Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us by Ralph Nader

RALPH NADER

THE BOOK NEWS RELEASE PRESS TOUR BUY NOW EXCERPT BIO SAVE US

Suggestions for the Super-Rich:

The problem that Super-Rich can solve that would draw the greatest attention, would be legislation that benefit the Super-Rich themselves like: 
• bringing back the estate tax (i.e. ‘billionaire’s tax) 
• getting rid of corporate tax loopholes 
• prosecuting tax cheats 
• getting rid of corporate personhood 
• increasing the minimum wage

Comment by Jesse C. — September 16, 2009 @ 1:25 pm
The Super-Rich should build wind farms to eliminate our need for foreign oil. We have the Saudi Arabia of wind available to us in the Midwest.

Comment by Sue Q. — November 23, 2009 @ 2:55 pm
Two things they can do on a local level:
Recycling. My city, at least, has one private recycling pick-up. The Super-Rich can easily fund a free recycling pick up company in several cities.
After that, move on to transform local public building into new green, energy efficient buildings.
And lastly, invest in better public transportation and alternative personal transportation like electric bikes.

Comment by David — November 24, 2009 @ 7:52 pm
I … asked Ralph Nader (RN) about lifting the cap on the FICA tax.
Two comments: RN emphasized several times the huge problem of Americans with “extraordinarily low expectations”. I want to suggest that one reason for this is that so many Americans have irrational and even pathological ideas about “individualism.” These ideas are crazy in two directions. In one, it leads millionaires to believe they did it all alone (as RN said, men like Buffett and Gates, Sr, know better) In the other direction, it leads steel workers to believe it’s THEIR fault when their bosses send their jobs overseas.
All too many Americans have believed in these wacky ideas about “individualism” for decades, probably for our whole history, and they play a big idea in why those Americans can’t think in social justice terms.
This is why so many swallow the Republican mantra that it’s Big Gov’t vs Individualism when it’s really, as RN seems to say, Big Gov’t vs Big Corps.

Comment by Ron T. — November 25, 2009 @ 11:01 am
Ralph, you have been my hero since the 60’s.
The Super-Rich won’t save us.
We need to save ourselves, with
massive civil disobedience like the labor movement
in the 19th Century, and the anti-war & civil rights movements.

I only wish the 3rd Party Populists would organize
to present a REAL challenge to the 2-Party Oligarchy.

I don’t know any super rich.

Comment by John E — November 25, 2009 @ 7:41 pm
I would love to be a part of the following and commit.
Come together with “working folk( for the lack of a better term”) to form a working panel that would help to fine solutions for us to get back to working together as a country. Here are some ideas and areas the combine panel can work on:
1-Working Folk share with Super-Rich what they have to offer in skills, talents, and ideas. This part of the panel will give insight as to how life is for the mass during the current times we are living in. And to look back as to where the Super-Rich roots are planted and how they have grown.
2-Super-Rich can offer how they worked their skills used to come to where they are today.
3-An open conversation as to what the two parts share as Americans.
4-An open conversation on where are we different.
5-We are Americans. We are they only country in history to have the freedom and choices.
6-We need to go back to why our country was formed, see where we have been and take this to the next step.
We have our own history to learn from. So why not look inside of our selves to go forward.
We can’t put all the responsibilities on one group. We all have positions in this society But we are in a country where folk can increase their potential and grow. Our Country was not to have classes as our old mother countries have.
We need to come together to stop the divide of have and have not. We need to one. Follow the Declaration of Independence,the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the UNITED STATES.

Comment by Terri B. — November 26, 2009 @ 11:55 pm
perhaps the super-rich could break ground on the US DEPT OF PEACE –

i suggest that the USDP becomes the CORNERSTONE of the new center of FEDERAL GOVERNMENT somewhere in the middle of the US like OKLAHOMA –

built GREEN –
high tech COMMUNICATIONS –
high tech TRANSPORTATION –
very TRANSPARENT –

Comment by mm w. — December 4, 2009 @ 2:34 am
Leopards tend not to change their spots even in advanced age, and it is being a little optimistic to imagine that super wealthy people may suddenly become very altruistic and concerned about the general public, who they have spent most of their lives ripping off in one way or another.

