I wholeheartedly support term limits. The argument, however, is that term limits would limit the ability of the good representatives to do more “good.” To determine who is bad and who is good is a purely subjective determination. To some people Barney Frank or Nanci Polosi might be good, but to others they might be considered bad for the country and out-of-touch. Yes, we will lose good representatives, but we will also loose bad ones. I believe that the less attractive it is to serve in office, we will have more honest and decent people serving us-- people who truly want to serve their country and not their own self-interests. I am sure many politicians serve because of the lifelong benefits or for notoriety. Take away all of the benefits and the possibility of serving for life and we will see more honest, decent, freedom loving people serving our country. Term limits would also cause politicians to think twice about the laws they make, because they would be subject to those laws after their term is up.
I suggest 3 terms for representatives and 2 terms for senators.
5-7 cont.
5) Once all welfare programs, both foreign and domestic are eliminated, gradually reduce the income tax over an eight year period. After eight years, abolish the IRS and the sixteenth amendment.
6) Sale all public lands to Americans to pay off the national debt and abolish the BLM once all lands are sold. Turn over control of all national forests and parks to each state respectively. This is the key to energy independence!
7) It took nearly 60 years or so to take the U.S. completely off the gold standard. Within 20 years restore the gold standard and abolish the Federal Reserve.
1) Eliminate all domestic welfare programs at the federal level, within eight years. It should be up to the states to create, if they desire, entitlement programs, and to manage said programs.
2) Eliminate all federal funding to the U.N. and foreign nations immediately.
3) Over an eight year period, close all foreign military bases that are not being used for legitimate combat purposes. Relocate all military personnel from closed military bases to new installations along both southern and northern borders.
4) Once new military bases are built and personnel are relocated, secure the border with a fence and military force. Once the border is secure, deport all illegal immigrants.
(5-7 cont.) (see above)
The tenth amendment states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” Essentially, the federal government cannot act outside of its specified, delegated powers. We need to take our government back through the state level. Congress does not have to amend the Constitution for an amendment to be valid. Article 5 gives the states the authority to amend the Constitution without the consent of Congress. If we want to instigate term limits; abolish the Federal Reserve, income tax, and IRS; and if we want a balanced budget amendment, we need to also act through our state legislatures. Many states are issuing nullification acts, similar to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. We need to pressure our state legislature to take back their sovereignty and start declaring the federal government’s blatant abuse of power null and void. It has been done before and we can do it again.
Amen! Only one item in a bill at a time. An amendment needs to be passed that will prohibit lawmakers from inserting their own bill into an existing bill in order to get it passed. The reason lawmakers do not read most bills is because they are too long, because they are not really one bill but are sometimes several hundred bills packed into one. If we want transparency and efficiency, we must demand the "one bill in one bill" rule.
Abolish the Federal Land Management and Policy Act of 1976 and sale all public lands to American citizens only. It is estimated that lands held by the federal government (which in most cases is unconstitutional) is worth over 11 trillion dollars. That is enough to pay off the national deb, or at least most of it! If environmentalist complain then they can raise the money to buy the lands-- like wise for conservationists, hunters, ranchers, farmers, hippies, and tree huggers.
If the electoral college were abolished the states with the largest population would have more control then they already have, which means that California, New York, Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, and Michigan (all voted democratic except for Texas and Ohio) would essentially elect the president every year. Take, for example, my home state of Utah and California. Under the Electoral College, California has nine times more votes than Utah; under the popular vote California has 13 times more votes than Utah. The Electoral College was the Framer's solution to satisfying the smaller states desire for more equal influence.
The Electoral College does need to be reformed. Historically, electors were voted on by the people and they in turn would vote according to the will of the people while exercising his own sound judgment. Today, electors should be proportionate. Each state should be separated into districts with equal population. Each presidential election the people will vote for one of their peers to be their elector. The elector will then vote based on the will of his peers and his own best judgment.
What you are suggesting is democracy in the purest sense of the word. If you read the words of the Founding Fathers, you will learn that they abhorred democracy. In a pure democracy the rule of law is usurped by the will of the majority. If the majority wants take your house, there is no law to prevent them from doing so. In a republic the laws protect you from the will and whims of the majority.
If America was originally set up as a democracy we would not have experienced such dramatic economic growth and prosperity. Under our republic, people were free to pursue their own desires and leave the governing to those who they thought would best represent them. If we were burdened with the responsibility of reading and voting on every proposed law, nothing would get done and our country would cease to function. What we need to do is vote for a person based on principle--not party. If we vote for someone who is firmly rooted in principle, we can rest assured knowing they will never do anything contrary to those principles and we will be free to pursue our individual goals.
All that has been suggested is meant to shrink the government to its constitutional form, which is an excellent goal. However, one reason the government has become so large and invasive is because we have become an immoral people and have strayed from God's eternal laws of morality (i.e. honesty, chastity, charity, frugality, stewardship, etc.). Throughout history, religion has tempered the passions of individuals and society as a whole. When there is an absence of a religious base moral code debauchery and immorality reign and government is called upon to temper the passions of society and the individual. When this occurs, freedom is the ultimate looser.
If we truly want to be free we must turn to God and obey His laws! We need to start with ourselves and once we have solidified a firm faith in God and submitted to His laws then we must influence others to do the same. As we allow God and His laws to govern our actions, we will need less government intervention to dictate to us what is right and what is wrong.
Let us return to our religious heritage and experience the kind of freedom our Founding Fathers enjoyed and fought for.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Brainchild