Revolution Now? (part 1)

Gas explosion; San Bruno, CA

In my last post I suggested establishing a 21st Century Continental Congress to wrest power from current political forces and demand common sense reforms to government and to laws and regulations. You may be wondering why I am recommending such a radical solution to address our country’s problems. I’ll be the first to admit that I have more comfort and convenience than any person has a right to. I’m not downtrodden or feeling oppressed. I have actually prospered in this country and I feel secure. But what I lack in my life is justice and I demand it. I demand justice for myself and for My Fellow Americans whose tax dollars are squandered on wasteful government spending. I demand justice for the citizens of other nations who suffer at the hands of US (military and financial) foreign policy. And because I feel that government corruption has reached lethal proportions.

On September 9th, 2010 in San Bruno, California, a natural gas pipeline exploded and killed 8 people. You can read about it here. [an excerpt from the article] On January 13, 2012, an independent audit from the State of California issued a report stating that PG&E had illegally diverted over $100 million from a fund used for safety operations, and instead used it for executive compensation and bonuses. These types of incidents occur rather frequently. I could recount hundreds of similar incidents. Americans killed due to lax government oversight and inappropriate collusion between government and big business. So where are the arrests? Where are the CEOs doing perp walks for taking money from a public safety fund to pay themselves millions of dollars?

So now that we all understand that our lives can be at stake when government does not work effectively--and I assume that most of us have little faith in government cleaning up its own act--is it unreasonable to demand that government do its job? Is it unreasonable to take dramatic action to ensure that the government does?

Hummer after IED blast

In Iraq and Afghanistan, we supplied our troops with Hummers which are inferior vehicles when pitted against the main threat, the improvised explosive device (IED). Other vehicles available could have been deployed to protect our soldiers from IEDs but were sent to the war front in far fewer numbers than the Hummer.(1) There are a few reasons for this: cost, government bureaucracy failings, logistics, military ineptitude and lack of fore-thought.(2) But I am suspicious that our politicians look at such issues, to some degree, from their own point of view and not ours. To them, the Hummer was perhaps a perfect solution. Sure, it didn't do much to ensure the safety of our soldiers, but the contract to provide them was already in place. People were already making money on the program. More money for the war profiteers means more money in the campaign coffers of politicians come election time. And the more Hummers that got blown up, the more that needed to be purchased. It was a feedback loop and a war profiteer's wet dream and I question if it is not another example of government corruption reaching lethal proportions. After all, in World War II automotive plants throughout the country were converted to produce war planes within a couple of years. What has kept us from producing and delivering the needed war vehicles in the Middle East?

Here is a bit more about how a new Continental Congress might work to reform government: delegates would be appointed by majority vote of the constituents of their district (districts and constituencies to be determined) and would propose reforms to current laws, regulations and Congressional rules that do not make sense, or propose laws, regulations and rules that do make sense. Once drawn, the proposals must be approved by the delegate’s constituents by a simple majority vote (>50%). The proposal would then be presented to the other delegates and must pass by a super majority (>75%), with each delegate in the Continental Congress getting simple majority approval of each proposal from their constituents. Once a proposal has been ratified as outlined above, it would then be presented to Congress to be implemented.

Any Congress member that opposes any of the proposals would be voted out of office in the next election. That’s where the impossible part comes in. We would need backing by a huge number of the citizens of the country. Ideally, the “constituencies” combined would number 100 million or more, although the objectives would likely be accomplished with as few as 30 million people. Any number greater than 30 million would represent a voting block so large that every politician would be at our mercy. No longer would lobbyists and big campaign contributors have undue sway over our elected officials. It is the way we flex our power and protect our own interests.

So how do we get 30+ million people on the same page? We have to look past the general arguments of the two parties and focus on the minutia of government function, regulations and budget line items. Here’s an example:

Conservatives want to cut spending in general. Liberals want to cut military spending. Here, the two sides can agree because there are a lot of wasteful military spending programs that can be improved or eliminated. We have military programs that are out-dated and only remain funded because they make a few powerful people money. The F-22 was the poster child for wasteful military spending. You can read about it here. That program has finally ended but there are others that can be examined. If we can eliminate similar programs we could save billions of dollars in wasted government spending. Some of that money can be re-allocated into research and development of new, modern-era weapons and surveillance systems that will make our military more effective at a lower cost. Are we really so entrenched in partisan ideology that we are unwilling to accept a win/win scenario (a more effective military for less money) when it is in our power to achieve it?

If Grover Norquist can strong-arm Republicans with his ridiculous oath that prevents them from eliminating any tax loophole, then we can certainly strong-arm all politicians to adopt common sense reforms that will help to eliminate corruption, promote transparency, make our elections accurate and over-seeable, reduce spending and ensure in a better, more efficient government.

I could live my convenient, comfortable life and not bother rocking the boat. I could occupy my time with enjoying my toys and distractions but my commitment to justice precludes me from doing so. It may be an impossible mission but I am convinced that direct democratic action is the only way to fix our government. And I will advocate for it for as long as our government is dysfunctional.

[please join this blog or return for part 2 of this post...]

~R. Charan Pagan
information systems technologist, musician, writer, filmmaker
Los Angeles, CA 90017
http://www.reclaimingourbirthright.blogspot.com/
(1) http://jalopnik.com/5542789/the-m1117-guardian-
(2) http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/008317.html