I Want to Run for President (inspired by “Designated Survivor” streaming on Net Flix)
You probably think this is a joke. It is not, but I realize it is not doable. If I did the following would be the basis of my platform:
I would only serve for one term and put all of my efforts into that term, with no reelection campaigning.
I would run as an independent and not take funding from any source in excess of $1,000. Regardless of the amount, I would not take any donation from a SuperPAC.
If I was fortunate enough to fill a Supreme Court position, I would only consider moderate Judges that were not registered members of a Political Party.
I would call for an independent third-party audit of all government departments. Audit firms would be interviewed with the understanding that their fees would be paid out of the first 3 years’ of savings, not to exceed 25% of those savings. The scope of the audit would cover staffing & administrative efficiency and marketplace wage analysis.
I would not spend any taxpayer funds on the White House to “improve” or upgrade other than routine repairs and maintenance.
I would restrict funding of White House social functions other than for certain international relations. I will not be wearing a suit while working at home.
I will introduce a bill that requires all those serving the country to abide by the healthcare, retirement, and other benefits enjoyed by the rest of the voters.
I would make Healthcare reform my highest priority. Our country has by far the highest annual per capita cost of first-world countries at over $11,000. At the same time the WHO ranks us 37th in terms of quality of care. Our costs are 2 ½ times the cost of the EU average per capita cost. Almost all of the EU countries rank ahead of us in terms of quality of care. I would direct that we evaluate several other successful systems, selecting the best and most efficient practices resulting in a healthcare reform bill. Healthcare should be a right, not a benefit for the wealthiest country in the world. An efficient system will do this and at the same time is the single issue capable of both reducing tax and the budget deficit.
I would impose military intrusion into any country experiencing internal civil conflict, regardless of our economic considerations. I would aggressively support methods to target terrorist strongholds, regardless of the country, but favor technology-based solutions rather than those that are manpower intensive.
I would appoint the most qualified staff available since I have no political favors to repay. My VP candidate would need to be in complete agreement with my platform.
I would be a vocal advocate for term limits with a phase-in period. We need representation that sees their role as a “service” and not as a career. Anything beyond 10 – 12 years combined service in the Senate and/or Congress is a career. I also would submit a bill that would change the Congressional Reps’ terms from 2 years to 4. A 2-year term is ridiculous as they spend 1 year working and the next running for reelection. I like the idea of 50% of the positions being up for election every two years.
I would introduce a tax bill that would reduce the burden on the middle class. It would be tied to the healthcare reform bill which would pay for much of the tax reduction. It would include a fraction of increases to the top 5%. I would recommend that at least a portion of tax be based on “wealth” as opposed to the income in a specific year. This will prevent the very wealthy from paying no tax. My thinking is that every family with a net worth exceeding $1 million would pay .5% of the equity up to $5 million, 1% on the net worth from the next $5 million, and 1.5% on the next $10 million and 2% on anything over $20 million.
Our country competes in a Global economy. To support our businesses, I would eliminate the corporate income tax and also taxes on dividends. While initially, this may sound like a windfall the free-market system would eventually respond with more competitive pricing. Today companies jump through hoops to avoid paying taxes and as a result, less than 9% of all Federal revenues are from companies.
The last tax reduction had both good and bad news The good news is the increased standard deduction made filing easier since it reduced the number of returns needing to itemize and it also helped out very low-income families. The bad news is that the top 10% of income earners received 2/3rds of the tax reduction benefit and the middle class received almost no benefit. The middle class is the “engine” of our economy. Over the past 20 years, the average middle-class family income has only risen 8% while GDP has doubled. Does this seem fair?
I would appoint a bipartisan commission comprised of both major parties and independents to evaluate systems employed by other countries that have much lower gun death rates without allowing citizens to own sufficient arms for protection and sport hunting. I would instruct the commission to only consider “evidence-based” data with the objective of crafting a gun safety bill.
Our country has 4.5% of the world’s population and we incarcerate almost 25% of all the inmates in the world. About 50% of crimes are drug-related and almost 2/3rds of all prisoners are repeat offenders. Other first-world countries with less crime have incarceration rates that are a fraction of ours. I would appoint a commission to review other systems with the objective of crafting a bill to improve our numbers and reduce the cost to the taxpayer. More prisons are not the answer!
I would introduce a bill that would either eliminate or severely restrict special-interest lobbying. The bill would restrict any federal election campaigning (or fundraising) to the period 4 months prior to the election. The bill would also cap what would be allowed for total spending. So much for a Representative, so much for the Senate and so much for President.
I believe we need to think long-term when it comes to the environment. I will support any legislation that provides for a reasonable transition from our current coal and natural gas energy dependence to renewable sources. I think a 10 -15- year plan is reasonable. Several renewable sources are already cost-effective. The phase period will provide time for current providers to amortize their fixed cost and transition to either renewables or install systems that greatly reduce emissions from existing plants. For more detail on this please refer to an earlier post titled: “Electricity Energy Sources: Costs, Emissions & Carbon Footprint”.
Considerable detail on these issues is provided in my book:
If you agree with most of my platform, please pass along the link to this blog and recommend that they review this week’s posting.