Slashdot Mirror
Obama To Launch Website For Tracking Tax Expenditures
internationalflights tips news that Barack Obama, in his first weekly address as President, has mentioned plans to set up a website for tracking "how and where we spend taxpayer dollars." Details about the website, Recovery.gov, are available within the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (PDF). The website "shall provide data on relevant economic, financial, grant, and contract information in user-friendly visual presentations to enhance public awareness of the use funds made available in this Act," and will also "provide a means for the public to give feedback on the performance of contracts awarded for purposes of carrying out this Act." The site itself currently contains a placeholder until the passage of the Act.
While I think this (as a non-US citizen) is a nice idea, my experience with Government released information is that those who should take notice don't and the Government risks the very real threat of releasing too much information... meaning even if someone wanted to look somthing up they'd have a hard job finding it in the first place.
It freaks me out how much Obama's doing right. It's almost as if I've been elected president, except he seems to waste less time on slashdot and actually gets things done.
Can we post comments, click on a little thumbs up/down button, have logins where we set up a profile and can choose what picture displays next to our comments (anime schoolgirl, picture of our cat, Karl Marx, Milton Friedman, etc.), connect to our friends (OMG can you believe they won't be funding our ipod museum WTF!!!), blog about what we think about how our money was spent on researching the impact improving a bridge will have on the local sewer rat population...
Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.
The thought might be good. But what percentage of our taxes will be listed as "other" for the NSA, CIA, classified Defense, State and God knows what?
On the other hand, if Americans realize how much is "other", it could be an eye-opener. People will have more to complain about than welfare mothers and mass transit.
I bet that our Congresscritters are not going to like this idea at all--for the very reason that it would actually bring transparency to the appropriations process, exposing all of the pet projects in their home states that they're getting funded. They won't want that info out and available the next time they're up for election . . .
What has surprised me about the Obama campaign was how they used information technology effectively to get their message out. These people get it. This administration understands that the majority of the U.S. population has access to the internet, has become relatively informed about the issues and wants to be kept in the loop with respect to governmental decision making. Not to be partisan, but this is quite a change from the previous administration, who made few efforts to directly connect with the average voter.
So, you can see where billions of dollars are being spent on failing car companies. Not that you can do much about it for 4 years.
Why are our tax dollars being paid to Wackenhut Corp to drive hundreds of empty buses around Tucson AZ in the dead of night?
Because driving at night saves fuel that would otherwise be used to run the air conditioning, obviously.
Blank until
Heh. Where do you nutcases come from, anyway?
Fox News: Will manufacture enemies for food and viewers.
Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
The government should tell us nothing otherwise the terrorists might get a hold of something valuable and use it to plot an attack against a flag lapel pin factory or something else that will compromise our patriotism and freedom!
Nobody ever said that real change would be easy or done for us. At least the man is pointing us in the right direction.
"Who modded this informative? Whoever it is must've been smokin' some of that martian pot!"
Although congress decides where it's spent, and the people elect the senators, it doesn't necessarily mean your vote matters a lot in the decision. The current legislative process is so hopelessly bogged down that most spending bills get rubber stamped. Who has time to read through several 800 page bills a week looking for one or two lines of pork in fine print, or do research on the 50 different contractors that are being awarded the contracts? You can't really blame them directly.
I suppose the only two solutions to this problem are (1) to get more senators per state, or (2) to require senators to have a staff of 20 each, whose sole job is to review new bills and provide "cliff notes" for the senators, that catch all the little gotchas that have been hidden.
The problem is the process itself is fundamentally flawed. It was developed for a country in 1776, not 2009, and it didn't scale well enough. Back then, bills were 10 pages long and discussed single issues. Today, to get anything voted on, considering all the things that crop up as bills, they have to wrap 20 different things into one giant bloated bill, each issue of which itself is incredibly more complicated than an entire bill was in 1800. The system itself needs to be redesigned. It'll be interesting to see is Obama will attempt this. But that's what we need.
I also think part of it is the senators and their pork. Despite the modern times, they're still looking out for their individual state, and try to work in their own pork at any opportunity. So to pass an important bill, committees have to stuff in pork for important senators to get their vote, because they're being greedy. Bills that are very popular with the public get really stuffed to the gills because who wants their opponent's political ad next year to say you voted against it? We've seen several cases where a bill that seemed like common sense was having a really hard time making it through the house or senate, and if you read into it, it's because it was so incredibly porked that a lot of senators were doing the right thing, saying "no, that's completely unreasonable". If you follow those threads, they sample the senators before the actual vote, and will slowly trim out the pork until they think it will pass. Or it fails, gets thrown back to committee, where more pork negotiations take place. It seems that very little discussion takes place regarding the actual core issue of the bill. That seems to be how a lot of bills go nowadays. Gives democracy a bad name.
Several times now we've seen those "emergency spending bills" cross over into the next year because they are so incredibly over-porked. "you can't possibly say no to the bill that pays the government for next year? PORK PORK PORK!" But a few times they've held their ground and that's what we get. Absolutely disgusting.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Like having 2 people create a tiny web page where text is an image!
Recovery implies you're only going to see the payouts of this one bill.
Because that's exactly what will be happening. This website will only show the breakdown for the spending authorized by one specific bill, not for the whole federal government.
... he didn't wear a USA flag lapel pin. I can only imagine how 4 years of McCain would've been different.
To this ONE recovery act.
There will be NO listing of the CIA, FBI or NSA budgets...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Let's see also, where the money comes into "the US govt", so we can see how far out of balance the overall budget really is (and whether we like where it is). I've always liked the chart where all the inputs (taxes and fees) are on one edge (stacked in a bar graph), with splits and flows to the outputs (expenditures) so in one picture you can see all the flows of $ into and out of the federal budget. Click on parts to drill down. "back in time" arrow to see what happened in previous years / administrations. Flag events (war, 9/11, ) to put into timeline/historical context. I'll be keeping an eye on the link. Thanks for posting.
PORK PORK PORK!
The Swedish Chef Goes to Washington.
From what I see on C-SPAN, Congress often resembles an episode of The Muppet Show.
Will it include race, gender, and job history information of recipients so we can be sure Secretary Reich's goal of keeping money out of the hands of skilled workers and white male construction workers is being met?
The Stimulus: How to Create Jobs Without Them All Going to Skilled Professionals and White Male Construction Workers
I didn't vote for the man but I agree with everything he's done so far.
Now if he can just get Universal Health Care going, and bring home our troops from ALL the nations where they are deployed, and redeploy them along our boarders to curtail drug traffic and illegal immigration I would be even more happy.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
Despite the modern times, they're still looking out for their individual state
We'd be better off if that were the case, but the bailout shows very clearly that it's not. That useless, senile cow Diane Feinstein joined senators from all over the country to loot us all for the benefit of their campaign contributors.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I think the gov should blatantly rip off the deathandtaxes website for their actual budget as well. Why stop at having super oversight of just the recovery money? This would work brilliantly for the budget as well.
You can be screwed in the ass or sideways in the ass. Take your pick.
Just remember Hal, it's 'down the block' not 'across the street'!
Yours in Christ,
Rippy the Razor
I have a feeling that if we had 100% control over precisely where our taxes went for every penny, we'd just end up using it to give ourselves a stimulus each year. What would be more likely is if each citizen had the ability to dedicate say 25% of their total taxes to what they want, and the other 75% can go to where its needed as determined by the government.
Instead, how about just providing more time for the senators to read each bill! Why would we ever want to expand the federal government to match the bloat at the expense of the tax payer? If they want to process more bills, then they should be compiled shorter or at least broken down in sub-sections to be voted on later.
Life is not for the lazy.
Hah. So, the two most fiscally conservative presidents in the past two decades may turn out to be *gasp* DEMOCRATS!
But the man kept hitting the "thumbs down" on each proposal. What kind of democracy is it when a dozen people on the internet support the ipod museum and all their suggestions get buried to the ground? I mean, why should any comment get buried?
Hopefully Obama will dedicate 24 billion to eliminating all software bugs everywhere. Those fat cats on wall street have let the bug problem carry on far to long. We need a bug-bailout *and* an ipod museum in every major city (Chicago, New York and Quahog, RI).
But seriously. If the Obama administration manages to pull off a successful, community oriented website during his presidency, I'll be very, very impressed. The moderation challenges alone will be a huge issue. How do you create a platform where
a) Your right to voice your opinion is protected by the constitution.
b) The website should be open to all
c) You want to create *some* kind of community, and to do so means sorting the wheat from the chaff.
d) People will post redundant crap
e) People will cry foul the second your bury their inane "ipod museum" idea.
f) A controversial issue might easily generate thousands of comments.
I tell you where I'd start, personally. I'd break the site into multiple sites organized by agency and topic. That way if you are interested in transit, the website you follow will not get "polluted" by people interested in energy policy.
It *has* to be separate websites, not just sections. The easiest way to kill a community website is to open it up to topics that don't fit with the original ones (like when Digg or Kuro5hin added politics...). With the topics divided by domain, it will keep the heat down by removing the urge to drag off-topic flames into a post. Merged, somebody might inject some nugget about gun control into their argument against solar cars and derail the whole thread.
Bottom line, if they can pull off a series of good, participatory websites hosted by Uncle Sam, my hats off to them.
It's awesome to look at where tax dollars are being spent. But wouldn't it be better not to have so many things to have to look at?
Take the "stimulus" bill that hardly spends any money this year (you know, when stimulus would seem to be required to actually help anyone). Happily thanks to third parties you can see just what kind of boondoggle is underway, and try to speak about about just what kind of pork is being lathered on a massive government spending increase:
ReadTheStimulous.org
We need openness BEFORE as well as after money is spent.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Instead of creating a website to show where the money is going
they could just link to this site instead
http://bailoutsleuth.com/
to find out where the money is going . . .
We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
A lot of those line items in a bill don't apply to you or your state. How would you feel if your senator added a line for funding light rail in your region and it was voted down by some jackass who doesn't live in your state? After all, didn't they get their stupid Elvis Museum funded last year? Why should their state get a grant and then have our project get overruled based on the will of random internet users.
Letting random internet users vote on each line item would change the power balance in government. It would let a non representative sample of people influence the government "outside" the house or senate. On the surface, the idea of letting internet users "vote" on bills sounds good, but there would be a lot of unintended consequences. You'd have to re-balance a lot of how government operates before you let people vote digg-style on legislation.
All this posting like we need some kind of system like Slashdot.... I hope you have an avenue to the bidding process....
He may end up "launching a website" on blogspot himself, which of course would be illegal if he was Republican.
Like the respectful leaders of other influential nations do?
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
The government needs to make sure that they post actual data in a portable format like XML. The EPA publishes emissions data http://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/ in portable XML formats for scientist and the public to use the data as they need. For example, http://www.govtrack.us/ uses publicly published data to deliver a complete service. Having the data available as a feed or a series of published data files instead of some static website enables everyone else to see the details and deliver meaningful content.
I voted for my congress critters based on how much money I thought they could get to fund Sound Transit. For me, I'd judge them based on how successful they were at doing that. This website, or any like it, will help me find that information out.
It will also let me know if our state gets a fair slice of the pie. If we aren't I'd blame our congress people, it is their job to make sure we get a fair share--they are elected to stand up for us Washingtonians.
I don't know where you live, but odds are good that many roads you drive on, libraries you use, or city halls you walk into were funded with "pork". What looks like pork to somebody on the outside just might be an important project for your state. As long as the "pork" is spent fairly among states and doesn't bankrupt us, who are we to judge what other states do with their share?
You can't really blame them directly.
I can, and I do. The processes are in place because they put them there. They don't do anything about it because it serves their personal interest in maintaining power.
If a bill is so large and the schedules so grueling that you can't read and understand what's in them before the vote, then you automatically vote against them. That would have solved one of the problems with the federal (and most state) government which is that there are simply too many laws.
"Pork" is just a euphemism for corruption, and corruption is a huge problem. When you have huge sums of money you can influence, corruption will always be an issue.
You can say that those corrupt politicians are in charge only because they were voted in by an ignorant electorate. There is some truth in that, but the parties have developed a system that ensures that only those on board with the current corrupt system will ever be voted on. The FEC makes sure that anyone with even a modicum of success with a third party will be charged criminally and fined into bankruptcy. And working from within the parties to change things is very time-consuming and it's extremely difficult to make any process at all.
Obama stated in his Inauguration speech that "We need to move beyond the debate about the size of government..." Really? Seriously? I think not. The size, reach, and power of the federal government is the root cause of most of the problems.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
During the inauguration, I got a text message from them asking if I wanted more info about the event. Once I set "yes", I got messages about the weather, where to go in Washington dc and other local info (even though I wasn't there :-). Once it was over, I got a thankyou email from "President Barack Obama" (info@pic2009.org) thanking me for participating.
Their campaign sent out all kinds of text messages and emails, I donated to the Red Cross/Hurricane Gustav by text message thanks to them. It was pretty impressive how much they used this new-fanged inter-tube-text-messaging thing. The fact they took that technology and are now using it for "serious business" is a great sign.
In short, when was the last time you ever got an email or text message from "President George Bush" thanking you for anything?
They obviously will already have all the numbers from budgets and such so I doubt it will cost insane amounts of money.
Because some idiots thinks buses is a good idea? Personally I hate them, less so for long trips though. But within a city or as commute transport they suck balls, slower than a bike or more expensive than a car...
I am an extensive mass transport system user who, every day, benefits from a multi-modal network that involves bus, suburban train and subway system. I use it to not only cover a 40km trip to work each day but also on my off time. In order to gain access to the local mass transport network I need to pay 47 euros for a montly pass. That is 47 euros for unlimited access to multiple modes of transportation. That ends up costing right under 600 euros a year.
