.
Continuing my list of unconventional suggestions to Congress ... last time we finished the first big category: "What can the House of Representatives do, all by itself, even if legislation is blocked or stymied?"
After all, with this President in power, Democratic majorities may be stymied by utterly obstinate veto obstruction until January 2009. Hence my emphasis on things that may be accomplished by Congress, no matter what Bush does or how much the opposing troglodytes yell and screech. Just the re-establishment of an independent scientific advisory apparatus for Congress would knock them for a loop. And the president would be powerless to stop it.
.
Now let’s move on to Part Two, which deals with actual legislation that might pass.
Of course, "might pass" is kind of hopeful. But let’s start with items that might seem so "obvious" to the American people that the trogs might have trouble standing in the way. Or, better yet, agenda items so reasonable that they start to split the Rovean alliance, drawing the better (Barry Goldwater style) conservatives closer to the middle and leaving the mad-right isolated.
.
Let's start by looking at what the Democratic Senate and House leaders already say they want -- Speaker Pelosi's legislative priorities for a Democratic Congress:
• Increase the minimum wage
• Overhaul House lobbying rules (I have already mentioned this)
• Enact recommendations of 9/11 Commission
• Cut student loan interest rates
• Lower Medicare drug costs
• Broaden stem-cell research
• Reform education funding
• Pass labor reform legislation (Employee Free Choice Act)
Over a longer time frame, Democrats have floated numerous policy proposals in some key areas:
• Budget/Taxes (fairer taxation and better fiscal prudence)
• Trade
• Finance
• Energy
• Environment
• Health Care
• Workforce/Education
• Telecommunications
• Agriculture
• National Security/Defense
• Judiciary
Clearly, the "policy wonks" have been very busy while they were in exile. You can bet they return filled with enthusiasm and with an almost-puritan work ethic! (The trait that probably makes GOP Congressional folk shudder most.)
Still, might there be room on the reformers' plate for a few more good ideas? Some of the following concepts may seem strange, at first sight. But the proposals in Part Two should strike the public as needed and fair.
So let's get started.
.
Some Actual (and passable) Laws That Could Make A Real Difference:
Suggestion #11: MY TOP PROPOSAL... create the office of Inspector General of the United States...
... or IGUS, who will head a uniformed agency akin to the Public Health Service, charged with protecting the legal and ethical health of government.
Dig it. Ninety percent of this service exists today! Every major department or agency already has an internal Inspector General (IG), charged with examining operations and giving warnings -- when it comes to minor infractions -- or else stepping in when things get out of hand.
The problem? Nearly all of these officials owe their jobs and paychecks to the very same secretaries and directors who head the agencies they must inspect! In some cases, they were old pals, ensuring partiality and conflict of interest. Many of the IGs are biding their time, working toward promotions that have nothing to do with a career in accountability.
Only now picture this. What if we made a very simple change, by appointing and assigning and paying all of the inspectors through a civil service unit completely separated from each department's political chain of command? Indeed, separate from the legislative, executive and judicial branches?
A uniformed service, with its own elite career path like the Coast Guard and NOAA and the Public Health Service... so that the word "general" has real meaning, encouraging higher-than-normal traditions and standards of conduct.
Under this simple law (possibly it could fit on one page), IGUS will command a corps of trusted IG observers, cleared to go anywhere and see anything. And thereby assure the American people that the government is still theirs, to own and control.
IGUS might be appointed by a commission consisting of all past presidents and retired justices of the US Supreme Court, plus other nationally respected sages, with advice and consent of Congress.
One might imagine special rules requiring inspectors to stay mum when it comes to legal policy decisions that fall rightly in the political sphere, but giving them a range of options when they uncover violations of basic ethics and/or the law. These needn't all entail immediate revelation or disciplinary action! For example, an IG cannot rebuke executive officials for their confidential musings, but should speak up, confidentially, when a plan seems likely to break a law.
One might even picture the Inspectorate as a way to provide basic rights to people who are being held under urgent "special circumstances" -- ensuring that those rare exceptions aren't abused or over-used. And above all, that all exceptions are temporary.
Ponder this; the very act of establishing such a General Inspectorate would so clearly be neutral, offering no visible long-term advantage to the Democratic Party, that this law would have immediate political effects, triggering public approval that (ironically) benefits the Democrats. Indeed how could the GOP dare oppose it?
Finally, consider this: who needs a special prosecutor when every agency already contains the pieces that we'd need? All of the right parts are already in place to create an ideal force for accountability, simply by incorporating all of them into a professional service that serves the people and the republic and the cause of honest government.