Thinking of running for President.

[MR2]

Dept of State:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Treasury:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?
What about the Federal Reserve Board of Governors? Who, what and how?

Dept of Justice:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Interior:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Agriculture:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Commerce:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Labor:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?
What about the LRB? Who, what and how?

Dept of Health and Human Services:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?
What about Obamacare? Who, what and how?

Dept of Housing and Human Development:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Transportation:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Energy:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Education:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Commerce:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Veterans Affairs:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Homeland Security:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?


Take your time, we'll look at Regulatory agencies next.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by MR2

Take your time, we'll look at Regulatory agencies next.

Well, awlrighty.

[sinjefe]

Dept of Interior: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Agriculture: Disband; no constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Labor: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?
What about the LRB? Who, what and how?

Dept of Health and Human Services: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?
What about Obamacare? Who, what and how?

Dept of Housing and Human Development: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Energy: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Education: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

Dept of Homeland Security: Disband; No constitutional authority
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How?

[I am Al]

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

Alright, let's have a little fun with this thread. Cyber "Town Hall Meeting" style.

Ask one or two, no more than three questions in a single post about how I stand on a particular issue affecting America at home (Domestic Policy) and/or American interests abroad (Foreign Policy) and I'll do my best to answer candidly and respectfully.

If I don't have answers I'll explain who or how I'd go about finding an answer. Because this country is bigger than one person and that's always been one of those things that has separated us from tyrants, dictators and kings.

The "meeting" starts now:

We have somewhere around $18 or $19 trillion in debt.
The budget is $3.7 trillion or so. We only take in $3.2 trillion in taxes, so we're spending about 13% more than we take in.

Medicare is 28% of the budget
Govt Pensions are 26% of the budget
Defense is 22% of the budget
Welfare is 10% of the budget
Interest on the debt (not debt payback) is 6% on the budget
Running govt is 1% of budget
Those 6 are 93% of the budget. The last 7% is for bridges/roads/education, etc.


IIRC, because of the ongoing deficit (and increasing debt) sometime around 2025 we're going broke.

How do we fix that?

[Old Dog New Trick]

This is gonna be a long meeting. Hope you brought beer!

[Old Dog New Trick]

MR2 -

You forgot the IRS...

Let me work on that one too!

Let me see, disband in its current form and policy and develop a means to create a national flat rate sales tax.

Don't have all the answers- it's complicated!

[MR2]

Originally Posted by sinjefe

Disband; No constitutional authority

Just like the real life ankle-biters - no solution. No how. No one gave you a magic wand. And you're not running...

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

This is gonna be a long meeting. Hope you brought beer!

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

MR2 -

You forgot the IRS...

Let me work on that one too!

Let me see, disband in its current form and policy and develop a means to create a national flat rate sales tax.

Don't have all the answers- it's complicated!

I listed Executive Departments to start with, the IRS is a part of the Department of Treasury. While it is certainly fair game for the discussion, my thought was it deserves it's own separate discussion - and maybe after we've abolished/created Departments, it would have more relevance.

I'm taking this as a serious discussion and you look like you want to play. And if the undeclared candidates want to formally declare - then do so and join in the debate.

It's complicated. Boy howdy it is! All too often well meaning folks, self included, pop off with shoulda, woulda, coulda's on how things should be changed, fixed, done. Well let's engage in a serious and substantive debate with the declared candidate of the ODNT Party and see what he has to say.

So for me, lets just concentrate on the Cabinet level Executive Agencies listed and cover:
Who would you nominate?
What would you change?
How? Let's also add a why in there too.

With all seriousness and respect.




Case of Dr. Pepper is a chillin'.

[Old Dog New Trick]

Fair enough and all seriousness I didn't mean to come off sounding smug.

I know that if I had to fill those "Secretarial" positions. It would be by trying to find the best qualified people with experience willing to do the job and not based on favoritism, back-door deals and cronyism.

I highly doubt the new or next president would be able to abolish federal agencies because they are redundant or serve no needed purpose.

[Old Dog New Trick]

As an Infantry NCO, an SF Medic and eventually an SF Operations Sergeant, I believed in doing the basics brilliantly! Continuously working towards mastering the core elements of the tasks needed to achieve success and sustainability for the unit from the singular person up to the higher commands mission objectives.

I required a high level of integrity, commitment and honor from those I led, and those I would give my life for their leadership.

I would hope to restore that level of expertise and knowledge in all the "Executive Departments" and hold them both fiscally and morally responsible for the duties they hold to the American people.