Where exactly can you purchase a car for 600 euros a year? Are you able to run a car for a year with 600 euros worth of gasoline/diesel? Can you even maintain a car (insurance, maintenance, etc...) with 600 euros a year? No, you can't.
Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
I really wish they'd implement something like this in the People's Republik of Kalifornia. It would be nice to tell them what useless programs to cut instead of trying to raise our taxes in the name of public safety and education.
Actually it isn't. You don't judge a book by its size, do you? You don't judge how good a computer is based on its size, do you? No. You judge them based on how well they do their job, not based on their physical makeup.
Regan was wrong. Size doesn't matter. It is how well you do the job that matters.
Let's see if it lists every single earmark and who is responsible for it. That crap accounts for more than 20% of the waste and could be 40%. Then we will know who to target for defeat in the next election.
All spending bills have to originate in the House. Seems that we need to just vote against every incumbent for the next 5 or 6 elections.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
What will be of secret underground military bases where they keep all those alien spaceships and huge jars of pickled aliens?
How will they be funded now? Where will Will Smith and Vivica A. Fox get married in case of a alien invasion? In a field somewhere?
There WAS a reason US government was spending $20,000.00 on a hammer, $30,000.00 on a toilet seat, you know?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
So he can get massive public response on an issue, then ignore it?
http://www.downsizedc.org/
"Read the Bills Act" (what I like to call "RTFB Act"): the bill must be read aloud before a full quorum in both the House and the Senate. In addition, 7 days must pass between when a change was made to the bill, and when they can vote on it. Furthermore, the full text of the bill must be made available to the public at least 7 days before a vote, and Congress must give notice on when they will be voting for that bill.
"One Subject at a Time Act": Self explanatory. Each bill can not address more than one subject at a time.
Obama really is amazing. I'm sure he has a lot of help, so at the very least he hired really good helpers! I guess it helps having a horribly incompetent president precede him, but he is just kicking ass right out of the gates!
read some interesting stuff at mightyinteresting.com
And just who will decide what is "relevant," and to what it is relevant.
My problem at this point is the apparent "need to know" basis by which the administration will run, and has run since the campaign. There has been a cycle of deflection and disinformation already which does not inspire a lot of Hope(tm) for Change(tm).
And will this be another hard and fast rule against which exceptions will be made for no other reason than being the "best option?"
But then, why not? We are already fostering a culture of entitlement to do whatever you want to do, anyway. "You have to work hard to succeed! Well, unless you don't want to work hard, then we'll legislate your success for you."
Dude. Learn how to spell stimulus.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Would you believe that I make errors to avoid offending the Gods with my perfection?
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
Apparently these are prison busses, not the public transportation kind. Unless they're transferring alien visitors that are invisible to human eyes they're not serving any purpose (maybe budget retention? We all know how budgets work...).
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
That makes far too much sense to ever pass. I don't know how our system can be changed without t
Trackball users will be first against the wall.
But most people under 50k in income don't pay anywhere near $4k in taxes.....so why are they getting the big rebates on taxes they never paid?
..first one to register and create something like "seethebudget.com", mirror the gov page with forums, comments, and articles about specific parts of the budget - will be a millionaire.
Tons of folks logging on to bitch, moan, flame, and look at banner ads. Sounds like a winner =P
Trackball users will be first against the wall.
But what we really need is a version tracking and autentication system for federal legislation to complement it.
It'd work like this.
You go onto the President's budget website and discover, say, a a hundred thousand dollar grant to some local company to study the effect of interpretive dance on crop growth. Where did it come from? Well, the budget site tells you it was an earmark in the 2010 transportation bill. How did it get into that?
Well, you go to Congress's legislation site, and find that the earmark was in the final bill, but not the initial house bill. The earmark was inserted the night before the bill went to a final vote, and the digital signature belongs to an aid in Senator Blowhard's office.
Transparency isn't just publishing data. It's establishing accountability by making everything traceable.
The technology to do this isn't exotic. The system resembles the kind of version control systems that even small software development teams can install and put in place. Commercial, off the shelf document and workflow management systems that could handle this for an enterprise the size of Congress have been in existence for at least twenty years, to my personal knowledge.
It would be amazing if putting such a system in place cost would more than ten or twenty million dollars. Even if it cost a hundred million, how much money would it save, even just in the first year? Could we even put a price on how much less corrupt government would be?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The debate isn't about size. It never was about size. "The size of government is the problem" is nothing more then a red-herring that lets our government get off the hook for doing a bad job.
The debate is, always was, and always will be about making sure the government does its job effectively. Every one of your bullet points are problems of their own. Their solution *might* be "make some aspect smaller", but their solution might be something entirely different as well. If all you say is "get rid of it", you might never actually solve the problem.
Regan basically thought the solution too all government problems is to remove them. He made mention of identifying the problems, to him the problem *was* government. This is a stupid argument--our world is to complex to believe that fixing our problems is as simple as shrinking the government. Look at the result! We let our government slack off on regulation and set us up for this recession thing we are now in.
Obama says "figure out what is wrong, and solve that". If a government program sucks, kill it. If it is a good program but badly managed, fix the management. If it is a good program and well managed, reward it.
Regan's entire argument was wrong. The entire argument was an excuse and a rationalization for poorly managed government. "Make something smaller" is a solution to specific problems, not a solution to all problems. The goal is to make the government work for the people, not make it bigger or smaller. If the government works well, who cares what the size is!
DHS....mysterious buses...mysterious government installations - might be a prison....the only thing missing is a fleet of black helicopters.
In times of trouble, the smell of frying onions usually gives confidence and comfort.
That useless, senile cow Diane Feinstein
Couldn't have put it better m'self.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
We should just limit bills to 10 pages. If it can't be said in 10 pages, it needs to be broken up into smaller chunks.
My hunch on this? The best way to end this "war on drugs" is for him to not lift a finger. States, via their initiative process, are already slowly ending the war for us. As long as Obama lets the whole thing go under the radar, by the time he leaves office the power state governments have will be significantly reduced. The *minute* he talks about reforming drug law, the gig will be up. The pro-drug war people will make it a wedge issue like gun control or abortion and the whole "underground" reform will grind to a halt. The best way he can end the drug war is to just let the process work its way out on its own.
As for the recession, I think we can't place blame anywhere until it is over and we can use hindsight to figure it out. But I'll bet you "regulation was a major problem" isn't right. Regulation is a word used to describe something. You can have good regulation and bad regulation. Partisan politics in this country have eroded our ability to communicate effectivly. They've taken words like "regulation" and assigned negative connotations to them that simply do not belong.
What you probably mean is "the wrong kinds of regulation helped cause the problem". That is a non ideological, non-loaded, non-partisan statement we can all agree on. If we could all work to stop loading words like "regulation" with emotional connotations, we'd go a long ways to ending this stupid partisan bullshit. Put your anger, concern and outrage into the word "wrong", not "regulation". Say "the wrong kind of regulation" and then offer "the right kinds of regulation". Saying "regulation itself is the problem" is a cop-out used by slick politicians to dodge complex issues :-)
But for all we really know your cat, Fluffy, caused this. I know my cat seems awfully content these days. Wonder what they know that we don't?
Thanks for that link. I needed to reboot my computer anyway..
No they are not. They are looking out for opportunities to benefit their FRIENDS in their individual state. Senators Kennedy and Kerry haven't helped Massachusetts much at all, if at all.
Hell, Kennedy still opposes the wind farm - because it will be "unsightly" when he's cruising in his yacht.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
They've been hoping to directly observe black holes for years! They might even glimpse the raw singularity!
If $800 billion falls past the federal event horizon, is it lost to the economy forever?
Heh, Object Oriented Law Making (OOLM)
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
Grassroots is our next step. Obama is in the process of setting up a new grassroots organization, "Organizing For America" to help us connect with our legislature.
Check out the video
http://my.barackobama.com/page/m2/55c13e0e/5004f5b0/3bc0ea31/11884c10/4128887817/VEsE/
Wait a second. These guys work for us. They are there because we put them there. They should READ THE BILLS themselves, whether they want to or not - it is their job. Do I get a staff of 20 people to read all my work for me? Do you? They need to do the job they are paid for and read every single bill, every single word - ALOUD for the record and C-Span.
Havent you been paying attention? The goal is not now, and will never be, to get america OUT of debt. The GOAL is to get america INTO debt. For without debt, you have no way for a corporation to 'monetize' the creation of money in a fiat system.
You should do some more research. The tax reform act of 1986 took AWAY the ability to write off credit card interest. In other words, it doesnt have any challenges at all. And adding a line item for interest before 2008 would be no more difficult for a CC to report than how it already reports interest on cash advances, or balance transfers.
Going after the bush-era full bore might make a lot of far-left democrats happy, but it would instantly piss off the republicans end the so-called "honeymoon". Speaking up too loudly about FISA right now would burn political capital he needs for more immediate plans (sadly).
Would you rather have him use up his political capitol on FISA, or something else? He can't do everything--he has to compromise on some things to move forward.
And if anybody though Obama was gonna go on a witch-hunt after the former administration, you will be dissapointed. He has said numerous times he wants to look forward, not backward.
Or, again, smart politics. Maybe he doesn't want to kick a fuss and burn his political capital over FISA because he figures it will be knocked down in the courts. Maybe if he did kick up a fuss, it would make it even *harder* to remove. Look at the war on drugs--the best way to fix that little problem is to shut the fuck up about it and start funding statewide initiative that chip away at it. The minute Obama starts talking about ending the drug war, the whole process will grind to a halt and become yet another wedge like "gun control" or "abortion".
Or maybe he agrees with parts of it. Who knows? Politics isn't easy.
How does congress manage documents now? Are they just emailing word documents around as attachments, or is there a modern-ish document management system in place? Is it homebrew, or commercial?
A quick search turned up that "they" might already be working on a solution to your problems.
FDsys
The proposed site is not going to display tax spending it is going to display how the money is going to be/is being spend to get an economic recovery going.
This is important because one of the major parts of getting out of the economic problem is to get people to think that things are going good and they should start spending and using credit again. If people start seeing that things are getting better and more money is going into the economy, and that more will jobs available there is a better chance that they will start spending.
While the recovery.gov site mentions taxes it mainly is about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and the 1-2 trillion dollars that barak will be wanting for this is not coming from taxes it is coming from US Government loans and if they cannot get the loans then it will come from the printing of more money.
http://callmehussein.blogspot.com/ ?
"Senators Kennedy and Kerry haven't helped Massachusetts much at all, if at all."
That's really not true. a good deal of money is funneled into Massachusetts through the Federal government for all sorts of wacky things, and it certainly isn't because this state lacks money to for things itself (we have the second highest per capita income along with a relatively high tax rate... which I love saying just because it frustrates right-wingers trying to justify how that makes sense without blowing their own theories completely out of the water) or we have such an enormous population. It's because they actually do what Senators are supposed to do, and represent the interests of their state. A very valid criticism of Senators who refuse to, for example, use the ear-mark system, is that by doing so they aren't solving any problems but rather harming their state... Arizona is actually suffering for the fact that McCain thinks ear-marks are evil, which means he's doing his job of representing and pursuing Arizona's best interests very poorly.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
47,- euros a month for unlimited access? Is it bound to a specific route?
I live in The Netherlands and my costs far outweigh that number. For the sake of simplicity let's assume I travel the same route 5 days a week.
A yearly subscription for the train between on a route of +/- 55km would cost me 132.40,- euros a month. Because I recently graduated I received a subsidized public transit subscription which allows me to currently bring this down to about 100,- euros a month (ignoring any taxes, again for the sake of simplicity). Add to that the fact that just traveling back-and-forth between the train station with the bus (+/- 10km) costs me about 4,- euros per trip. That's 80,- euros without a subscription, I could possibly bring that down to about 60,- euros a month with a subscription.
So in a best case scenario (without the subsidized subscription) using public transit costs me roughly 2300,- euros on a yearly basis.
Back on-topic. What I'm wondering is just how much spending is included with the bill that mandates this website. I actually opened it with the intention of at least somewhat reading it, but it has a gazillion more pages than I'm willing to read right now. Starting with a bill that mandates actually reading the bills sounds like a plan to me.
Perfect is the enemy of done.
... the process itself is fundamentally flawed.
Yes. The legislative "compromise" phase almost reminds me of a family at Christmas that spends when they shouldn't. Everyone knows they shouldn't be spending as a whole because they are already over-loaded in debt and sinking. Yet, if they all get what they want, they find some justification.
what ? everyone is allowed to go otaku every once in a while.
Read radical news here
Mass transit receives enormous subsidies and only service small areas, which massively shifts the numbers.
Not a takeover, just (apparently) spawns popup windows, gay porn, and a loud repeating sound clip of "I'm watching gay porn." Noscript solves problems like that.
Not a sentence!
Even Better, how about this:
It can't be a law unless it can fit on one page, single sided, 12 point times-new-roman, double spaced.
Everyone has time to read one page of text. That's where the bullshit gets thrown into the laws, on the 600th page, in small print, under Article XVII, Section 125, subsection 43, paragraph 68. Laws should be simple. If it requires explaining, it isn't a good law, or it should be broken up into sub-laws.
~X
sig?
Unpaid interns are CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP. In a regular 40 hr work week 8 aides would only have to read 100 pages each, which (100 pages) can be done in probably 2-3 hours if you're just flipping through speed reading and highlighting important/suspicious parts. Heck one person could do it as a full time job no problem and still have time for 2 hour lunches and still have plenty of time to write up a 10 page summary of that week's legislation. Mosy legislators have at least two aides.
