Thursday, January 11, 2007
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Monday, December 11, 2006
In Response To One of My First Comments......
This is a joke that i picked up while living in Wales....You have to understand the disdain that the people in Great Britain still have for the French....
What is the smallest building in the world?........
The museum of French war heroes.....
Considering this is a historical / current events blog I felt this would be appropriate.
My friend from N. Ireland told me this when I lived with him a few years back.
What is the smallest building in the world?........
The museum of French war heroes.....
Considering this is a historical / current events blog I felt this would be appropriate.
My friend from N. Ireland told me this when I lived with him a few years back.
U.S.A. / Immigration Policy of the Future
(Again, a little outdated, but this issue is still far from resolved, and has fallen by the wayside concerning our current foreign policy issues.) In this paper I will provide a short overview of the current policy proposals by our leaders in Washington, and try to examine some of what I feel are the positive and negative aspects of each. I will then provide you with my own policy proposal concerning the issue of illegal immigration in our country today, detailing how I believe this problem can best be resolved.
Immigration policy, particularly over the last several months, has been a hotly contested issue among our nation’s political leaders and the country as a whole. I feel that this is an issue of vital importance because of the consequences that increased foreign populations; both legal and illegal, living in the United States has on other domestic policies, our demographic and social make up, as well as some of our fundamental public institutions. Therefore, I believe that a new comprehensive immigration policy must be enacted in our country in order to deal with this potentially crippling problem.
As I see it, there are essentially two distinct schools of thought currently floating around Washington regarding proposals to repair our nation’s failing immigration policy.
House Resolution 4437
On the one hand there is the House of Representatives Resolution 4437 passed in December of 2005. This resolution takes an extremely tough line on the issue of illegal immigrants already living in the United States and also on proposed ways to stop the influx of undocumented persons into our country in the future. In brief, this bill, if passed by the Senate, would essentially make immigrating to the United States illegally a felony, permanently barring any person attempting to come into the country this way from trying to enter through legal means in the future. This bill would also make it a criminal act for employers to hire undocumented workers, which would theoretically be enforced through extensive fines and possible jail time for those who fail to comply with the law, although history points to the fact that employers who do higher illegal immigrants are often overlooked. Its last major provision calls for the creation of a 700 mile long fence along the U.S. and Mexican border in order to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the country.
I agree with the House Resolution that we need to construct further walls along the U.S-Mexico border, but I think that the bill calls for this action for the wrong reasons. Currently Latin American governments and populations are becoming progressively more left leaning in their politics, and increasingly hostile towards the United States and our democratic form of government. In this age of global terrorism and insecurity I feel that it is becoming ever more important that we continue to have positive relationships with other countries in the Western Hemisphere. We need to make it clear to these countries that we are not constructing a wall to keep friendly neighbors and potential workers out of the United States, but to prevent terrorists from entering the country under our border patrol’s radar. This “interpretation” though only brings me back to the other failings I find in the House Resolution. If we are to sell this reasoning to Latin American nations, particularly Mexico, we undoubtedly need to increase the channels through which migrant workers can enter the country legally, while at the same time taking the pressure off employers who need these unskilled workers and the labor they provide. I feel that this bill fails to address any of these issues in a logical manner, and instead is really just a lot of unrealistic “tough talk” about the immigration dilemma. For these reasons I hope that House Resolution 4437 gets completely scrapped. I think it is an extremely encouraging sign that the Senate is looking much more favorably towards President Bush’s policy proposal, because I feel that it is a much more realistic approach to dealing with our immigration problems. (I can’t believe I am saying that considering how much I usually dislike Bush and a majority of his policies)!
Bush’s Proposal
On March 15, 2006, President George W. Bush addressed the nation regarding his proposals to remedy our failing immigrations policies. The President’s plan calls for an increase in funding for border security by 66%, and the addition of 6,000 agents to the 12,000 strong border patrol by the end of 2008. This additional funding for border security is primarily being directed towards beefing up our technological defenses against illegal border crossings, not towards an effort to build a structural wall. The plan also proposes that immigrants entering the country should be issued a tamper-proof identity card that would indicate to employers that they can be legally hired to fill open positions. Most significantly, George W. Bush’s proposal includes a provision to create a temporary worker program that would enable migrant workers to enter the country through legal channels to find employment, and then later return to their home countries with the money that they have made. The President’s plan includes several other features, but I believe that these are three of the most important.
