If you were King for 30 days

[slamdunkpro]

The show “30 Days” got me wondering. For 30 Days you are King of the US with absolute power to reshape our government. The only 2 caveats are that after 30 days it reverts back to the present system with your changes and you can’t do anything that’s against the Constitution or amend it.

Here are my thoughts:

Reduce spending

1st to go – Department of Homeland Security – what a waste – we already have a Department of Homeland Security; it’s called the Defense Department; Do your job folks.

Next in no particular order:

BATF – gone (If gambling is a State by State issue then why aren’t Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms?)
DEA – gone (see above)
EEOC – gone (an agency that forces discrimination to fight discrimination? I don’t think so)
TSA – more later
Most foreign aid – don’t like us? Fine, Hate us without our money
IRS – mostly gone

Reaffirm the following:

1st Amendment – There is no “separation of Church and State” There is just no “official “ Religion. (Think I’m the religious right – read on)
2nd Amendment – It’s there, it’s clear. Live with it. Bye Bye GCA of 68, NFA of 34, Class 3 ban from 82 and more. BUT Commit a crime and it’s gonna be bad, real bad for you.
4th Amendment – No more no-knocks,
5th Amendment – It’s your property
14th Amendment – No seizure of assets upon being accused of a crime or in some cases suspected.

There’s more but you get the idea.

Change the Tax base:

Since the Fed is now lean and trim we can reduce the tax burden. I actually like Canada’s General Sales Tax system. Buy more? Pay more. NOBODY or organization would be exempt. Churches, Charities etc would all participate. Food, medicine and life essentials would not be taxed.


Areas the Federal government should be in
Nationalize the rail and air travel system. Our transportation system is in a shambles. This is an area that need cross state intervention There can be a strong case made for a national (Federal owned) Airline.

The ICC returns – to mediate cross state commerce issues.

Regulate the health care industry – This doesn’t mean socialized medicine, but the health care industry has proven that it’s can’t police itself. The right to exist is the most fundamental right. The government has a duty to its citizens – regulate the industry.

Other basic human services that cross state line that should be or remain regulated: Water, Power, Highways. Hookers (just want to see if you are still reading)

Justice – a separate thread but in short.

Crime = punishment. Judges enforce the law as written: Cap the number of laywers to reduce the number of lawsuits.

World Affairs

Simple – We are nice guys, but attack us or our citizens and our response will be swift, draconian and final. As Zeno said in another thread “Time to take out the Trash”

Lastly – No more federal influencing (blackmailing) of States. Gone would be the 55mph speed limit, federal forcing of helmet and seatbelt laws. Roe vs Wade would have to go (It’s a State rights issue) the attempted regulation of technology and more.

Your thoughts?

[[censored]]

Eliminate the federal income tax all together, instead there would be a 1-3% national sales tax. I would eliminate state aid and just about every federal program except defense, transportation and a few others.

Eliminate most laws which set some type of federal standard for education and other similar programs.

States would be free to set their tax policy as determined by their elected officials. They would then determine what type of educational programs they have, whether they offer health care etc.

States would then be set up to compete with each other over jobs and quality of life. Those that succeed in educating their people would attract employers.

Social Security and medicare would be ended immediately, the amount owed to people would tallied and paid out over a 10yr annuity.

Completely secure the American/Mexican border.

[[censored]]

Strengthen State's rights and reduce the power of Federal courts. Matters like abortion, gay marriage etc would be decided on a state by state basis determined by the will of the people.

[[censored]]

Oh yah-- kill all the socialists and lawyers.

Bring the death row count to 0.

[PorscheNGuns]

<<Reduce spending: 1st to go – Department of Homeland Security – what a waste – we already have a Department of Homeland Security; it’s called the Defense Department; Do your job folks.>>

The Department of Homeland Security consolidated 22 government agencies and over 180,000 employees into one, far less wasteful agency. Its tasks and responsibilities are not "new", nor are they at all related to the tasks and responsibilities of the Department of Defense.

Nice insult at the people putting their lives on the line every day for your security though.