The biggest problem is kind of weird, actually. We have 500-odd congressmen representing 300 million simply because you can't fit more desks into the legislative room. Sometime around 1900, congressmen stopped representing a fixed number of people/area and their constituency and power started to grow. This isn't a huge issue for smaller states like Vermont, Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska (three congressmen!) and other states, but states like California, Texas and New York are seriously undeserved. This is where congress starts to break down, and is the root of under-accountability. Build a bigger legislative meeting room, shrink the size of the desks, there are lots of solutions besides making a second tier of federal legislative districts similar to how there are federal court appeal circuits.
moox. for a new generation.
Don't load that link except with wget.
Part of the problem stateside is that transportation isn't that cheap. Even in New York, which can't survive without mass transit, it costs $2 every time you get on the subway. I think you can parlay that into a bus pass, but if you're coming from Newark or something, it can easily cost you $15/day in transit, between a train trip and subway fees. That's roughly 250 euros per month.
Now, can you run a car on 3000 Euros per year? Probably. Also, thanks for being an insolent shit and not getting your facts straight, assuming Americans don't use public transit because of malice towards the environment or Europe or 3rd world countries or god knows what. If there were a way that people who commute to Washington or New York could pay $60/mo ($47 euro) for unlimited public transit, people would jump on it by the millions.
Just to drive the point home, let's say you live in a suburb of Washington, DC like ... Stafford VA.
Step 1: Drive to Fredericksbug and get on the train. Here's your fare:
http://www.vre.org/service/fares.htm
That gets you to L'Enfant Plaza in DC, from which you have to transfer onto the Metro, and head to, say, DuPont Circle (you work in the diplomatic corps). that's $1.35 each way.
So, when you add up a monthly pass on the VRE plus $2.70/day on the metro, you're talking $325/mo plus wear and tear on your car, plus whatever they charge for parking at the train station, to commute aproximately 45 miles to work. Let's call it $400/mo. That actually works out to more like 3600 euros a year.
But of course, we're the bad guys for shunning mass transit. Please choke on your self righteousness.
sig?
Even Better, how about this:
It can't be a law unless it can fit on one page, single sided, 12 point times-new-roman, double spaced.
I understand the sentiment, and totally agree with the idea of simplifying the laws. However this is too far of a swing in the opposite direction. The current systems makes it too easy to hide all kinds of pork and loopholes. But if we do an aboutface you are going to leave way too much open to interpretation, which could be just as bad or even worse in some cases.
very true. the bills aren't for our time anymore and are overbloated. this "lets share info with society" will take a lot of load from senators when all the pork watchers are doing their part. 1 man might not be able to keep up but a society will. this more open sourced govt will be better for everyone. who knows? they might actually let 20% of your tax dollars have limited choice as to where you'd like it spent. might stop corporate tax evaders as they now have power over their money again (but within reason) log in site where everyone can bitch out is perfect. it's needed as everyone has issues on their minds. all they gotta do is get this ball rolling and issues will iron themselves out as they progress, much as linux sucked when it was first out. all code and only tech people used it. now grandma can have her ubuntu set up for her to check webmail and surf no problem. the govt can let it's people decide stuff, keep the power of the senate for tie breakers, and of course the leader above them signing bills/laws. what i'd like to see is a law website law.gov where people can make/propose laws or vote on exsisiting ones that are out of line (in their opinion). majority vote of 60% can force senate to vote on the matter. least attention to diff things might be good for everyone. always gonna be a group pushing to bring back slavery but doubt they'd hit 60% in favour. even if they did it's against master root code so it'd be thrown out (i surely hope!) things like music/movies downloads might hit 95% not wanting to be sued over it and long as its not for profit (burning dvds from yer garage for the neighbourhood) it ain't against the law from forcing the senate to vote, recording their decision, and not electing them next time based on their vote. balances itself out. :D
or military votes from people in service for where they feel they should go/pull out of. not that there votes will count any more but at least its all recorded for the leaders to see and their fellow kin to see.
really hope they use this population resource to get guidance as to what our pop really needs/wants. far as im concerned i could vote on 50-100 things a day happily. least my vote would count on a website, still worth more then the last election! or the one before that!
one single vote every 5 years just simply aint enough input from us...
And I've said it elseware...
Our governments (all of them) should be the folks in charge of SSL. In a perfect world, we'd get a free SSL certificate with our drivers license or business license.
In addition to 47 Euros, how much of your monthly taxes goes to subsidizing that transport? "Hidden costs" != "No costs".
That said, I'm pretty sure public transport is still more financially efficient. And it has other benefits (such as being able to go out drinking and not have to worry about driving home). And it allows foreign visitors to travel with much greater ease. And provides transport options to those who can't afford cars.
Simple laws leave massive loopholes, which is why laws are complex - legalise is a form of programming, where you don't want obvious bugs.
Not one man or woman, not one penny for the imperialist war! Mobilize workers power on the road to international socialist revolution! Defend Cuba, China, North Korea and Vietnam against capitalist counterrevolution and imperialist aggression! For new October revolutions an a reforged Leninist-Trotskyist Fourth International!
Heh. Where do you nutcases come from, anyway?
Fox News: Will manufacture enemies for food and viewers.
No, you've mixed your biases/networks. That was a communist/socialist troll. Fox News is claimed to be biased right. NBC/MSNBC/ABC...well...practically all the others...are claimed to be biased left, so would be the more sensible guess as to a leftist, pro-socialist/communist trollers' favorite network.
Just sayin'
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Because some idiots thinks buses is a good idea? Personally I hate them, less so for long trips though. But within a city or as commute transport they suck balls, slower than a bike or more expensive than a car...
I am an extensive mass transport system user who, every day, benefits from a multi-modal network that involves bus, suburban train and subway system. I use it to not only cover a 40km trip to work each day but also on my off time. In order to gain access to the local mass transport network I need to pay 47 euros for a montly pass. That is 47 euros for unlimited access to multiple modes of transportation. That ends up costing right under 600 euros a year.
Where exactly can you purchase a car for 600 euros a year? Are you able to run a car for a year with 600 euros worth of gasoline/diesel? Can you even maintain a car (insurance, maintenance, etc...) with 600 euros a year? No, you can't.
Remember that the 47 Euros you pay is only your outright cost. The government heavily subsidizes public transportation with your tax dollars.
You need to also consider that in the US, we don't have as developed a system of public transportation and people travel much further to work than in Europe (especially in the midwest). In these situations public transit can cost more than in Europe and also can 2-3 times longer than driving. When you have 4 hours of time at home, you don't always want to add an extra 2 hours to your commute with public transit.
Techincally, a "tax expenditure" is when the government forgoes revenue on something in order to protect or promote it (ex. the 501(c)(3) tax exemption is a tax expenditure on charitable activities). See this definition: Tax Expenditure
The federal government "spends" vast amounts of money by specially exempting certain things from taxation. (This is not to be confused with the stuff government doesn't have a right to tax to begin with.)
