Causes Q&A: Your Questions Answered - May 2021

Please tell me why we can not get bills passed through the senate when we have 51 to 50 majority?

From America’s Frontline Doctors: Cancel culture: I know you’ve seen it swirling around you in politics, entertainment, and education, but do you realize the implications of medical cancel culture may affect you most dangerously of all? A free society must consistently and staunchly oppose cancel culture in all its forms. As we know, silencing speech (Democratic Party) is the hallmark of communist regimes, not of free nations. The Constitution is neither right nor left. It is the middle ground between tyranny and anarchy. In recent years, gagging those who believe in the Constitution has become accepted, setting a course for a very dangerous destination of massive human repression by government, big tech, and mainstream media, the likes of which have only been witnessed in totalitarian dictatorships. Enter COVID-19. The past year has swept up our country in a frenzy of fear, misinformation, suspicion, division, and wholly un-American suppression of ideas and medical news. Justifying their attempts to clamp down on medical research and the free and honest flow of medical discovery by claiming to “protect you”, ideologues have tried to shut down any source that might call into question their official narrative. (Which changes frequently- but only the CDC is allowed to modify directives repeatedly and tell you what to think and when to think it- taking a page from Orwell’s Animal Farm.) Who is there to speak up for you when you can’t get accurate information about your own health, free of anyone’s political, financial, or ideological agenda? America’s Frontline Doctors are your warriors, that’s who. That is why we do what we do. We can’t sit down and we won't be silent. Medical cancel culture is the newest form of repression trotted out by the unholy trinity of big government, big media, and big tech, and someone’s got to take them on. WE THE PEOPLE NEED TO STAND STRONG against these Totalitarians!

Why, oh why is there nothing on this site about the elephant wearing a blue coat, Joe Manchin and his Op Ed....saying that he will neither support the voting protection act or getting rid of the filibuster?

Frank-001: I rend to agree with your observations regarding term limits, that institutional memory is indeed a good thing. It should be part of the acquired wisdom that guides the institution. On the other hand, it is also important that the institution must admit, embrace and accept younger members who are going to impacted tomorrow by the decisions of the day and often have closer ties to the people they represent and the real issues of the day, and are not trapped by conclusions based on what was instead of what is and what is coming. (In my younger days, as part of an enthusiastic group with new ideas, we were often told by by senior people that what we wanted to do was impossible, largely because in the past it may have been - but with the support of some enlightened management were encouraged to proceed and to succeed with some really great new things). I think that there are a few things that our country can do to both keep institutional memory and broaden the demographic makeup of the legislature generally and adding younger voices specifically. … … … Remove gerrymandered districting so that no politician has a unified constituency that does not represent a demographically balanced electorate pool. Gerrymandered districts allows legislators to pander to a captive, unchanging political ideology without ever having to consider the needs of the broader electorate - it gives them permission to govern for the benefit of their fixed homogenous constituency instead of honoring their oath of office to govern for the benefit of the entire country. This also gives them a pretty easy path to continued re-election without a whole lot of effort. … … … Secondly, and harder to do, is to rid our country of the use of willful disinformation as a political tool to dominate political opponents and to control the national narrative. This not only entrenches political leaders power to stay in office but is also extremely dangerous to the functioning of a viable democracy. I think a broad apolitical national program to teach the electorate ways to discern disinformation and address it’s dangers could help people who are making decisions and drawing conclusions based on the strong emotions of hate and fear instead of facts begin to see things more realistically. (This could also be packaging into cyber-security awareness in ways to protect yourself from giving up passwords or personal details to disingenuous email, websites or callers). … … … I would support a PAC to litigate the crap out of political news sites that intentionally mislead or do not do due diligence on ‘news’ stories can be shown to be willfully spreading disinformation. I know that Australia has been considering some regulations to reign in Rupert Murdock’s disinformation enterprise, but do not recall the details nor whether their approach would be possible in this country. … … … The framers definition of a ‘Congress’ was from their time and was ‘a collection of independent knowledgeable representatives meeting to discuss and resolve issues of the day’. Our Congress is not that. The dominance of the two party system, with hard party-line positions makes us hope to at least reach bi-partisan agreements instead of non-partisan agreements, where all independent elected officials have an opportunity to compromise on the issues. There is little need or even a place for legislators to act according to their principles or to honor their commitments so long as they toe the party line - which is often regimented by the big money donations to the party and used to punish anyone who dares to disagree. … … … As far as our system of checks and balances go, the Congress has reserved unto itself the right to hold it’s members to account for ethics violations and breeches of the public trust. This hardly does any good at all if a major political party is intentionally endorsing disinformation or not or not condemning it, because they see it to be politically expedient. This is how a political party can become a political faction dominated by decisions to insure their persistence and that of their entrenched leadership, instead of honoring espoused principles and protecting an ideology for benefit of the country. … … … The only practicable way to deal with this problem is via an educated, vigilant and informed electorate that remembers promises made but never even attempted to be kept (the GOP replacement for the ACA which would be so much better, would cover pre-existing conditions and be so much more cost effective promised widely in the 2018 midterms), and remembers past arguments of ‘high principle’ to justify one position when politically advantageous and using diametrically opposite arguments of ‘high principle’ to do exactly the opposite when that now becomes politically advantageous. We need a better educated electorate that will not tolerate being lied to in these ways as the only ‘check’ on a political faction’s breech of ethics and public trust - and to keep aging dinosaurs that lead these breeches from staying in power just to retain the considerable perks that the Congress has also legislated for itself.

