Pascals Gambit

 Another election cycle is upon the United States. For some it brings new hope, for others it tears the scab off a wound that is all but impossible to heal. The wound has been created over months, years, decades of trying to be a patriot, by working hard and paying taxes, by believing that it might be different this election. The problem is it only seems to be worsening, not improving. Yet each year the people show up knowing that at any time the common vote could be overridden by an Electoral College, knowing that more than likely it will be another election where they vote for the candidate they feel will do the least harm instead of having a true leader to vote for.
At lunch tables in break rooms and around water coolers across this great country people are voicing their disdain for politics as usual. The lack of leadership coupled with the abundance of greed shown by elected officials has left many indifferent to the hope that anything worthwhile can enter or come out of Washington DC. The attitude is much like the lyrics from The Who song we won’t get fooled again “meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
Why should politicians be allowed to make promises that win them elections that will never be mentioned again after they are sworn in? Shouldn’t it be common sense that a candidate must do all they can to fulfill their campaign promises or be labeled a carpetbagger and a Charlatan? What if tomorrow two things occurred; those being that the 28th Amendment was passed and also a law was passed that any promises made during an election campaign must remain in the forefront of a candidate’s term in office and they should be expected to do everything possible to see those promises through. And if they do not do this they can be tried for misrepresentation.
If candidates were held literally to the promises of their campaign speeches, would they make promises they had neither the ability nor intention to keep? Shouldn’t any true leader concerned about their constituents want the same for their people as themselves? If this were the case would there be the need for the 28th Amendment? Unfortunately what should be simple and straightforward has become as elusive as The Grail.
“Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.” This is a saying so old and with so many similar variations in many different languages that it is difficult to say where it originated. The age and communality serves to support the truth of the phrase. It also points out that it is the responsibility of eachAmerica Citizen to avoid being “fooled again.”

I think it is a safe assumption to say that the Republican and Democrat parties have utterly failed the country. Both parties are in gridlock and elections remain their only priorities. Problems like rising national debt, an over-extended military, and government corruption that has rigged the system to benefit  big money corporate and special interests (Rome’s
downfall) are given no more than lip service. However, there is another fundamental problem – the candidates themselves are largely the wrong people.

Somehow we have been led to believe that just because someone was, for example, a successful businessman than that person will automatically be a great public official. While business skills and experience are certainly components of a well rounded elected official, successful businessman are actually proving to be part of the problem. A successful country is not run
according to short term profit maximizing strategies, and is not measured in successful profitable quarters and shareholder wealth generation. There are many other factors involved in running a country, some of which are very long term and not related to profit generation in any way.

I find it interesting that to become any type of professional (doctor, lawyer, accountant, etc) requires that an individual attain the  proper education then start at the bottom or near the bottom of their new profession and work their way up. Their promotions are determined, one would hope, according to their track record, current performance, and experience. Yet when it comes to our elected officials, arguably the most important and most influential profession of all, we allow anyone to run for office, and their proficiency for office takes a back seat to
party ideologies and who will provide the greatest campaign contributions. I realize that this is how the process has evolved and how it is easy to criticize without providing viable solutions so I will take a stab at one.

Any person that plans to run for elected office MUST have a graduate degree in Governing and Legislating which includes but is not limited to the following courses:

Business and commerce

• Business  Management and Organizational Development
• Economics – micro and macro
• Marketing – product, service, business to business
• Finance – investment and corporate
• Global Management
• Entrepreneurship

Public Administration

• American Government – structure and function
• Federal bureaucracy
• Organizational Theory and Comparative Administration
• Strategic Management
• Public Policy
• Public Budgeting

Law

• Administrative Law and Federal Courts
• Constitutional Law
• Civil Procedures
• Contract Law
• International Law
• Economic Organization and Business Associations

General

• Principles of Sociology and Social Problems
• Leadership
• Negotiations and Bargaining
• Morality and ethics

No one becomes a doctor without a MD, A lawyer without a JD, or will attain senior management positions without a MBA. It should be no different for our elected officials. If a person is planning on a career in public office or intends to switch careers they should attain the proper education. This demonstrates a serious commitment and will provide the necessary knowledge required for a well rounded candidate.

