The Foxes who live in this hen house

I really get nauseous every time I see another article and caption describing how Senator Chris Dodd and  Congressman Barney Frank are overhauling our financial system.

Weren't these two jokers part of the gang to blame for getting us into the housing mess in the first place? If memory serves, both men (who sat on banking/finance committees way back in the Clinton Administration days) pushed hard on opening up first home buying opportunities for those who never could afford to own before. They were quite successful because they forced Fannie Mae to significantly lessen its mortgage standards for who would be deemed credit worthy to buy a home. Their laws created opportunities for banks everywhere to drop any and all ethics they had left. The result was something called subprime mortgages. You can read about the rest in any good history book.

What's my point (you might be asking)?

I'll tell you. Our political system stinks. And, one big reason why is because guys like Dodd and Frank have become professional career politicians. Because of this, they can (and have) entrench themselves into committees that have absolute power. Incredibly, this allows them to remain in charge after they facilitated creating the biggest economic disaster in 80 years.

How are these jokers still in leadership roles charged with changing banking regulations now? It's just amazing. They continue to feast on power because our system allows it. And, that's just wrong.

I have a solution. And, I’ve said it (and written it) before. We, the people, should create a new law that prohibits any American from serving more than two terms in office. That would pertain to any public office.

Wasn't this the true concept that our founding fathers had over 200 years ago? Back then, Americans served their fellow man by taking public office for a brief period in their life. This ‘sacrifice’ away from their careers and/or livelihoods was deemed very important because it helped preserve (our ever so delicate) Constitution and these public servants created new laws that were needed to establish rule and order.

I know we live in a different world now. But, think about it. If politicians could only serve two terms, then they probably wouldn't need to spend all their time shoring up power and votes (i.e. always worrying about the next election). And just maybe, our system could simply focus on passing laws that a new breed of politicians actually think will do well for their fellow citizens versus what will keep them in office.

I think this new political system could also bring more ‘fresh blood’ and innovative thinking into our stale, corrupt pockets of government, as well.

Sure, I’ve thought about the negatives with my concept. We'd clearly lose lots of institutional knowledge on important issues within key committees (Military and Armed forces are two highly specialized ones that come to mind). Still, I'd  rather end this current system (and live with that sacrifice) when it allows two hatchet men like Dodd and Frank to remain in complete power, bumbling around the same issues that that they helped screw up more than a decade ago.

Comments

[Flackman]

Amen, Ed. And it's not just Dodd and Franks EVERY pol that serves more than two years is on the track to "career politician". I've liked the idea of term limits for years. It would flush out a lot of what's wrong with the system, particularly the lobbyist taint of which these clowns reek.

[Steve]

Agreed. Another problem with the professional politician: they lose all touch with the lives their constituents lead. Being in the statehouse or Washington for years is like living in a foreign country--your understanding of the day-to-day concerns of non-politicians atrophies. Even those politicians who are honest and well-intentioned lead lives alien to those of the very people they are supposed to represent.

[Sean Williams]

Hi Ed - if financial crisis blame were a jar of something, it'd be peanut butter -- lots to spread around.

The Barney and Chris show is getting bloody old, I agree, and they did play a role in fostering the housing bubble. I hate the idea that they're seen as change agents!

As for the two-terms idea - I have to disagree. All politicians are term limited if the voters turn them out. What would make sense to me is to remove the structural perquisites that make it altogether too easy for them to be reelected.

For example, the US taxpayer pays for the postage for the Congressperson to mail "status reports" from The Hill. These only appear in the 3-6 months prior to primary elections - they're puffery and should be paid out of their reelection budgets. Further, it needs to be easier to run against these jokers -- but with protected, gerrymandered districts, it's awfully hard to do.

The redistricting efforts in the wake of census should be nonpartisan, but redistricting is seen as a spoil of the party in power. How about drawing appropriate districts, contiguous populations, without regard to party? No more safe seats.

The biggest issue preventing such things from happening is the reduction in power for certain cities, counties and states that would result. That makes breaking the status quo exceedingly difficult.

Add in a disaffected populace more interested in the latest Dancing With The Stars and American Idol than in who is governing them, and you've got what we've got.

[ed]

All good points, Sean. I'm sure we could think of half a dozen more new rules to make this system better (like severely restricting campaign funds) if we kept thinking about it.

[Abraham Lincoln]

These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.

[Steve]

Abe--loved the Gettysburg address.

BTW, skip the theatre; just go out to a restaurant.