A suggestion for helping Americans understand who our Reps are talking for.

[Old and In the Way]

What if all members of Congress had to wear a blazer with the various special interests/corporations who give them money? Wouldn't that be helpful when we listen to them give their speeches in the well or their opinions on TV? I'm thinking it would be like NASCAR...the more they donate, the bigger the decal/emblem is on the vehicle. I was thinking about Smokey Barton's comments on CO2 today and thought....I'll bet he's bought and paid for by Exxon. Well, if Smokey had a jacket with the Mobil-Exxon logo prominently displayed, we'd be able to understand why he has such a problem with this type of legislation.

They all like to wear their flag lapel button prominently displayed....well, why not the corporations or the SIG's that contribute big bucks to their campaign. I mean, I know what country they are from...what I don't know is who has bought and paid for their services.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I think that would be great!

Maybe someone with photoshop could make up coats for the various conmen...er, Congressmen and women and display them online. A sort of visual to the charts you can find that list donars. John Boozeman, for example, would have a BIG WalMart smiley face on his coat, as I believe they are still his biggest campaign contributors.

[BOSSHOG]

2. Like NASCAR drivers

I love it. The bigger the donation the larger the patch.

[Old Smokey]

3. Thats pretty good

i like it

[Fridays Child]

4. That is one beautiful idea! And how about TV and radio ads that end with...

...proud sponsor of __________________ (insert name of congressperson the advertiser has given money to)?

[necso]

5. Throw in face paint

portraying the logo of their largest contributor (tattoos are too permanent for use -- in some cases), and I'll vote for it.

[neoblues]

6. How about adding that their jackets are colored...

Each Congressman's jacket (with Corporate decals) should be colored so as to show how consistently their votes "actually" represent the will of their Constituencies... Perhaps tending towards bright yellow for those who have a higher percentage of crooked (as defined by variance from the polling derived vote of their constituent districts) votes.

Maybe their "Integrity Quotient" (again, defined by their voting record) should follow their names... like (Sen. Joseph Lieberman, (D?-CN)(IQ:50%)). I don't know what Vinegar Joe's "quotient" would be--probably better than 50%, but you get the idea. Note: I also recognize that sometimes the "will of the people", especially the "will of the constituency" doesn't actually reflect the right or wise choice, so even the best Congressman wouldn't get 100%--and those that do get 100% probably deserve a second look to see if they're just exclusively letting the polls determine their votes. Congressmen have access to and supposedly spend more time considering and discussing issues than the average person in their constituency--and they have to consider what's best for the country, to some degree (probably a modest degree), so it should be expected that great Congressmen will vary from their constituent polls. This program also has the flaw that many of the bills they undertake are never even noticed/heard of by most of their constituents (people really do need to pay more attention to politics and what our leaders are up to; and the media ought to be keeping us informed--alas). Then too, being a Congressman also involves some "give and take", making deals--I'll give you my vote on that if you'll support this--kind of thing, so there are many reasons why a Congressman wouldn't achieve a 100% score. Therefore... on deeper consideration... maybe this wasn't such a good or workable idea.

So, nevermind. Besides, how often do most Congressmen even get seen on television, and/or how many people watch C-SPAN (though, even there, how many times do most Congressmen appear).

[neoblues]

7. If that was far-fetched... try this...

For every controversial/suspicious large campaign donor (the large Corporations as well as those questionable organizations "American Family Values Association Organization" which are primarily Republican, but whatever)... Anyway, for each of these--instead of making them wear a patch (soon, they'd be covered in nothing but patches), make it a legal requirement that they have to appear in public without one general item of clothing (shoe, sock/stocking, pants/skirt, underpants/panties, t-shirt, shirt/blouse, vest, jacket, tie, wristwatch, bra, etc...) for each untoward donor.

Almost instantly, most Congressmen/Senators would have to go out in pulic... naked.

The emperor has no clothes--literally.

[CrispyQ]

8. Fantastic idea!

We need a special We the People patch for those few Kucinich types who actually support We the People!

Hmmmmm, is there a Halliburton patch big enough to represent the favors they've received from Cheney?

[blue sky at night]

9. omg...

it makes perfect sense, but you know an aware electorate would already know this stuff. But, of course, our msm doesn't do it's job of informing that electorate.

great post, I am nominating it!

[Old and In the Way]

10. Thanks! Really, the idea is tad outrageous, but the point is we should

have a simple way of understanding where the money gets raised for each Congressperson and that information should help us to understand the context of any statements he or she makes on any issue.