Boom Shanka
And if they really wanted to get America out of debt, they'd
Respect the Constitution
I fail to see how transparancy in spending solves the fundamental problem.
It doesn't. But some would see this as a necessary first step. We can't fix what we don't know about, and if nothing else, this might make a few Congressrats think twice. Then again, it might not, but it probably can't hurt.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Obama needs to get new designers for the site. Or Doug Jackson and Laura Clark GSA need to get some updated training in HTML. :-)
That just shows how sucky it is to work in a large city and work for companies that don't provide parking.;)
Most of the metros in Europe are in the $1.50 - $2 range for a single ride, Paris is around $1.90, Marid is around $1.25, London the most expensive at $5.00 with discount, close to $8.00 without. You do have decent discounts if you purchase monthly tickets, and those long distance trains are good discounts, but from workmates who use them they are linked to specific sites and have limits to make them usable as work transport.
Now for some reality, here in Germany if you are in the rural areas mass transit is like in the US. I could take that discount for trains but the train comes by once an hour, each direction. The bus comes every 15-20 mins during morning and evening times but besides normal users they are also used as school buses so are filled with kids; trains are also used for school transportation.
There are reasons that the streets are filled with cars even with the "great" mass transit.
When do we get to decide how our money is spent?
There, fixed the link for you.
In this case:
"shall provide data on relevant economic, financial, grant, and contract information in user-friendly visual presentations to enhance public awareness of the use funds made available in this Act,"
The keyword is "relevant". The key question is "who decides what is relevant?"
Note that the answer isn't Obama. He can't micromanage to that level, even if he was so inclined (and I've seen no evidence that he's inclined to micromanage).
Note also that this seems to apply only to the Act in question, NOT the entire federal budget.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I bet you think 640K is enough for anyone too, eh?
"It was developed for a country in 1776, not 2009, and it didn't scale well enough."
Although I agree with this to some degree, that's not the entire problem. Part of the problem is that we have completely turned our backs on the part of the 1776 plan that made government scalable: states' rights and extended autonomy. The Federal Government should have been a small lean organization that did nothing more than what it was allowed to by the Constitution. That's not how things have worked out because instead of thinking of themselves as the glue between the states, they imagined themselves as the rulers and it all went downhill from there.
I dunno how to solve this mess though. The US government has been telling people they need it to pass more laws in order to be a prosperous society. It's a joke. We continue to erode everything that was core to the system though. It doesn't really matter anyway: so long as the average man is either fat and happy, or not on the brink of desperation yet still too afraid to do anything corruption will grow until the common man is literally faced with consequences so bad he has no choice but to fight back.
We can barely get out people out to vote and when they do vote... well, just look at this presidential election. The average voter supports either of the major parties for reasons as arbitrary as the reasons they cheer for any given sports team and act accordingly.
You post in this thread, and the moderation is undone :)
[Sorry to stay off-topic, please don't destroy my karma]
Can you imagine how cool it would be if they used an interactive zoomable pie chart like this one that shows inflation.
You'd start with every government department visible, you could then zoom in to any spending program and see how it was made up, area being proportional to cost.
If recovery.gov don't do it, someone should.
I like your idea. The other one I heard that I liked was that you can't implement a new law, till you remove an old one!
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
"provide a means for the public to give feedback on the performance of contracts awarded for purposes of carrying out this Act"
No, I didn't. I though it was about somewhat empty buses, or completely empty such as the ones outside the central city over here which I guess exist because it should be possible to commute but it seems kind of a waste when there's sometimes just a few passengers.
Why do they drive around then?
Are you serious? Good god.
I live in Ã-rebro, Sweden.
I have no idea what bus costs are now but back in the days when I lived at my mom bus to the city cost 36 SEK if I remember correctly, a distance of 20-25 km. If we only count gasoline you'll notice that the gasoline cost for a car would be less than the bus fee.
Then I also happen to know that back then you only did pay around 20% of the actual cost by fees since the rest was paid by taxes, so even if you didn't paid it on the bus the fee cost around 36*5=180 SEK.
Add the fact that the busses in the city almost always get close to full but the busses from around the cities often travels with just a few people who happens to need the bus / don't have cars / .. So there cost is probably higher in percent, so it may be above those 180 SEK ...
And this isn't that weird if you consider the prices of the busses, the employe driving the bus, the amount of fuel a bus probably need, and so on.. Also idiots vandalising bus stops and buses and such.
And if you live outside the city you probably have atleast one car already since you more or less need it and planing your trips by every second hour schedules and such and also getting to the bus stop when it's winter and such suck so people use the car. So there goes much of the maintenance cost to since people have cars anyway.
Within the city it makes somewhat more sense, they go quite often and not everyone living in a city need a car.
But when I studied at the university I lived on one side of the town and the university was at the other, taking the bus took like 30 minutes and taking the bike took like 20 minutes. Sure you don't get any ice, rain and such but ...
And when I go to the gym the bike is faster than the bus again, and also if I'm at the gym I don't really know when I will finish, and I'm doing it on the evenings so the bus schedules is more stretched out.
So then I may have to wait on the bus for 10-30 minutes, or just take the bike and get home in 15. If there is no rain the saved amount of time of say 15-45 minutes vs 15 minutes makes it worth it, also the saved cost. And if there is rain or whatever I'd still have to wait in the fucking rain on the bus so I'd rather start getting home than standing in the rain.
And then there is the issue with lots of buses in the city since they lead to more red lights, you get to bicycle in their fumes and shit like that. No buses and less trafic in the city, eventual no engine powered things at all (though probably impossible) and open roads for all kinds of "people" would be so much more fun and enjoyable =P
They had an idea of building a roof over the cycle roads from the city to the university, which would be a really nice idea because then the rain and eventually ice to would become a non-issue for cyclists.
To hell with buses!
Also I've seen videos of KMX trike with 84 volt electronic helper motor mod, and his bike was one of the smaller ones so he mentioned it got unstable around 60 mph (I wouldn't go that fast in a fucking bicycle trike but whatever ..) ..
The trike is around 1000 euro for a better model and the engine and such is probably 500 euro more or so but then you can go wherever you want for almost a free cost and it would run on electricity and be quiet and all
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1103941&cid=26603017
Yeah, see my post about paying 36 SEK for 25 km trip but knowing that's just 1/5 of the cost so the actual cost for the people is closer to 180 SEK ...
Gasoline for said trip would be like 20 SEK. And it would get even better if you had more than one passenger in the car.
I see it was "omg we need to offer alternatives to cars! Cars stupid!", so then they waste everyones money on that crap.
Get the electric devices going instead, let me have a small low energy one myself or make a phone call so one come and pick me up. Also eventually let them link together as "trains" for longer trips.
Hi, I admin the list in question and just saw this. The list is a default installation of Mailman, and I have no idea why it would give that error. If you write to contact(at)metagovernment(dot)org, I will subscribe you manually.
Also, if you could forward that error message to the above address, I can try to debug (but again, it is a default install as provided by a standard Cpanel host).