Warren Buffet might show some concern for how society is deteriorating, but at the same time he has tens of Billions of dollars sitting waiting to buy up distressed companies when the financial meltdown really begins.

Warren may treble his personal wealth in just a year or two, and he will no doubt feel very pleased with himself – just before he falls off the perch !
undoubtedly he will be the richest man in the Cemetery.

But only because the really super rich like the Rothchilds
etc do not get buried in local cemeteries.

George Soros may seem interested in wind power but George will probably be keeping an eye on the currency markets and if he can invest against certain currencies to make a billion dollars for himself while helping to impoverish whole populations – then he probably will because he has done that kind of thing in the past.

The super rich are likely to keep looking after themselves as they always have.

Most of them have plans to flee the US when the full meltdown begins and see out the next few years in safe gated communities outside the US

Comment by Jim B. — December 11, 2009 @ 6:12 pm
I have had thoughts that the imbalances of capitalism needs a balancing item. However I come at this from a super poor perspective. I am in the throes of employing one of the tools of the capitalists, the Company to enable the poor to equalize to some extent the advantages of the rich. My idea relates to home ownership. If ordinary people can buy shares in a company whose purpose is to acquire accommodation of all sorts,to whit the sort that the people are actually living in. The shareholders receive no dividends, but they do have the right and the privilege to live in that accommodation rent free, at least to the extent that they have equity. A largish number of shareholders would mean a smaller average “deposit”.($300,000 divided by 1000 requires only $300 each on average). The shareholder can then pay rent on the unowned part of the house while they increased their equity over time as they buy more shares. This enables the shareholder to acquire a house without borrowing or paying interest, there are no mortgages and they are buying one house only instead of two and a half. They have absolute tenure because the company could be completely flexible about payments(it is their money).
I have thought that this concept could serve as model to solve many problems of the poor, that is taking of corporate law just as the rich do.

Comment by Patrick W. — December 11, 2009 @ 6:21 pm
The inability of some cultures to govern their own countries and thus destroy their own culture and people.

Exploitation of the poor cultures and children – Nike.
and others.

International arms dealing. America, North Korea, Russia.

Getting rid of corporate tax loopholes by initiating a debit tax that supplies the tax revenue and replaces the bullshit systems that we have now.

Replace home loan interest manipulation manipulation as a controller of the economy with a system that adjusts the amout you pay into superannuation. The hotter the economy the more you pay of your earnings into superannuation, the cooler the economy the less you pay – thus reducing or increasing the available cash. Same result but you don’t lose your home to the bank because government has only one economic control tool in their toolbox. 

Comment by Paul — December 11, 2009 @ 6:48 pm
First of all the superrich could publicize the truth about climate change, that it is natural, undoubtedly affected by farming and deforestation, flying in the stratosphere, producing enormous dust loads from vehicles but scarcely affected by carbon di-oxide which has been demonized the fake curves of the IPCC. The level of carbon di-oxide exceeded the present level during the 1940’s and before at times. this is being lied about by the IPCC. Without adequate power the world will not be able to produce the water and food for the world’s population. But of course many of the super rich understand that. But they couldn’t care less, they will not starve no matter how much food costs.

Comment by Henry B. — December 11, 2009 @ 7:23 pm
The super rich may wish to subsidize improving insulation and water storage on new and even existing homes as these are major deficiencies in the products offered in many countries. Even a low-interest loan to the purchaser (not builder) would greatly assist.

Comment by Peter G. — December 11, 2009 @ 7:25 pm
I think the super rich should help facilitate bringing into effect a system whereby industrialised nations that produce carbon emissions pay countries like Brazil and Papua New Guinea to keep their forests. These countries provide a service to the world and aren’t paid for it, (lungs of the earth). This is unjust, and doesn’t give them any incentive to stop clearing forests. These countries must make a healthy living out of providing a carbon dioxide – oxygen conversion service because these forests are a critical weapon against climate change.

Comment by David S. — December 12, 2009 @ 5:50 am
Conglomerate the super-rich into one voice,some of those there will be powerful advertising moguls, can we not use the power of ‘the dream’ to educate, inspire and motivate (rather than sell)? One idea to one mogul, to one entire agency to one billboard to one enormous, high profile building, and so on.
There is so much to do it’s daunting but any measure to bring integrity back to the dollar and banish forever the idea that you ‘earn’ anything more than one million plus per year- the inequity is sickening.
Tax reform, tax reform, tax reform!

Comment by molly h. — December 13, 2009 @ 5:25 am
Dear R, Surely the issue of social justice is too complex to be left to the ‘whims’ of a few philanthropists. You spoke of the overwhelming power of those who run the US, was it ever otherwise? It took more than one hundred years of fighting, living and dying by many people to give us what exists in Australia. It requires a thorough going, trial and error process growing out of the society’s unique experience to be successful. The specific struggle of a people in each place has to be taken seriously.

You said that perhaps someone may be interested in the book’s film rights, I suggest Disney.

Comment by brian t. — December 13, 2009 @ 6:16 am
The concept of corporate person-hood needs to be stricken from the books and here is how to do it:

This doctrine says that corporations have the rights of persons as guaranteed by the constitution. So take them at their word. Use a hostile corporate takeover as a test case. The corporation being taken over points out in a suit that as a person that corporation has a constitutionally guaranteed right not to become a slave; the takeover, should it go through would put them in the position of being owned by another person.

No doubt the court would quickly understand that any public company, being owned by their stockholders, is also a slave. What would have to give is this doctrine of corporate person-hood.

Comment by Paul C. — December 15, 2009 @ 9:30 am
Agriculture. Stop propping up corporate farms and open markets for small farmers.

Comment by Mark A. — December 21, 2009 @ 3:55 pm
It would be too obvious if voting was illegal, so instead the two parties and their corporate sponsors choose the candidates and the issues by avoiding the four things that would help insure that voters get fair representation:

1. Regulated, limited, public campaign financing.
2. Direct voting in presidential elections.
3. Proportional representation (i.e. Choice Voting) in multi-member congressional districts instead of winner-take-all in single member districts.
4. Majority Preference Voting (i.e. Instant runoff voting) in single member elections to insure a majority winner and eliminate the spoiler effect. (Al Gore would have been elected president in 2000 if we had had this and people could have voted their conscience. Nader would have had a much stronger showing.)

Once we get full representation through electoral reform, good leaders and good policies will follow. We would not need the super-rich to save us anymore.

Comment by Michael A. — December 22, 2009 @ 10:53 am
* getting rid of corporate personhood 
* labor party

End of story

Comment by charlie — December 23, 2009 @ 9:42 am
I would say that developing a format by which to better inform our public about our capitalist identity should be a priority. There is little we can continue with in any meaningful way, both nationally and internationally, without this happening.

Comment by james p. — December 29, 2009 @ 12:20 pm
Invest in education in under-funded areas, particularly at the lower levels. As a teacher, I see that many classes have very few books. Children are then raised without an enthusiasm for reading and turn their attention to TV and other media that blunts their imagination, making it harder to envision them as active and progressive citizens later in life. Prepare young minds to THINK.

Comment by Eric — January 2, 2010 @ 4:49 pm
Only one? start non-profit energy co’s that can only tax business that use expensive ceo’s. mandate the term limits for any public office that gets bad advice from any Corp-Lobbie. ban top 500 co’s from making or publishing any political text other than public philanthrapy. prosecute as a felony with the national media prooven Greed, corruption, and incompetence.
audit top 500 co’s before they report to nasdaq or wall st for mis-used tarp $. produce or direct shows for the media that expose co’s that outsource jobs and are unconstitutional.

Comment by steve — January 4, 2010 @ 1:41 am
I know it’s been mentioned before, but I’ll add my voice anyway. We need the super rich to spearhead public financing of all congressional, senate, and presidential elections.
* They could also work on proportional representation which should end this crazy gerrymandering that we see on both sides.
*Worker representation on all boards of directors.
*A first class system of high speed public transportation (rail, subways, etc)that spans the entire country.
* Single payer, everybody in, national health care.
* An end to policies that benefit corporate agriculture at the expense of small farmers.
*A large increase in the funding of public radio and TV so they won’t be as beholding to corporate funding as they are now.