As far as repealing or replacing policies like ACA or PPACA? I think it needs a line item review and an overhaul of the parts that aren't feasible or effective. I don't know that a "single payer" system is the answer but would like to review the whole thing and come up with both a sustainable and viable solution to a complex problem. Both Medicare and Medicaid need an overhaul as well.

An enormous amount of greed and needless spending is caught up in insurance scams, tort claims and liabilities, and just plain old corruption that plagues being able to medically do the right thing at a fair and equitable cost. It doesn't cost what people are charged for the service rendered.

[Old Dog New Trick]

[QUOTE=MR2;604638]Dept of State:
Who would you nominate? The best qualified person for the job with years of experience in foreign relations. Probably an Ambassador from a high profile posting with a record of success.
What would you change? Return the focus on international diplomacy and foreign trade agreements that are fair or more fairer to us.
How? Establish strategic and economic priorities through analysis as most important to the least important.

Dept of Treasury:
Who would you nominate? Don't know. Someone with both a legal and financial background and a propensity to promote and protect our monetary value.
What would you change? I'm not entirely sure. We need to loan money at an affordable rate and protect against inflation. People who invested in the country should expect a safe and legitimate return. We can't print our way out of financial destruction...the balance of output needs to weigh heavily against intake and a means to payback what's already owed.
How? Like I said, I don't know.
What about the Federal Reserve Board of Governors? Who, what and how? Why isn't that a responsibility of the State elected Governors? As a "Republic" each of the 50 Governors should have a say as to the financial welfare of the country as a whole.

Dept of Justice:
Who would you nominate? A career Lawman (someone who's been a trusted and respected Commissioner, Chief of Police, Director of a Federal Law Enforcement agency...etc..), Criminal Justice Lawyer/Judge and someone with an excellent history on Constitutional law and law enforcement.
What would you change? Return to a focus on oversight only of local and state jurisdiction. Establish compliance with Constitutional law and civil rights issues. Stop imposing federal levels of justice at the local level (unless the Feds just want to take possession and prosecute) and get back to criminal justice to find and prosecute only the right "bad" people and organizations. There is no need to create a problem where none exists. Fiascos like Waco, Ruby Ridge, Bundy standoff (AZ) and Oregon (Bundy II) never even needed to be solved with force. If one thing the government has is time.
How? Damn good question! Return to the basics and use technology only where appropriate and necessary.

Dept of Interior:
Who would you nominate? Someone with a clear understanding and a sound management plan for the national parks, fish, wildlife and conservation policies. Probably a scientist or environmental professor open to ideas and not a person who believes the best way to protect the land is to fence it off and close the gates.
What would you change? Return a sense of this land is our land, be good stewards and enjoy it! I also suppose this is good place to cover BLM and land use agreements. There needs to be a clear and definable purpose to control or regulate open lands, and one that has historically been used by ranchers and citizens for pleasure or business. There must be better ways to protect turtles, small birds and scrub oaks in the desert than to close millions and millions of acres of desert.
How? Proper enforcement of established policies and an openness to discuss land use grievances in a mutually beneficial way to all users.

Dept of Agriculture:
Who would you nominate? I would think someone with an extensive background (Ph.D./Doctorate) in horticulture, zoology (animal husbandry), disease, infection, contamination, and parasitical infection. Although it may not be as important for the Secretary to know all this stuff, the staff should be experts in food handling, animal safety, produce inspection and a list of other variables that promote food safety and inspection from the hoof to the table, or the farm to the supermarket.
What would you change? I would get the Dept of Agriculture out of the federal payroll system that see to making payroll for federal law enforcement agencies as part of its months duties. I would hope that the Dept would step up inspection, enforcement and prosecution of plant managers, farmers, shippers, and restaurants that cut corners and produce, release, or store foods that are not fit for human consumption.
How?

Dept of Commerce:
Who would you nominate? This will take a wise, educated and experienced business (person) to regulate, control and expedite Interstate trade and transportation of goods and services. It should be someone who has actual experience in running a large business or corporation with thousands of employees, multiple business locations and has dealt with government red tape and bureaucracy to find ways to cut the "middleman" and streamline the process. It is the responsibility of the Dept of Commerce to "PROMOTE THE CONDITIONS FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH AND OPPORTUNITY!" Promote - not control or restrict.
What would you change? It's not the "Governments" job to find you a job! However, it may be the governments job to make sure you are earning the proper wages for the work being performed. That you are not being discriminated against because of your race, sex, religion, or any of the other protected statuses.
How? Damn good question, because as I see it, there is too much control being orchestrated by the government to tell local business how to run their company and too many regulations that far exceed common sense. You can't tell a company they are not in compliance with "federal" hiring practices if none of the people they didn't hire didn't meet the requirements of the job. Life it not fair, the job market should reflect that unfairness if the best person for the job isn't a minority by classification.

