Investigate the rules of Congress. In particular, make the conflict-of-interest regulations now applicable to all other federal government employees applicable to Congress too. Make it illegal for congressional politicians to actively trade stocks or sit on the boards of companies while they’re in office. Make campaign contributions only able to be spent on campaigns; presently, there may be loopholes allowing money in leadership PACs and some political committees to
go with a politician when he retires. If politicians want to make more money, than leave government service and go make more money. But congressional political office should not be a “get rich” scheme that it can be today.

Investigate a mandated 5-10 year waiting period between working for the government and working as a lobbyist, or, better yet, forbid government employees from working as a lobbyist period. (Background) – Stop the revolving door of congressional legislators & ex-military to become lobbyists. Of the 358 members of Congress who left office since
1998, almost 80% went to work as lobbyists since retirement (Center for Responsible Politics). A huge part of this problem that voters don’t realize is that many of these same congressional members basically worked as lobbyists while they were still in Congress to prepare for their upcoming careers. Yes, many congressional members are working on behalf of their future corporate employers during their government careers when they are supposed to be working for the American people. If you want a job in the government, work for the government and don’t use your government employment to prepare for your future corporate careers. There is a political adage that says – In China, the government controls business; in the US, business controls the government. Unfortunately, there is a lot of truth in that.

Investigate: 1) restricting the time that Congressmen/women, and Senators can remain in office; perhaps 12 years total would be enough, and 2) implementing age limits, such as 70 years old. (Background) – The founding fathers may not have envisioned that elected Congressional positions would become lifelong careers, but for some elected officials, it certainly is. We believe there should be limits to ALL congressional positions, just as there is for many local elected offices.

Investigate the use of “add-on amendments,” or “pork-barrel” funding, as additions to congressional bills. All spending that requires taxpayer funding should be transparent and voted for as stand-alone items. Period. (Background) –
Congress should not be permitted to use “add-on amendments,” including so-called “pork-barrel” funding, to be added to ongoing congressional legislation. Budget items that cost taxpayer money should stand by themselves, and be voted on separately and individually. “Pork-barrel” funding is often a process of “legalized bribery” through the action of congressional members that have been lobbied byspecial interests to give money to states for specific and sometimes questionable local projects. The Alaska “bridge to nowhere” is an example since it was a very expensive engineering project to benefit 50 people who lived on a small island off the Alaskan coast. As one can imagine, there were campaign
contributing contractors who would have benefited greatly from the construction of that bridge. Mercifully, funding for the bridge was eventually terminated by Congress after the bridge’s only proponent, Senator Ted Stevens, died while in office. Needless to say, America shouldn’t have to wait until a politician dies in order to terminate a wasteful pork-barrel project. America’s working/middle economic classes understand wasteful spending and want it stopped.

Investigate how to make it illegal to gerrymander to benefit one party over another when drawing congressional districts. Assess the mandatory use of independent commissions to draw congressional districts. (Background) – Currently, two states, Arizona and California, use an independent commission to draw congressional districts, and many more states are considering this alternative. If the commission can be isolated from political pressure and influence, it is probably a good way to draw congressional districts that are fair to both political parties. The idea that a party in power can redraw state districts to benefit themselves is corrupt and should not be tolerated in a democracy.

Investigate the consolidation of federal law enforcement agencies. (Background) – The consolidation of some federal law enforcement agencies may be appropriate, including: FBI, ATF, DEA, U. S. Marshall’s Service, U.S. Transportation Security
Administration (TSA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and U.S. Coast Guard, etc. Perhaps the Department of Homeland Security would be a logical home for law enforcement. Wondering if one agency is talking to another agency during a crisis is dangerous, and reducing overlapping administrations may actually reduce costs to some degree. While the majority of federal law enforcement employees work for the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security now, there are dozens of federal law enforcement agencies under other departments. Reducing the number of administrations may help with coordination and reduce cost.

Investigate the use of secret ballots to be allowed for Senators to vote for cabinet positions. (Background) – The role of cabinet-level officials in our government is impactful and important. But in recent years, voting for cabinet candidates has
become politicized due to candidates who obviously do not have the experience for the job, other than to be Presidential loyalists. The use of secret ballots would allow Senators to vote their conscience without worry of retaliation and would help lessen the politicalization of voting for cabinet candidates.

All of our government agencies should be audited every 2-3 years with no exceptions. (Background) – Since 1996, every agency in the U.S. has been audited routinely except one – the Pentagon. Therefore, U.S. taxpayers have no idea the true cost of our military and intelligence services.

Investigate changing US tax law to allow information to be shared with foreign governments about money that is invested inside the US from foreign citizens. (Background) – The US receives tax and asset information from American investments, but does not share that information with other countries, making the US a potential tax haven for corrupt international money. This, in turn, encourages money laundering through US banks and investments. Case in point – Chinese billionaires, Russian oligarchs, and Saudi sheiks today invest in the US specifically because the US will not give information to their respective governments about money invested inside the US.

Investigate doing away with anonymous shell corporations by making all corporations document who their real owners are and other transparency characteristics. (Background) – Today, anonymous shell corporations are created in the U.S. for mainly three reasons – 1) to help criminals launder money through the American banking system, and 2) to allow the uber-rich to hide money so they do not have to pay US taxes, and 3) to reduce liability for fraudulent insurance companies and other companies wanting to hide assets and responsibility from clients and customers.

Anything that hides money to avoid paying taxes has the potential to hurt America’s working/middle economic classes by reducing government revenue. The working/middle economic classes do not use shell corporations in Delaware, the Cayman Islands and in Bermuda, so it’s time the U.S. government stops encouraging them by facilitating their creation in the U.S. We’re encouraging international money laundering by allowing anonymous shell corporations to proliferate through Delaware and other locations that cater to the banking industry.

Investigate closing the myriad of loopholes and tax avoidance schemes that allow individuals and corporations to avoid paying taxes. For instance, if a company sells something in the US, it should pay US taxes. Period. (Background) – Tax
avoidance through offshore tax loopholes is a significant reason why corporations, which paid one-third of federal revenues 60 years ago, now pay one-tenth of federal revenues, despite the fact that many corporations have become global powerhouses dominating international commerce.