Comment by Robert K. — January 20, 2010 @ 1:43 pm
I think bill gates warren buffet and others should try and tackle health care and environment. This would stop the naysayers from saying it would cost us taxpayers. it would also promote the private sector in the solution creating jobs. the only problem would be corporate America taking over to only make a profit out of it

Comment by SEAN T. — January 20, 2010 @ 3:10 pm
If the super-rich were motivated to, they could invest in alternative methods of energy production so that polluting oil and coal would become economically unfeasible.

Comment by Terry — January 20, 2010 @ 5:43 pm
Put an index in the next printing!I have mine on the back of an envelope.
Organizing People from all walks of life is the beauty in your book.Solutions are set out in your book.With all the 1000’s of organizations and the millions of people working for Human Justice -how can we organize to come together, like you so wonderfully describe in the book?

Comment by Lawrence H. — January 20, 2010 @ 11:48 pm
The Super Rich could help us dismantle the war machine and free up the money and the work force to rebuild our infrastructure, make health care a right everyone has.

Also, public financing of elections.
All media required to let all political candidates have equal and adequate time to get their message out-for free! The airwaves belong to the people.
Rebuild America’s ability to produce goods (jobs) and have them be toward local, sustainable products and energy.

Comment by Melinda F. — January 21, 2010 @ 12:02 am
Good Health Care for all…how could we not have that in a nation that espouses taking care of its people? This would include education about preventing disease, improving curricula and school lunches. I hope Deepak Chopra is on board!

Comment by Sunny G. — January 21, 2010 @ 9:41 am
intervene in the bastardizing of our history by Gingrich in the state of Texas (take away their hold on right wing indoctrination in the schools)

Comment by Wynne D. — January 21, 2010 @ 10:44 am
Ive long thought that if I won the lottery I would go around the country and put solar panels on peoples roofs. That would help tremendously.

Comment by Sandy R. — January 21, 2010 @ 4:41 pm
I’d love to see the Super-Rich invest in the creation of a free-to-all online education portal that easily transfers knowledge of this country’s untold histories around government corruption, profiteering, occupations and coups, and makes clear that the U.S. government has consistently been subverted for the benefit of the few. I’d like to see the populous become awakened to the successes of grass-roots organizing movements, get invigorated about politics, and truly understand the need for each individual to be, and stay, alert and involved. Without knwoledge of our shared history we cannot understand what is going on, how we’re being exploited, how our government throws its weight around the world in our name, and most importantly, how we the people can participate to make certain we are never again at the mercy of corporations or their paid-off corrupt government pals. Within this theme is the need for a truly unbiased media that’s sole purpose is not revenue, but education, and enlightenment. We cannot expect people to become more involved when our news media is consolidated and corporate-owned and favors profits over truth or investigating the horrors of the self-serving.

Comment by Chris M. — January 25, 2010 @ 9:39 pm
Access to top people is THE problem of ordinary citizens. Why couldn’t the people named in “Only the etc.” (who obviously have access) work to bring pig-headed capitalists to a more humane point of view and change their greedy destructive behavior?

Comment by Jean G. — January 28, 2010 @ 3:28 pm
If only the super rich can save us, then we are well and truly doomed. Not because they cannot, but because they will not. And if “they” save “us” what good is that, really?

In 2000 Ralph Nader inspired me. Today, his words leave me so sad and tired.

Comment by Kitty S. — February 3, 2010 @ 2:50 pm
Depending on their ages, the super rich can save our deficit; more or less keep us happy by contributing more often.

Comment by Steve A. — February 5, 2010 @ 5:09 am
Put a 4 year term limit on all political and justice positions and put a ban on wealthy individuals obtaining these positions. Keep our military stateside.Put a cap on how much wealth a person can accumulate.