Even though there may be drawbacks of term limits, I still believe we need to make some kind of changes. I think there should be limits on money spent on campaigns, no dark money, less influence from Lobbyists, less recesses for our representatives and less time allowed to campaign. We just completed a presidential campaign and election, and it is starting already to elect congressional representatives. We are in constant campaigns and there is no time to breathe between elections! I believe other countries limit their time for campaigning.

Ask…Out Loud….where is there a photo of…so-called UFO that is clearly defined? There are other airplanes we see clearly, not ‘fogged-up’!!??

@jimK wrote: "Frank-001: I rend to agree with your observations regarding term limits, that institutional memory is indeed a good thing. It should be pa..." Read more here: https://www.causes.com/comments/1474676 You wrote some good stuff. I think an organization’s _leadership_ team must be cognizant of an organizations history _and_ be open to new ideas. In my experience the folks with institutional memory are not the ones opposing new ideas, it’s the lazy ones who are threatened that are the naysayers. However they can be dangerous. The leaders make the difference. I thrived under one type of leader and barely hung on during another. Your experience may differ of course. Still most strongly oppose term limits.

Manchin says he'll vote against For the People Act and digs in against eliminating filibuster We knew he was the ultimate jerk. No matter his antics he aint presidential’ material nor the seat he currently occupies. Better to have a gop jerk than a pseudo democrat. At least the lines will be better defined.

Term Limits: An Alternative Opinion I strongly oppose term limits. Consider that having term limits might make Congressmen and Senators even more useless and more corrupt. I. More Useless: A. As with any job, it takes time to get up to speed, probably at least two years. During which time, your Congressperson is already thinking about his or her next job if he or she isn't re-elected. B. Who is going to head responsible and complex committees, a wet behind the ears newbie? No thanks!! II. More Corrupt A. Don't think for a minute there will be any less dirty money, any fewer campaign contributions, etc. Think Quid Pro Quo on Steroids but with rapid turnover. Already lobbyists write legislation. With term limits, lobbyists will know more law and process than every "lawmaker." B. Parties will wield even more power than they already do. If you think party bosses are kingmakers, now imagine what will happen with musical legislative seats. C. As it stands now Red Stares are gerrymandered to remain Red, Blue to remain Blue. Little chance of getting a Federal Anti-Gerrymandering Law on the books. So even if we increase the churn, what chance is there to change votes that matter? Nil! Yeah, it might be a pessimistic view, but I see term limits as a very naive solution that few have addressed even the off-the-top-of-the-head issues someone like me can think of. Coming at it from another perspective. I have been at places of employment where the new person in charge decides to clean house. The cleansing removes all those with experience and institutional memory. Having kept my head down and stayed in technical positions, I escaped some purges. This enabled me to see firsthand the value of having people with experience and institutional memory. Do you know what happens next? Yep, things get worse, the board hires another cretin who does another purge. The downward spiral continues until a placeholder or a laissez-faire type is employed to create stability. Why should the political world be better, it'll likely be worse. For these reasons, at least, I'll oppose term limits without a good plan, including making the minimum requirements for holding office much tougher, mandating all holdings be placed in blind trusts, no outside employment, eliminating campaign contributions and ending Citizens United. Believe me, I get the motivation, its the means I have grave doubts about. Remember — for now we have Pelosi and McConnell. With term limits we'll get the Tazmanian Devil and Elmer Fudd or Bozo the Clown. And those characters are too high quality. In my opinion the real question given the political landscape how to we force anyone in office to act reasonably?