Investigate not allowing U.S. companies to write-off expenses associated with closing factories here and re-opening
them outside the U.S., as well as opening new factories outside the U.S. (Background) – Companies based in the U.S. can write-off expenses associated with closing factories here and re-opening them outside the U.S. This reflects a profound lack of concern for America’s working/middle classes. These businesses already have an incentive to move overseas to receive lower labor costs and lowered environmental regulations. Should we also be giving them a tax deduction in the process? We’ve seen the result of the so-called “free market” in trade agreements signed over the past 40 years and we can see they have been the primary driving force that has destroyed much of the manufacturing base in the U.S. We need a vibrant manufacturing base in America or we’ll never have a strong, fully functioning working/middle class, especially as technologies become more sophisticated.

Investigate using the tax system to encourage business to keep jobs, especially those in manufacturing, in the U.S.
(Background) – Using the tax system to encourage business to make good decisions that support America’s working/middle economic classes makes sense. That would help to even the playing field between those companies that want to sell products to U.S. citizens and hire American labor, versus those companies that don’t want to manufacture in the U.S. but still want to sell products to U.S. citizens. American workers are well-aware of the result of so-called “free market forces” and its result on the American manufacturing base.

Investigate making an existing national holiday, such as Veteran’s Day, a national election day. Mandate that waiting times to vote in national elections and primaries for national elections be no longer than some maximum time, such as one hour. (Background) – Exorbitant times waiting on line to vote is an indication of voting suppression as long wait times discourage people from voting. In 2020, voters in some states waited on line for over 6-hours before being able to vote for Democratic primary candidates. Wait times this long shows either incompetence by state election officials or outright bias and should not be tolerated. Today, most democratic countries around the world have a national holiday to give voters the time to vote in national elections.

Investigate making it mandatory for all candidates for national political positions to show complete tax returns for five years prior to becoming a candidate. No exceptions. No excuses. No nonsense. (Background) – Anyone planning to be a candidate for any national political position in the U.S., including the President, should show complete tax returns for five years prior to becoming a candidate. The notion that a candidate would be afraid to show their tax return means they have something to hide and should disqualify anyone from aspiring to political positions in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. Period.

Investigate concepts that could make a fairer system for national elections that would not favor one political party over another. One way would be to stop the “winner- take-all” electoral process used in most states and make electors proportional to the voters’ actual votes. This would give a better chance for the national vote winner to actually win national elections. It doesn’t guarantee it, just makes it more likely. (Background) – Admittedly, getting rid of the electoral
college altogether would be impossible since it would be seen as eroding the power of low population states in favor of large population states. A state's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for their Senators. Currently, it’s a “winner-take-all” process in 48 out of 50 states where the winner of a Presidential vote in a state receives all the electors for that state (Maine and Nebraska are already proportional in their assigning electors). History tells us the electoral college was first created because the founding fathers were afraid of direct election to the Presidency where a tyrant could possibly
manipulate public opinion and come to power. So electors were created and chosen by politicians and it is the electors that directly vote for a President, not the voters. Today, this process does not operate as envisioned because the electors just vote for the winner of a popular vote in a state (even if it is by one vote). And because the electoral college is a “winner-take-all” event, the process makes it relatively easy for the loser of the national popular vote to actually win the Presidency. The bottom line is – the electoral college is an outdated process created because America’s Founders did not trust the citizens of the US to vote for an “acceptable” candidate.

Investigate putting all Special Council investigations under the authority of some entity, other than the President. Perhaps Congress or the Supreme Court, but not the U.S. Attorney General as long as the AG office-holder is chosen directly by the President. Keep Inspector- Generals non-political by protecting them from the people they are supposed to investigate.
(Background) – Special Councils investigating the President (or anyone in the government) must not be under the authority of the President or an appointee of the President. That is an obvious conflict of interest that all autocratic-leaning politicians will implement if they are able. Likewise, Inspector- Generals must not be able to be fired by a President for any reason other than for corruption. Allowing a President to fire those investigating him is clearly a flaw in the organization of our government.

Investigate adding legal restrictions to the presidential pardon process, such as: 1) exclude the possibility that a president can pardon himself, and 2) exclude the granting of pardons for offenses in any way connected to the president, himself, whether involving impeachment or not. (Background) – A corrupt or incompetent president can do tremendous damage to the country and should not have the equivalent of a “get out of jail card” for himself and his supporters. The presidential pardon process can be corrupted and makes the president potentially “above the law.”

Investigate: 1) putting a time limit on Supreme Court Justice tenure, such as 12 years, 2) putting an age limit on justices (such as 70 years old), and 3) making the Senate vote for a Supreme Court Justice a 2/3 vote in order to bring some level of bi-partisanship back into the process to make it more likely moderate justices can be chosen. The reality is both parties are self-serving, and we need to accommodate that fact. (Background) – With the current simple majority process in the Senate to choose Supreme Court Justices, each party sends right-wing or left-wing justices to the bench, depending upon which power has a majority in the Senate. The current process can ignore moderates because a simple majority is enough by one party as long as they control the Senate. This is not what most Americans want. Most Americans are moderates and do not want to be led by extremists from either side.

Investigate enacting congressional legislation to define that corporations are not people, and money is not speech. And let’s see who votes against it! (Background) – Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a landmark U.S. constitutional law, campaign finance, and corporate law case dealing with regulation of political campaign spending by corporate organizations. Despite the Supreme Court’s decision known as Citizens United, most Americans agree that corporations are not people, and money is not speech. This decision has exacerbated an already entrenched system of “legalized bribery” that congressional members have created for themselves because it benefits the reelection of incumbent politicians who often have more corporate sponsors/money to fund campaigns compared to challengers. The solution is to initiate congressional legislation to correct this perversion of law that was enacted by the Supreme Court in 2010. We believe only a corrupt country in the grasp of fascist oligarchs and/or big business would allow such perverted
definitions to exist.