All candidates seeking public office will start out at the local levels and work their way up. There would be two paths of progression. The first is for those seeking to govern, the second for those seeking to legislate.

Mayor of a town > Mayor of a city > Governor > President

City Council Member > State Senator or Congressman > Senator or Congressman

The only exception would be if the candidate has extensive public or private sector relevant experience and a proven track record in a profession whose skills overlap with
governing. These candidates may petition to begin one rung up the ladder as either a mayor of a city or as a State Senator or Congressman, but will require approval by a board of currently residing city Mayors or State Senators and Congressmen.

• Mayor of a town or City Council member – Any candidate with the appropriate Governing and Legislating degree may run for these offices.
• Mayor of City or State Senator or Congressman – Prior or current Mayors of towns or City Counsel members and candidates with extensive overlapping experience and approval of a board of currently residing city Mayors or State Senators and Congressmen (Governing and Legislating degree is still required)
• Governor or Senator and Congressman – Prior or current city Mayors or State Senator and Congressman
• President – Prior or current Governors

What should be evident is that candidates must start at or near the bottom and work their way up. This is what is expected of all other professions when a person crosses over into a completely unrelated profession (example is a doctor to a lawyer) regardless of prior experience in their previous profession, unless of course they are being hired for their connections instead of their competency.

Only candidates that have held or are holding a prior position will be allowed to run for office. For example, candidates running for Governor will have held or are currently holding the office of a city Mayor, candidates running for the Senate or Congress will have held or are currently holding the office of State Senator or State Congressmen. The public will vote from among those pools of candidates and no one else.

Candidates should only be elected based off an 80/20 rule. 80% of consideration should be determined by the candidate’s prior performance in his previous public office and how his or her decisions impacted that office. Independent panels could be established that outlines their decision making processes, the outcomes of those decisions, and whether those decisions
resulted in successes and failures. 20% would be left towards the candidate’s political and socio-economic beliefs and personal history. The goal is to get the right people in office and this would enable voters to select from a well qualified pool of candidates instead of those with simply the money and inclination to run for office.

Term limits could also be established to ensure that candidates do not become comfortable or to beholden to special interests. Candidates that rise all the way to Governor and serve out their term limits could then pursue the legislative track and run for State Senate or state Congress.  Candidates that have risen to Senator or Congressmen and have served out their term limits could pursue the governing track and run for City Mayor. Candidate can also apply for Sate or Federal positions within the government or pursue careers in the private sector if they
are not electable, have tired of running for office, or have reached their term
limits.

Congress and the Senate have the lowest approval rating in history and it is justly deserved considering the current state of the country. The American public is finally growing wise to the corrupt practices of elected officials who are more loyal to financial contributions and getting re-elected than to the American people. What happened to our elected officials that have caused them to turn their backs on the people? The answer is twofold.

1.  Wall Street and Large Multi National Corporations (MNC’s) use massive campaign contributions to get their candidates elected and those candidates become more beholden to those interests the longer they remain in office.

2.  The country’s laws are increasingly influenced and in many cases even written by high paid lobbyists funded by the same Wall Street Banks and large MNC’s. The favorable legislation is worth billions in profits for these companies and those profits are in turn used to fuel an ongoing cycle of political corruption.

In truth, the only way to stop the decaying electoral process is for the American public to set aside partisan politics, stop listening to divisive voices, and realize they have the voting power to put an end to it. The country needs new blood, legislators are so beholden to corporate and other special interests that the majority will never vote for laws that anger large financial contributors and threaten their re-elections.

The process to win back the electoral process is simple:

1.  Vote out the majority of incumbents and replace the with challengers willing to set term limits. All elected officials would be allowed to serve only one term in federal office (term limits for House of Representatives extended from 2 years to 4 years). This will remove a law makers political focus away from getting re-elected and allow him or her to concentrate on issues crucial to the country.

