Prevent riders, of any kind, for any reason. No more pork barrel projects being tacked on to larger, more important or popular legislation. Make each piece stand on its own, and be voted on individually.
I'm cool with no riders, on the face of it. I am intrigued by your rough sketch of money allocations. I do think it would mean the end of many social programs completely, which would have devastating consequences.
The idea of choosing where your tax dollars are applied is fascinating to me. If configured correctly, I would love this. It's actually very much like the option my company provides through our employee giving campaign. Each year we allocate how much we wish to contribute (either set amount or percentage of salary), and then are provided a significant number of charities (and their sub charities) to choose for allocation. I have always felt this is a great way to do it because many of us have organizations and causes we feel strongly about. I think many people would respond well to having a say in where their money is going.
The earth's population continues to increase. It's projected to double by the year 2100 which seems far away but that's less than a lifetime, only 78 years. So, in less than a lifetime there will be twice as many people on earth and yet we continue to create technology to replace jobs, self check out lanes, mobile banking, shop online, etc. How in the hell do we create enough employment for all these people?
Funding for Pell Grants, which help millions of low-income students pay for college each year, could be significantly reduced by Paul Ryan’s proposed budget. That’s what the Obama administration is suggesting, but the truth is more complicated. Pell Grant confusion - Salon.com
The death of those programs as we know them? Yes. However, outside of the fringed elements of "zero entitlements" and "bury the problem in tax dollars" - I believe that they would be quickly reincarnated, and likely into something which would produce measurably better results than our current systems which, by and large, have almost no tangible oversight and too often fail to do. The vast majority of Americans agree on and value the need for taking care of our own, IMO. We need infrastructure and roadways. No child should go to bed hungry, or suffer with a second-rate education. A single parent seeking to improve their lives, and those of their children, by going back to school should be helped in that endeavor. No elderly person should go without proper medical care, while the nation that they helped to build and maintain, spends trillions of dollars elsewhere, and on comparatively trivial things. It's usually not the question of "should" we do these things that causes the rub, but "how", and "to what end", instead. The American people would not allow these things to go unattended, or unanswered. I believe that as strongly as I believe in both gravity and mortality.
I believe the thought that the government will just take care of people stops a lot of people from doing more. I don't want people to do without, but the system that we now have is broken. I don't know what the fix is , but I'd be open to changes.
1- Limit the campaign season to a shorter 2-3 month period, a la the British. It's incredibly wasteful and detrimental to our society to have the year and a half politicking we do now. Washington cripples itself for that time, looking towards elections rather than governing. 2- Universal health care. Figure out a system and go with it, but everyone should have health care. 3- Subsidize college tuition. I have no doubt this will raise the cost of college, but the offset of removing student loan debt would be immense to our economy. Speaking as someone who is staggering under the cost of multiple degrees and won't pay them off until near retirement age, I can attest to the relief it would have to me and my bank account. 4- Stop pouring money into boondoggle military projects with little value (unless we are expecting a return of 1950s USSR). 5- Spend that money on infrastructure, instead. 6- Listen more to teacher's suggestions for education instead of allowing career politicians to determine curriculum, teacher evaluations and student assessment. Stop wasting educators' time with a new idea every year, while you're at it. 7- Pass legislation (if an amendment, then so be it) eliminating the Citizen's United ruling. I can't remember anything so destructive as allowing political offices to be summarily bought in such a blatant manner. Boss Tweed and Banana Republics are not models of government.
In regards to 3, education is the next bubble to burst. It's cost is unjustifiable, and I have no idea where all that money is going because it isn't going to faculty or facilities.
My tuition doubled while I was in college. The lottery scholarship did nothing but drive up the cost of public college in Tennessee.
2. No. I'll pay for my own healthcare. I don't want to pay for someone else's. 3. You should've gotten degrees with a better return on investment. The purpose of attaining a higher learning degree is to garner more lifetime wages. If the degree doesn't do that, it's not worth it. If you think it is then so be it, but don't complain and expect someone else to pay for it. You weren't forced to go after those degrees. It's the path you chose. Again, I'll pay for my own education; I don't want to pay for others. I can get on board with the other suggestions.
Talking points to rile up the masses. We are accountable. TEA is as strong as a saturated Kleenex. How about companies quit acting like petulant children because they aren't getting their hard-ons slurped and let loose of some of those record profits and become what pro-business and to hell with everyone else folks claim them to be and create some f**king jobs. I support #s 1 & 3.
As to the University - follow the service academy model and help to ensure that each graduate of your college has a paid gig in their field of training, when done. Obviously, there would have to be some strict safeguards in place to ensure for the students sustained and sincere effort toward the obtainmen (not keep, but obtain....some people are shitballs and wouldn't last anywhere) of said position. Or, insofar as they meet their requirements to attempt to gain such employment, allow the loans to be forgiven for an equal length of time (so if you can't get a gig for a semester after graduating, you get a semester knocked off of your debt) - and allow them automatic enrollment to pursue a graduate degree for more specialized (and hopefully, a more necessary) aspect of their chosen field...for free. Have them serve the University and the community beyond during this time, by requiring a certain amount of hours each semester in tutoring non-traditional undergrad students, or better, at-risk or disadvantaged children in targeted and underperforming public schools. What of they can't get a job in their selected field after four years? Allow them to repeat their undergrad work in another major - again, but this time in a known area of need (i.e. healthcare, teaching, etc.) and again - for free. If the promise of a college education is to assist the student in obtaining that knowledge and experience necessary to start a career - then by God, deliver it. Or, keep educating them until you can. What if someone doesn't want to work in their field / get a grad degree / repay loans / choose another major field of study? Well, don't. Do whatever you want, just be sure to pay your loans back - just as you must now do. What if the college says that they cannot afford to be giving away all of this "free" education? Well, I guess you need to start churning out a little more engineers / scientists / teachers / business persons / accountants, etc. and far less theatre majors and Middle-Ages French philosophy students. And if universities still cannot agree that their efforts toward educating its students should be most heavily weighted toward their careers and the betterment of society - all of the nonsense about education being its own best reward - then what, exactly, is their purpose, then?
That's great, just remember this idea when your kids get shitty teachers due to a lack of interest from those concerned about a "return investment". Yes, I chose this path, but the point was still that college loans have a crippling effect on the personal finances of individuals and families and would be beneficial to our economy as a whole. Not everyone can (nor would it be a positive on our society) be business majors and earn 6 figures. As for health care, you already do pay for others. When the uninsured go to the ER and receive service, guess who gets the bill? Might as well have everyone pay through their taxes into a system instead of getting your premiums raised.
Your comments on the need for businesses to create jobs is on point, IMO (I'm convinced that many businesses used the recession as a welcomed excise to make desired, but not entirely necessary cuts). But your argument for the impotence of the TEA seems counter-intuitive, at best. If it has no power, and of some significance, then why do you support it? Or better, why defend its admittedly useless existence?
TEA's best function, as I have seen it, is to provide protection for teachers up against the system in some manner. For example, if you are a male teacher accused by a hormone laden teenage girl of something improper, good luck on your own. The TEA, at least, provides some assistance and has enough clout to keep you from being blackballed and get a fair review, if innocent.