Investigate reorganizing America’s foreign policy to insure it benefits the residents of countries and not just political leaders. Provide more support to the Peace Corps, America’s best public relations entity. Peace Corps volunteers are America’s non-political ambassadors, but they are now grossly underfunded and supported and very poorly organized. Yet the fact remains, the Peace Corps is an organization with great heart, people and potential. (Background) – the U.S. (and England before them) is known for throwing money at the leaders of other countries through foreign aid grants and loans, especially developing countries with natural resources. Such money helps foreign leaders stay in power and continue being friendly to American business interests. But it does little to help the people of those countries who are the ones who should receive that aid. A recent result of America’s foreign aid policy can be seen in the large numbers of migrants from Central America who are seeking asylum in the U.S. today. The billions of dollars given to the leaders of Central American countries over decades did not trickle down to the people (actually, it never does). And now because of horrific crime rates, agricultural losses caused by drought (exacerbated by climate change), plus a lack of jobs, poor educational system and government support, residents of Central America are trying to escape their chaotic conditions by traveling north. America’s foreign policy towards Central America is a prime example of failed government policy with no end in sight. Let’s look at another country’s foreign policy to compare – China loans money through its foreign aid program to developing countries too, but it does so in a way that ensures that its money is spent on visible projects to benefit people directly. An example of this are the roads that were built in Kenya since 2000 that were funded by the Chinese. In this example, the Chinese sent earth-moving equipment to Kenya with administrators, supervisors, and engineers to design the roads (minimizing the political “middlemen” to embezzle money along the way). They hired local Kenyans as laborers to form a team led by the Chinese to actually build the roads. Together, they built well-engineered roads throughout the country of Kenya. The public relations that emanated from that foreign policy process will endure for many, many years as the Kenyans enjoy paved roads for the first time in many years. Now that’s foreign policy that works!

Investigate federal funding for vocational schools similar to those used in Europe; once established – starting in high school, let students decide whether they want to be on an apprenticeship track or an academic track. Investigate the expansion of worker co-op programs, used extensively in Europe, to provide more stability to America’s working force.
(Background) – The following information is mostly taken from an opinion piece in the NY Times by columnist David Brooks (Nov 8, 2018) entitled: “What the Working Class Is Still Trying to Tell Us.” As he describes – the Republicans who flooded to the polls in November 2018 weren’t college-educated suburbanites. They were high-school-educated, working-class citizens. Pre-Pandemic, this was a country in which nearly 20 percent of prime-age American men were not working full time, and only 37 percent of adults expect their children to do better financially than they. This is still a country in which millions of new jobs are through “alternative work arrangements” like contracting or consulting — meaning no
steady salary, no predictable hours and no security. Working-class voters tried to send a message in 2016, and they are still trying to send it. The crucial question is whether America’s leaders are aware of what many, high-school-educated workers are going through and will even listen. As Oren Cass points out in his book, “The Once and Future Worker,” one-fifth of America’s students fail to graduate high school in four years; roughly one-fifth take no further schooling after high school; roughly one-fifth drop out of college; roughly one-fifth get a job that doesn’t require the degree they just earned; and only one-fifth actually use their degree in their career. As David Brooks laments: we built a broken system and then ask people to try to fit into the system instead of tailoring a system around people’s actual needs. Cass suggests that we instead do what nearly every other affluent nation does: starting in high school, let students decide whether they want to be on an apprenticeship track or an academic track. Vocational and technical schools are ubiquitous across the developed world, and yet that model has been mostly rejected here. Cass also suggests the expansion of worker co-op programs that are used extensively in Europe and elsewhere. Today, we have an old, adversarial labor union model that is inappropriate for many private-sector employees who work temporary positions, short-term contracts, or several jobs in our ever-expanding “gig economy.” But co-ops, drawing on successful models used in several European nations, could represent workers in negotiations, train and retrain workers as they moved from firm to firm and build a safety net for periods of unemployment. Shopping for a worker co-op would be more like buying a gym membership than joining a union. Each co-op would be a community and service provider to address a range of each worker’s needs. We believe the above discussion (and subsequent congressional legislation) is absolutely needed to begin to help working class employees find meaningful, steady employment with real retirement opportunities and healthcare protection. Without such a paradigm shift in the relationship between education and employment, the quality of life for high-school-educated, working-class citizens will continue to diminish.

Investigate tasking the DOE with devising a method to identify “excellent” teachers in the country for a wide variety of subjects between K-12 classes. Post videos of the best teachers actually teaching by subject category for all teachers, students and parents to use when needed. (Background) – The Department of Education (DOE) should create K-12 courses for teachers to use in class, especially during national education interruptions, such as what occurred during the pandemic of 2020. These courses would be useful for teachers to use during normal years when they need support with particular subjects. The reality is – not ALL teachers are good at teaching ALL subjects; they’re just not. DOE can seek out the best teachers across the country for a particular course and post each course on a government-created YouTube channel.

Investigate the termination of high-interest private student loans and replace with low (or no) interest loans, preferably from the government without the use of “middlemen.” Investigate allowing private student loans to be erased in bankruptcy, and putting a maximum time period (such as 20 years) after which loans may be forgiven if the loans are current in payments. (Background) – Saddling students with high-interest loans is unconscionable in a developed
country such as ours, and it hinders our economy in many ways. We should be encouraging our citizenry to advance their education to better support themselves and the economy at large. This is another topic that is sadly unique to the U.S. in its scope and is partly a result of intensive lobbying efforts by the private school industry.

