Vote for Me (My political ramblings of late)

defjon

New member
Things piss me off. Lots of things. Not just some things, but these days- most things. For one of my classes, I'm tasked to keep a journal of musings and thoughts. Through this, though my major is pysch, I'm halfway considering working in politics. I am just not sure that I could stomach it. I do know enough of myself that if I made it to Washington, I wouldn't bend and break like so many who go there hoping for reform and to shake things down. At any rate, I don't even know where to begin to get involved in the Machine. I do have a couple of ideas I've been rolling around of late. Comments appreciated.

- MY first proposal is one I came upon just the other day. My significant other was telling me about something she had seen on T.V about a woman trying to get into prison because it would be a better situation then she was currently in. She would have three square meals, television, and lots of "quiet time" to write her book. This led me to an idea for prison reform. I think that most Americans are tired of fronting the money through their taxes to pay for prisoners to live the way they often do. I know that there are some extremely tough prisons, one in Arizona comes to mind though I can't recall the name. But, for the most part, prison is not what it used to be. Weight rooms, libraries, outside free time- inmates can even get college degrees!! Who pays for this? We do! Someone invades me home and robs me, and I end up paying for him to have congical visits and internet access? This isn't right.

Not to mention I think most of us are offended by the revolving door method of prison, where repeat offenders are just in-and-out. Wash, rinse, repeat. Nothing gets done and victims keep piling up while we keep paying for it.

My solution? I say that all the food, water, electricity, etc that is used by an inmate is placed on their tab. A running tab is kept for the prisoner's entire sentence. If they cannot pay their tab when released, the tab and burden is placed on the criminal's immediate family. That's right, Mister Gangbanger! You've got so much respect for your 'Momma that now you've pushed her into Chapter 11! If they have no living immediate family, it is passed to next of kin. Taxpayers/victims shouldn't pay one red cent for criminals luxuries, nor should they be burdened for their imprisonment.

Now, some people serving really long terms or who have backbone/conscience at all may not wish to place the fianancial burden on their families. In this case, they may work, at minimum wage, to reduce their debt during their incarceration. This can be worked off through cleaning of the prison, manual labor, etc. Full time (40 hrs) is expected to be put in. The bottom line is that no more free-ride prisons that are better than life on the street. Criminals who commit crimes should be doublely punished with incarceration and then also the BILL for their imprisonment. This is added incentive to NOT go to jail and place your familiy in debt because of it.

- All of our "leaders" in Washington have their heads firmly inside of their colons. This point really can't be countered. Even on a state level, a bill is being passed for a 10% raise. People in power are voting on whether or not they deserve more money. Hmm, gee...I wonder which way that vote will go? This practice alone seems illegal to me. No one who is a public/civil servent should be incharge of their pay. This brings me to my other mute rambling. Anyone who occupies a public office like President, Congrees, State Rep, etc should be making no more than the federal minimum wage. That's right, Mr. President! I don't care how rich your family is! For the next four years, you're making (non-salaried) 6.50 an hour! Haha, you too Kennedy. I bet you'll quickly be switching to Milwaukie's Best Light Beer-like product, shant you??

This would ensure that people who are in those positions truly are there because they want to help America- NOT because they're making six figures and can get great insider trading benefits (psh!). Also, I think when the guys in Washington aren't quite pulling in fifteen G's, well, maybe their agenda's would change! All of a sudden we might get that minimum wage raised to a genuine LIVING WAGE. All of a sudden the affairs of the Middle East and the rest of the world may be put into proper focus, and suddenly- maybe they would start doing what is really best for America.

All things considered, if the office of the President paid 6.50 an hour...I would still run for it. That says something....something....tasty?
 
I'd do one thing first. Kick out ALL lobbyists. Take ALL the money from outside influences out of Washington. I believe you'd attract a better breed of candidate.
 
Congratulations, you just reinvented debtors prison from 19th century England. And a fine system it was!

Hey, why not rewrite the works of Charles Dickens for an encore?
 
My significant other was telling me about something she had seen on T.V about a woman trying to get into prison because it would be a better situation then she was currently in. She would have three square meals, television, and lots of "quiet time" to write her book.
Obviously the fantasy of someone who has never spent time in prison.

The reality is, she would work a sweat-shop type job that pays about 35 cents an hour, eat food most of us wouldn't feed our dogs and she will be forced into "servicing" every inmate that is tougher than she is.

She'd better rethink - working for a living is not such a bad thing.
 
Well, I acknowledge that some prisons ARE really tough. There are also the type of prisons that Martha Stewart go to, the cushy, white collar money laundering prisons.