-Matt

[slamdunkpro]

First - what is the responsibility of the defense department? To keep our citizens safe and secure from foreign enemies and attacks. What was 9/11? An attack by a foreign enemies. Whose purview did that fall under? The defense department. Some reform was needed in the intelligence community but a lot of those 22 agencies were redundant. Even though they consolidated 22 agencies no one was fired, laid off, or let go, and the operating budgets increased. Other than enacting the Patriot act, which seems more aimed at you and me than terrorists, not a whole lot has happened.

When I read the Department of Homeland Security mission statement, I'm a little disturbed by the broad sweeping areas of domestic life that they have influence and access to. Maybe I’m paranoid, but it is a slippery slope and it’s not too far from “Your friend the Department of Homeland Security” to “Your papers please”

Second – This was a “what if” exercise. – Lighten up.

[quinn]

1. Ban all government-sponsored racial discrimination.
2. Round up all the rapists and child molesters and hang them publicly.
3. Build a castle for me in every major city.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
3. Build a castle for me in every major city.


[/ QUOTE ]

You only have 30 days; may I suggest just the coastal cities /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[quinn]

[ QUOTE ]

You only have 30 days; may I suggest just the coastal cities /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
30 days is enough when I conquer Canada and Mexico on the first day and enslave all of their people on the second day.

[slamdunkpro]

All hail our new alien overlord!

[vulturesrow]

Rather than come up with all my own ideas, I'll just list the ones I diverge from you on. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Dept of Homeland Defense-I would keep this one.
Nationalizing transportation-Yuck. You do realize the Amtrak is essentially nationalized right? And Southwest and Jetblue seem to be doing just fine on their own, no need to nationalize, just stop bailing out incompetent corporations.

Not sure what you mean by regulating health care. This industry is highly regulated already. Its a mess for other reasons, mostly because it has very little free market principles at work in it.

I will add one of my own. Get the Fed out of the welfare business other than possibly providing grants (without strings attached) to private charitable organizations. This is something states can do on their own.

[wmspringer]

hmm. This is actually something I've thought about before, although it's been a while. I'm assuming here that you have absolute power over the *federal* government, but not the states.

The first thing I would do is get rid of all drug laws. You want to shoot up? Fine, it's your funeral. Replace them all with a law mandating STRONG penalties for anyone operating a vehicle (or other potentially dangerous equipment) under the influence. This one step alone should cut costs dramatically (no more wasting millions of dollars catching people who want to smoke pot and keeping them in jail for years), increase revenue (since we can now tax the drugs), and decrease money going to terrorists and criminals (since the drugs are no longer illegal)

The second thing I would do is kill the PATRIOT Act. Has anything (aside from the Clean Air Act) ever been so misnamed?

The third thing I would do is simplify the tax system. It's too complicated, and full of loopholes...and without exactly this opportunity (absolute power over the system) it's probably never going to be fixed. First, I eliminate *every* federal tax - income, social security, medicare, etc. (Note the apparent contradiction with #1 above; I'd say just give the *states* the option of taxing drugs, but keep the feds out of it) I replace them all with a flat tax which applies equally to *all* income, regardless of source. (If you're getting your money from investing, you still pay as much as someone who actually works) The first $X isn't taxed. No deductions.

Note that this does NOT affect the states; they can continue to set up their tax structure however they want. The point of this is to overhaul the federal government, simplify the tax structure (both making it fairer and eliminating the need for a large part of the IRS)

Fourth, the government takes over health insurance. You get the same service you do now (assuming you currently have good health insurance) but the government pays for it instead of your insurance company. The money saved on paperwork covers those who are currently uninsured. Businesses which currently provide health insurance increase your salary by the amount it would cost, and your taxes increase a smaller amount (efficiencies of scale) to pay for it. We'll probably still be spending more per capita on health insurance than most industrialized countries, but probably less than we do now and for better coverage.

Maybe more later..

[PorscheNGuns]

<<The first thing I would do is get rid of all drug laws. You want to shoot up? Fine, it's your funeral. >>

No, dumb dumb, often a heroin or meth addiction means the funerals of the closest family members as well. (I've seen this in my own family). And then there will be the funerals of the victims caught in the violent rages spurned by certain drugs such as PCP and angel-dust.

And I'm always confused when someone complains about the Patriot Act, yet when prompted to name just one freedom they have lost since it was put into law, or just one way it has affected his life, he can never respond.