Investigate ways of reducing overall costs for healthcare starting with four concepts: 1) healthcare organizations could be non-profit, 2) the “pre-existing clause” of the ACA should be made into a permanent feature of all-American healthcare policies, and 3) prescription drug prices in the U.S. should not be different than the rest of the world and 4) U.S. citizens
should be able to legally purchase prescription drugs outside the U.S. (Background) – At one time in America, healthcare organizations were non-profit. costs seemed fair and most everyone could afford to go to the doctor or a hospital when they got sick. Fast forward to today and now for-profit healthcare organizations dominate American healthcare. This is result of the mythical theory that for-profit companies can always do a better job because money is the most important motivating factor to do a good job. This myth was started by business leaders wanting to infiltrate into traditionally non-profit industries. In the healthcare industry, investment banks became major players in the push to make healthcare a money-making enterprise. But perhaps not everything in life, or in an economy, should be money-making; and perhaps quality of life should take precedence sometimes, especially when it comes to a matter of life and death. One shouldn’t have to worry if they can afford to get sick, especially since it’s stressful enough living in today’s modern world. The Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) sweeping health reform legislation ended the unconscionable feature of health insurance plans kicking customers off of plans if they became seriously ill, eliminating the healthcare industry’s hurtful “pre-existing clause” feature. The ACA was passed in 2013 and the Republican Party has tried to terminate it ever since. We have the most successful economy in the world, the most expensive healthcare system, by far, and mediocre results in some healthcare categories compared to the rest of the developed world. Something’s terribly wrong with America’s healthcare picture, although the ACA was a step in the right direction. In terms of prescription drug prices, America needs congressional legislation to mandate several healthcare features: a) that Medicare (and all other government-related healthcare organization) MUST negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies to correct the Medicare Part D prescription drug insurance program, b) that drugs sold in the U.S. can be no more expensive than the average cost of the
same drug sold in Europe, and c) a mandate that drugs can receive a 30-40 year patent life total and after that period, any new patent must show a material improvement in order to receive additional patents. In this way, drugs will be treated more like other patents, instead of a special category designed to be a monopoly forever, and d) allow Americans to legally buy prescription drugs outside the U.S.

There is a perversion of law that was originally enacted by Congress in 2003 legislation creating the Medicare Part D prescription drug insurance program. After intense lobbying by the pharmaceutical industry, a provision was inserted in the law that specifically forbad Medicare-related government agencies to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. Laws enacted by Congress in 2022 now allow Medicare to negotiate prices for a limited number of popular drugs, but not all drugs. Not being able to negotiate ALL prices associated with healthcare costs is contrary to every government and private healthcare organization in the world that buys drugs for their constituents. As the largest healthcare organization in the U.S., Medicare should be mandated to negotiate ALL drug prices, not prevented from doing so. Americans already pay more for healthcare than any other country in the world, and much of it is a result of Big Pharma and the healthcare industry lobbying congressional members to make decisions favorable to them. Big Pharma literally throws money at Washington politicians to get their way, as evidenced by the fact that in 2017 the pharmaceutical and health products industry spent a staggering $279.6 million on federal lobbying. Another reason drug prices for “established” drugs, such as insulin, are high is because drugs are given special treatment for their patents. All patents expire after 20 years, except drugs. Insulin was first patented in 1923 (over a century ago) but, until recently, it was still patent-protected by its manufacturers. Drug manufacturers only need to make a simple change to the drug (which does not have to improve the drug) in order to receive another 20-year monopoly. This charade should be stopped by giving a drug inventor (or often licensee) a 30-40 year timetable as a monopoly total; this is up to double a normal patent life and
enough time to recoup R&D funding. Lastly, Americans are not allowed to purchase prescription drugs from other countries, such as Canada and Mexico. This is yet another perverse law in our healthcare system aimed at keeping prices as high as possible for Americans.

Investigate: 1) providing free medical
school tuition to students who will go into primary care medicine and provide a minimum of 4-years of service in lass populated regions of the U.S. and hospital emergency departments, etc. after becoming a doctor, and 2) if the American Medical Association (AMA) restricts the number of doctors allowed to graduate in the U.S. each year. (Background) – There is a lack of primary care doctors in the U.S. that rivals third world countries in some rural areas. Because of America’s medical tuition costs, doctors often graduate with upwards of $200K worth of debt after going to med school and that drives most doctors to shun primary care and gravitate towards more lucrative specialty practice. With America’s
aging population, we need many more primary care doctors. Let’s encourage positive things in the healthcare industry that can support the needs of America’s working/middle economic classes. Also, it has been reported by some that the AMA restricts the number of doctors that are allowed to graduate each year and this is why there are so many foreign-born doctors practicing in the US today.

Investigate ways to support caregivers and monitor what transpires as the RAISE Family Caregivers Act becomes implemented. One possibility is to provide a minimum wage more commensurate with the job that caregivers must
perform. An hourly wage of $15-$25 per hour may be a place to start, although regional wages may be more appropriate for this work and easier to “sell” to legislators. In addition, it would be worthwhile if there was support personnel that could help and advise homecare workers answering questions or providing muscle when a task, such as lifting, is beyond the strength of a particular care provider. (Background) – With our aging population, caregivers are becoming commonplace throughout the country to take care of seniors, as well as grandparents taking care of children. But our healthcare system does not support caregivers very well. With good intentions, Congress passed the bipartisan Recognize, Assist, Include, Support and Engage (RAISE) Family Caregivers Act” and it became law in 2018. But so far it looks like a typical bureaucratic start with lots of reports and meetings and a group of 30 advisors who will meet several times a year. The reality is if homecare is not available or poorly supported, the alternative may be government facilities which are far more expensive.

Investigate starting a national prescription drug monitoring program and rescind the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2016. Investigate ways to make it easier for government agencies to stop unlawful activities involving legal pharmaceuticals. Government inaction under the banner of deregulation is literally killing Americans every day. (Background) – The over-prescribing and overdose deaths due to opioids is unique to America and is a direct consequence of the deregulation of business that started in earnest in the 1980’s. It is an example of how deregulation can hurt the American people and is a symptom of an important American agency (the U.S. Food & Drug Administration – FDA) not doing its job by allowing Americans to be harmed through the over-prescription, and often illegal distribution, of opioids. U.S. physicians who bought into opioids for chronic pain started people on the medications and were told to just give them more and more if the meds didn’t work. The drug manufactures told doctors that opioids
did not pose an addiction problem and eventually the patients would get pain relief. But that was a lie. Long-term use of opioids is only partially effective in most cases, and is associated with severe addiction and many adverse long-term effects on the body. That is precisely why opioids were never prescribed in Europe as they are here. Deregulation has diminished the mandate of the U.S. FDA to use its authority to shut down obviously illegal distribution chains for opioids, and to suggest guidelines for the use of drugs that exhibit addiction and other health problems. Instead, the FDA allows drug distributors and manufacturers to self-monitor and self-regulate themselves, as deregulation dictates. The result is in 2017, 5 million people misused prescription opioids in the U.S. (out of 323 million people), or 1.55% of the population.
In the same year, only 1.3 million people misused prescription opioids in the European Union (out of 511 million people), or 0.25% of the population. The difference between opioid use in Europe compare  to the U.S. has been obvious. In concert with deregulation, the authority of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) was greatly diminished by Congressional friends of the drug industry, especially by the ironically named: Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2016, initiated by Rep. Tom Marino from Penn. Marino’s bill requires the government to meet a much higher bar before taking certain enforcement actions and this is believed to have significantly contributed to the current
opioid epidemic in the U.S. As Robert Heary, MD, of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, suggested – drug providers (doctors, psychiatrists, etc.) should complete a short (less than 5 minutes), standardized form, with each opioid prescription, to explain WHY the prescription is medically justified. If such a national prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) was established, data from those forms could feed into it and be cross-checked at pharmacies. The bottom line is that over-prescribing by doctors of any potentially-harmful drug can be controlled through a straight-forward monitoring program.