Comment by James D. — February 5, 2010 @ 5:48 am
Form a work co-op that would scour the country to determine what each household is needing. In the Poverty Reduction Initiative there are people called navigators who go out and help people get what they need and do the paperwork, ie: DHS, VA, SSD, etc. These people volunteer but maybe people without jobs who need one, could help with the same. The job would be based on actual work done, not an hourly wage so people can slide, been there, seen that. I like the alternative energy ideas, maybe buy up companies planning to outsource and rehire Americans. Build a computer factory back in the US, and not in Southern California, maybe mid Michigan or Pennsylvania. I appreciated one person’s point about the wealthy women. Oprah is ready.

Comment by RebD — February 9, 2010 @ 12:28 pm
Clean air, clean water, clean food, helping the poor, defeating crooks in Congress when they run for office again, strictly separate church and state, identify smart children and pay for their college scholarships!

Comment by dennis j. c. — February 10, 2010 @ 12:42 am
Make all of our elections “clean elections” first and then we can clean up all the other problems.

Comment by James B. — February 10, 2010 @ 12:46 pm
OMG! thank you! 1st fix our government and return the power to the people. unionizing Wal-Mart.This group should form with the sole purpose of advancing clean elections! Invest largely in alternative forms of energy that will effectively clean up the environment! Yes do take on corporate goliaths and Congress MAKE them provide the necessities of life and advance the solutions so long left on the shelf!!!

Comment by carol s. — February 10, 2010 @ 6:30 pm
Solve the health-care issue – no one in America should die because of pre-existing conditions or because they cannot afford treatment.

Comment by Glenn W. — February 12, 2010 @ 11:53 pm
I agree with Jacob R. who says:
“We need to stop the gross bribery that is part of our election system. Election campaigns should be funded by the government and the government alone (This way campaign contributions will not decide who is elected). I understand that people have the right to representation, but representation should be equal among all people. As Americans we are not guaranteed a right to buy extra time with politicians, nor should we be.”

Comment by Elizabeth B. — February 16, 2010 @ 5:22 pm
Setting term limits on the House and Senate would be a good place to start.

Comment by Terri W. — February 17, 2010 @ 3:34 pm
they could help to organize environmental and economic think tanks by bio-region to use the resources of the region as a whole to address its problems and exploit its resources. They cold publish the results and sponsor forums for the experts and their conclusions could be debated by the public at large, and secure commitments from various politicians to sponsor legislation to forward these suggestions.

Comment by Melie S. — February 17, 2010 @ 5:12 pm
It is only when individuals and society change their world views to see that we are all one–that no one can have peace of mind unless everyone has peace of mind, that a cooperation and sharing will take place. And here was a super rich King who had did just that.

Comment by susan n. — February 18, 2010 @ 9:18 pm
[T]he SRs should: help states to form STATE BANKS or, as NM is doing, transfer state funds back to the states’ local banks; help fund candidates to replace the most obstructive and negative House and Senate members; help establish public funding for our elections; press our legislators to reestablish fair progressive income taxation

Comment by Noel E. — February 19, 2010 @ 4:09 pm
The super-rich cold buy land to lease to small, local farmers to help solve the problem of these farmers not being able to afford land. Localization is the antidote to globalization in the exploitative sense of globalization. It is hard to exploit your neighbors.

Comment by Carol M. — February 21, 2010 @ 2:01 pm
Understanding the principal that one can not sell what one does not legitimately own/represent…

The Super Rich can create a special law firm, whose sole purpose is to challenge the legitimacy of natural resource extraction contracts (oil, timber, minerals) that any corporation makes with Kleptocracy governments like the ones in Myanmar and Cambodia.

1) The law firm would document human rights abuses and unfair elections.
2) The firm would use this information to officially and publicly “place on notice”, that the corporation is about to enter into a contract with a person or government that that not the legitimate owner or representative of the natural resource being sold.
3) That they are essentially buying “stolen merchandise” by entering into these resource contracts.
4) Law suits will be filed in American courts, on behalf of expatriate plaintiffs from these victimized countries… or at least be planned and ready, in the event a positive political change in one of these countries sparks a future law suit.

Because the corporations will made aware of documented stolen elections, property theft, corruption and rights abuses, there would be no future “plausible deniability”, and a full understanding that they (the corporations) knowingly entered into a criminal enterprise.

