General observations on just about anything.
Make your voice heard.
Published on May 20, 2010 By Nitro Cruiser In Politics

Whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or other I believe most reasonable Americans agree that something must be done about the out of control government spending. Until now the only way for the public to participate in their government was to write their representatives or run for office themselves.

This basically floods the offices of representatives and senators with a wide variety of suggestions or grievances that may or may not actually be read by the recipient. A good idea could just as easily get thrown in with the in-actionable rants, there is no way to know. The sender gets a nice "thank you" for your concern and put on the politicians mailing list.

Now there is YOU CUT. Admittedly this is has one focus, but that one issue is of extreme importance in these times. What government spending is not important to you?

This is how it works:

1. Go to the website

2. Each week 5 items will appear. READ each one carefully (or better yet research each on your own). You will only be able to VOTE for ONE issue (one form of government spending you DON'T approve of) of the five for that week.

3. Click on the VOTE box for that particular item (you can also text vote), a small box will appear requesting your e-mail to complete your vote. That's it.

4. You will receive an e-mail the following week with the topic that received the most votes and the outcome of it on the floor of Congress.

Some anti-Republicans will no doubt abhor going to one of their websites. To them I say, the issues are right there, your "exposure' time is minimal, and it's not overbearing to begin with.

I don't know if it will catch on, I hope it does. I'd like to see a non-partisan government website to something similar on a wide range of issues. I would not support this if it were promoting programs, but since its purpose is to seek cuts in spending, I'm all for it and if one doesn't see something they feel should be cut they don't have to vote that particular week. I'm sure most everyone could fine one thing they believe is wasteful, so that shouldn't be a problem. Anyway it's an easy way to get involved.

Here is the LINK

 

You Cut


Comments (Page 1)
on May 20, 2010

Great site, great way to use the same technology that Obama praised while running for President as a great tool to run his campaign but then criticized as bad technology for people because it keeps them from getting educated. I casted my vote already.

on May 20, 2010

Double post, that's how much I care.

on May 21, 2010

That one was easy.  While all the programs should be cut, having only one vote, the easy one was the pay raise since they already make more than the private sector (and to my knowledge have never had a pay cut or not gotten a raise).

on May 21, 2010

I casted my vote already.

 

on May 21, 2010

That one was easy. While all the programs should be cut, having only one vote, the easy one was the pay raise since they already make more than the private sector (and to my knowledge have never had a pay cut or not gotten a raise).

Heh, that's the one I picked Doc. I thought is was wrong last year to offer a government pay raises while the country was hurting. Even Social Security recipients received no cost of living increase, even though prices rose. Don't get me wrong, lots of hard working gov. employees, but they still need to understand who really is paying the wages.

on May 21, 2010

Heh, that's the one I picked Doc. I thought is was wrong last year to offer a government pay raises while the country was hurting. Even Social Security recipients received no cost of living increase, even though prices rose. Don't get me wrong, lots of hard working gov. employees, but they still need to understand who really is paying the wages.

The Commonwealth of Virginia employees have not received a raise since 2006, and with the furlough this year (fortunately only one day - next Friday), they are actually getting a cut this year!  Most states know how to balance budgets and the employees generally understand and go along with the hard decisions.  I doubt federal employees will be so understanding.  But it is only the feds and deadbeats that seem to think they are above the law of balancing budgets.

on May 21, 2010

I doubt federal employees will be so understanding. But it is only the feds and deadbeats that seem to think they are above the law of balancing budgets.

We all see what is happening in Greece with the riots. The same could happen here, and with an ever expanding federal government, that could be a lot of rioters.

on May 21, 2010

A good idea but it would've been nice to see them set up a separate website not obviously linked to any one political party. It'd also help make the results of it carry much more weight (although either way they'd probably be ignored). Still a good idea how they've done it though. My main criticism (which isn't that big of one) is that the voting options ought to be similar in value - having a 1m cut alongside a 1bn cut isn't that helpful in terms of choice - I might feel that proportionately to the money the 1m one is the least harmful cut, but that the 1bn one because of it's size would have a more favourable overall impact. If instead I could choose between 5 ~1bn cuts or 5 ~1m cuts it'd allow for a clearer picture to emerge.

 

It'd be good if more things like this could be done, instead of politicians deciding amongst themselves what to do and the electorate getting only a minimal amount of input indirectly via periodic elections.

on May 21, 2010

A good idea but it would've been nice to see them set up a separate website not obviously linked to any one political party. It'd also help make the results of it carry much more weight (although either way they'd probably be ignored).

I agree (see main article). I do understand this a republican initiative and their "baby". That doesn't mean that others can't use it to advance their beliefs. I would like to see a non-partisan site with many more topics explored, pipe it to all congress members. They would know if people support their initiatives before they vote on a bill. Some sort of account to prevent fraud (multiple voting) and hacking would have to be devised. I would not want to see it dominate government politics though, because activists would be the ones making policy. I see it more of a tool letting politicians read their constituents temperature on issues, preferably from their own districts.

My main criticism (which isn't that big of one) is that the voting options ought to be similar in value - having a 1m cut alongside a 1bn cut isn't that helpful in terms of choice - I might feel that proportionately to the money the 1m one is the least harmful cut, but that the 1bn one because of it's size would have a more favourable overall impact.

I see your point, but I disagree to an extent. More balanced figures would make some folks think hard about what is important. But, life is rarely that simple. I hope people will look at all the issue and not just focus on the dollar amount.

It'd be good if more things like this could be done, instead of politicians deciding among themselves what to do and the electorate getting only a minimal amount of input indirectly via periodic elections.

This could be a start. I could see something like this on even local representative's websites.

on May 22, 2010

They would know if people support their initiatives before they vote on a bill

Sounds good, but I don't think they care what we think.

on May 22, 2010

BONEHEADdb

They would know if people support their initiatives before they vote on a bill


Sounds good, but I don't think they care what we think.

I hear that, however I believe it would still be a plus. If the majority of people were against a bill and the politician still voted for it, then he/she is not serving their constituents. A pattern of this behavior would be easy to follow. Politicians rely on the publics "short memory" all too often. That needs to stop.

on May 24, 2010

(although either way they'd probably be ignored)

Sad and true.

having a 1m cut alongside a 1bn cut isn't that helpful in terms of choice

That was what influenced me the greatest.  not the stupidity of each program, but the magnitude.  Yes, the 1m boondoggles need to be cut, but when you have trillion dollar deficits, you need to start whacking big slices, not nibbles at a time.  Perhaps whacking all programs under 1 billion should be grouped together.  Then let them try to add them back with referendums.

 

on May 24, 2010

The only problem I see is, how many roughly equal dollar amount spending bills come up at any given time? I hear what you guys are saying, chop big. I will examine each bill though based on the "stupidly unnecessary" factor as sometimes it is easier to cut a small chunk of fat than a larger one (given the way US politics works). I wish I could vote for all of them sometimes (at least more than one).

on May 24, 2010

Sounds good, but I don't think they care what we think.

Our job as American citizens is to make them care. If we give up before we even give it a try or we do it but still think it won't work then we may as well just vote ourselves into Communism. What makes this country so desirable is the fact that we get to choose and in a way force decisions. With this we have more of a hands on with the hopes that a better alternative will give us even more hands on.

on May 24, 2010

Our job as American citizens is to make them care.

Exactly, it is our responsibility. I don't believe this method is prefect, but it's a step in the right direction.