Some Political predictions for the new day....

[PinkTiger]

I've had some revelations. Here they are:

1. The presidency, as we know it, is on its last legs. I'm not sure of the timeline, but it will happen soon - No one person should be given so much power. The president has too much autonomy, and the only way to preserve our union and to prevent another Bush-like person, an evil little emperor, if you will, from taking power is to divide it up among five people. We are a divided nation. That is becoming more evident. It is becoming more and more impossible to corral all of us under one umbrella. I have been shown, in a dream, a blueprint for a new government, based on breaking the U.S. up into five separate zones, each of whom choose a leader and representatives for legislature, to serve as our leaders. These zone "presidents," but that is not what they will be called, will rotate, so that at no one time will our nation ever be without strong, capable leaders with experience. They will serve the usual two terms without being eligible for another once those are served. The zones, or regions, will be truly regional, reflecting the unique issues and characteristics of each zone. Hawaii, Alaska and Puerto Rico will become members of nearby zones - Hawaii with the western states, Alaska with the northwestern states, and Puerto Rico with the southwestern states. I look for this to happen within the next 12 years. I don't see a presidency as we know it existing after 2016. From this group of five people, one person will be elected by the five to serve as a non-voting "presider" on a rotating basis, and will become a baby-kisser for a year. During that year, their vice-president will run the legislative end of the job, while they travel and become an emissary for the U.S. in the International arena. The real power will stay with the legislature, which will change very little, except that the members of Congress will be elected from within their respective zones instead of the states. State legislatures will change the most. Instead of one state, each zone will have its own legislature and collectively, will have more power to oversee education, health and welfare systems, and utilize federal and zone funds for the good of all. I don't know why we haven't done this before. It will require a Constitutional convention to do this, and I see this happening in the next 10 years. I feel strongly that Al Gore and Hillary Clinton will be instrumental, as well as Bill Clinton and other Democrats. However, it will also be promoted heavily by Republicans who are progressive by nature and want to see some changes made.
None of these presidents will live in Washington, D.C. The White House will continue to exist, but become a museum of sorts. Functions will happen there, ceremonial ones, but the Oval Office will be occupied no more. Instead, each president will live and operate in his or her (yes, women will serve at the beginning as well as men) zone. I see some cities popping up - Cleveland, Atlanta, Tulsa, Albuquerque, Boise, Omaha. Not sure those are the correct cities, but close.

2. A third party is about to be born, one that will become very powerful. Joe Lieberman is the catalyst, but this party will meld two groups who now feel disenfranchised - the progressive rightwing factions of both the Republican and the Democratic parties. Too liberal for Republicans and too rightwing for Democrats, this group will form a strong constituent base and become very much alive and well by 2008. I will not be joining, LOL. But many people here will. This party is the brainchild of those who feel a need to grab the strong centrist enthusiasts who feed from corporate interests in both parties today. That is why it will become rich and powerful very soon.

[Cleita]

1. I agree that Bush has ruined the office of the President

forever and it will cease to function in the future as a powerful executive office. Your visions say we will be ruled by a committee more or less. I'm all for it after what has happened since Nixon poisoned the presidential well. I would like to see the House of Representatives made into a parlaimentary model, with representatives selected from various parties according to their strength.

Other seers have seen our future government very much like the ancient senate of Athens, where citizens were selected by lottery to serve as senator for two years of their life, a true democracy, not a Republic. It was sort of like doing jury duty. The only voting done was to vote a bad senator out of office before his time was up. This was done on ostraca or pottery shards (in a time when paper was very expensive). Here is where we get our word ostracize. Perhaps this will happen on a regional level as you have suggested.

I too have seen the necessity of a new conservative party arising from the conservatives of our democratic party and moderates of the Republican Party. The GOP is in its last death throes from the criminality of it's extreme neo-cons. They will stand alone as the corrupt minority that they are. The Democrats can go back to being the party of the working class and backbone of the majority of our society. I did an interesting Tarot read about this yesterday. I will put it up soon.

I like the idea of the country divided into regions but yet united as one when needed. We do need this because different regions have different needs. I always felt out west here that our issues weren't being addressed by a government that operated back east except that we pay most of the taxes that Washington squanders not on programs we need here but their pork barrel and other payola schemes.

Good post, Pink Tiger and you give us hope.

[SheilaT]

2. Interesting.

However, do you really think the kind of rewriting of the Constitution necessary for the changes you see will actually happen?

And, small detail here, I expect if such changes do take place, that Puerto Rico would join southeastern states, not southwestern ones.

[PinkTiger]

6. That was a typo. Yes, Puerto Rico would be in the Southeast group.

Good catch!

[PinkTiger]

9. A Constitutional Convention would be the easiest.

Some of these changes could take place without one, but in order to change the leadership and the ways leaders are chose, it would be necessary to have a new, amended Constitution that would simply lay out a new way of governing.
The new process would not entirely remove corporate participation or cronyism, but would fragment it a great deal. Influence would not go from region to region without a new organization within that region working toward the goal.
The staggered terms would also take some of the wind out of the sails of those who want to see sweeping changes every 4 to 8 years. We have grown too big for that. And we are too important to the world for polarization with one or two people at the helm.

[SheilaT]

12. We have never had another Constitutional Convention

since the one that got this country started. While these changes would completely alter our political system, and perhaps improve many things, I honestly cannot imagine such changes coming about any time soon. Heck, I'm not sure there are any kind of provisions for a new Constitutional Convention, and it's completely impossible to imagine such sweeping alterations in our form of government under any circumstances. What incentive would regions have to separate? What kind of borders would exist? Would people start thinking more of themselves as belonging to a particular region rather than to the nation as a whole? There would be five new regional governments, and, I suspect, a lot of duplication and waste would ensue.