Investigate 1) closing some of our military bases around the world that are not needed, and 2) having the cost of our military partially paid by international business (see Financial Transaction Fee below). (Background) – The reality is we’re the military-police of the world whether we want to be or not. And thank goodness we are today to help Ukraine and to disrupt the imperialistic fantasies of Vladimir Putin. But perhaps we spend too much on certain aspects of our military. For example, the US now has almost 500 military bases around the world, outside of the U.S. and it begs the question – are all these bases necessary to defend ourselves? Historically, most of these bases are there to give the U.S. a presence to intimidate and to encourage host governments to be friendly to U.S. business interests. Quite simply, maintaining basses all over the word is very expensive and may be unsustainable, as the Roman and British Empires discovered. The reality is most of those bases do not help protect the U.S. or our allies.

Investigate a small “Financial Transaction Fee” (FTF) on all US stock purchases to help fund America’s military in order to
reduce the amount of funding American taxpayers must contribute. (Background) – The US is the military-police of the world, so it is appropriate that international business help pay for the cost of our military, since our military helps to maintain law and order, and to create a safe world to do business in many ways. One such way is the work our Navy does to keep shipping trade routes open for all countries to use. Here’s an example of how an FTF could work – Adding one tenth of one percent = 0.1% or 0.001 tax on all stock trades. If you buy $1,000 worth of stock, your tax would be $1.00. It has absolutely no impact on the vast majority of stock trades. However, admittedly it will impact computer-generated stock trades that can cause extreme buying and selling disruptions in the stock market. Computers can buy and sell stocks in hundreds of thousands of trades per second, unlike ordinary stockholders. These enormous stock trades tend to move markets and can cause great disruption in individual stocks. They should not be encouraged and should be called for what they truly are – STOCK MANIPULATION. This is not a new idea – In 2011, there were 40 countries that made use of an FTF, together raising about $38 billion worldwide {Reference – Stephany Griffith-Jones; Avinash Persaud, February 2012. Financial Transactions Taxes – a report produced for the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (PDF)}.
The bottom line is this – U.S. taxpayers shouldn’t be the only contributor to supporting the U.S. military when the world clearly relies on the U.S. to be the “military-police of the world.”

Investigate methods to reduce the federal budget for long-term economic sustainability. Some combination of new revenue sources and/or lower expenses will be required. A small “Financial Transaction Fee” (FTF) on stock purchases is one option for a new revenue source. However, we’re not suggesting to increase taxes on America’s working/middle economic classes. (Background) – According to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) report entitled: 2018 Long-Term
Budget Outlook, the U.S. will face severe economic problems if our federal debt continues to rise. Our current federal debt is now at its highest level since shortly after World War II. If current laws remain unchanged, CBO projects growing budget deficits will boost that debt sharply over the next 30 years; it will approach 100 percent of GDP by the end of the next decade and over 150 percent by 2048. That amount of debt would be the highest in the nation’s history and many economists believe is it unsustainable.

The prospect of large and growing debt poses substantial risks for the nation and is a manifestation ofthe failure of our Washington politicians to be able to make sensible, long-term decisions. Make no mistake – high debt has the potential to saddle our children and grandchildren with an economic future of high interest rates and painful recession/depression if nothing changes. The primary reasons for our current debt problems are: unfunded Middle East wars, exorbitant tax cuts on high-wage earners, interest on our current debt, Social Security, and social programs. In CBO’s projections, most of the
spending growth for Social Security and Medicare results from the aging of the population, especially the baby-boom generation (people born between 1946 and 1964) and as life expectancy continues to rise. However, Medicare spending growth (and other major health care programs) is also driven by rising health care costs per person. In addition, the federal government’s net interest costs are projected to climb sharply as a percentage of GDP as interest rates rise eventually due to increasing debt. The bottom line is U.S. debt looks unsustainable in the long-term and should be reduced if possible.

Investigate making it a federal hate crime to harass family members of victims of mass shootings in order to give these families some relief with combating these unconscionable lies. (Background) – There is a sickening activity going on in this country where the families of those who have died as a result of some mass shootings are harassed by people claiming the mass shooting is a hoax. The rationale for this misinformation is that mass shooting deniers think that anti-gun advocates are staging mass killings to make gun ownership, especially assault weapon ownership, the problem. The parents of children killed in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut is one example, but it’s happening elsewhere, as well. Telling survivors that their loved ones were not killed and blaming them for creating an “anti-gun political hoax” is an obnoxious and aggressive action that should be punished with federal legal consequences, instead of leaving it up to individual parents to try to deal with the consequences of these lies on their own.

Investigate methods to reduce the federal budget for long-term economic sustainability. Some combination of new revenue sources and/or lower expenses will be required. A small “Financial Transaction Fee” (FTF) on stock purchases is one option for a new revenue source. However, we’re not suggesting to increase taxes on America’s working/middle economic classes. (Background) – According to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) report entitled: 2018 Long-Term
Budget Outlook, the U.S. will face severe economic problems if our federal debt continues to rise. Our current federal debt is now at its highest level since shortly after World War II. If current laws remain unchanged, CBO projects growing budget deficits will boost that debt sharply over the next 30 years; it will approach 100 percent of GDP by the end of the next decade and over 150 percent by 2048. That amount of debt would be the highest in the nation’s history and many economists believe is it unsustainable.

