English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Our system of relying on individual congressmen or senators (or the president) to offer a bill for a vote puts only one option up for consideration, and often not the best one possible. If all the options were offered, we'd have a better chance to find the best solution.

2007-01-02 10:07:07 · 9 answers · asked by William F. Torpey 2 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

9 answers

The term for it is "Think tanks" and we already have them.

2007-01-02 10:10:53 · answer #1 · answered by Common Sense 5 · 1 0

You Yanks need a new Government just as we do in Britain, then may be we can leave the rest of the World in peace. However if such a body had been in existence do you think that anyone, even the great American public would have listened before the illegal war in Iraq.

2007-01-02 18:23:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Funniest element so far: "this is the full factor of delegating power, permit decrease point officers stressful with regard to the small info whilst the president concerns with regard to the large issues" Don;t you think of the 'small info' are already well-known in the regulation? does not the IRS could perform in the regulation? the place did the thought particular communities could be concern to greater scrutiny come from? A 'low point worker'? some 'low point' attorneys or accountants or different workers desperate in certainly one of those coverage for that IRS branch? Can any IRS worker set or substitute coverage at will? whilst it replaced into added to the attention of 'greater mamagement' not something replaced into executed. Why? i don't doubt that the President did not expressly direct such action from the IRS. i'm extremely particular that it replaced into made glaring that such action might pass unpunished could it happen. so far it HAS long previous unpunished. permit's see who gets tossed decrease than the bus first and what they could say decrease than penalty of purgery. No 'low point' worker is keen to lose each and every thing, that's composed of his freedom and in all probability his family individuals (to divorce/estrangement via encarceration). As with Beghazi, the story isn't in easy terms that it 'exceeded off' yet how replaced into it even available that it could happen and that reaction to what 'exceeded off'. each and every American could be outraged!

2016-10-19 09:20:12 · answer #3 · answered by pachter 4 · 0 0

We certainly don't need to waste even more money on another new goverment agency to solve yet another problem that Tony Blair and his spineless good for nothing Tonettes cannot solve

2007-01-02 17:44:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We do have them, they plan ahead as far as 25 years.
Check out a book called "The Pentagons New Map"
it will explain allot.

2007-01-02 10:39:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The only part of your question i got to was
DO WE NEED A NEW GOVERNMENT

YES

mind you who do you want in there all as bad as each other

2007-01-02 10:15:49 · answer #6 · answered by Clem 2 · 0 0

yes but then it would take years to listen to all options

2007-01-02 10:11:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No our government has enough beurocracy.

2007-01-02 10:12:55 · answer #8 · answered by Jon M 4 · 0 0

No

2007-01-02 23:57:37 · answer #9 · answered by LongJohns 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers