Lets VOTE for a different party... ANTI-INCUMBANT!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuncanONeil

The issue is not campaigning. It is fundrasing, which occurs year round. Some of which is paid for with votes.

By the by the last Presidential election ran for nearly two years. And the winner has yet to stop campaigning!!!

---

The U.S. laws have huge problems with how much one can spend during a campaign. This makes fundraising for years and years (Basically the whole time one is in office) the lifeblood of a campaign.

In Canada, we have a lot of candidates that are highly successful who don't spend an excessive amount of time fund raising. In my current riding our current MP (Member of Parliament) is Olivia Chow of the NDP (New Democrats Party -> Basically Canada's most left wing serious party).

She manages to get out to community rallies, events, show up in parliament when its in session, help individuals in our community deal with issues like government improperly processing their UI (Unemployment Insurance), or other such issues. Before that I lived in a different riding, a seat that was held by Ken Dryden (A Liberal -> Canada's main centrist party), who had a similar track record.

Many of my friends have lived in ridings (I think you guys call these congressional districts) where the Conservative Party of Canada (our right wing party) has a seat and attest that the candidates have similar track records.

In short, for the most part our politicians attend to their responsibilities both in parliament and in the communities which they represent. And a lot of this is that they don't have to run elitist expensive fundraisers as often as possible to ensure re-election.

How long is Parliament in session?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SadisticNature

The U.S. laws have huge problems with how much one can spend during a campaign. This makes fundraising for years and years (Basically the whole time one is in office) the lifeblood of a campaign.

In Canada, we have a lot of candidates that are highly successful who don't spend an excessive amount of time fund raising. In my current riding our current MP (Member of Parliament) is Olivia Chow of the NDP (New Democrats Party -> Basically Canada's most left wing serious party).

She manages to get out to community rallies, events, show up in parliament when its in session, help individuals in our community deal with issues like government improperly processing their UI (Unemployment Insurance), or other such issues. Before that I lived in a different riding, a seat that was held by Ken Dryden (A Liberal -> Canada's main centrist party), who had a similar track record.

Many of my friends have lived in ridings (I think you guys call these congressional districts) where the Conservative Party of Canada (our right wing party) has a seat and attest that the candidates have similar track records.

In short, for the most part our politicians attend to their responsibilities both in parliament and in the communities which they represent. And a lot of this is that they don't have to run elitist expensive fundraisers as often as possible to ensure re-election.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuncanONeil

How long is Parliament in session?

---

Our parliament is in session long enough to address the changes in law the level of government needs to make. Parliament is far from the only job our elected representatives have, and they need to balance those other responsibilities.

It was not a trick question.
Trying to get a prospective of how the two differ or compare.
Here Congress works about 180 days. Recent news has them working extra hard at three days a week.
Somehow I do not feel I am getting value for the cost.
Tried to find some help on the Parliament sessions. Interesting that your answer, while seeming a bit flip is actually kind of accurate. Not sure our Congress could get its collective head around that idea. They actually think they work really hard and earn their pay as it is!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SadisticNature

Our parliament is in session long enough to address the changes in law the level of government needs to make. Parliament is far from the only job our elected representatives have, and they need to balance those other responsibilities.

---

All the more reason to vote the lot of our bastards..oops, I mean incumbant congressmen out of office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuncanONeil

It was not a trick question.
Trying to get a prospective of how the two differ or compare.
Here Congress works about 180 days. Recent news has them working extra hard at three days a week.
Somehow I do not feel I am getting value for the cost.
Tried to find some help on the Parliament sessions. Interesting that your answer, while seeming a bit flip is actually kind of accurate. Not sure our Congress could get its collective head around that idea. They actually think they work really hard and earn their pay as it is!

---

Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have. I think part of the reason politics is less radicalized in Canada, is that we can count on good representation on these responsibilities even from a person on the opposite side of the issue as us.

"Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have."

Huh??
I don't see how that relates to what I said!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SadisticNature

Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have. I think part of the reason politics is less radicalized in Canada, is that we can count on good representation on these responsibilities even from a person on the opposite side of the issue as us.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuncanONeil

"Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have."

Huh??
I don't see how that relates to what I said!

---

I was providing details of why the Canadian setup makes sense. I think it relates to the idea of getting a congressperson's head around it. If the taxpayers are going to pay for your salary, office costs, secretary, etc., then you are responsible for these services to your constituents.

OK!
Just to add to that line of thought, the accepted number per Congressman is somewhere north of $1,000,000 each including office and staff!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SadisticNature

I was providing details of why the Canadian setup makes sense. I think it relates to the idea of getting a congressperson's head around it. If the taxpayers are going to pay for your salary, office costs, secretary, etc., then you are responsible for these services to your constituents.

---