The prospect of large and growing debt poses substantial risks for the nation and is a manifestation ofthe failure of our Washington politicians to be able to make sensible, long-term decisions. Make no mistake – high debt has the potential to saddle our children and grandchildren with an economic future of high interest rates and painful recession/depression if nothing changes. The primary reasons for our current debt problems are: unfunded Middle East wars, exorbitant tax cuts on high-wage earners, interest on our current debt, Social Security, and social programs. In CBO’s projections, most of the
spending growth for Social Security and Medicare results from the aging of the population, especially the baby-boom generation (people born between 1946 and 1964) and as life expectancy continues to rise. However, Medicare spending growth (and other major health care programs) is also driven by rising health care costs per person. In addition, the federal government’s net interest costs are projected to climb sharply as a percentage of GDP as interest rates rise eventually due to increasing debt. The bottom line is U.S. debt looks unsustainable in the long-term and should be reduced if possible.

Investigate going back to the rules prior to enactment of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 when only a
percentage of buyers of food and fuel commodity futures (about 20%) were allowed to be speculators in the market without any business interest in owning the commodity. (Background) – There is rampant speculation in fuel and food commodity markets today largely because of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) of 2000. But it wasn’t always this way because the CFMA changed the existing guidelines that allowed speculation in the fuel and food commodity futures market. Before the law was changed in 2000, most commodity buyers of food and fuel had to be in the business of food and fuel in order to buy their products so as not to influence the markets with unbridled speculation. The
allowance of unlimited speculation in the commodity markets was changed by enactment of the CFMA and many believe to the detriment of everyone who must purchase food and fuel around the world. One must only look at the volatile price of gasoline to see the effect of unlimited speculation in oil commodities: From 1995 to 1999 speculators made up about 10% of the oil market. Fast forward to 2006-2010 and speculators now dominate the market, making up almost 70% of the market! {article entitled: Speculation in the Commodities Market: New Economic Perspectives} This is why gasoline
prices move so quickly today at the mere hint of an international issue that could affect oil prices. Unfettered speculation in commodity markets primarily helps the investment class, not the industries the commodity markets are supposed to benefit, and certainly not ordinary folks who buy food and fuel.

Investigate ways to make the post office more cost-effective, such as: 1) rescinding the 2006 law that saddled the Post Office with prefunding retirement costs, and 2) eliminating Saturday delivery of mail. (Background) – The post office is continually under pressure to privatize because it loses money every year. But it is a national treasure started by one of America’s beloved founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin. In recent years, several congressional politicians have tried to implement a privatizing model instead of the historic form of the post office. An unusual burden on America’s post office was enacted by the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act that put the economic encumbrance on the post office to pre-fund healthcare costs for future retirees, and this is one of the reasons why the post office loses money each year.

Investigate gun safety issues with law enforcement input, such as: – 1) a national universal background check for all guns sold in the U.S. regardless of how or where the gun is sold, 2) a reasonable waiting period for sales, such as 3-days, 3) mark ammo to more easily identify a particular gun used in crime, 4) restrict the number of bullets allowed in a magazine to 10 bullets nationwide, 5) regulate the sale of some ammunition, such as preventing armor-piercing (“cop-killer”) ammunition and mandating the use of non-lead ammunition in hunting areas to protect endangered species, 6) eliminate the sale of ghost guns. (Background) – American gun violence is unique to the U.S. and studies have suggested that this is largely due to the extraordinary availability of guns in the U.S. compared to other countries in the world (not actively engaged in war). We are, by far, the most violent developed country in the world, and this is exacerbated because of the availability of powerful guns and ammunition in virtually unlimited quantities. Despite the rhetoric of conservative politicians supported by the NRA (the U.S. weapon industry’s lobbyist), three-quarters of Americans believe the second
amendment does not “mandate” unrestrained gun ownership and the fact that reasonable restrictions on gun ownership are warranted. Some of the gun limitations suggested in this IDEA will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in its interpretation of the second amendment. Some scholars have concluded that the second amendment was written to give a guarantee to slave-supporting states that they could continue having armed slave-patrol militias after the Constitution was ratified by the states. At the time, militias were used to keep slaves under control and to track down runaway slaves trying to escape to other states. The word “militias” was an important part of the second amendment for this reason. Mass shootings, where four or more people are shot, now occur every day on average in America; clearly this is not what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the second amendment.

Investigate a simpler, fairer tax system, perhaps based upon a progressive flat tax, with limited deductions that makes sense and would reduce the tax burden specifically on the working/middle economic classes. (Background) – Despite tax changes throughout the decades, the U.S. tax code is still too complicated and has been created with benefits to a myriad of special interests over many decades. Plus, the “very rich” in this country often do not pay ANY TAXES due to a very effective economic lifestyle known as BUY-BORROW-DIE. Because appreciation and borrowing are not taxed,asset-rich people never earn a “salary” and instead borrow from their assets ad infinitum. When they die, they often do not pay inheritance tax either, so they live their life never contributing to the American economy in any meaningful way. With that as background, here are some starting-points for an investigation into a fairer tax code:

A Progressive Flat Tax based upon a household’s annual gross income and limited deductions is worth considering; here are some specifics for individual tax rates based upon a progressive flat tax:

•  or = $20K annual income no tax (but, perhaps, no earned income tax credit either)

• $20K to $40K 5%

• $40K to $100K 10% (Most of the Middle Class, based upon income)

• $100K to $160K 15% (Upper Middle Class, based upon income)

• $160K to $250K 20%

• $250K to $1 Million 25%

• $1 Million 30%

• $5 Million 39%

For personal taxes, no deductions except for:
style=”font-size: 16.8px; word-spacing: 0em;”>
Primary Residence – can deduct all mortgage interest and federal and state tax payments (up to $100,000); no deduction for additional homes; no change to how investment properties are taxed;

Charities – can deduct cash up to $10,000 (or some other pre-determined amount); State Income Taxes – up to $25,000 annually (this should cover the middle economic classes);

Medical Expenses – should be considered since many U. S. bankruptcies are due to medical expenses; Other taxes:

Capital Gains Tax – consider taxing capital gains one tax tier BELOW one’s personal tax rate; therefore,
middle class investors would pay between 5-10% capital gains tax, while millionaires making over $5
million annually, would pay 30% capital gains tax.