I believe that Bush’s three policy proposals that I mentioned above are all sound in there intentions, and would have a positive impact on the immigration problem our nation is facing. I do feel though that Bush’s plan is lacking in one fundamental area. He proposes that we allow the approximately 12 million undocumented workers already living in the U.S. to earn their citizenship progressively over a period of time. His plan would require illegal immigrants already in the country to pay an initial fine and back taxes on their income, learn English, and work for several years while staying clear of any form of legal or financial trouble. Although I agree with these proposals in principle, I think that the restrictions that they would place on illegal immigrants would outweigh the incentives of coming out of the shadows and registering with the government. I will explain my position more clearly in the section concerning my own policy, but for now I believe this will suffice.
Before I move on to my policy proposal I simply want to make one statement about why I believe we need a comprehensive new immigration policy as soon as possible. On CBS’s Sixty Minutes last Sunday, several Mexican families were interviewed by reporters regarding how they felt about the changing climate of immigration into the United States. These families indicated that in recent months since the immigration debate has really taken off in the U.S., illegal border crossings by Mexican youths has skyrocketed because of the worries and confusion about what a new immigration policy would entail. I fundamentally believe that no matter what policy we do institute we need to make its provisions abundantly clear to our southern neighbors in order to curb these illegal desert crossings that are resulting in an unbelievable amount of unnecessary deaths. I personally hope that our new policy will allow more immigrants to enter the country legally, but either way something needs to be done rapidly to end the current disarray we are experiencing. Now I will delve into my own policy, which will hopefully provide some solutions to these complex problems.
In many ways my policy proposal is similar to some of the provisions presented by President Bush, but I also believe that there are several important differences. First of all, I would like to grant amnesty to the approximately 12 million illegal immigrants already living in our country. This idea is central to the rest of my argument, and I feel that this action will solve the problems associated with any undocumented workers already in our nation by formally bringing them into the American system. I think that it will be necessary to supplement this provision by immediately building a wall on the border with Mexico for “national security reasons”. This will keep any terrorists from entering the U.S. through these channels, and provide us with the added bonus of stopping the influx of illegal border crossings by those who seek employment in our country. For this to be effective though, we will need to create several border check points where migrant workers from Latin America can enter the country legally. I propose that we allow as many workers as have the desire, to come into the country through legal channels, where they can be documented and issued temporary workers visas. They would be provided with tamper-proof identification cards that will allow them to legally work in the U.S. for a period of six months, while at the same time entering them into our tax system at a flat rate of 20% of their income. I believe that these tamper-proof identification cards can work because we will make the provision that employees cannot hire any immigrant that cannot produce one. Of course this will only be as effective as the degree to which they are actually tamper-resistant, and the willingness of our governmental authorities to severely penalize any employer who does not comply with this law. If we can ensure these provisions it would become impossible for any immigrant working in the U.S. to continue their employment longer than the allotted six months, or fail to pay into the American tax system out of their earnings. I propose that these taxes should go towards providing them access to medical care while they are in the U.S., which has become one of the most serious problems associated with illegal immigration. After six months, their identifications will no longer be valid which effectively means they will no longer be able to find employment in the U.S. At this point they will be required to leave the country and return home with the money they have made for a mandatory period of one year. After this 12 month period they will be allowed to once again enter the country to seek employment. I believe that this system is fair and will allow the greatest number of persons to earn income in the United States every 18 months. I feel comfortable that we can rely on market forces to dictate the number of people who will actually come to the U.S., and that by rotating the periods that workers have valid identification to enter the U.S. will ultimately help to keep their numbers at an acceptable level. This might be a messy process at first, but eventually I believe that only the amount workers who can actually find employment will make the long journey to the United States. I also propose that after an immigrant has gone through four 18 month cycles, they will be allowed to apply for citizenship in the United States. If they qualify for admission they will be allowed to enter the U.S. as a citizen and bring their immediate families with them. I believe that this policy could work because it covers three very important bases. First of all, it provides Latin American immigrants not only with an incentive to come to the United States, but also with an incentive to leave. Secondly, it includes provisions, which if regulated properly would deny any worker who stays in the country longer than six months the ability to find employment. The third, and perhaps most important, is that it will enter these temporary workers into the American tax system, which at the very least will no longer require American citizens to foot the bill for their health care needs. I believe that if this policy is enacted it would not only solve the problem of illegal immigration into the United States from Latin America, but also continue to provide us with the unskilled labor which is necessary to fill many occupations Americans typically are unwilling to do.
