'Missing' GOP Congresswoman in Senior Facility

[adjusterjack]

Report of "missing" GOP congresswoman in senior facility sparks backlash

Kay Granger's son said she's been "having some dementia issues" amid concerns over her prolonged absence in Congress.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Tax Counsel]

We seriously need to get octogenarians out of Congress. Even if they don't suffer from dementia, they are very much out of touch with modern American society both due to their age and because they've spent so long in Washington that they have no experience of what it's like for most of us to live in this country today. America is not like the country they grew up in. It may even be time finally to seriously consider term limits or age limits for members of Congress. The founders of this nation did not expect that members of Congress would make it their lifetime career.

 

[army judge]

We seriously need to get octogenarians out of Congress. Even if they don't suffer from dementia, they are very much out of touch with modern American society both due to their age and because they've spent so long in Washington that they have no experience of what it's like for most of us to live in this country today. America is not like the country they grew up in. It may even be time finally to seriously consider term limits or age limits for members of Congress. The founders of this nation did not expect that members of Congress would make it their lifetime career.

Its worth studying and serious consideration, as well as a public discussion.

However, I see constitutional hurdles and/or unforseen impediments.

In the instant matter under discussion, Congressional representatives and Senators have very few requirements that most Americans are required via their employment.

Congresspeople and senators consider themselves the nobility. They answer to no one, until election time.

 

[Tax Counsel]

However, I see constitutional hurdles and/or unforseen impediments.

So do I. The Constitution would likely have to be amended, just as it had to be done to impose term limits for president. It wouldn't be easy, but if the public gets fed up enough there may be the push needed to do it. This is one issue that is not rooted in one particular party.

 

[adjusterjack]

Call me a cynic but I don't think congresspeople will ever vote themselves out of a job.

It will be up to their constituents to replace them with younger people.

 

[army judge]

The Founders placed too much trust in Joe and Jane Citizen.

Unfortunately, the majority of our citizenry have wandered away from patriotism, or diligently avoid it.

Furthermore, most citizens have no idea or understanding of what is expected of United States citizens, our constitution, and our duties owed to our nation.

 

[Tax Counsel]

I think (as do a number of historians) that the Founders did not place all that much faith in the common citizen. For the first 125 years of our nation that the members of the Senate were chosen by the state legislatures rather than a vote of the citizens of those states. That was a move to guard against the ever changing passions of the comman man. That idea was inspired by the UK Parliment which has the House of Lords, which members are unelected members of royalty, to be that buffer.

Furthermore the electoral college was also added in as a buffer against the passion of the common man. The president has never been directly elected; the electoral college does that. While at least some states now require electors to vote for the candidate they pledged to support that wasn't always the case. Intially the electors could have voted any way they wanted in every state.

Thus, as designed by our Founders, the People only had direct input into the election of the House members, giving the elite quite a bit of say over how the nation was governed (again, much like the UK). Considering that nearly all the Founders were rich white landlowners their wariness of the common man isn't terribly surprising. The Founders nevertheless did create a very durable and remarkable system in which the People had at least quite a bit of input (though much of it indirect) in who runs the country.

The 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913 (the same year the 16th Amendment allowing Congress to impose an income tax) changed that by providing for direct election of Senators.

 

[welkin]

Furthermore the electoral college was also added in as a buffer against the passion of the common man.

Maybe that is why it was founded, but it has since evolved into a protection against states with large city populations ruling the country excluding states in more rural areas with less populations. It evens the playing field.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Maybe that is why it was founded, but it has since evolved into a protection against states with large city populations ruling the country excluding states in more rural areas with less populations. It evens the playing field.

That effect is distinctly undemocratic. Why should the vote of a citizen living in a rural state count more than those in a more urban state? Are citizens in rural states superior to those in urban ones such that they are entitled to a great say in what happens in this country? If you say yes, then you are taking an elitist attitude that some people are better and entitled to more because of it. If the answer is no and you believe that each person's vote — whether rich or poor; man or women; white, black, brown, yellow, red; rural or urban, highly educated or high school drop out, celebrity or someone totally unknown — should count the same then the electoral college is an institution that does not belong in our political system. I've long advocated for the elimination of the electoral college. The rural states have the much more significant protection of their equal votes in the Senate, so the argument of protection of rural states is not at all persusasive to me. There is no compelling reason for the continued use of the electoral college and its effect of giving some voters more say than others is, to me, offensive to the democratic principles that this country is supposed to be founded upon.

 

[cbg]

Sing it, brother.

 

[stealthy1]

Sing it, brother.

And then preach it!

 

[justblue]

New Hampshire lawmaker reflects on retiring from Congress: ‘I’m trying to set a better example’ - The Boston Globe

Representative Annie Kuster hopes her decision will encourage Democrats to make room for younger generations in the halls of power.

www.bostonglobe.com

Someone heard the song...

 

[army judge]

New Hampshire lawmaker reflects on retiring from Congress: ‘I’m trying to set a better example’ - The Boston Globe

Representative Annie Kuster hopes her decision will encourage Democrats to make room for younger generations in the halls of power.

www.bostonglobe.com

Someone heard the song...

Some songs don't need to be sung.

Most people know what must or shouldn't be done.

Truth is, many are too darn lazy and/or trifling to do the right thing.

Fortunately, my grandfathers, grandmothers, mother, and father were consistently incessant about acquiring and maintaining good habits. Had they ever allowed me to do it my way, I'd probably never done much with my life.