Inheritance Tax – America needs an inheritance tax that does not hurt the middle class, but recoups something from asset-rich individuals who do not often pay tax during their lives. Therefore, consider reasonable taxes for inheritance, such as: 0% tax up to $2 Million; 2.5% tax over $2 Million; 5% tax over $5 Million; 10% tax over $10 million; 15% tax over $20 million; 20% tax over $30 million; family farms pay a reduced amount, such as half of the numbers suggested;

America’s middle class realizes there is inequality in the US tax system when high-wage earners pay a smaller percentage of income than members of the middle class. The reason lies with powerful interests who have molded the tax structure to favor themselves with a patchwork of competing concepts and favorable tax benefits for a wide array of corporations, business interests and wealthy individuals. Simply put, our tax system favors rich investors and powerful corporate interests. A sad reality is – in Congress, EVERY political decision relating to money is done on behalf of one or more “special interests” and hardly ever, the middle class.

Investigate several ways to make the southern border more secure, such as: 1) more effective inspections of vehicles entering the U.S. at legal ports of entry, and 2) more effective ways to find tunnels along the border. (Background) – The southern border of the U.S. is porous and allows illegal drugs and people to cross at will. Many drug problems here have
been exacerbated by access across the southern border through vehicular traffic at legal entries and today, it is the primary way drugs enter the U.S. Plus, continuing to find underground tunnels along border areas into the U.S. is further proof that drug transportation across the border is a major issue that continues to be out of control.

Investigate instituting a modest royalty in the 2% to 10% range that companies will pay back to the Treasury if they produce a profit-making product or technology with “free” taxpayer grant money. (Background) – We believe it is reasonable to have a royalty system for businesses to pay the U.S. Treasury for “free” grant money they receive that leads to the successful creation of profit-making products. This is especially germane to the huge grants that are given to Big
Pharma every year to pay for a significant portion of their internal research and development (R&D). The U.S. government provides Big Pharma about $30 Billion per year through no-cost grants. Congressional members have generously devised a system that government-funded research money is given away freely without the necessity of creating a benefit for the funding source – the U.S. taxpayer. Politicians will tell you “the benefit to the U.S. taxpayer is the use of the technology or product.” But that’s not how private investment works, so why shouldn’t U.S. taxpayers receive something more tangible in return to funding product development for the entire world! Simply put, engineering technology, pharmaceutical drugs and everything else created with U.S. taxpayer funding should generate a royalty for U.S. taxpayers if Americans paid for the R&D and it creates a profit-generating product. And if a company isn’t willing to pay such a royalty, they shouldn’t take “free” taxpayer grant money.

Investigate raising revenues for the Social Security system that does not hurt America’s middle-class. (Background) – Because the social security (SS) system has long-term monetary issues, we should explore ways to increase revenues going into the system. Such revenue increasing methods include: 1) raising the social security payroll cap (in 2018, the cap is about $128K); raising the cap to $250K would increase revenues by an estimated $648 billion over the 2017–2026 period, according to the government’s staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), or 2) increase the SS payroll tax, itself; or 3) raise money through third-party fees (for instance, a Financial Transaction Fee), or 4) add a surtax to wage earners making more than $5 million per year to make up the shortfall. Either way, it’s going to take more revenue from somewhere to fix social security. It is clear that most Americans rely on social security in their retirement years in varying degrees so its importance cannot be overstated.

Investigate what industries now receive government subsidies in all forms (tax credits, grants, etc.) and make that support transparent to voters. Determine appropriate levels for annual support according to America’s needs and not necessarily the needs of a particular industry. One outcome of this investigation may be to support newer technology
industries with R&D funding and tax breaks rather than mature industries that may not need continuous support ad infinitum. (Background) – The U.S. government subsidizes a variety of established industries, such as fossil fuel and nuclear, to conduct R&D and other functions of normal business every year. Subsidies are a “zero-sum” game so money going into mature businesses means there is less money to support promising new technologies. An example of this is the fact that the U.S. is behind China, Germany and other European countries in terms of investing in renewable energy. The amount and form of government subsidies going to business is not transparent today so no one really knows if it should be changed. This lack of transparency further facilitates business to influence congressional politicians as they weigh decisions that could benefit a particular business, rather than America’s future.

Investigate and review the Department of Interior’s and Bureau of Land Management’s mining and land use royalty system for government lands to confirm it’s a fair system for American taxpayers. (Background) – The Department of Interior’s and Bureau of Land Management’s mining and land use royalty system for government lands has been in place a very long time and is designed to accommodate business interests who want to use the property. These industries include: mining, fossil fuel, renewable energy, farming and ranches. The current royalty system should be reviewed to confirm it’s fair for the owners of gov’t property – the American people.

Investigate and review the value of the Glass-Steagall Act or maintaining the Volker Rule to protect American taxpayers from having to bail out the banking system in the future from losses due to risky investments. (Background) – Former FED
chairman, Paul Volcker, proposed a rule to prohibit banks from making risky, speculative trades in their own accounts. Speculative trades contributed mightily to the financial meltdown of 2008 when big banks made bad bets on all sorts of obscure financial securities and didn’t have the money to cover their losses. Although the “Volker Rule” was put into the Dodd-Frank legislation as an attempt to restore some of the protections embodied in the New Deal-era Glass-Steagall Act, it has been under attack by Wall Street and their many congressional supporters. Glass-Steagall separated commercial banking from investment banking, so commercial banks that hold deposits from individuals and businesses (and insured by U.S. taxpayers) couldn’t risk that money on investments. Without such separation, the world will always be in danger of incurring another worldwide economic catastrophe in the future. Quite simply – Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999 enabling many of the unregulated banking processes that resulted in the 2008 economic crash.