As much as I would like to say that my policy proposal is perfect I completely realize that it is not. For one thing, what happens to children born in the United States by migrant workers? This should not be a problem in terms of workers becoming impregnated while they are in the country because they are only legally allowed to be here for six months, but what about females who come to the U.S. already pregnant? Do we institute mandatory pregnancy tests at the border? I don’t really know how to resolve this situation. The other problem that I can readily see is if we mandate that migrant workers can only be in the country for six months will we be required to pay for their transportation home? I think that this is an easier problem to fix though because we can use a portion of the 20% of their incomes we tax to provide this transportation. The last problem that I can think of is what happens if the Mexican or other Latin American Governments refuse to allow these migrant workers to reenter their home countries? Again, I don’t know how to remedy this sort of problem, or how we would deal with it if this kind of situation were to occur further down the road.
In conclusion, immigration policy is a problem that will not simply go away. I hope that as a nation we can come to terms with this fact. I also hope that the American people in general can come to the realization that immigrants are good for our economy and that it would be a mistake to simply shut our borders off to the rest of the world.
Immigration policy, particularly over the last several months, has been a hotly contested issue among our nation’s political leaders and the country as a whole. I feel that this is an issue of vital importance because of the consequences that increased foreign populations; both legal and illegal, living in the United States has on other domestic policies, our demographic and social make up, as well as some of our fundamental public institutions. Therefore, I believe that a new comprehensive immigration policy must be enacted in our country in order to deal with this potentially crippling problem.
As I see it, there are essentially two distinct schools of thought currently floating around Washington regarding proposals to repair our nation’s failing immigration policy.
House Resolution 4437
On the one hand there is the House of Representatives Resolution 4437 passed in December of 2005. This resolution takes an extremely tough line on the issue of illegal immigrants already living in the United States and also on proposed ways to stop the influx of undocumented persons into our country in the future. In brief, this bill, if passed by the Senate, would essentially make immigrating to the United States illegally a felony, permanently barring any person attempting to come into the country this way from trying to enter through legal means in the future. This bill would also make it a criminal act for employers to hire undocumented workers, which would theoretically be enforced through extensive fines and possible jail time for those who fail to comply with the law, although history points to the fact that employers who do higher illegal immigrants are often overlooked. Its last major provision calls for the creation of a 700 mile long fence along the U.S. and Mexican border in order to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the country.
I agree with the House Resolution that we need to construct further walls along the U.S-Mexico border, but I think that the bill calls for this action for the wrong reasons. Currently Latin American governments and populations are becoming progressively more left leaning in their politics, and increasingly hostile towards the United States and our democratic form of government. In this age of global terrorism and insecurity I feel that it is becoming ever more important that we continue to have positive relationships with other countries in the Western Hemisphere. We need to make it clear to these countries that we are not constructing a wall to keep friendly neighbors and potential workers out of the United States, but to prevent terrorists from entering the country under our border patrol’s radar. This “interpretation” though only brings me back to the other failings I find in the House Resolution. If we are to sell this reasoning to Latin American nations, particularly Mexico, we undoubtedly need to increase the channels through which migrant workers can enter the country legally, while at the same time taking the pressure off employers who need these unskilled workers and the labor they provide. I feel that this bill fails to address any of these issues in a logical manner, and instead is really just a lot of unrealistic “tough talk” about the immigration dilemma. For these reasons I hope that House Resolution 4437 gets completely scrapped. I think it is an extremely encouraging sign that the Senate is looking much more favorably towards President Bush’s policy proposal, because I feel that it is a much more realistic approach to dealing with our immigration problems. (I can’t believe I am saying that considering how much I usually dislike Bush and a majority of his policies)!
Bush’s Proposal
On March 15, 2006, President George W. Bush addressed the nation regarding his proposals to remedy our failing immigrations policies. The President’s plan calls for an increase in funding for border security by 66%, and the addition of 6,000 agents to the 12,000 strong border patrol by the end of 2008. This additional funding for border security is primarily being directed towards beefing up our technological defenses against illegal border crossings, not towards an effort to build a structural wall. The plan also proposes that immigrants entering the country should be issued a tamper-proof identity card that would indicate to employers that they can be legally hired to fill open positions. Most significantly, George W. Bush’s proposal includes a provision to create a temporary worker program that would enable migrant workers to enter the country through legal channels to find employment, and then later return to their home countries with the money that they have made. The President’s plan includes several other features, but I believe that these are three of the most important.