That spreadsheet is an interesting read.. but to be fair, think about some of these projects, especially building and construction projects.. you just don't throw the money out there and boom your doing it tomorrow..
The education funds might have an immediate impact, especially if you can convert some people from unemployment to fully funded students.. but again, to use the money wisely it takes time to screen it to people who will actually be successful.
I am not sure where they are with this spreadsheet, seems to be less than halfway there.. and it also seems that there are quite a few loans in there..
13 billion for education for disadvantaged, and 16 billion more for financial aid.. don't quite see the difference between the two.. Just lump it all together in financial aid, and make sure that the people getting it, really need it.
The SBA loan figure is pathetic at 426 million (I think it should be like half of the 800 billion).. I'd like to see a program where groups of experienced people, who lost their jobs because their employers panicked (thereby creating this mess), could start their own companies.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
Australia has a one-subject-at-a-time approach to lawmaking and it works well. It is required by the constitution that each tax be in a separate bill and I suppose they liked to do it for everything else.
Consequently it's very difficult to attach riders, which is how pork happens: vast omnibus bills where everyone agrees to vote for each other's riders.
On the downside, Australian politics exhibits the strictest party discipline in the world. That prevents a lot of horse-trading style pork, but it does reduce the amount of actual debate in the Parliament.
Classical Liberalism: All your base are belong to you.
Heh, Object Oriented Law Making (OOLM)
Well, yeah. Think about it. Programmers deal with some of the most sophisticated, detail-oriented, exception-proof, persnickety list of procedures, regulations, and rules out there -- namely, computer code. Surely, the simplification and management techniques we employ are among the best known. So why shouldn't Congress adapt some of our techniques to the U.S. Code?
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
The reason bills and such have gotten so large is that government itself has gotten far too large and intrusive. If government was concerned with protecting the rights of individuals and defending the country, the sole legitimate aims of government, we wouldn't "need" super huge bills. Admittedly there is some wiggle room in "protecting the rights of individuals", but I'm pretty sure most sane people can agree that building a new art gallery or whatever has nothing to do with protecting anyone's legitimate rights.
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
The 17th amendment is what really fucked things up IMO:
The selection of delegates to the Constitutional Convention established the precedent that states could choose Federal officials at a higher level than direct election. Originally, each Senator was to be elected by his state legislature to represent his state, providing one of the many necessary American governmental checks and balances. The delegates to the Convention also expected a Senator elected by his state's legislature would be able to concentrate on the governmental business at hand without direct, immediate pressure from the populace of his state, also aided by a longer term (six years) than the one afforded to members of the House of Representatives (two years).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Historical_background
Before this, Senators were accountable to the state's legislature. The State legislature represented the people more directly than a national Senator, so if someone in the U.S. Senate wasn't listening to the desires of the people they could get recalled very quickly.
Now it's down to popular vote, and the Senate seems to just be incumbent after incumbent, nothing ever really changing...
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Why not just have a delay period of X days before a submitted bill can be voted on so Senators and Representatives have time to read it?/p?
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Change.gov worked and the new site seems to be a logical and excellent extension. This administration is actually encouraging and allowing us to get involved, take action and communicate with our leaders. I've had an amazing amount of communication with and through the change.gov site and it raised millions via small, private donations and fundraisers towards covering the cost of the inauguration (something most pundits ignored).
It's not about getting everything we want nor should we always get what we want. Since the Baby Boomers made throwing temper tantrums and self-absorption into "political action" the standard response now is "Hey, I'm not getting exactly what I want so I want it ruined for everyone else." Throughout our history the majority wanted things like slavery, child labor, sweat shops, Japanese internment camps, segregation, the war in Vietnam and more that upon reflection were wrong. Usually, the majority is opposed to new technology and R & D. Wise up, guys! Corporations will not do what's in the best interest of the nation's citizens -- or even what's in the best long-term interest of the corporation!
But good leaders communicate with the majority and persuade enough of the right action to make a positive (we hope) change in the world. The Obama administration knows that and are trying to provide the communication. They also understand the technology and are trying to build the tools for communication.
After *cough cough* years of presidents, including one who approached the military heads about supporting a coup to take over the government, another who was suffering dementia and another who committed treason and ignored the constitution, I'm full of gratitude for a president who at least makes an effort to give some voice to the citizens.
"So let me get this straight. You think other states should contribute to your admittedly high tax system because your senators are so benevolent and decide you really could use that money. Like you are getting any. You admit you are not having a high tax rate..."
I pay 3-4 times more federal tax than state. This is true of most people here. While our tax rate is high compared to other states' tax rates, most of the people who are complaining aren't actually paying it.
"Pork spending is just what it is. A spend of money on something not really needed. Though you could make an argument that the spending helps the economy in some ways by loosing it up for other projects. A redistribution of wealth."
Define "not really needed". While I won't deny there is some pork here, the bulk of our money goes to things like road maintenance, public safety, public education, and other projects that actually do have value to the community. And while I know "redistributing wealth" is a dirty word these days, I think it should be pointed out that one of the most appealing aspects of capitalism to its early proponents was that it allowed for wealth to be redistributed from landed aristocrats to whoever was actually best at earning it (and therefore most deserving of it). Nothing kills an economy or a community faster than too great a stratification of wealth, no matter what system it claims to use.
"I know MANY people who moved away from what they called taxachusetts. Or my favorite quote from one of them 'i moved away and am making less money but take home more'. He made 10% less but took home 20-30% MORE money to spend on his family. Also ask all the people who work 'on the border' if they live in massachusetts. You will get some interesting answers. But I would be willing to bet most of the reasons is money..."
So do I. A lot of them move back when they realize that without taxes, you get no public services. One of the more interesting ones I've heard is the different levels of consumer protection one gets here (or in similarly taxed states) compared to elsewhere; effectively, here we have them, and elsewhere you don't. As for people working here and living elsewhere, I assure you it has nothing to do with their tax payments: our state income tax is applied based on where you are employed, not where you live. I work with some guys from New Hampshire, and they are paying Mass income tax anyway (and complain that it is the bulk of their tax burden, even though the numbers plainly show federal withholding FAR outstripping state). That said, our cost of living is pretty high, which is probably at least in part because of taxes, but high property value and high standard of living almost certainly have something to do with it.
"If you enjoy being a slave to the state (which you obviously do) stay there. Just dont think I want to you to enjoy your spending of my money on whatever because I live somewhere else."
I enjoy getting public services for the taxes I pay. You can call that slavery if you wish, but it doesn't make it so. Anyway, if your senators can't get your money is spent on you, well, it's not my problem you can't get decent senators for your state, but maybe you should be directing your anger at states that actually do take in more Federal money than they pay... like Alaska.
"McCain is doing what he said he would do (even though I am not from that state it did interest me). Kerry and Kennedy do what they say they are going to do spend more of everyone elses money. They do not say it in that way they probably say it something like 'we are going to enact/propose programs that will XYZ'. Which means spending money."
And what he said he'd do hurts his state. He's promised not to secure any money for Arizona, and in doing so hasn't caused there to be less spending or less taxation, just less money in his state. Politicians are in the business of spending other people's money in ways that benefit their constituents, that's the game, and criticizing people who are good at doing what
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Apparently someone can't document their code worth shiat then.
So people bundle a bunch of laws together now, and the flaw is that the system wasn't designed to handle that? Sounds more like the flaw is "bundling a bunch of things together and calling them the same bill".
Nonsense like "He voted against SHOES FOR ORPHANS! Elect Barnaby instead!" could be a thing of the past if "make shoes for orphans" wasn't allowed to be in the same bill as "convert Oklahoma into a landfill"
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Actually, I'm running Firefox on Windows 7 beta. As I watched it pop up a bunch of windows, I just started task manager and closed firefox.exe, and it all went away.
Consolidating everything under one process: ruining trolls chances of taking down my computer since $whenever_they_did_that.
"We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
Simple rule-based laws leave massive loopholes... Even incredibly complex rule-based laws leave loopholes. Principle based laws usually don't leave loopholes, but some defined rules are inevitable. This is why I believe in a mixed approach between rule based and principle based.
Nice try, but according to this the reality is that Massachusetts pays more to the Federal government than it gets in return. How about that, so all that "pork" going to Mass is actually just them getting a percent of their own tax money back. Think of it as a tax rebate... now doesn't that just make your fiscally-conservative heart all aflutter?
Funny how you are so impressed with McCain and yet Arizona is taking in $1.19 per every dollar it pays. Supposedly no pork and yet he's still making off like a bandit. Nice trick that is.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
Yeah, riders are a huge part of the problem. It seems to me though that banning them would be difficult. Legislators can always make an argument that converting Oklahoma into a landfill is germane, since umm.... Well, of course we'll need a place to dump all the orphans ratty old shoes. So who gets to decide what's relevant and what's not? Someone said they do this in Australia, I wonder how it works?
Come to think of it, if it works in Australia why do we constantly hear about so many crummy laws being past down under? Maybe it doesn't work so well for them.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
I am an extensive mass transport system user who, every day, benefits from a multi-modal network that involves bus, suburban train and subway system.
I live in Oslo, Norway. 550 NOK (~61 Euro) per month gives unlimited access to public transportation (Subway, tram, train, bus, boat) within the city limits.
Mass transit will likely have a boom as mobile devices with efficient route planners get more common. The key point is the network effect of mass transit - the more people that use it, the more efficient it becomes.
The unique benefit of cars is that they provide mobile storage. Having a place to dump all the stuff you "might" need is often more important than the difference in transportation.
I lost my sig.
"Who has time to read through several 800 page bills a week looking for one or two lines of pork in fine print, or do research on the 50 different contractors that are being awarded the contracts?"
Interns and grad students.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
I think this would be more appropriate if Obama legislated that all LOCAL tax expenditures would be tracked centrally for folks to check.
I only say this as I remember when I first started working for government there was a bit of sticker shock. By that I mean that due to the scale of things it is sometimes hard to understand the cost. There are also some costs in government that I would call intangibles. That was for Ontario, Canada also, the US would be several magnitudes greater than that. I can just see people looking at some of the costs and not really understanding that in many cases what you may think is a gigantic sum, is really just a drop in the bucket when put into perspective.
Additional oversight is good, however only if those people watching have any clue as to what they are looking at...
Hell most people don't know what their mechanic is even doing (myself included), and they could say "You need to replace the Bortan McScattle, and that is going to cost you about 850$". My answer is usually, "Um... ok."
Just think when it is a 106page report on the need to do an environmental assessment for 850,000$.... "Um... ok."
We should just limit bills to 10 pages. If it can't be said in 10 pages, it needs to be broken up into smaller chunks.
Are you kidding me? 10 sentences with word count limits. We should also have a max limit of number of bills that congress is allowed to run by. That number should be 1 publishable and readable sized book. Say 300-500 pages for every federal US bill that congress wants to operate by. If they don't all fit down into that size, then they need to start removing crap until it fits. Then you need to require the entire 300-500 page novel of bills to be read and signed that they understood it by anyone who wants to run for federal office. Think of it as the paper work reading torture test for running for office.
How many people use their tax refunds from the mortgage interest deduction to pay down their mortgage? Very few... instead most people buying a house will factor in their tax savings to convince themselves that they can buy a more expensive house. Similarly, if you let people deduct their credit card interest, they will use their credit cards more and get more in debt.
If you want to get America out of debt, the government has to lead by example and stop deficit spending.
That's really not true. a good deal of money is funneled into Massachusetts through the Federal government for all sorts of wacky things, and it certainly isn't because this state lacks money to for things itself (we have the second highest per capita income along with a relatively high tax rate... which I love saying just because it frustrates right-wingers trying to justify how that makes sense without blowing their own theories completely out of the water) or we have such an enormous population. It's because they actually do what Senators are supposed to do, and represent the interests of their state.
Yeah, it really frustrates folks that you can manage to vote in and rig to have the rest of the nation to have higher tax rates to support your states toys. If you want to have toys in your state, have it funded at the state level. There are a few things that other states do what in your state though and will vote to build.
AR wouldn't ever build highways if it was up to it. There is just too much land and not enough population base to support those things all over properly. Now, it really helps the rest of the nation to be able to drive through Arkansas rather than around it. I actually wonder some times how much rail roads or boats would have been used if we just didn't have a national highway system. Well, the point is things that really indirect benefit US as well we will support. Things like Ports we do support because they increase trade for everyone.
I'm so glad that the US has basically an internal free trade zone that the feds or states can't really screw up too much anyway.
I'll bet $20 that it won't be accurate. Never trust the Government or politicians. That includes the almighty messiah.
Why not just require senators to read bills before they vote on them?
"Here's a new bill, Mr. Jones"
"800 pages? Shit, I'm not reading THAT!"
*DENIED*
I think part of the problem is that lawyers and legislators are really bad programmers. They cover corner cases by jamming in lots of special-case code, rather than refactoring.
I suppose that rather than blame them, we could blame the fact that they're doing maintenance on a 200 year old legacy system. That mandates leaving lots of crap in place and trying to cover it up with more, baroque crap.
I'm not in favor of refactoring the same way we went about it last time (with guns in the hands of extremely peeved users), but I've heard it suggested that it's time for another Constitutional Convention.
The US Constitution is only 17 pages (18 if you count the title page). But it was obviously mulled over, debated, and word smithed extensively.
An 800 page bill is nothing more than laziness. Like an author in dire need of an editor.
I forgot to mention that she's a goddamned hypocrite. She's done all she could to attack our right to self-defense, but she has a concealed-carry permit herself. Those are damned near impossible to get in California.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Those are damned near impossible to get in California.
Unless, of course, you're "special." Well, I'll remember that if I ever meet up with here in a back alley somewhere.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.