Investigate a federal/national minimum wage that companies (with some minimum number of employees) would have to pay employees. One alternative to a single national wage could be in the form of several regional minimum wages attuned to the economics of a regional area, such as the South. (Background) – Consumer spending makes up about 70% of the activity of the American economy so it is logical for our economy to encourage companies to pay their employees a wage that allows them to spend and participate in the economy. Recently, corporations have shown to be more interested in buying back their own stock and raising dividend payments to shareholders rather than increasing the wages of their employees. The reluctance of employers to increase the wages of their employees today is reminiscent of 1914, when Henry Ford made the announcement that shocked the country – he was raising wages to $5.00 a day, over twice the average wage for automakers in 1914! It caused the financial editor at The New York Times to ask his staff “Don’t you think he’s crazy?” In addition, he was reducing the work day from 9 hours to 8 hours, a significant drop from the 60-hour work week that was the standard in American manufacturing at the time. It might have been just another of Ford’s “wild” ideas, except that it proved amazingly successful, beyond anyone’s imagination (including Henry Ford’s). Here’s what happened – before the wage increase, Ford sold less than 200,000 Model T cars a year. After the wage increase in 1914, the company began selling 300,000 of its Model-T; more than all other carmakers at the time combined. By 1915, sales had climbed to 500,000 and by 1920, Ford was selling a million cars a year. Ford recognized that higher salaries gave their employees the money to buy Ford’s cars. This has been forgotten by many in today’s business community.

Investigate enacting a federal offense for actions that can be called “domestic terrorism.” (Background) – Currently, there is no federal crime classification for “domestic terrorist” and yet America has seen its share of what most of us would agree are terrorist activities within the U.S.: the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013, the white supremacist attack at a Charleston, South Carolina church in 2015, and the attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018. People who engage in acts of violence to intimidate and coerce are terrorists, plain and simple. It’s time they were recognized as such. That label carries weight—it creates a moral equivalency between domestic terrorists and international terrorists, and it signals to Americans that the threat of extremism is just as significant when it is based on domestic political, economic, religious, cultural or social ideologies as it is when based on Islamist extremist ideologies. This has become ever more important as the United States experiences increased incidents of violence, and threats of violence, perpetrated on behalf of extremist right-wing ideologies. There are no good terrorists, domestic or international.  It is time for Congress to enact a federal offense of domestic terrorism.

Investigate labeling domestic gang members an equivalent to domestic terrorists with new federal legislation allowing state law enforcement to remove gang members from gangs for mandatory educational, vocational, and social services. (Background) – May believe members of a gang that is known to have committed violent felonies may be considered domestic terrorists. However, American state law enforcement does not have the tools to protect the public from hardened gang activities. The result is gang-related chaos in the form of killings, robberies and extortion that exists in areas of many cities in America today. The reality is U.S. laws allow gang members to fester into violent criminals and gangs now control large swaths of neighborhoods in some American cities to the detriment of law-biding residents. New federal law enforcement legislation could help state police deal with gangs and the problems they create. Such law enforcement might include allowing police to remove young gang members from the influence of gangs known to commit violent felonies. This would remove gang members off the streets and out of society for a period of time whether an individual is known to have committed a specific crime or not. Enemy combatants in a military environment are treated as a “whole” and not as individuals; domestic terrorists could be treated the same. If someone is in a violent gang, then that person is a promoter of a violent, anti-social culture. However, we do not suggest arresting and incarcerating gang members in the conventional sense. These gang members would be given mandatory educational, vocational, and social services while under a “military-style” supervision in order to attempt to rehabilitate them. Their “sentences” would accommodate educational and vocational trade opportunities provided to them to prepare them for jobs when they leave this period of mandatory supervision. A mandatory supervisory process would give gang members the educational, vocational, and social support they need in order to attempt to turn their lives around.

Remove cannabis from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s Schedule-1 drug list (that have “no currently accepted medical use”). (Background) – Marijuana has proven to have a wide variety of medical uses and consequently today, many states allow medical marijuana. However, research into medical uses for cannabis is greatly curtailed because of its Schedule-1 drug designation. Past investigators believe lobbying from Big Pharma is the primary reason the U.S. has maintained cannabis into the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s Schedule-1 drug list, so it wouldn’t take profits away from prescription pain medications. The opioid epidemic in the U.S. clearly showed that opioids are far more addictive and dangerous than marijuana ever was and people need safer alternatives for pain maintenance.

Investigate whether the U.S. should adopt rules for personal digital data that the European Union (EU) has enacted, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), a single, comprehensive digital data law applying to all EU member states. (Background) – The subject of our personal data and who owns it is a prime example of how the U.S. Congress handles almost all decisions – it sides with business at the expense of its citizens. As a consequence, the GDPR gives EU citizens a much more robust and comprehensive legal framework for data protection than the US; this includes: a broader scope applying to all organization processing personal data of EU residents (regardless of location), provides stronger individual rights compared to most US laws, has stronger enforcement mechanisms with significant penalties, and takes a more proactive regulatory approach, while the US approach is more fragmented and ineffective as it relies more on industry self-regulation.

Investigate whether the U.S. prison system, starting with the federal prison system, should test/demonstrate programs that have shown to work to reduce recidivism in other countries and some American states, such as programs being used in Germany and being tested in Connecticut. (Background) – The United States has less than 5 percent of the world’s population, yet we have almost 25 percent of the world’s total prison population due to the high rate of recidivism in U.S. prison populations. One of the more “radical” attempts at prison reform to reduce the rate of recidivism is taking place in a Connecticut prison nicknamed “the Rock.” Its program is based on therapy for 18-25-year-old prisoners, whose brains, science shows, are still developing and their behavior more likely to be influenced to change for the better. The idea came from Germany where the main objective of prison is rehabilitation and where the recidivism rate is about half that of the U.S. The prison system in the U.S. is a notorious failure creating a prison culture that helps to create criminals more than it rehabilitates.

Investigate the concept that all American citizens should provide some amount of their time to support America and American values. (Background) – The concept that everyone should provide some period of time to support America in some way has been debated for many years. Military service is obviously one way to support America, but there are other ways that can satisfy different motivations, such as: community-based local services, International Peace Corps, helping family farms at harvest times, intern with small businesses (to help the business and learn a trade), and for doctors and nurses to use their skills helping poor regions of America with healthcare challenges. One concept is to establish a community service period of hours (500 – 2,000) to be provided over a multi-year period (3-5 years), perhaps starting when a citizen finishes or leaves school or immigrates to America. And there should be NO EXCUSES for anything except health issues.