Comment by Luke W. — February 22, 2010 @ 2:44 am
Briefy, my suggestions are for the super-rich and those beyond the super-rich, who have a good word or deed, and encouragement to share- and a positive outlook. This is part of the true foundation that the Super-rich will have to emulate and embrace on their trail of ’saving the world’.

Comment by Nesha F. — March 1, 2010 @ 11:14 pm
I may not be super rich but I am willing to donate what I can to take back America. I want someone to honestly start a grassroots agenda that will take back America from those who suppress the democratic dream that our forefathers laid out for us. Why doesn’t someone assemble this round table of honest super-rich people to buy back America with the help of her less well off citizens? It is obvious that the president and the congress (GOP or Dem’s) can not do anything to reform America but maybe someone without a political agenda can……though the cynic in me wonders why the super-rich would want to change the current balance of power. How would they benefit from a reformed America? Or is this simply just another book that makes one super-rich guy richer by exploiting the dreams of the dreams of the working middle class American.

Comment by Glen W. — March 2, 2010 @ 2:59 am
Despite the ridicule the MSM has heaped on the book, I think RN’s central premise may be correct for the reasons he outlined. However, I doubt that a group of super-wealthy individuals would self organize. Thus, it is incumbent on Mr Nader (or members of his team) to explore actual interest in this idea and I encourage him to do it privately.

Comment by Eric — March 2, 2010 @ 11:28 am
The super-rich could help us fund universal healthcare for all of us.

Comment by Samantha S — March 7, 2010 @ 12:54 am
I want to take a large building in NYC and make a vertical greenhouse; cover it in solar panels, build a windmill on top and I think a super wealthy person with real vision should take this on. This could be a real great way to provide fresh food locally: no pesticides, insecticides, transportation, etc. I have been thinking about this for a long time and think its time has come. The technology exists…it would only take vision and a whole lot of money.

Comment by C R. H. — March 8, 2010 @ 6:43 pm
Establish a national, world-class teachers college.

Comment by Jerry — March 19, 2010 @ 3:56 pm
Health Care. Could the super-rich not finance the drive for single payer? [R]emutualize. The aim is to lead to divestiture.

Comment by Carol T. — April 13, 2010 @ 11:14 am
I think that, should we be able to gather a group of liberal/progressive super-rich together for a dedicated cause, it should be to remove the personhood from corporations. I can (As I’m sure you can, as well.) trace the cause for EVERY major problem that we are facing back to under-regulated corporations. The way I see it, we are spinning our wheels by trying to resolve all other smaller problems until we address this major source of our ruination.

Comment by Terry S. — April 14, 2010 @ 2:49 pm
1) The problem that I know the Super-rich can help us solve is to help the people end the disastrous war on drugs. With the backing of the “wisdom” of the Super-Rich, I feel we will be able to educate the American people as to the disaster that the drug war has been both economically and socially. Finally, with the backing of the Super-rich, I believe that Marijuana and Hemp are two “Homegrown” products that will help save the republic and we the people will be able to do that with the help of the super rich.
2) I do believe, though, that if society would embrace the earliest ideals of Leland Stanford and his University, the idea of Co-operative ownership of business by employees without employers, we would find ourselves quickly on that long road to true recovery. Peace.

Comment by Stefan M. S. — April 16, 2010 @ 3:25 pm
Unless somehow money can incite the public to reasoned action no amount of it can effect positive, lasting change. The three changes that I believe most urgent, although perhaps not the most fundamental, are:

(1) Term limits for Congress
(2) A no-exemption military draft.
(3) Legalization of the distribution, sale and consumption of drugs under strict governmental control.

Here is a longer list that includes these three items but also several suggestions for fundamental change (skip the preamble if you want):

Our representative government does not seem to be working – not in its response to Al Qaeda (and terrorism) and certainly not in its laggard and inadequate response to the devastation that Katrina occasioned. These failures of government, especially at the federal level, challenge all of us to consider changes that would make government work for the greater benefit of the people – changes that might also encourage more active citizen participation in the process of government.