Why is the Unites States the only country where the leadership degrades and calls the citizens names? “Inherent racist” “Systemic racists”, a racist country, i don’t see or hear of any other country’s leadership calling their people names and degrading their nations.

I, personally, think 8 years is enough. Especially because of the caliber of idiots we see running these days. Think Hawley, Greene, Manchin and McCarthy, for example. Would you want these anti-democracy halfwits for 2-4 years, let alone 12? And Joe Manchin with his I want bipartisanship bullshit! He cares NOTHING for bipartisanship. All he cares about is getting his face on tv and all other media! FUCK Manchin! NOTHING BIDEN DOES WILL BE ACCEPTABLE TO HIM OR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HE CHOOSES TO DEFEND! MOVE ON FROM HIM! HE, SO OBVIOUSLY, HAS NOTHING TO OFFER US! How many times does he have to prove this, before you believe it? He is just another McConnell, who hides under the term Democrat. Use reconciliation and be done with his theatrics, before it’s too late! We may NEVER HAVE THIS CHANCE AGAIN. DON’T let them continue to pretend there is something they will ever agree with. MCCONNELL meant what he said. Anyone with half a brain knows that. MOVE ON!

Oh, and Brian, to be clear, I would like it to be two four-year terms, not one eight year. 😊❤️. That ought to be an incentive to not f around while they are in office. No more of these long vacations every other month, or so they seem to be- if not more.

We must NEVER STOP TRYING, Brian! ❤️😊❤️ No matter what it may take. Our country is a beacon once again! We need to do whatever is necessary to shore up our RIGHTS AND OUR FREEDOM!

RE: Term Limits www.Termlimits.com You can also advocate for term limits by contacting your reps. Almost everyone agrees that the U.S. Congress is broken and that most of the dysfunction stems from people spending too much time in Washington D.C. listening to the lobbyists and special interest groups instead of their constituents back home. The time has arrived for us to finally put an end to the life-long career politicians in Congress and impose term limits on members of the U.S. House and Senate. An overwhelming 82% of the American voters support term limits for Congress, and we know that they will never propose the amendment themselves, which is why we need you to support the resolution in your state’s General Assembly allowing the state legislatures to propose the amendment instead.

@PattiZ, I'm glad we agree on something again. Congress will likely never pass term limits on their own, and we need them. I don't care which party they're from, nor their views on the Supreme Court, none of these people in Washington should be able to determine our lives for decades without care for what their constituents say. 12 years maximum for all members of Congress and Supreme Court justices. Anything more is damaging to our democracy.

@Glowurm, you're probably right, but then we need to change Senate terms, which are 6 years. That's two different amendments, which is even tougher!

I like too know why there is not a cross the board coast of living pay increase and all companies. I work in the air cargo and never in a year and a half years got a pay increase, but they just announced a two dollar pay increase that still puts my pay below a person just hired for the same job? We need better laws to keep wages fair, workers are not having to pay for healthcare in some companies for themselves? Employers should be covering the employee and giving a discount on family coverage, this should be for full and part time. It should not be based on merit or hours reached.