I believe that Bush’s three policy proposals that I mentioned above are all sound in there intentions, and would have a positive impact on the immigration problem our nation is facing. I do feel though that Bush’s plan is lacking in one fundamental area. He proposes that we allow the approximately 12 million undocumented workers already living in the U.S. to earn their citizenship progressively over a period of time. His plan would require illegal immigrants already in the country to pay an initial fine and back taxes on their income, learn English, and work for several years while staying clear of any form of legal or financial trouble. Although I agree with these proposals in principle, I think that the restrictions that they would place on illegal immigrants would outweigh the incentives of coming out of the shadows and registering with the government. I will explain my position more clearly in the section concerning my own policy, but for now I believe this will suffice.
Before I move on to my policy proposal I simply want to make one statement about why I believe we need a comprehensive new immigration policy as soon as possible. On CBS’s Sixty Minutes last Sunday, several Mexican families were interviewed by reporters regarding how they felt about the changing climate of immigration into the United States. These families indicated that in recent months since the immigration debate has really taken off in the U.S., illegal border crossings by Mexican youths has skyrocketed because of the worries and confusion about what a new immigration policy would entail. I fundamentally believe that no matter what policy we do institute we need to make its provisions abundantly clear to our southern neighbors in order to curb these illegal desert crossings that are resulting in an unbelievable amount of unnecessary deaths. I personally hope that our new policy will allow more immigrants to enter the country legally, but either way something needs to be done rapidly to end the current disarray we are experiencing. Now I will delve into my own policy, which will hopefully provide some solutions to these complex problems.
In many ways my policy proposal is similar to some of the provisions presented by President Bush, but I also believe that there are several important differences. First of all, I would like to grant amnesty to the approximately 12 million illegal immigrants already living in our country. This idea is central to the rest of my argument, and I feel that this action will solve the problems associated with any undocumented workers already in our nation by formally bringing them into the American system. I think that it will be necessary to supplement this provision by immediately building a wall on the border with Mexico for “national security reasons”. This will keep any terrorists from entering the U.S. through these channels, and provide us with the added bonus of stopping the influx of illegal border crossings by those who seek employment in our country. For this to be effective though, we will need to create several border check points where migrant workers from Latin America can enter the country legally. I propose that we allow as many workers as have the desire, to come into the country through legal channels, where they can be documented and issued temporary workers visas. They would be provided with tamper-proof identification cards that will allow them to legally work in the U.S. for a period of six months, while at the same time entering them into our tax system at a flat rate of 20% of their income. I believe that these tamper-proof identification cards can work because we will make the provision that employees cannot hire any immigrant that cannot produce one. Of course this will only be as effective as the degree to which they are actually tamper-resistant, and the willingness of our governmental authorities to severely penalize any employer who does not comply with this law. If we can ensure these provisions it would become impossible for any immigrant working in the U.S. to continue their employment longer than the allotted six months, or fail to pay into the American tax system out of their earnings. I propose that these taxes should go towards providing them access to medical care while they are in the U.S., which has become one of the most serious problems associated with illegal immigration. After six months, their identifications will no longer be valid which effectively means they will no longer be able to find employment in the U.S. At this point they will be required to leave the country and return home with the money they have made for a mandatory period of one year. After this 12 month period they will be allowed to once again enter the country to seek employment. I believe that this system is fair and will allow the greatest number of persons to earn income in the United States every 18 months. I feel comfortable that we can rely on market forces to dictate the number of people who will actually come to the U.S., and that by rotating the periods that workers have valid identification to enter the U.S. will ultimately help to keep their numbers at an acceptable level. This might be a messy process at first, but eventually I believe that only the amount workers who can actually find employment will make the long journey to the United States. I also propose that after an immigrant has gone through four 18 month cycles, they will be allowed to apply for citizenship in the United States. If they qualify for admission they will be allowed to enter the U.S. as a citizen and bring their immediate families with them. I believe that this policy could work because it covers three very important bases. First of all, it provides Latin American immigrants not only with an incentive to come to the United States, but also with an incentive to leave. Secondly, it includes provisions, which if regulated properly would deny any worker who stays in the country longer than six months the ability to find employment. The third, and perhaps most important, is that it will enter these temporary workers into the American tax system, which at the very least will no longer require American citizens to foot the bill for their health care needs. I believe that if this policy is enacted it would not only solve the problem of illegal immigration into the United States from Latin America, but also continue to provide us with the unskilled labor which is necessary to fill many occupations Americans typically are unwilling to do.