2.  Establish real campaign reform. This can only occur when the opportunity for re-election is removed. Such measures would include:

• A candidate can only personally contribute up to $25,000 towards their election campaign and accept no more than $500 from any registered voter.
• No special interest contributions, no third party donations, no private media campaigns, no additional financial contributions of any kind.
• Reign in the political news organizations by time delaying all opinions based broadcasts and streaming fact checked information below the broadcasts to correct all forms of misinformation.
• The top contenders will be given equal airtime for debates, locations for speeches and town hall meetings, even the number of volunteers allowed in a campaign should be set.
• Candidates should be elected according to their merits, prior accomplishments, and their ideas for improving the country, not by how much money they can raise or negative advertising can be brought to bear.

3.  Restrict lobbying. Lobbyists can no longer provide financial contributions or incentives of any kind. All interaction between lobbyists and public officials must be transparent and made available to the public. Lobbyists will not be allowed to assist in writing legislation regardless of how complex the matters are.

These measures will even the playing field for the American public. Large banks, MNC’s, and other special interests will still have a powerful influence but will no longer use public officials as tools to improve their profit margins or to determine the course of the country’s future, that role belongs to the people.

Wall Street financial institutions and Large Multi National Corporations (MNC’s) are buying the loyalty of U.S. politicians with campaign contributions and using lobbyists to write U.S. legislation.

The bottom line is that we have corruption in the United States Government. This is not an argument, it is a fact. Corruption is corruption regardless of how many laws are created to legalize it or how many media outlets are designed to defend and even promote the corruptive practices.

Corruption in the U.S. government includes:

1. Wall Street banks, financial institutions, and large MNC’s are providing campaign contributions either directly (due to 2010 Supreme Court ruling) or through political action committees to such an extent that they can all but determine the outcome of elections. Legislators who accept these contributions find themselves beholden to corporate interests and their voting records reflect those loyalties. This process becomes more abused the longer the elected official is in office and is one of the primary reasons for the distrust of congress among the U.S. population.

2. Wall Street banks, financial institutions, and large MNC’s use millions of dollars from corporate profits to hire the very best lobbyists firms on K Street. These lobbyist firms acitively court law makers becoming another source of financial contributions and providing many other perks. The relationships that develope enable lobbyists to assist congressmen and senators in writing legislation that will affect their clients. This is done under the guise that the laws being developed are so complex that industry input is required. The end result of these actions is favorable legislation, industry subsidies, and reduced regulations.

3. Wall Street banks, financial institutions, and large MNC’s are achieving considerable influence over many government regulatory agencies. Beholden politicians and administrative personnel make certain that industry executives from the very industries that the regulatory agencies are suppose to be monitoring are hired in key decision making positions within those agencies. In addition, bureaucrats that have worked their way up to key regulatory positions are promised lucrative future jobs by corporations that are regulated by their decisions.

These practices cost Wall Street and biggest companies in corporate America more than a hundred million a year in campaign contributions and lobbyists but the return is billions of dollars worth of profits from favorable legislation. These profits come at the expense U.S. taxpayers who end up paying for unnecessary subsidies, tax breaks, and bailouts to already profitable corporations. They are also the ones who bear the brunt of health risks from reduced safety regulations.

The country needs real campaign reform and lobbying restrictions. The current system of selling legislation to the wealthiest financial contributor’s or lobbyist is broken. The wealthiest individuals and corporations have had the majority of legislative influence over the past decade and the result has been stagnant wages for the middle class, polarization of wealth, near financial collapse, and unparallel bailouts while banks and large MNC’s enjoy record profits and capital reserves. The occupy Wall Street protestors should start occupying the capital as well.

There has been considerable media and political criticism that the Wall Street protesters have no clear demands or even a concise message. While I can’t speak for all the Wall Street protesters their message appears fairly straight forward – Remove the dominate influence of Wall Street and Corporate America from our government. Perhaps the following list could be used to better define that message.

1. Wall Street and large Multi National Corporations (MNC’s) will no longer be allowed to determine our country’s course of action or our legislation by providing large campaign contributions that buy our politicians loyalty or make them beholden to their interests (profits).

2. Wall Street and large MNC’s will no longer be allowed to spend millions of dollars of their profits on lobbyists who are used to influence ($) our politicians and write legislation and regulations that benefit their interests at the expense of the country.