[Sanity Claws]

14. We did have a constitutional convention

The country first operated under the Articles of Confederation. I've forgotten the process under which they were drawn up. The Articles didn't work very well and so a Constitutional Convention was called in 1787 to amend the Articles. Instead of amending the Articles, a completely new Constitution was drafted. That is the constitution under which we now operate.
Our present constitution specifically refers to a convention as one of the ways to amend it.
I see incentives for regions to break off. Power has been taken from the states. They used to be able to control education but now the federal government has taken over. The states have also lost authority over some insurance issues and employee benefits due to ERISA. I think regions may be a way to restore some of the autonomy the states had.

[SheilaT]

17. Right. We had the first one

which gave us the Constitution. The Articles of Confederation were not a Constitution. And while we've amended the Constitution some 27 times since then, and occasionally I've heard people suggest a new Constitutional Convention would be a good idea. I see where Article V section 4 talks about the amendment process, and it certainly looks as if a Constitutional Convention could be called, I don't think the issues you mention, education, some insurance issues, and ERISA are really enough to make three-quarters of the states want to completely remake the country.

I probably shouldn't throw cold water on anyone's revelations, but it would help to think through the likelihood of such changes really happening.

[PinkTiger]

18. Our present system creates a lot of waste and duplication

with 50 states. And there is not total consensus, because of the way the electoral college is, and how we are split into red states and blue states. The founding fathers wanted states to have autonomy, but now what we have is a system where the states are held hostage by a federal government that is increasingly corrupt. Most of the money we pay in taxes is going down the tubes into military infrastructure right now. That is way we don't have decent services for the people. The banks have the upper hand over all of us, and now with deregulation of credit, the consumer is the victim.
There are provisions for a Constitutional convention, but I'm convinced it will take a horrendous upheaval to make it happen. I fear the upheaval is coming. It always does.

[Cleita]

3. A little kick to get you back on top.

:kick:

[BluePatriot]

4. A thought

Hello!

Probably a bit off topic but I thought I would pop in and say that the "5 presidents" scenario reminds me of this guy:

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

The materials are interesting reading, esp. regarding worldlines/alternate universes.

[PinkTiger]

7. Yes, John Titor has an interesting idea.

I have to admit that I have read all that, and it could have addd to my vision. But the vision was a little different. We would not use Omaha as a national hub, only as a regional one.
Also, I don't see a war or time travel.
It is my opinion that John Titor is and was a hoax.
But I think the creator of Titor was wanting to share his visions.
I would be interested in knowing who, among the group of leaders we now have, might be thinking along these lines. Anyone know?
Someone has to be the catalyst for it.
I suspect Al Gore.

[cliss]

5. Good post PT, and I agree with you.

There is something seriously wrong with the entire government that we have right now. I think anyone who has taken even a casual look, can see that the whole system is broken. It really is beyond repair, in my opinion. We can't try a band-aid approach like throwing out certain senators who are corrupt. The entire system is corrupt.

As this corrupt system continues to spiral out of control, a nation bleeds. I can tell you hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Americans, agonize over what is happening to their beloved country. They feel helpless, enraged.

After 6 years of seriously pondering this problem, here is what I have come up with -

1) Bush and Cheney are acting as Shiva the Destroyer. They are taking things apart.....but it's not what you might think. They are in fact taking apart the US American Empire. They are breaking it down, by breaking down the government itself through corruption and cronyism. Why? Because it's become a destructive force. When the ashes have settled, a new United States will emerge like a Phoenix from the ashes. We will see a humbler, more understanding US, able to empathize with our brothers in other countries.

2) I think you are absolutely right about a new party emerging. I see it as the Green Party, or something that will emerge as a direct result from the Dem party not being able to fulfill their needs.

3) What should we be doing in the meantime? Pick some values and ethics that work for you. Just hold on to them, and ignore what the corrupt politicians are doing. If you just hold on, you will come out of this OK.

[PinkTiger]

8. I don't see the Green Party being the victor.

What I see is, a new progressive conservatism, one that I would not embrace, but one that would have some good ideas to impart. It would become the business mode, the capitalists' idea of how government should run.

[marions ghost]

10. yes, a possibility

but won't that mean the corporatists will just continue to rule if that party became strong enough? And then we're right back to one-party rule. One-party rule is killing this country. We need proportional representation.

Some form of regional govt body is an interesting idea. It's obvious what we have now is falling apart.

[cassiepriam]

11. Yes, time to re-think all of it.

Is the govt set forth in our Constitution the best form of govt?
Doesn't seem to be working very well, it was very easily corrupted and sold to the highest bidder. Capitalism is not high on my list of favorite things either right now.

The executive branch has too much power, one man holds too much power. We have a president who is most likely drunk or drugged most of the day and night. Dangerous.

And the checks and balances don't work. Congress corrupt like the WH, and the SC as well. Democrats sleep walking.

And how can we improve the education and/or parenting of our children? We have a country of adults who cannot tell the difference between truth and lies. Or right from wrong.

Time to at least question the paradigm we all used to take for granted.

(I know, I know, I was burned at the stake in many lives for asking these kind of questions :( )

[Grateful for Hope]

13. All very excellent questions, Cassie

My only issue is with the statement "Democrats sleep walking". I think the majority of our current reps are just as much in the pockets of corporations as their repub counterparts.

We need to repeal the "person" status of corporations, and, pronto, IMHO.

[cassiepriam]

15. Exactly what I wanted to say Hope, but did not want to piss off

everyone. Yes, Dems as corrupt as the rest of them. :(

Skinner may bounce us off the forum yet!

[Grateful for Hope]

16. Naw, I don't think he will.

I have a little hope that he agrees with us.