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

Having spent several months in the US capitol as an engineer, I was shocked at how a modern government tries to function in such an outdated, overcrowded and isolated environment. The first thing a modern company does when it can afford to do so is to move into a new building in a better location. If we want the Federal government to change, we should build a new capitol in a better location that would be dedicated to the buisness of government for the people and by the people. The old capitol would still be a great tourist attraction since most of the buildings are already museums.

2007-03-03 11:12:09 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

20 answers

Only if the millionaire politicians pay for the move. How about this, our elected officials come to Washington once a week for business, the other three weeks, everything becomes public museums thus helping to pay for their existence. The other three weeks, EVERY elected official in the federal government has an office in their district, where it is mandatory they spend an eight hour day and at least three a week seeing their constituents instead of lobbyists. Two days a week to travel to areas of concern in their district. How's that?

2007-03-03 12:03:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I was thinking the same thought recently during the debate about Senator Pelosi's transport to California.

Moving the White House, and Congress to a geographic center point would be an wise (though costly) move. LEAVE the FBI, CIA, Pentagon where they are... they can hold their meetings on teleconferences.

I'd like to see a simple study on how much it would save the tax-payers on the commute costs for the Congress !!

I was stuck in DC for 9 months, and the cost of an apartment was just WAY outside of the budget of a lowly E-6.

2007-03-03 11:24:11 · answer #2 · answered by mariner31 7 · 0 0

America has more to do with its dwindling resources! Openers, the VA does not have the funds to pay deserved compensation to veterans. They are currently in a funding crises.

There is no reason why Katrina victims should still be homeless or the city completely restored.

Many of our schools suck right on the bottom of the barrel. Those issues should have been erased eons ago.

Our national health policy is way behind many other countries that have fewer resources than ours! Why?

We have proved incapability or unwilling to secure our boarders and we ALLOW any one to come in and commit crimes that would put US citizens in jail!

You are shocked about the location of our capital, why aren’t you shocked about the miss use of our troops, their needless deaths and injured bodies, why aren’t you shocked about the on going corruption in both government and big business?
Why aren’t you shocked at the number of unwed mothers and the negative repercussions that has on the child and ultimately the American society?

Why aren’t you shocked at the on going forced SEX slavery supported by kidnapping children and the importation of children and females into this country? Did I mention the American males that pay to use these slaves?

You are shocked?

2007-03-03 11:28:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

we can't move the capital for one because when we are moving it it may be attacked also what would be the benefit of moving it just less crowded that's not a good enough reason and also we would spend millions of tax payers dollars to rebuild the capital building, white house, FBI building, CIA and more

2007-03-03 11:16:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No. We don't need to be thinking up things in which
to spend taxpayer's money, especially if it is not
something really important or emergency. Let's just
keep history like it is and has been.

2007-03-03 11:18:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

No. The cost is too high and the govt already spends more than its worth.

2007-03-03 11:15:10 · answer #6 · answered by kool_rock_ski_stickem 4 · 0 0

It would be very costly and would cause the change of every map and many documents. Not practical.

2007-03-03 11:15:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I believe it should as well as the White House , in my opinion both need more security and alot more land

2007-03-03 11:14:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I'm still upset that Philadelphia isn't the capitol!

2007-03-03 11:14:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

You are only talking about geography. Your proposal would be a tremendous waste of money.

2007-03-03 11:15:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers