your on your own.
oy gevalt. Alright. I'll be back.
Here's one idea. Bridge.
I often point out that there are many, many more clever people in any individual state than all the clever people all of the states send to the District of Columbia. I am certain that is true of every state. Each and every state has better, more qualified people residing and working in their individual state than there are representing the entire nation in D.C.
Each state seems to send politicians, lobbyists and their minions to the nation's capital and hope they will not be corrupted like all the other people we have sent before them. They never seem to do what they promised. On the rare occasions when they do fulfill a promise or two, the primary beneficiary seems to be some oligarch or mega-huge corporation. The results of their actions rarely, if ever, have the intended effect. On the even rarer occasions when the fulfilled promise does what it was supposed to, years or decades later we discover that wasn't what our state or county really needed or wanted.
Why do we keep falling for the same propaganda every electoral cycle?
Problem 1 is getting the clever people in their respective states to step up and take the reins of power to steer their respective states in the direction most suited for the electors and their wards in each state. How do we get the power to those prospective leaders in each state?
I also often point out that, although I was a big fan of Brother Reagan at the time of his election, Republican Raygun never even tried to do for California as Governor of California what he claimed he was going to do for the United States as President. We just took his word for it. We trusted a politician's word? Why? Are we as incredibly gullible as we appear to be? Every four years?
Mr. Reagan was sent to the capital with a mandate to return power to the states, the people. Ditto for Mr. Gingrich and his Contract with America.
They suggested less government was better government. We all drank the bug juice, crossed our fingers and hoped Mr. Reagan would fulfill his promise of State's Rights. He didn't. Moreover, the Federal workforce exploded under Mr. Reagan's tenure. Not only did he not do what he suggested he would, he made the problem as bad, if not worse than his predecessors, Democrat and Republican.
Did Mr. Reagan want to get elected more than he wanted to get something done? Was the entire State's Rights agenda simply a campaign tool? If not, why hadn't Gov. Reagan first done in California what he claimed he was going to do as Pres. Reagan? Perhaps Mr. Reagan drank the State's Rights bug juice too late in his political career. Perhaps, thanks to standing on his shoulders, we can follow through on the idea he poplularised.
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
2022.10.22 = 令和五年十月二十二日 = 5 by 10 by 2 by 2 =
a perfect defence perfection Noah's Ark when the greatest danger is ourselves
If we are to have true democracy, we must have representation in electoral jurisdictions in the single digit millions, i.e. less than 10 million, not in the 100s of millions. Even tens of millions of voters are too many to provide effective representation. Democracy, I think, can only begin to function when governing a few million voters. The fewer the electors, the more direct representation.
The key is to experiment. Show the American electorate that at least one state can devolve power from the state capital to the counties, cities, and localities. The devolution of state power to the counties is considerably more difficult than the devolution of national power to the states because, I think, there are some counties with less resources and less qualified people to administrate those sparsely populated counties than there are in the state capital. Many, probably most of the counties could, given the same tax revenues, handle county matters better than the state capital handles county matters, however, I doubt that is true of all the counties in any state.
Another big problem is that many Michigan State Government resources are based in one county and used predominantly in one or more surrounding counties. The difficulty will be getting counties to cooperate and share resources. The Michigan Executive's primary duty or task might eventually be to mediate or arbitrate inter-county squabbles.
Much more thought needs to go into this. There are many more Michiganders well more versed in Michigan issues with good ideas, and better problem solving skills than I. I am hoping to start a dialogue regarding devolving power from Lansing to, for example, Charlotte, the County Seat of Eaton County where I live. Start people thinking.
If we gave this or that power (and the tax receipts associated with that power) that has, for decades, been wielded by Lansing, to Suttons Bay Township, the seat of Leelanau County, how would they use that to better serve the people of Leelanau County and the people of Michigan? If Suttons Bay had that power, would the people of adjacent Grand Traverse or Benzie Counties be advantaged or disadvantaged? What remedies could be used on the Leelanau Peninsula and surrounds that the folks in Lansing, almost 300 kilometres away, have not even considered, or don't even know about? How inventive are the people of Leelanau, how much more communitarian than the money/power grabbers in the capital? How much better can the local analogue communication, and trial and error, stimulate ideas and solutions than long distance electronic communication?
Perhaps most importantly, keep in mind, the drift of tax dollars and electoral power to Lansing has been around a relatively short period of time, decades, not centuries. Turning it around shouldn't be that difficult if we free our minds. The first step is the hardest. Your great-grandchildren will thank you.
friendly competition
cover photo Mackinac Bridge
bridging the finger of the gods to The Benevolent Hand
trying different things