3. The people of the United States will no longer trust politicians to look out for their interests and instead place term limits on them to reduce their beholden tendencies; Senator – 6 yrs, Congressmen 4 yrs, President and administration – 4 yrs.

4. Wall Street and large MNC’s will no longer be allowed to pick our leaders or buy our elections but shall instead place campaign contribution restrictions that allow only U.S. citizens (human beings) the right to contribute a set amount per candidate.

5. Third party organizations will no longer be allowed act as funnels for ideological or special interest money to influence our electoral process.

6. Banks, financial institutions, and large MNC’s will no longer be allowed to be “too big to fail”. If they are too big to fail, they should also be “too big to exist” and should be broken into smaller entities.

7. Banks will no longer be allowed to have investment banking capabilities or to act as financial brokerage houses. Traditional banking will remain separate from investment banking and speculative investing.

8. Exotic financial instruments i.e. derivatives (which contribute nothing to the real economy) will no longer be allowed to dominate the financial landscape. These highly speculative investments will be strictly regulated, transparent, and clearly classified as having a very high risk.

9. Our country and its future generations will no longer be saddled with debt. Congress will balance its budget. Before government pensions, Social Security, and Medicare are cut the billions of dollars spent on wars and subsidizing profitable industries will cease.

10. The Federal Reserve will no longer be allowed to have independent free reign to expand the money supply (print more money) and issue debt instruments (Treasury Bills) without  congressional approval first and will be subject to annual audits.

It appears that the ”Occupy Wall Street” movement and many other Americans are realizing that something is fundamentally wrong with the way the U.S. government is functioning. This movement wants to remove the growing power and control that Wall Street banks, large MNC’s, and wealthy politically connected individual investors / investor groups have over the U.S. government. This does not appear to be an attack on Capitalism like some in the media are trying to claim it is. Rather an attempt to stop the decline of Capitalism into a system of crony capitalism combined with socialism for Wall Street banks and Large MNC’s who are routinely receiving government bailouts, subsidies, and tax relief while small and medium size businesses (which provide 85% of jobs and the bulk of corporate tax revenues) are required to operate under the traditional capitalist model.

The actions of the majority who are protesting on Wall Street (and around the world) are drawing attention to the fact that Wall Street banks and large MNC’s are only interested in profits, shareholder wealth generation, and executive compensation packages and they are doing all they can to ensure that government will help them with those objectives. These endeavors while of short term financial benefit to these companies do not have the country’s long term interests at heart and have led the U.S. and world economies to the brink of financial collapse and have expedited the deterioration of the middle class.

The United States government has not been successful in dealing with illegal immigration. States have been bearing the costs of providing food assistance programs, Medicaid, and K-12 education for illegal immigrants at a cost of tens of millions of dollars per year. Many of these States can no longer afford these costs as they are drowning in debt due to fiscal irresponsibility. Arizona has tried to take matters into its own hands in an attempt to curb illegal immigration and has received a great deal of both praise and criticism on its new immigration law S.B. 1070.

However one chooses to think about illegal immigration, it is illegal according to Federal law – 8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code – Section 1325 that states:

Any alien who

(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or

(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or

(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall,

o       for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or

o       imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent

o       commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or

o       imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

The majority of illegal immigrants are hard working people from Mexico or other Latin American countries (approximately 78%) and many are fleeing economic oppression and poverty.  It is understandable that these individuals or families to want to improve their lives and the lives of their children or to send financial support back to family members in their country of origin. This Hispanic migration also provides considerable benefits to numerous industries (construction, agriculture), service sectors, and countless companies by creating a pool of cheap labor that benefits those companies profitability as well as providing cheaper products and services to U.S. consumers. Illegal immigrants also pay sales taxes, purchase a variety of goods and services, pay rent, and deposit money in local banks.

There are however additional sides to illegal immigration that are considered undesirable. Thirty seven percent of all inmates in federal prisons are in the U.S. illegally. Drug trafficking and human smuggling by illegal aliens is increasing throughout the Border States and requiring those States to increase manpower and equipment costs in both law enforcement and border patrol. There is also the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars that end up sent outside of the U.S. Cheap labor and low wages become the expectation of companies and eventually are built into their cost models which ensure a depreciation of wages in affected sectors. Overcrowding in public schools / prisons and burdens placed on hospitals emergency rooms used as primary care facilities.

