Term limits for all federal elected officials
How to foster term limits on Congress. In our polarized dysfunctional DC environment I believe an overwhelming number of Americans, left and right, would back this movement and show the degree of disfavor for the way thing are being done. Also interested in the changes needed to make viable 3rd parties a reality.
Less earmarks led to polarization?
Have you heard the theory that the curtailing of earmarks aka legislative pork is what led to the extreme polarization of today? Everyone hated earmarks and they were considered the epitome of political sleaziness/corruption - lawmakers would attach expensive goodies for their own districts onto completely unrelated bills which definitely looked bad. So curtailing them should be good, right? Maybe not - the theory goes like this: Earmarks were a safety valve for extremism because even if a lawmaker compromised on some important ideological issue to their base, they could trade that for earmarks to bring home the goods to their district and still keep voters satisfied. With earmarks reduced, there's nothing left but ideology - now if a moderate representative compromises on some hot button issue for their base they can't make up for it by getting funding for that new traffic interchange or whatever, and then they end up getting primaried by a more extreme challenger from their own party. So now they don't compromise, or they did and were in fact replaced by someone more extreme. So my question is this: a) is this actually true? are there less earmarks than in the past? b) if it is true, what do you make of this theory and would more earmarks cool things down by allowing moderate lawmakers to compromise by trading their votes on sensitive issues for pork for their district to keep voters happy?
"Assault Weapon" ban?
Curious why I have not heard you guys mention the bill that would be on of the most overreaching violations of the 2nd Amendment if passed into law. It already passed the house after a last minute suprise change brought it to the floor on Friday. Was listening to your Thursday show and Friday round up to see your thoughts and it and nothing.
Big Ask from a Physician (psychiatrist)
[Please note I'm not able to separate this into paragraphs on this platform] Hi Saagar - I love your show and have turned many of my liberal media absorbing friends into listeners. Just upgraded to a yearly membership. I am writing this to you as a psychiatrist to beg you to please drop the story about this research about SSRI's and the serotonin hypothesis. I believe what you are doing is just as bad as what the news outlets you hate are doing in this one instance - NOBODY (that I know) in our field has thought that depression is due to too little serotonin - at least not for the past few decades. It is an extremely multifaceted and complicated process (or really processes) and SSRI's work due to multifaceted and various downstream effects. Putting the small disclaimer in your post that this doesn't mean SSRI's don't work is NOT ENOUGH to dissuade the amount of stigma against psychiatry and mental health care propagated by these posts. I am not a politician with an alternate agenda, I am not a lying researcher trying to be famous for my work. I simply care deeply about treating my patients and I believe making it seem like we were WRONG [and dishonest] about the "underpinnings" of how these drugs work is just not true. The authors created their own argument and argued against it. I'm sorry that this was the general public's lay understanding, but nobody in medicine thinks that too little titanium in bones cause arthritis (even though we treat it with titanium joint replacements), that too little botulinum toxin in our foreheads cause wrinkles (because we fix them with botox) that a chemical imbalance of tylenol causes headaches (because they get better with tylenol), or that depression is caused by too little serotonin in the body (even though it improves with meds that increase the availability of serotonin...not even the amount of it). The article that was published is clickbait and not telling us professionals anything we didn't already know and is only serving (along with your post with Tom Cruise suggesting we force people against their will to get ECT) to dissuade the general public from trusting those of us who are experts in treating mental and emotional suffering. You are a proponent for increased mental health care based on all you said after Uvalde. It's not JUST about money. It's also about stigma. And by looking at the comment section of your post, the message you are sharing is working to further reinforce the stigma associated with mental health care. Please, with this one thing, just drop it and move on because I believe the way you are presenting it is doing more harm than good. Thank you for reading. -Joe