How to stop the Supercongress

[Capitalocracy]

1. Make sure everyone knows about the Supercongress, and that it's more important (and interesting) than just "some procedural thing".

2. Organize a massive group of people who are adamantly opposed to its existence. (That's the easy part! /sarcasm)

3. Actively campaign against anyone on the Supercongress.

4. Actively campaign against anyone who votes for anything passed by the Supercongress. Make it clear, from the get-go, that a vote for legislation pushed through using procedural acrobatics to circumvent democracy means losing your seat.

[ejpoeta]

1. the congress is bad enough. wtf is with a 'supercongress'. i don't even understand this bs.

[kayakjohnny]

4. It may actually be the over exuberant ramblings of a single reporter.

At this point, there's no evidence to the contrary.

[Capitalocracy]

13. I hope you're right.

But it sounds like something they would do. That was the idea behind the Deficit Commission, too, forcing votes with no possibility to amend or filibuster.

[southerncrone]

5. Just like what's happening at some local levels.

A few yrs back, our school board was changed from 12 members to 6.

It's a lot easier to get fewer people in your corner (or buy them off).

It's bad enough that committees have the power that they do.
We might as well not have the rest of Congress once we get a "Super Congress".
:hangover:

[Capitalocracy]

9. Not to mention the laws dissolving local government altogether

that they're pushing in multiple states, where in the case of a "financial emergency" (read: Shock Doctrine-style manufactured crisis) they actually dissolve the local government and appoint a single unelected person to be in charge of everything.

The Republicans are really good at coming up with structural changes that alter the way our nation actually functions, which will make things just continue to get worse and worse exponentially. We need to think more structurally in how we try to change things, rather than just fighting on individual issues.

[ejpoeta]

10. we've had that going on around here too. it's such a great idea to downsize the government from 5

to 3 people. didn't know how that would save money, but seemed to be easier to have problems. bet that will work out grand. funny how when they tried to get city and towns to combine people didn't seem to want that around these parts. LOL!

[valerief]

12. Fewer knees to break, too. nt

[AsahinaKimi]

2. I guess Kryptonite doesn't work?

:hide:

Sorry... I had to just say that..

edited to say.. wait till the Supreme Court becomes the "JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA" !!

[Capitalocracy]

3. if only it were that simple!

unfortunately, the solution I've posted above is not likely to ever happen.

[PATRICK]

6. In NY

we have the Triumvirate who decide the budget. The guv, Senate and House leaders. The little guys squawk but this theater behind the scenes covers all asses and elephants totally on the lobbyists' take with too much to lose from the lobbies and the people to even try to do their job.

But(on edit: five thousand three hundred seventy nine expletives deleted), it can barely be discussed(one question in a town hall meeting) that the President could follow the Constitution and simply raise the debt ceiling? Not even mentioned with all this chicken little BS. And why? because the MSM and the GOP have decided that option must be seen as only Obama's idea so they can squawk all the way to Doomsday and beyond. If he does that more sensible thing now of course it will be sold big time as interfering with Congress's right to screw around the Constitution to do the job it cannot and will not do.

And those who believe Obama allows all this painting into corporate corners can argue this as the beat goes on.

[Capitalocracy]

7. Also not discussed in all this mess:

The fact that social security does not add to the deficit, in fact, they've been essentially robbing from it,

the fact that this is all a manufactured "crisis" to begin with because the Republicans have no problem with raising the debt ceiling until they can use it as leverage (ie, hostage) to further damage the economy through budget cuts,

the fact that we can't balance the budget without cutting unnecessary military spending,

the fact that some amount of debt, spent on job creation, would actually help the economy...

On edit: You would think someone would've had time to bring these things up, considering how long this travesty has been going on.

[ejpoeta]

11. they would have had time, but that would be assuming a media that isn't owned by

multinational corporations who have money to make somewhere in all of this. an independent media is probably making that point, but you aren't going to hear it on the tv box.

[woolldog]

8. It's so undemocratic

The entire purpose of it is to insulate reps from the consequences of their actions. Goes against the entire spirit of representative government where you hold reps responsible for their vote.

[hairyHans]

14. MORE POLITICS? Instead PUT POLITICIANS FIRST!

WILL THEY EVER PUT THEMSELVES IN THE LINE OF FIRE???

Why do Americans not insist(RALLY, RANT & RAGE) that the
first cuts to ANY taxpayer-supported wages/benefits are those
of ALL the politicians... President, congressmen,senators,
upper political civil servants!
If this were to happens you would have NO problem coming up
with PRAGMATIC not rhetorical solutions.
WHY do AMERICANS NOT JOIN TOGETHER EN MASSE AND INSIST
" POLITICIANS FIRST!" .
Don't forget: they put themselves first on EVERYTHING ELSE:
Best benefits, best expense accounts, best health care, best
working environment .... all at taxpayers' expense.`

Will you allow them, by dithering, to further reduce your
common American's well-being?

[Warren DeMontague]

15. Put away the tin foil. There's not going to be a "supercongress".

Trust me.

[applegrove]

16. I keep thinking this is ALL ABOUT the GOP wanting to be as far away from teabaggers as possible!