The USA has again embraced a tar baby, this time in Afghanistan, with no honorable means of disengagement in sight. Any response needs to concentrate on long term solutions that might prevent future administrations from following similar destructive schemes. I see a reform of the political system as absolutely essential – particularly a reform directed toward securing better qualified, better informed and more honorable people to serve in appointive and elective office – people who would be more likely to place the long term good of the people foremost. Is it too optimistic to think that those in political office might seriously consider promoting substantive reform? It calls for imaginative, audacious leadership – a lamentable scarcity.

I mention “long term solutions,” “fundamental change,” and the Founding because I think that they are important – vitally important. Anyone engaged in political action would do well to have a solid foundation in America ’s early history, particularly the fascinating saga of the struggle for the Constitution. As Bernard Bailyn reminds us: “We must get the two-hundred-year-old story straight, in some way, in order to make sense of our own world.” Even Karl Rove has read (and badly misinterpreted) bits of Madison . None of the founders, certainly not Madison, thought of the Constitution as a sacred document. It aches for a few fundamental changes – and soon.

Here, then are some of my suggestions for change, by no means exhaustive. Please consider discussing them with friends and promoting those that appeal to you. Most of them would require a change to the doddering, old and justly venerated Constitution:

1. Transparency in government to include (a) declassification of ALL official government records five years after the date of their origin (exact, uncensored and unaltered duplicates might be filed, at the time of their origin, with a special archivist and made readily available to the public after the five year period has expired) and (b) immediate and unrestricted access to all files, records and offices of any federal department (when expressly authorized by the full House) by a standing committee of five House members composed of three from the majority party, two from the minority, all of whom have been sworn not to divulge sensitive information.

2. Elimination of the electoral college allowing presidential elections to be decided directly by a majority of the popular vote.

3. Restriction on the number of times that a person may hold federal elective office. I’d hold it to two terms, period, with one exception permitted – a person who has held federal elective office for two terms could subsequently occupy the office of president for two terms. (I’d prefer, though a single six year term for president, no re-election).

4. Revision of the system for electing Senators so that, in so far as possible or practical, Senators would represent all the people, fairly and equally (each Senator would ideally represent the same number of people), through election by national or regional, rather than state, constituencies. This might prove the most difficult change to bring about, but perhaps the most important. Alternatively, each state might retain its two senators, as prescribed by Article V, but Senators would have weighted votes based on their state’s population. If all else fails, the Senate could be relieved of all real power.

5. Elimination of the unconscionable (and growing) disparity in the distribution of wealth. This would require an aggressive, vigorous policy of progressive taxation and absolute limitations on inheritance.

6. Elimination of primary elections for national office with candidates to be nominated by their political parties.

7. Supreme Court nominees (maybe candidates for all Federal judgeships) to be proposed by the House, vetted by the President and approved by the Senate. For example, the House might be allowed to propose five candidates, the President to select two of the five, and the Senate to approve one of the two (or to reject both in which case the process would begin again). Both the President and the Senate might be required to act within a certain time frame.

8. Equal television time for all major party candidates for Federal elective office.

9. Elimination of special privileges (perks) and “gifts” for all members of Congress. For example, members would be required to get their health care just as any member of the public or the most humble government employee gets theirs. Also, no special clubs or spas for members, no cut-rate dining rooms, etc.

10. Federal regulation of funding for public education that would insure equitable distribution of funds nationwide based solely on student enrollment.

11. A loop-hole free, hard-nosed and effective campaign finance law. This might require that the Supreme Court overturn its recent free speech ruling (the Supreme Court’s equation of money with “speech” ) or that congress enact an imaginative law to circumvent its noxious effects.

12. Opportunity for the public to decide directly, perhaps every seven or twelve years, whether or not they would like to convene a constitutional convention for the purpose of revising or amending the constitution. The question might be placed simultaneously on the ballots of each of the states and might require approval by two thirds majority of the national electorate (not the states) to carry.

13. An exemption-free draft for all able-bodied citizens. No exemption for members of congress or White House staff. No exemption for college students (grossly unfair and discriminatory). No exemption, period, except for health or disability.

14. Legalization and strict governmental control of the sale and consumption of drugs.

Comment by Sanford R. — April 19, 2010 @ 3:43 pm
Decent food & housing for all, secular education — academic and vocational — for all, competent medical care for all. Developing mandatory program for expectant parents teaching good, basic childcare, federal sterilization program for all parents/caregivers guilty of child abuse.

