IOPList.Org

Just the way race car drivers wear the logos of companies who have given them money, many people would like to see our bought and paid for politicians do the same thing. Well, in california they are poised to do just that. A measure should be approved next week for a ballot measure forcing legislators to wear the logos of their top 10 contributors. It will also require candidates to state their top 10 in any political ad.

I think its a great idea, how do the rest of you feel?

nice. it's about time.

of course, i am cynical. if they mess the numbers around, whom knows what will show up?

maybe i should wait and see.

Grandote,
I saw that on Facebook a few months ago and thought it was one of the best ideas about politics, ever.
Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren.....my dream ticket. They may be the only 2 left who haven't been bought yet. IMHO. Rumor.

Agreed, although my opinion is that anyone above city council is corrupt. Those campaigns are expensive, and the purpose of public office is to make millions lobbying after your term so i cant see the jerks using their own money. A dude in my state did it in 05 for senate, some billionaire, and it was big news

That is a good idea to be accountable to who politicians receive money from. Also there ought to be an app or poll on how all politicians vote on issues that are strong with the money people

On an even more basic, and perhaps common sense approach... why don't we require that politicians pass proficiency exams in order to hold office?

We do that for physicians, lawyers, architects, etc. because of the impact that the quality of their practice has on our collective well being.

Are politician's responsibilities any less important than other professionals in whom we place our trust?

Actually Lechter, that is a very good idea. Before you go to college, you take an SAT, or before a job some type of skills tests. Before a candidate can become a candidate for president or governor or congress, They must take a test on their knowledge of the financial system, foreign issues, and complete knowledge of or Social Security and corporate involvement in politics. At the end of the day during the debate you hang your Candidate Competency Score on your jacket like a runner does at a track meet. This way we will never have a Sarah Palin train wreck again. :-)

(02-14-2016, 03:32 PM)JimboS Wrote: [ -> ]Actually Lechter, that is a very good idea.   Before you go to college, you take an SAT, or before a job some type of skills tests.   Before a candidate can become a candidate for president or governor or congress, They must take a test on their knowledge of the financial system, foreign issues, and complete knowledge of or Social Security and corporate involvement in politics.  At the end of the day during the debate you hang your Candidate Competency Score on your jacket like a runner does at a track meet.   This way we will never have a Sarah Palin train wreck again.  :-)

Jimbo, I'd venture a guess that many train wrecks could be avoided by vetting all candidates competency for service prior to election... ethics in particular.

Confucius was, above all, a social and political philosopher.  Today, of course, he is best known for "Confucius say . . ." jokes, as in "Confucius  say woman who fly upside down have hairy crackup." 

China was a disparate mess before his impact.  He introduced a common written language in a land of 1000 dialects, the notion of the obligation of a ruler to his people, adherence to familiarities and social norms that would unite a very large space of very different people.  One of the things he advised that was adopted was that government functionaries be required to take tests to secure a position.  Cronyism disappeared almost overnight, and the govt, spending, allocations of funds, etc. improved dramatically.  We do the same for lower level government positions, IRS, etc. 

As mentioned by most here, once above a certain rung, it's money and good-old-boyism.  So, yeah, testing basic civics, geography, history, and other needed knowledge to make decisions that would insure our higher pols can identify Italy on a map would be a very good step in the right direction. 

Newt Gingrich said once he'd have a hard time at higher politics because he thought too much about things.  I'm neither a Repubican/Democrat or conservative, but Newt is probably one of the smartest politicians in the last century, and he's a history professor.

Today's top runners have just the opposite problem, their knowledge, whatever the level, is funneled though a thin cone of political awareness.  They rise by not thinking too much, and by providing slogan-dominated general, and nondescript answers to specific questions.  The Donald is simply the natural evolution of the process.  

the Spanker

I'm actually an independent. I'm not happy with Hillary or Trump. Trump is all for the rich people. He can care less about what's going on in the world. As for Hillary, she was already the POTUS. She has always been interested in politics. She was a Republican during the 1960's, then switched to Democrat. Bill married into a political family. I believe Hillary was calling a lot of shots in the White House. I like Bill but I don't think he knew a lot about politics. That's why I said Hillary was already the POTUS. I wish Bernie Sanders was president.  Now, in my opinion the world is devided and everyone is crazy. Trump wants to cut Social Security & Medicare. And Hillary is not in good health to be POTUS. That's a stressful job. You have to be in good health.