The current methods to battle illegal immigration are not proving effective. Building a wall across the U.S. southern border with additional patrols and surveillance equipment is costly. These efforts have been met with ingenious and often dangerous countermeasures by illegal immigrants, human smugglers, and drug traffickers that have built elaborate tunnels, hiked immigrants through remote areas of the desert, transport individuals in cramped places within vehicles, and utilize human trafficking methods that involve complex routes. Border fences and increased manpower along the borders will not stop an individual’s survival instinct or a person’s desire to improve their condition or improve the conditions of their families.

A long term realistic solution needs to be considered. At best current measures can slow the flow of illegal immigration. In addition, the U.S. itself would suffer severe negative economic impacts if all illegal immigrants were removed as illustrated by the movie “A Day without a Mexican” where California essentially shut down as numerous vital services the public relies on found themselves without workers. Without the low cost labor pool companies would be forced to raise their prices or go out of business.

My proposal is that if an individual is caught entering or living illegally in the U.S. or especially if that person is caught working in the U.S. they will be provided the following options:

• Temporarily be placed in a work camp where they will work to pay for their room, board and extradition costs to the southern most part of their country of origin, and subject to the full measure of U.S. Code – Section 1325.
• Provided the opportunity to earn U.S. Citizenship by voluntarily serving 4 years in the military and upon completion of their active military service the immigrant would be awarded temporary citizenship contingent on an additional 4 years of service in the inactive Reserves for full citizenship. After the eight years they will earn U.S. Citizenship.
  • Beginning compensation will begin at E-1 with considerations for E-3 for college degrees and will be promoted according to normal military advancement standards.
• Provided the opportunity to earn U.S. Citizenship by voluntarily serving 4 years in federal, state, or local public civil service programs, i.e. civil infrastructure development, community based programs, facilities maintenance personnel, etc. At the end of 4 years these individuals will be temporarily awarded citizenship, with an additional 4 years of which they could be re-instated into service in the event of natural/national disaster. After the eight years they will earn U.S. Citizenship.
  • Wages provided by civil service appointments will be comparable to existing entry level positions and the immigrants will be available for promotion according to existing government standards applicable to the position.
• Provided the opportunity to earn U.S. Citizenship by voluntarily serving 4 years as an indentured servant (dependent on skill) for state government of their residence. That state could in turn contract their services to private companies. Fifteen percent of earnings generated would go to that State. At the end of 4 years these individuals would be temporarily awarded citizenship. After an additional 2 years of voluntary indentured servitude with only five percent of earnings going to the state of residence they would be provided the opportunity to earn U.S. Citizenship.
  • Wages will be comparable to private sector wages minus amount withheld by the state and determined by immigrant’s skill level. Promotion will be determined by private sector employer. Immigrant may apply for removal from current position if employer operates outside of state employment guidelines.

During the six to eight year process and until reaching full citizenship, immigrants will be protected by and subject to the laws of the U.S. and laws of their local/state governments.  Immigrants will also be expected to be able to speak English and have met all the requirements of those applying for citizenship legally prior to being awarded full citizenship.

If the immigrant leaves the U.S. or leaves their employment without proper authorization or approval prior to completion of their four year commitment for any reason or they will lose the right to citizenship. If the immigrant is caught in the U.S. again (without legal visa’s, etc) and wishes to establish citizenship, the process will start from the beginning but instead of 4 years the initial commitment will extend to 6 years. Or, they will be subject to the full measure of U.S. Code – Section 1325 for subsequent offenses and required to pay for their room / board for the up to 2 years of incarceration, then extradition to the southern most location of their country of origin.

This would be a pilot program designed to address those illegal immigrants currently in the country or the Hispanic migration coming across the U.S. southern border until adequate action can be taken to truly stem the flow of immigration. The program will be limited in availability.   All applicants will be subjected to criminal background investigations and the U.S. immigration office will have the right to deny claims based off criminal histories or potential links to terrorism. This process will also allow immigrants the opportunity to keep dual citizenship if their country allows it.

Please provide corrections or additional ideas.