I must admit, I know little of debtors prisons! I still, however, feel that I shouldn't be taxed to keep a mass murderer or rapist alive and in prison for the rest of his life. He should be punished for his crime, and the average cost (which I believe was quoted as being between 30-50k, I'll need to find my source) per year is placed unto law abiding citizens. Where's the classic english dialogue about that??
 
Well, I acknowledge that some prisons ARE really tough. There are also the type of prisons that Martha Stewart go to, the cushy, white collar money laundering prisons.

Somehow, I think more prisons fall into the former category rather than the latter category.

I still, however, feel that I shouldn't be taxed to keep a mass murderer or rapist alive and in prison for the rest of his life.

Fair enough, but most people aren't in prison for those crimes. Most people are serving time for crimes that merit less severe sentences. I think that dumping the cost of imprisonment onto the family of the imprisoned just means the cost of imprisonment won't get paid, and then you have a real problem.

It's also my understanding that most prisoners do work while serving their sentences. I don't think that the vast majority of people held in American prisons are loafing about earning doctorates, getting fit, and bemusedly scoffing at the American taxpayer. Frankly, if we're going to talk about reforming the corrections system in this country, I'd much rather see nonviolent offenders get a GED and have a chance at life on the outside than furthering their education in crime and hardening them beyond almost any hope of rehabilitation by throwing them into inexcusably violent, understaffed, logistically overwhelmed institutions, which seems to be the case now.

I'm no criminologist or expert on corrections, just my humble 2 centavos.
 
fyi

In the original draft constitution/bill of rights, legislators were allowed to vote themselves pay raises, but the raises would not take effect until AFTER the next election.

As far as passing the cost of prison on to the felon's family/next of kin, why would you want to punish them too? The felons (mostly) won't care. Yes, therre are a few decent people in prison because of a mistake, or a momentary lapse of judgement, and they would feel bad about their family having to foot the bill, but I think the majority could give a s**t.

We (try) to hold parents responsible for minor children, but how can you justify holding a family responsible for the acts of an adult? This is misguided thinking. Emotionally satisfying, perhaps, but wrong. Is your family responsible for your actions? Is the government? Your fellow citizens? The UN? I say no. You are responsible. No one else. YOU. Part of the problem with our criminal justice system is that is does not (fairly and evenly) hold criminals responsible for their actions.

I also object to the diminished capacity (insanity) defense. Why a criminal does something maybe interesting, but it does absolve the fact that the thing was done. The thought that someone should not be in jail (or be executed) because "they didn't understand what they did", is, to me, the best argument for putting them in jail, because they have proven themselves a danger to others, and should no be allowed to run around loose!
 
The prison bit is a little too touchy an issue for me to post my views on five minutes before bedtime, but I do agree that politicians shouldn't be allowed to adjust their paychecks any...

I think it oughtta be handled as such: Mid-way through a politician's term (regardless of office), the people they're intended to represent (either their state or the entire country) gets to vote on various pay grades: $5,000 , $10,000 , $15,000 ... All the way up to some slightly-more-than-reasonable level ($100,000 maybe?).

This way, folks can see the first half of a politician's term... If the politician is neglecting his duty to carry out the will of the people, he risks going down to below-minimum-wage paychecks. If he does great in the first half, he gets to be rewarded for his dutiful representation.

Also, when a candidate enters office, they should have to allow all their assets to be monitored and agree not to accept any sources of income that either didn't already exist (already owned stock, interest on bank accounts, etc). The one exception is their publically-decided salary.

And finally, when a new candidate enters office, his salary is set at whatever the DOL's latest statistics show as being the country-wide average income... This way if there's a good politician followed by a bad one, the bad one doesn't get to spend half his term with the raised salary of his fore-runner.

Anyways, that's already a mouthful so I'll leave it at that.

Cheers,
Wolfe.
 
Dang, I would really like for my city to raise the minimum wage to $6.50 here. I have two MW jobs and the MW here is a dollar less.

Wouldn't making positions like the president and others you mentioned a MW job just give corrupt people more reason to scam and steal than before? You know, to make up for what their not getting anymore.

As for prisons, what about in addition to the regular sentenced term, after an inmate does his time in a regular prison, he is sent to a type of pergatory prison where he works off his bill to the prison system. He would have served his time before so he would be deemed "safe" enough to perform higher paying jobs for the system that he wouldn't be able to do in regular prison. Thus he could make more restitution money to pay of his times of stay in both prisons. So basically a criminal is sentenced twice for one crime. It seems to be better than passing the bill off to family members who most likely couldn't or wouldn't be able to pay it anyway. They could even use the slogan, "Do one crime, double the time".:cool:
 
Back
Top