would be in our best interest. And IMO, we can't just let drugs go willy nilly without also removing the social safety net for those who go off the tracks. We may waste a bunch on enforcement now but how frustrating would it be to have to pick up the tab for even more burnouts that can't support themselves because of their problem?

 

#8- Wholeheartedly agree that elections and campaign finance needs to be addressed. Not convinced eliminating the electoral college is the way to go. However, modifying the EC would be a very good idea. Instead of a state, like California, awarding all their EC votes to one candidate, how about they divide them up commensurate with the ppercentage of votes? Sort of like Maine and Nebraska do. I don't think there is an inherent problem with using the EC method of the same number as in the senate and house, just with making it an all or nothing deal.

 

If they got #1, #2, and my #3 done, I'd be pleasantly surprised. #8 would just be icing on the cake.

[carlfense]

Surprisingly, I agree with most of this.

 

the amendments I would make;

 

#3- Modify Obamacare to make it better. Not repeal it but tweak it to accomplish the number one problem; out of control healthcare and insurance costs. they glossed over that most critical issue when they originally rammed it through in haste.

Some of the out of control healthcare costs problem will be handled by the individual mandate. Fewer ER patients will (in theory) make quite a difference.

 

That said, a lot of the increased costs will not/can not be solved. As medicine extends life expectancy we're adding more and more years onto the most expensive healthcare years of peoples' lives.

 

#4- Is not really an issue that anything concrete can be done about. I don't think that is major and, if it is a problem, it only takes a little distancing from the extreme elements. Dealing with #2 would go a long way in that regard.

I don't know. As long as they keep nominating the Akins/O'Donnels/Angles of the world . . . it will be a problem.

 

#7- Not something that needs to be dealt with urgently. the war on drugs will shift and go away naturally given time and changing attitudes. Not convinced ignoring things like heroine or meth would be in our best interest. And IMO, we can't just let drugs go willy nilly without also removing the social safety net for those who go off the tracks. We may waste a bunch on enforcement now but how frustrating would it be to have to pick up the tab for even more burnouts that can't support themselves because of their problem?

I don't think that anyone wants us to ignore heroin or meth. Have you heard that somewhere?

 

We currently pick up the tab for those burnouts. Incarceration is expensive.

 

#8- Wholeheartedly agree that elections and campaign finance needs to be addressed. Not convinced eliminating the electoral college is the way to go. However, modifying the EC would be a very good idea. Instead of a state, like California, awarding all their EC votes to one candidate, how about they divide them up commensurate with the ppercentage of votes? Sort of like Maine and Nebraska do. I don't think there is an inherent problem with using the EC method of the same number as in the senate and house, just with making it an all or nothing deal.

What purpose do you see for the electoral college?

[carlfense]

Post referenced regarding the war on drugs:

 

No arguments that combatting illegal drug abuse is critical. From what I've seen I'd like to see the following changes in our strategy:

 

1. Focus more attention on treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts rather than straight incarceration.

2. Simultaneously, maintain or increase the penalties for distributing narcotics.

3. Where fiscally prudent, expand the training and deployment of canine units.

4. Increase cooperation with foreign governments (Mexico - methamphetamine, Columbia - cocaine, etc.) to intercept shipments both inside and outside of the US.

5. Decriminalize marijuana.

 

Thoughts?

[krill]

As part of the budget deal to avoid the fiscal cliff, and perhaps in in dealing with our long term deficits, I would like to see the Build America Bonds renewed and made permanent instead of any new spending on pointless jobs programs or trying to prop up specific industries with grants and subsidies. It doesn't make any sense to be holding off on these projects when so many roads, bridges, waterways, water systems, etc. are in dire need of improvement and expansion, and the cost for municipalities to borrow is almost zero, while subsidized bonds create safe investments.

[strigori]

True net neutrality is another topic Congress needs to get set right. ISPs being able to block things like ESPN3 or WatchESPN needs to go. Especially as companies like Comcast buy up media companies.

 

And depending on what happens in the Supreme Court, Congress may need to go in and rewrite a large chunk of copyright law. I posted about it earlier, I think its a much bigger deal and no one is talking about it.

 

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/62181-supreme-court-and-ownershipreselling-rights/

[JJ Husker]

 

 

Some of the out of control healthcare costs problem will be handled by the individual mandate. Fewer ER patients will (in theory) make quite a difference.

That said, a lot of the increased costs will not/can not be solved. As medicine extends life expectancy we're adding more and more years onto the most expensive healthcare years of peoples' lives.

 

 

I don't think that anyone wants us to ignore heroin or meth. Have you heard that somewhere?

We currently pick up the tab for those burnouts. Incarceration is expensive.

 

 

What purpose do you see for the electoral college?

I agree that the individual mandate should help. And, who knows, maybe there will be some more affordable options for insurance available once it gets fully implemented. But I have firsthand experience at what it currently costs for group health and the increases are not slowing down. My company provides what we can to our employees but I'll use my personal family insurance as an example. Family of 4 and since I am a business owner I get to pay for 100% of my own coverage. That cost is $900 per month for a high deductible plan with a health savings account attached. the deductible is $10,000/family. No copays, no relief at all until I hit $10,000 out of pocket and that doesn't include the $10,800 in premium. No prescription benefit, office visit cost about $135 oop. I could get a better plan but that premium is more like $1500/mo. and the worst case scenario doesn't get any better. I just think the prospect of being out $21,000 per year is a bit out of line. Luckily we haven't hit the 10K OOP yet but, as you know, it wouldn't take much of a medical problem to make it there.

 

I probably mistakenly assumed too much when someone said "legalize drugs". I took that to mean all of them. I agree MJ should be legalized. I also agree that we are currently picking up the tab for a lot of drug related problems through incarceration, medical care, etc. I'm just a little funny though when it comes to my tax dollars paying for these things. I don't have as much of a problem with incarceration for a convicted drug felon as I would if drugs were legal and that same person got to game the system for welfare, healthcare, etc. It's very similar to my views on charity. I don't mind and actually like to contribute to charities of my choice. But, when the government steps in and forces the issue and uses our tax dollars for basically the same thing, well it just kind of bugs me.

 

I don't really like the EC the way it is currently. It is supposed to provide a little more voice to less populous states. It happens to be synonomous with how we are represented in congress and I don't think our electoral voice needs to be significantly different than how we are represented. I just think that with the way our republic is setup (or the way it should be setup) that the individuals vote should maybe go through this filter. I don't think in an extremely close election, say a ten or twenty thousand simple countrywide majority vote, that our rights as citizens of a particular state may be well expressed without the EC. The problem I see with it is that a behemoth like Cali could split the vote 51/49 and still award all 55 to one candidate. Maybe if they went 28 & 27 in that scenario, it would work better by simultaneously giving the individual voter more of a voice as well as maintaining some voice for the states. there haven't been too many instances, 5 times I believe, where the EC was different than the majority anyway. I just kind of hate conceding all the decision making to a few overgrown states. I'm sure some of my feeling is due to my political bent. It's no secret that the liberal left coincides strongly with the more urban population centers. That isn't just a demographic anomily, it's because those are the places where more citizens want the government to provide and take care of them. I don't like looking at a county by county map that is 90% red area wise and then realizing that little bit of blue is all that matters.