How can we choose the best possible leaders to lead our cities, counties, states, and nation? One way NOT to do this is through the process of parties selecting who THEY want to be our leaders and then sit idly by while they pick out the best candidate that fits THE PARTY's views. The reason we all know this does not work is because today we have one of the worst governments North America has ever seen. Public approval for Congress is lower than 10%, and a recent poll shows they are less popular than roaches, herpes and communists. What have we become that such an organization remains in power despite its abject failure? The last Congress sent our economy to the edge of bankruptcy and caused a credit down-grade by the world's most important credit bureau because the two parties couldn't agree on a budget. Their crowning achievement was approving "In God We Trust" as the nation's motto. They get nothing done while in Washington, but they sure are good at staying there.
We have to think outside of the box and re-arrange this process. We are not hostages to the way things have "always" been done. This isn't how they did it in the beginning before our democracy became entwined with the insects that infest it today. George Washington himself was vocally against any sort of political party system and even mentioned the topic in his farewell address in 1798, warning the nation of the dreadful consequences possible with such a process. (Of this I will elaborate on in my blog on the political parties to come at a later time)
Here's what I propose to at least begin the process of winning our country back. We have to get rid of the politicians. How do we implement such a plan? In order to draw out the best potential leaders we have to begin harvesting from existing leadership. So your religious leaders, Toastmasters, Kiwanis, business leaders, firehouse chiefs, any and all local leadership and even military leaders are open to nomination for positions of local leadership. Once these leaders have gone through a nomination process from those that know them, each person that is interested in actually running will begin the process of speaking, debating, and having their positions and ideas submitted for review through the local media. No money is necessary because the facilities where debates and speeches will be located would be at local places for gathering such as civic centers. NO MORE of these mysterious people who come out of nowhere with bundles of money to start doing the bidding of their beloved parties. Only local leadership who have shown what they can do and accomplish for their fellow citizens as leaders and administrators. Another great benefit; not all of our leaders will be restricted to lawyers., a personal pet peeve of mine. Why is a nation of shop keepers, engineers, computer scientists, firemen, policemen, teachers, etc.... being led by this group of people who chose a profession that prides itself on clever tricks and abundant mendacity? Is it any wonder our leadership is populated mostly by a herd of silver tongued rats that seek nothing other than to stay in power or yearn to earn "real" money as one of those most loathsome of all snakes known as lobbyists.
What about higher levels of government ? As each person is elected to a lower level of government then they qualify for the next level of government., there is no way to go higher unless you have served at the lowest level. With this requirement you will always be getting the best of the best as you go to a higher level. In theory, within about 30 years we will have a fully, effective, efficient President who has demonstrated through years of work and dedication to his people that he is essentially the most talented leader in the land. How can anyone argue against such a circumstance?
I know there are details about all this that would need to be worked out but the details could be hammered out according to local custom and preference. As long as the structure is there that all leadership nominated must start at the very bottom levels, and that no money is needed, necessary, offered or required. It would strictly be the people listening to the candidate and voting on exactly what he or she thinks, believes, his or her composure, his or her experience as a leader, and his or her position on the concerns of the governed. Nothing else. In other words, all elections are no longer funded by anyone at all. Most people I mention this to are totally confused because they (and all of us) are so use to elections costing as much as a billion dollars (IE, for the presidential election for 2008 even more for 2012 !). But why does it cost that much? Because of media advertisements. Television commercials are the bulk of it, but also newspaper ads, political signage, mailers, etc..... The overwhelming majority of the expenses for campaigns are for the marketing. Why is marketing necessary? It's not if you look at the election process from a different perspective. Think about it, all citizens need is the following to make an educated decision;
1) To hear each candidates opinions on all major issues of the day in their own words
2) To hear the candidate speak in an address to their constituents as to what their vision is for the future.
3) To read a list of each candidate's opinion on all the major issues of the day.
4) To hear the candidates debate each other in a moderated fashion.
5) To read and understand each candidate's qualifications/resume. Much like a job interview., "What about your experience makes you qualified for this leadership position that you desire?".
6) Any and all prosecuted crimes to be fully disclosed. Any and all matters that have fallen under the eyes of the court in the past, including divorce, etc.... are to be fully disclosed.
None of this requires all the marketing nonsense we are constantly exposed to. All that's required is the following; 1) publication of these points listed above via the media 2) Public buildings for the speeches and debates. 3) A process for selecting the nominees that will yield the best possible people for these positions.
No money required.
If the money is removed from the process, then much of the problem we see today in our leadership will be solved. How? If the best leadership in society is now able to lead the country, rather than those who go in willingly bought by specific groups, then the whole of the country will benefit. Money corrupts the process and leads to the twisted mess we have today with a hodge-podge of laws outlined to be of benefit for the few well connected. Think of the consequences, a naked democracy for the benefit of all mankind. The best leadership working hard for the best results for the American people as a whole with no financial concerns for their re-election. Only the best leaders focused on getting the job done.
No comments:
Post a Comment