Comment by shelly c. — April 22, 2010 @ 12:08 am
Will the left-rich compete with the right-rich to out-bribe the Congress. How dysfunctional and immoral is that?

Comment by Ted R. — April 22, 2010 @ 5:06 pm
Strengthen and enforce antitrust laws.

Do not allow media conglomerates.

Do not allow “entertainment” shows to call themselves news.

Make names of humans who make large donations to political activities and politicians easily available to all.

Comment by Pat K. — April 26, 2010 @ 11:54 am
What if Michael Moore made this book into a movie!!!!!!!!

Comment by Pat K. — April 26, 2010 @ 12:00 pm
Organize all the independent Media into a corporate-style MERGER and kick the Big Money Boobs out of the business so Americans can get the TRUTH for a change.

Comment by Kristen Z. — April 26, 2010 @ 10:22 pm
Organize a Populist Party that ordinary Americans can join and support against both the corporate overtaken Dem and GOP national parties.

Comment by Kristen Z. — April 26, 2010 @ 10:23 pm
aside from the poor economic situation of our country, the cut-Backs n our schools need 2 b stopped. teachers r being cut, extra curriculars being eliminated. help our children, they are this country’s future!

Comment by sarah — April 28, 2010 @ 3:49 pm
We need a Constitutional Convention, aimed at changing the role of the Supreme Court, as well as how it is configured. It is merely an ideological extension of the Executive Branch, and is unaccountable to the Public. This is anti-democratic, as it was intended to be. Once there is Supreme Court “reform”, grass-roots public interest agendas can get traction, particularly those interested in removing the role of money in politics and policy making. Ralph, you are a hero of mine, bu the premise of this Utopian literary work of yours, while interesting to imagine, seems like you have said, “If you can’t lick-em, join-em” Fight money with money? That’s how Justice Roberts “justified” the recent majority decision (Citizens United).

Get money out of politics. Require that legislators are treated like jurors. No one should have access to them in any private forum. Sequester them, if necessary! The only way the super-rich can help is if they can be made to believe, collectively, that their vital interests are at stake.

Comment by Robert D. — April 28, 2010 @ 6:07 pm
As stockholders and executives of companies, the super-rich have tremendous power to influence the decisions of boards of directors. Moving the American workplace toward a more democratic, egalitarian system where workers are paid well, have benefits and feel appreciated should be a priority not only because it’s the RIGHT thing to do, but because many companies have shown that the best way to avoid unions–something that American corporations are deathly afraid of–is to render them irrelevant by giving the workers what they deserve without a union forcing you to.

Comment by Russ B. — April 30, 2010 @ 4:14 pm
350 ppm would be a good start, so that our species won’t be extinct within 100 years.

To restore democracy, we need comprehensive electoral reform: public financing, proportional representation, IRV, verifiable ballots, along with the elimination of corporate lobbyists, and a democratization of the media, maybe through more community and public access stations.

The USSC ruling on corporate personhood is obscene, but it is only the beginning of what this court might do to overthrow our democracy. We need to eliminate the radical corporatist majority, preferably through impeachment, or else through an expansion of the court to at least 11 justices.

Remaking the health care system, to single-payer for universal access and efficiency, to be more focused on prevention and guided by the best research and the best of ancient wisdom, rather than being run as a marketing device for pharmaceutical companies. Also, changing the food system, to be better for the environment, through localization, and shifting to organics and permaculture, and to be better for people’s health, through the elimination of GMO’s, improved nutrition education based on modern evidence, elimination of junk fillers like corn syrup, and improved affordability of organic foods, and assistance with community and backyard gardens.

All of that ought to put us on the right track.

Comment by Matt L. — May 1, 2010 @ 9:37 am

CLICK HERE FOR OLDER SUGGESTIONS >>

Send Us Your Suggestion:

1) What problems do you think the Super-Rich should unite to solve?

2) Do you know anyone who is "Super-Rich" who might want to contribute
to fixing the nation's problems?

0.512

site designed by ivey doyal