Rules of the Engagement for Politicians

Democracy as practiced in the US doesn't seems to be government by the people for the people anymore.  It feels more like government for the big corporations by hidden hands of CEOs.    More and more, policies and laws are passed that satisfy the interest of the corporations by incessant lobbyist.  The average desire of the people, the things that ought to be the right thing for the nation as a whole are often hindered.  Some have very good intentions, but incessant push and threats by corporation and trade group lobbyist makes them impossible.  Compounded to the problem is that many politicians are working really to push their careers ahead, they play politics for self gain rather than for the good of the people. 


The current debate about health care reform is a good example.  On the grand scale, it is obvious that the US need a much needed reform to get health care on track.  How is a wealthy, "developed" nation offer worse health care than many "third world" countries?  Think Tank organizations could draft up plans of what a good health care plan should look like (programs from NPR and movies like Sicko makes excellent presentation for even the general consumers).  Yet politicians is effectively only creating band-aid patches for things that would be palatable to big corporations rather than hit the stop button and restart with brand new approaches. 


It is obviously hard to make changes to an existing system with lot of legacy to worry about, but that's why we elect country officials from a pool of millions of people.  They should be the cream of the crop.  Given a right framework to work in, such goals should be very achievable.  Here are my two cents on how we can change the system so that deep-pocket lobbyist (and thus the corporations they represent) more visible and accountable to the general public.  Methods that limit their power from their money so that it is on a more level playing field with grass-root and citizen organizations that promote ideas that are truly for the good of the nation.


Political officers really ought to make their plans and actions transparent.  They should publish their daily/weekly activities.  eg,
- meetings for longer than 30 minutes with lobbyist should be published. 
- meeting with other branches of government should be published.
 They can be done after the facts, so that they can have some uninterrupted time for discussion.  The exact location need not be disclosed, but if they are meeting at a five stars restaurant, such description should be stated.


They should have a FAQ answered about their standing ground/point of view of all hot-topics.  External body such as news reporter can them call out whatever actions that they take that is inconsistent with their published PoV. 


Debates about how policies should be written should be done in open, balanced discussion groups.  Lobbyist representing corporations should only be allowed to present their ideas across from NGOs/citizen organizations in scheduled, open forums.  Both parties could serve as board of advisor to officials drafting new laws, but views and hidden agendas would be reveled from opponents so that truly balanced laws could be passed, rather than laws that sounds good in spirit but are largely ridden with loopholes that benefit the status quo.


All high level officials need to do this.  eg Senators, House of Representatives, even head of each departments such as EPA, FDA, DoJ, etc.  Same apply to state level officials.


And finally, this country was formed from the idea of freedoms.  Please keep this in mind when passing new laws.  How is it that the House of Representatives create policies that prevents health care providing organizations from being able to provide abortion services if they receive federal-aid?  Remove the discussion of whether abortion is right or wrong as that should be separate discussion.  The government should just provide framework that support its citizen's freedom.  It should not use money dedicated for improving the live of the population at large to push agendas that is not universally agreed on.  Think of it this way: Could the government stop payment of welfare if a person is not a "registered" Catholic?