Why we need less democracy.

[Rockntractor]

Too Much of a Good Thing
Why we need less democracy.
Peter Orszag
September 14, 2011 | 9:46 pm




In an 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote that “there never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” That may read today like an overstatement, but it is certainly true that our democracy finds itself facing a deep challenge: During my recent stint in the Obama administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget, it was clear to me that the country’s political polarization was growing worse—harming Washington’s ability to do the basic, necessary work of governing. If you need confirmation of this, look no further than the recent debt-limit debacle, which clearly showed that we are becoming two nations governed by a single Congress—and that paralyzing gridlock is the result.

So what to do? To solve the serious problems facing our country, we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/...NDE2MjE2NjE2Nj

Friggen libtard!

[Tipsycatlover]

When people are deprived of the ballot box, they invariably resort to the ammo box.

[Starbuck]

When people are deprived of the ballot box, they invariably resort to the ammo box.

That's damned funny, and damned true........but I gotta tell you, I am not always a fan of democracy. I'm afraid I fall into the camp of some of the founding fathers by viewing it as sort of mob rule.

In my world you would need a license to vote, and have to pass a test to get the license.

[DumbAss Tanker]

We don't need less democracy, just fewer Democrats.

[fettpett]

I've seen people on here that want to limit it too...and not our resident libtards...

That's damned funny, and damned true........but I gotta tell you, I am not always a fan of democracy. I'm afraid I fall into the camp of some of the founding fathers by viewing it as sort of mob rule.

In my world you would need a license to vote, and have to pass a test to get the license.

case in point...(no offense Tucker :D )

We're a Republic and people need to be taught the difference between the two. I honestly would not mind a test that was given to everyone when they turn 18 (or naturalized) that was a basic comprehensive History/Civics test that one had to pass in order to vote. Nothing like the 1963 Alabama literacy test that I've posted before, but with enough that shows ones know the basics of the Constitution and history of the US. You'd then get a voter ID (or mark on your drivers license) to say you've passed the test and can vote.

[noonwitch]

case in point...(no offense Tucker :D )

We're a Republic and people need to be taught the difference between the two. I honestly would not mind a test that was given to everyone when they turn 18 (or naturalized) that was a basic comprehensive History/Civics test that one had to pass in order to vote. Nothing like the 1963 Alabama literacy test that I've posted before, but with enough that shows ones know the basics of the Constitution and history of the US. You'd then get a voter ID (or mark on your drivers license) to say you've passed the test and can vote.

Michigan requires all students to pass "government" class or civics before graduation. You'd be surprised by how many people I have had as coworkers (a job requiring a bachelor's degree) can't name the 3 branches of government, nor list any of the checks and balances that separation of power entails. Not to mention the differences between a Senator and a member of the House of Representatives. And it's people on both sides of the spectrum, not just liberals or conservatives.

My high school even offered 3 levels of government class: 1. for advanced students, 2. for average students and 3. for slow students. They all covered the same basics, but the advanced class had guest speakers, and discussed political issues in addition to the basic lessons.

[fettpett]

Michigan requires all students to pass "government" class or civics before graduation. You'd be surprised by how many people I have had as coworkers (a job requiring a bachelor's degree) can't name the 3 branches of government, nor list any of the checks and balances that separation of power entails. Not to mention the differences between a Senator and a member of the House of Representatives. And it's people on both sides of the spectrum, not just liberals or conservatives.

My high school even offered 3 levels of government class: 1. for advanced students, 2. for average students and 3. for slow students. They all covered the same basics, but the advanced class had guest speakers, and discussed political issues in addition to the basic lessons.

honestly? no I wouldn't be surprised....but if they want to vote, they should be able to passed a test that covered all that

[djones520]

Michigan requires all students to pass "government" class or civics before graduation. You'd be surprised by how many people I have had as coworkers (a job requiring a bachelor's degree) can't name the 3 branches of government, nor list any of the checks and balances that separation of power entails. Not to mention the differences between a Senator and a member of the House of Representatives. And it's people on both sides of the spectrum, not just liberals or conservatives.

My high school even offered 3 levels of government class: 1. for advanced students, 2. for average students and 3. for slow students. They all covered the same basics, but the advanced class had guest speakers, and discussed political issues in addition to the basic lessons.

The teacher in my school wasn't a bad one, but it was obvious that Civics was a "secondary" class for her, with economics being her primary one. I taught her a few things when I went through the class...

It is required, but if many schools are like mine was, it's not really taught.

[Starbuck]

............We're a Republic and people need to be taught the difference between the two. I honestly would not mind a test that was given to everyone when they turn 18 (or naturalized) that was a basic comprehensive History/Civics test that one had to pass in order to vote. Nothing like the 1963 Alabama literacy test that I've posted before, but with enough that shows ones know the basics of the Constitution and history of the US. You'd then get a voter ID (or mark on your drivers license) to say you've passed the test and can vote.

Amen, Brother.:)

[fettpett]

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/...NDE2MjE2NjE2Nj

Friggen libtard!

I've seen people on here that want to limit it too...and not our resident libtards...