As much as I would like to say that my policy proposal is perfect I completely realize that it is not. For one thing, what happens to children born in the United States by migrant workers? This should not be a problem in terms of workers becoming impregnated while they are in the country because they are only legally allowed to be here for six months, but what about females who come to the U.S. already pregnant? Do we institute mandatory pregnancy tests at the border? I don’t really know how to resolve this situation. The other problem that I can readily see is if we mandate that migrant workers can only be in the country for six months will we be required to pay for their transportation home? I think that this is an easier problem to fix though because we can use a portion of the 20% of their incomes we tax to provide this transportation. The last problem that I can think of is what happens if the Mexican or other Latin American Governments refuse to allow these migrant workers to reenter their home countries? Again, I don’t know how to remedy this sort of problem, or how we would deal with it if this kind of situation were to occur further down the road.
In conclusion, immigration policy is a problem that will not simply go away. I hope that as a nation we can come to terms with this fact. I also hope that the American people in general can come to the realization that immigrants are good for our economy and that it would be a mistake to simply shut our borders off to the rest of the world.
Democrat?, Republican?, or a new American system?
I wrote this paper prior to the 2006 midterm elections. I believe the message that the book presents as well as my editorial on it are even more salient today in light of the current political seperation of average Americans and our country's current debacle which we call a foreign policy. This is my opinion. What do you think?
The Radical Center is a fantastic book. I encourage you all to read it.
In their book, The Radical Center, Ted Halsted and Michael Lind put forth the idea that 21st century America presents new challenges that our current political system, the dominant political parties, and their “archaic” policies are unable to resolve. They believe that “America needs a compelling vision of national renewal and a concrete program of national reform, capable of guiding the way forward while unifying the American people.” The authors also feel that the Democratic and Republican parties have become increasingly controlled by their more extreme constituents, causing their policies to move further away from what average voters would like. Therefore, in order for the new radical center to emerge one or both of the political parties will need to adapt their policies to meet the desires of American voters or a new comprehensive political party which reflects the needs of 21st century America will need to be born. According to the authors, the purpose of this book is to “propose the policies of the next generation”, which will hopefully see the development of centrist political movement within the next ten to twenty five years.
There are several ideas put forward in this book that I found particularly attractive. First of all, I agree with the authors’ proposal to establish a mandatory private healthcare system for all Americans. It is unbelievable to me that we are the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the world yet we cannot figure out a way to ensure the every American has access to high-quality health care. I believe the authors’ hit the nail on the head concerning this issue. We need to “sever the traditional link between employers and the provision of benefits”. America’s poor continually suffer in this system because the jobs that they are employed in, if they are at all, do not provide them with health insurance to pay their medical expenses. I feel that creating a private health care system would alleviate this problem. Secondly, I agree with the authors’ diagnosis of the problems with the Social Security system. We need to initiate mandatory retirement savings for all workers in order to ease the burden that will be faced by younger generations in caring for the nations elderly. I am not sure exactly how this could be achieved, but I feel that “progressive privatization”, which to me means gradually instituting a new retirement savings policy, would help begin the process without cutting Social Security benefits to those people who are receiving them now. Finally, I feel that it is a great idea to try to support the creation of universal capitalism in this country. I agree with the authors’ that this could be done fairly easily by “endowing every American child with individual financial assets from birth.” This is actually an idea that I have endorsed before reading this book. I still think that this is a very good idea and that it has the potential to give every child a solid financial backdrop from which to begin their lives.
I am actually skeptical of the authors’ proposal to completely eliminate state sales taxes altogether, and replace them with a progressive national consumption tax. I feel that many of our institutions and tax policies are so firmly grounded in this system that it would be a very difficult process to actually eradicate them all together. I feel we would be better off leaving the issue of sales tax alone to the system that currently is in place. Instead we should focus our attention on creating a progressive federal income tax. I feel that this would be more beneficial for the nation as a whole. We need to tax the wealthy much more heavily than we currently do, and try to ease the tax burden that is felt by the nations poor.
Halsted and Lind have a very good point that a lot of the popular resentment towards our government stems from the lack of true electoral choices. I agree with the authors’ that it is time to revamp the structure of our democracy. I feel that we need to get rid of the Electoral College system. I believe that this is a relic of the past that is no longer necessary. People are educated enough today that we no longer need the safety net of an Electoral College. Instead we should elect the President by direct popular vote. More importantly I feel that we need to establish a proportional representation system in the house and senate. This would allow people to truly vote for the candidate of their choice rather than picking the lesser of two evils. It would also break the chains of the two party system that we are currently shackled by and allow candidates to be elected from alternative third parties. This would have the ultimate effect of giving American voters more say in who is making policy, and what policies are most important to them.
The Radical Center is a fantastic book. I encourage you all to read it.
In their book, The Radical Center, Ted Halsted and Michael Lind put forth the idea that 21st century America presents new challenges that our current political system, the dominant political parties, and their “archaic” policies are unable to resolve. They believe that “America needs a compelling vision of national renewal and a concrete program of national reform, capable of guiding the way forward while unifying the American people.” The authors also feel that the Democratic and Republican parties have become increasingly controlled by their more extreme constituents, causing their policies to move further away from what average voters would like. Therefore, in order for the new radical center to emerge one or both of the political parties will need to adapt their policies to meet the desires of American voters or a new comprehensive political party which reflects the needs of 21st century America will need to be born. According to the authors, the purpose of this book is to “propose the policies of the next generation”, which will hopefully see the development of centrist political movement within the next ten to twenty five years.
There are several ideas put forward in this book that I found particularly attractive. First of all, I agree with the authors’ proposal to establish a mandatory private healthcare system for all Americans. It is unbelievable to me that we are the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the world yet we cannot figure out a way to ensure the every American has access to high-quality health care. I believe the authors’ hit the nail on the head concerning this issue. We need to “sever the traditional link between employers and the provision of benefits”. America’s poor continually suffer in this system because the jobs that they are employed in, if they are at all, do not provide them with health insurance to pay their medical expenses. I feel that creating a private health care system would alleviate this problem. Secondly, I agree with the authors’ diagnosis of the problems with the Social Security system. We need to initiate mandatory retirement savings for all workers in order to ease the burden that will be faced by younger generations in caring for the nations elderly. I am not sure exactly how this could be achieved, but I feel that “progressive privatization”, which to me means gradually instituting a new retirement savings policy, would help begin the process without cutting Social Security benefits to those people who are receiving them now. Finally, I feel that it is a great idea to try to support the creation of universal capitalism in this country. I agree with the authors’ that this could be done fairly easily by “endowing every American child with individual financial assets from birth.” This is actually an idea that I have endorsed before reading this book. I still think that this is a very good idea and that it has the potential to give every child a solid financial backdrop from which to begin their lives.
I am actually skeptical of the authors’ proposal to completely eliminate state sales taxes altogether, and replace them with a progressive national consumption tax. I feel that many of our institutions and tax policies are so firmly grounded in this system that it would be a very difficult process to actually eradicate them all together. I feel we would be better off leaving the issue of sales tax alone to the system that currently is in place. Instead we should focus our attention on creating a progressive federal income tax. I feel that this would be more beneficial for the nation as a whole. We need to tax the wealthy much more heavily than we currently do, and try to ease the tax burden that is felt by the nations poor.
Halsted and Lind have a very good point that a lot of the popular resentment towards our government stems from the lack of true electoral choices. I agree with the authors’ that it is time to revamp the structure of our democracy. I feel that we need to get rid of the Electoral College system. I believe that this is a relic of the past that is no longer necessary. People are educated enough today that we no longer need the safety net of an Electoral College. Instead we should elect the President by direct popular vote. More importantly I feel that we need to establish a proportional representation system in the house and senate. This would allow people to truly vote for the candidate of their choice rather than picking the lesser of two evils. It would also break the chains of the two party system that we are currently shackled by and allow candidates to be elected from alternative third parties. This would have the ultimate effect of giving American voters more say in who is making policy, and what policies are most important to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)