-Matt

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
And I'm always confused when someone complains about the Patriot Act, yet when prompted to name just one freedom they have lost since it was put into law, or just one way it has affected his life, he can never respond.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good luck. The best answer I have gotten yet is a link to a list of ACLU talking points.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
Nationalizing transportation-Yuck. You do realize the Amtrak is essentially nationalized right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but Amtrak is a political football. They serve many non-profitable routes for no better
reason than one of the cities is in some congressman or senator’s home state. Amtrak is fixable, but it would take major changes.

[ QUOTE ]
And Southwest and Jetblue seem to be doing just fine on their own, no need to nationalize, just stop bailing out incompetent corporations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both are fine operations but they only serve selective routes. A national airline discussion would require a separate thread, so I’ll leave it at that.

[ QUOTE ]
I will add one of my own. Get the Fed out of the welfare business other than possibly providing grants (without strings attached) to private charitable organizations. This is something states can do on their own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good one, I’ll add that to my list.

[HtotheNootch]

[ QUOTE ]
And I'm always confused when someone complains about the Patriot Act, yet when prompted to name just one freedom they have lost since it was put into law, or just one way it has affected his life, he can never respond.

-Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

I take it that you've never read Section 802.

[PorscheNGuns]

I'll post Section 802 so that everyone can go over it, and to answer your question - Yes, I've read section 802, and I'm relatively certain that I'll never commit acts of mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping in my lifetime.

-Matt

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;

[/ QUOTE ]

Call the cops - Congress tries to blackmail the States everyday! Wait they've probably exempted themselves from this law too! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[flatline]

I don't pretend to know enough about national policy to make changes that would be more beneficial than harmful, so I'd just do one thing that would make me happy: 8-team College Football playoff, starting this year.

[HtotheNootch]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll post Section 802 so that everyone can go over it, and to answer your question - Yes, I've read section 802, and I'm relatively certain that I'll never commit acts of mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping in my lifetime.

-Matt

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't see how that is way overbroad?

Enjoy neocon facism.

[slamdunkpro]

To me the scariest line in this is:

(B) appear to be intended--

So now the government's perception that you may commit a crime is a crime?

I'm a pretty righty guy but this makes me nervous.

Your papers please?

[PorscheNGuns]

Only your far left wing gorilla logic could surmise that outlining the definition of terrorism as acts dangerous to human life, including primarily mass destruction, assassination, and kidnapping amounts to "neocon fascism".

You don't impress anyone with your trendy "ism" of the month either.

-Matt

[HtotheNootch]

[ QUOTE ]
Only your far left wing gorilla logic could surmise that outlining the definition of terrorism as acts dangerous to human life, including primarily mass destruction, assassination, and kidnapping amounts to "neocon fascism".

You don't impress anyone with your trendy "ism" of the month either.

-Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

I love it when people get things so wrong it's laughable.

"Far Left Gorilla Logic" - cute, but wrong. If you want to get an idea of where I'm coming from, check out these links...

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2005/tst061305.htm

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2005/tst050205.htm

btw, Dr. Paul is a Republican Congressman from Texas.

[PorscheNGuns]

You call me wrong, but don't point out why, and then you post 3 links (congrats on thinking for yourself by the way), all from a psychopath libertarian who wants to abolish the IRS as well as all environmental laws, and on top of that, 2 of the articles have NOTHING to do with the Patriot Act, and you expect me to have any clue where you are coming from? Are you also a psychopath libertarian??

-Matt

[HtotheNootch]

[ QUOTE ]
You call me wrong, but don't point out why, and then you post 3 links (congrats on thinking for yourself by the way), all from a psychopath libertarian who wants to abolish the IRS as well as all environmental laws, and on top of that, 2 of the articles have NOTHING to do with the Patriot Act, and you expect me to have any clue where you are coming from? Are you also a psychopath libertarian??

-Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

The title of the third article is "Reconsidering the Patriot Act" so once again you're wrong.

I posted the articles because they are good reads, and give you an idea of some tennants of my political philosophy. If you know anything about Dr. Paul, then you know he is far from a practitioner of "Left Wing Gorilla Logic".

Beyond that, I feel no need even attempt to educate someone who feels the need to throw words out there like "psychopath" and consistently resorts to insults rather then debate. Therefore I'm done with you.

[renodoc]

How can you tell you are the King?