Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Health-Care Reform And Political Malpractice

image credit
The House version of the health-care reform bill runs over 1000 pages. Is that wacko, or what? The bill is as long as War and Peace or Gone with the Wind — and much drier reading, too.

Let Freedom Ring has created a pledge for our elected representatives to sign. The text of the pledge and the list of signatories are available HERE. As of my last viewing of that list, only 72 have signed the pledge.
In my view, any elected representative who votes for a bill has a duty to read that bill. In fact, I would further state that any representative who hasn't studied and read proposed legislation and still votes for that legislation should be brought up on charges of political malpractice:
Political malpractice is an instance of negligent or unethical conduct on the part of an elected official. Like medical malpractice and legal malpractice, political malpractice involves a breach of duty, and a failure to offer professional services as expected....

There are a number of different kinds of political malpractice. The most innocent, though not necessarily the least harmful, is negligence. If a politician fails to fully review a bill, for example, and it later turns out to be a disaster, this could be viewed as negligence by the voters....

On the more sinister end of things, political malpractice can involve improper or unethical conduct undertaken deliberately....In some cases, this type of political malpractice can result in criminal charges for corruption.

Citizens rely on their elected officials to advocate for them in legislative bodies, and to make good choices which will benefit their communities. When politicians fail to hold up their end of the bargain, this can have unfortunate consequences for the citizens. An accusation of political malpractice indicates that citizens are deeply unhappy with the way in which a politician has handled a situation, and it can threaten a political career.

In some cases, political malpractice can be the grounds for a tort suit. In the law, a tort is a civil wrong, and if proved, such a suit can result in fines and other consequences for the convicted party. When the citizens feel that they have experienced direct harm as a result of political malpractice, many nations allow them to bring suit against their elected officials to recover damages or remove those officials from office....
The drawback to filing charges of political malpractice, of course, would likely tie up our court system until the end of this century. And, of course, suing for political malpractice could be used as a political agenda by a particular party. I don't actually advocate such law suits. But I do mention political malpractice in letters to my elected representatives and always get a personal response instead of the usual form letter.

Today, we largely have a body of politicians who have forgotten that they are elected representatives with duties to perform FOR on behalf of their constituents instead of on their on behalf and on behalf of their political party. Our leaders today are mostly Snollygosters, like the one pictured at the beginning of this post.

Note: I did have an image of the Master Snollygoster, created by RaDena and sent to me some time ago, but PhotoBucket has deleted that image. I'm sure that you can guess on one try who the Master Snollygoster is.

Addendum: Aha! I have retrieved the image of the Master Snollygoster from my files! My policy of "Save everything!" pays off again.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 7/21/2009 08:42:00 AM