Dept of Labor:
Who would you nominate? I think this one is redundant to the Dept of Commerce and could go away or be combined under the leadership Commerce. With few exception to OSHA, Fair Wages, Unemployment standards and Insurance - this really should be a States issue and no federal duplication is necessary.
What would you change? Disband it!
How?
What about the LRB? Who, what and how? I don't know, some unions are good, most have lived past their usefulness, some are just plain harmful to equality, wage standards, and working conditions. I think there is a better way to move this forward at the State level and get the federal government out of business and workers rights issues.

[MR2]

Thank you. Appreciate your putting forth the effort in this intellectual exercise. I think we can all learn more about the process.

You might want to consider adding some policy advisers to your campaign staff to help flesh out any areas. Upon appointment, they would would be able to play and you could agree/disagree with their 'policy advice'.

BTW, the Fed is not made of of State Governors but are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

[Last hard class]

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

MR2 -

You forgot the IRS...

Let me work on that one too!

Let me see, disband in its current form and policy and develop a means to create a national flat rate sales tax.



Don't have all the answers- it's complicated!

I would be interested in seeing your ideas on taxation. Most of the candidates have a couple of good ideas but don't stand the acid test in totality.

Also:

You have some good ideas, and would make the government run better. But is that enough to get you elected in today's digital world? IMO, if you are going to run against the establishment you will need a couple of bold ideas that differentiate you from the herd. Otherwise you just splinter the republican party. As a third party candidate you will need to peel votes from both sides.

I read somewhere that the average smart phone user has an attention span of less than 30 seconds when reading articles.

For example. If you want to sell a stronger immigration policy, get the fence and all that, offer a path of citizenship to the illegals who have already made it in. I know it wouldn't taste good going down, but common sense says we are never going to deport 20 million people. Why not use that to get the attention and a huge voting block behind you?


I'm going to go have a couple of libations while you guys fire for effect.

LHC

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Last hard class

Why not use that to get the attention and a huge voting block behind you?


I'm going to go have a couple of libations while you guys fire for effect.

LHC

Incoming!

Because it doesn't. We have a huge legal Mexican population here, and the ones I know are pissed at anyone who suggests such a thing. Those who did it legally would riot against allowing illegal interlopers in. You don't have to "round up" the 20 million, just deport the ones who come into contact with law enforcement for any reason. And, BTW, the 14th Amendment doesn't include aliens. The author of the Amendment specifically said that it did not. I posted a reference to that on this site.

ETA: I left out the important part: If you give free entry to illegals, there is no way in hell that they would vote for anyone (Rep) who would deny them other freebees.

Lets say the offer of amnesty was that they could not vote for 20 years. Would the Democrats go for that?

Pat

p.s. Is your daughter an RB Sea Hawk or a MB Mustang, now?

[Last hard class]

Originally Posted by PSM

Incoming!

Because it doesn't. We have a huge legal Mexican population here, and the ones I know are pissed at anyone who suggests such a thing. Those who did it legally would riot against allowing illegal interlopers in. You don't have to "round up" the 20 million, just deport the ones who come into contact with law enforcement for any reason. And, BTW, the 14th Amendment doesn't include aliens. The author of the Amendment specifically said that it did not. I posted a reference to that on this site.

ETA: I left out the important part: If you give free entry to illegals, there is no way in hell that they would vote for anyone (Rep) who would deny them other freebees.

Lets say the offer of amnesty was that they could not vote for 20 years. Would the Democrats go for that?

Pat

p.s. Is your daughter an RB Sea Hawk or a MB Mustang, now?

Jeesh. I haven't even made it out the door yet.
While I happen to disagree, my point is to think UW as a 3rd party candidate.

I will pm you tomorrow on the personal stuff.





LHC

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Last hard class

Jeesh. I haven't even made it out the door yet.
While I happen to disagree, my point is to think UW as a 3rd party candidate.

I will pm you tomorrow on the personal stuff.





LHC

FFE means now.

Third party means Loser Party.

Copy on the PM.

Pat