The Democrats: Ethics and Reform
So, the Democrats announced back in they had decided they
will take their newly won House Majority and run with it on Day one (what a
concept, remind me again what legislation the Republicans had ready when they
took the Oval Office in January of 2017, but I digress). As part of the “For the People” campaign, they
announced a legislative bill they are calling “H.R. 1”. In this bill they said
they will be addressing “donor disclosure requirements for political
organizations, a system to multiply small donations to political campaigns,
mandating a new ethical code for the Supreme Court, ending most first-class
travel for federal officeholders, and a broad effort to expand voting access
and reduce partisan gerrymandering”.
I see a myriad of issues with these areas which they are
looking to address. Let’s start with the
first one, “donor disclosure requirements for political organizations”. As we have seen in the past few months, the
defiant, militant followers of the Democratic Party are uncivilized enough to
go to the homes of people they do not agree with (from a political standpoint)
in an effort to intimidate/terrorize them (Tucker Carlson, US Sen. Susan
Collins, Kirstjen Nielsen, etc.).
Wouldn’t this provide a virtual hit list of private citizens these
groups could target, all because these citizens donated to a political
organization these protesters don’t agree with?
The next one I have significant issues with is the, “mandating
a new ethical code for the Supreme Court”. So, let me see if I understand this correctly,
the Democrats want to outline an “ethical code” for the Supreme Court of the
United States. They do realize the US
Supreme Court was intended to be completely devoid of political party
influence, right? The job of the Supreme
Court has always been to address cases where there is a question of
Constitutionality. This is why the
Supreme Court has the authority to refuse to hear a case. If it does not fall under the parameters of
“is it a question of constitutionality?”, they do not have to listen to
it. If it does fall under those
parameters, it falls under their responsibility to determine, “does this
violate a person’s Constitutional rights?”
Now, if members of Congress feel that a member of the US Supreme Court
is not exhibiting “good behavior” (US Constitution, Article III, Section 1)
there is the impeachment process.
Additionally, are we really going to listen to the Democrats on what
adheres to an “ethical code”? This is
the same party that gave us Charles Rangel (who was found guilty of 11 ethics
charges by the House Ethics Committee).
This also the same party that has been the subject of 13 of the last 20
House Ethics Committee Investigations. I
think we might want to look somewhere else for the standard bearers of ethics.
They also want to look into “ending most first-class travel
for federal officeholders”. I notice it
says “most”, I wonder who will be exempt from being included into that
“most”. Will Nancy Pelosi being flying
coach with the rest of her voting constituency?
Next, they want to address “a broad effort to expand voting
access”. I don’t see how this is
something that needs to be addressed. As
long as you are an American citizen, over the age of 18 and you have not been
convicted of certain felonies (voter fraud is one of them, as well it should)
you have unfettered access to vote. Does
this mean that Democrats want to legislatively empower one of these types of
people the right to vote? Considering
many teenagers in America today self-identify as “Democratic Socialists” It
could be any/all of these groups of people.
Lastly, they want to take under consideration efforts to
“reduce partisan gerrymandering”. I find
this to be amazingly ironic because many political analysts consider one of the
worst cases of US Congressional gerrymandering as being Maryland’s 3rd
District. It just so happens, this
particular Congressional seat is held by Democrat Re. John Sarbanes. So will his district be looked at as one that
needs to be rezoned?
Maryland’s 3rd
District
As I said previously, I would like to congratulate the GOP
on squandering the position they so passionately asked for; having control of
the Oval Office, House, Senate and Supreme Court. They begged voters to give it to them. The voters did, and they did virtually nothing
with it from a legislative standpoint. Was
the Affordable Care Act Repealed?
No. Did they end the Troubled
Asset Relief Program (TARP)? No. Is health insurance able to be purchased
across state lines? No. Did the cancel all efforts to spend
previously “unspent” stimulus funds?
No. Have they stopped Federal
Funding toward Planned Parenthood? No. So, aside from appointing two Supreme Court
Justices, what have the Republicans done, from a legislative standpoint, to
facilitate Conservative values? Again, I
commend the 115th United States Congress, the 80th United States
Congress would be proud.
Nathan Cotus
@Nathan_Cotus
Nathan Cotus on Facebook
Comments
Post a Comment