Raw reports on wikileaks publishing Congressional Research Reports (CRS) which have been, until now, closely held. Some of the CRS reports cover disasters including Katrina, 9-11, Iraq, and Afghanistan. This financial crisis is a fifth disaster.

While CRS might have reviewed the systemic problems, the financial crisis spread. Had the reports been disclosed, the public might have reviewed the systemic governance problems contributing to these disasters. Now we can.

Some are talking about the symptoms.  We need to focus on the real problem, then talk about solutions.  While some take to the streets, we must discuss abandoning what has failed.

Are you ready?

This financial crisis is a symptom of flawed governance.  There error is to characterize the  financial crisis as "the problem". The real problem is the failed governance model.

If you want to productively spend your time, there's something you can do: Discuss the specific solutions which will reform the failed governance model.

This failed governance model cannot get it right. It recklessly conducts combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq; it failed to prepare for Katrina and 9-11; but asks that we celebrate its do-overs and reckless reaction.  This isn't leadership.

Indeed, the subsequent (still unsuccessful) adjustments would not have been required had governance first succeeded. Despite failing to mitigate this financial crisis, the US government would have us believe we should continue to have blind faith in what what has failed. That is folly.

Symptoms of Failed Governance: Impeachable Offenses, Financial Crisis

This group was created after the Asian Financial Crisis.  Yet, after more than ten years to get ready, they failed.  Also, instead of challenging the Executive branch misdeeds, Leahy wants to review what happened. However, the time to investigate and confront was when the problem was small, and something could have been done.

The same governance system which refused to apply the "lessons" of the Asian Financial crisis to our economy cannot be expected to apply the lessons of the Bush Administration to better conduct Executive branch oversight.  Congress (again) promises to do better, but doesn't deliver. Congress needs a credible threat of new governance: Both to awaken it to its responsibility, and to deny it the discretion to ignore what's needed -- real change.

It is irresponsible for us to roll our eyes, and say, "There they go again."  "Too late" means they're not up to the job.  Like this financial crisis, this Congress turned a blind eye to the warnings about impeachable offenses. The US government would have Americans celebrate the idea of change, but in the old way. We did that after the 2006-era promise of change, but that gave us this financial crisis. Enough.

They didn't do their job. Their reasons excuses for inaction can be eliminated. We need something better.

Failed Systems Recklessly React

In the wake of may disasters since 2001 the American governance model is conveniently tripped by a financial crisis. We don't need more examples of failure. We need a plan.

Real solutions would dilute or strip the US government of power it abuses, and re-delegate that power to responsible centers of power.

This American leadership loves this crisis. As a convenient smokescreen, this crisis creates a new problem for them to "solve," without confronting the real problem which led us down this path: The failed American governance model.

This crew explained away the lessons of 1929 as enacted in the 1933-4 Acts. The lobbyists said the regulation was quaint (as they did with FISA, Geneva, and rendition), but demand American citizens foot the bill.

This crew wants to spend with this bailout on the order of $600,000 per job and call that a bailout. With that ratio, for each job the government creates, we could hire 20 Americans, at $30,000 per year. It's a no brainer we could put 20-times the people back to work, never mind whether there are profits to sustain those jobs.

This crew continues to abuse power. It has failed to use the power of the purse to constrain itself, but expand its failed model.  The US government has it backwards: They ignore our ideas when our inputs might make a difference; they view the law as discretionary; and cast aside the lessons of history as irrelevant.

We didn't sign up for this, but agreed through this Constitution to secure our common prosperity, justice, and defense, not create a gravy train for failed governance.  Those who thwarted regulation should shoulder the burden. We should not reward their obstruction.

The government is belatedly begging for American citizen input. This isn't leadership, but an admission the elected officials and their paid lobbyists have run out of ideas.

Their goal is to take credit for creating a wider net of blame. Yet, when it comes to their power and authority, they rush to the very governance model they ignore and exploit; and demand we rally around their incompetence.

To add insult to injury, they're not paying us for our ideas, but rewarding the same incompetence which led us to where we are.  This leadership isn't responsibly bailing out those who should be supported, but feeding those who should be prosecuted.

They're ratifying the same inefficient operations which, in part, fuels the problem: More reckless management decisions. Once the Congress turned a blind eye to impeachable offenses, others made an excuse to ignore the recklessness within Congress, and mismanagement within the American legal profession and executive branch.

We cannot reward those who share the responsibility for what went wrong, nor attack those who call for what is right.

Their trumpets rally the public to support their failed governance, not the needed systemic changes.  We need systems to ensure legal compliance, and not merely a check on, but a lawful confrontation with abusive power.

Abuse isn't just how power is abused, but how power, when not used, allows an emerging threat to blossom into another crisis. The current governance model fails to aggressively challenge and defeat malfeasance and neglect.

Supportable Governance Effectively Manages Problems

This governance model consistently allows problems to spiral out of control. There is another way. Management means adjusting to solve problems as they emerge, not react after the crisis becomes foregone conclusions.

The current model rewards systems, professions, and careerists who have a perverted sense of loyalty and priorities. Better governance would require the power and rights of the people to be placed first; and institutionalize as Constitutional requirements basic economic governance standards including auditing, oversight, and financial regulation.

Powerful and corrupt forces have thwarted the needed reforms. The new governance model most check, confront, and, where needed, defeat these forces, not create loopholes to allow them to fester and threaten our common security.

The changes must compel the leadership to timely conduct oversight, investigate, risk mitigate risk, and steward the economy -- things lawyers explained away as quaint.  Then let the lawyers explain away a new established order which makes their defiance illegal.

The lawyers claim they are in a profession that calls. They cannot take credit for their failure to answer. The economy is a bridge to economic goals. Government and the legal profession view themselves as a cottage industry, not as a tools to our common prosperity. The same lawyers thwarting financial regulation should be examined for their similar obstruction of legal profession oversight and tighter federal regulation.

The Price of (Non) Regulation

What was explained away as too costly for some has unacceptably mushroomed into financial burden for all. Yet those who thwarted the preventive measures have left the American public with the cost of the medicine. The patient is still sick.  The US government is the cancer.

There needs to be a crushing assault on the independence of the legal profession. They were "called" to rubber stamp war crimes, FISA violations, Geneva violations, and loose financial regulations. The profession failed to timely put the rule of law before their secret agreements to man.

Those "called" to the profession should not require the catalyst of a financial crisis to comprehend their credibility problem, leadership failure, and inability to work within the established order. They're not being called, but prodded. And they arrogantly resist, orchestrating more financial relief not accountability.

It is appropriate to view the American legal profession as a threat to the established order. Without improved oversight of this reckless legal community, we should expect to endure more crises. This cycle of failure needs to end.

Yes, it can.

These mechanisms need to be independent of the three branches. The US government cannot be trusted to oversee other institutions more loyal to the Constitution, much less itself. New centers of power must be granted independent, weighty power to challenge the  US government complacency.

Reform within new governance is possible. We must aggressively ensure the three branches put the Constitution first, not subordinate the Supreme Law to political favoritism and recklessness.

The new governance must compel the leadership to prudently act, deny them the discretion to do nothing about horrendous activity, and force leadership to lead.

Some suggest we muddle through, and as the economy spirals down, then we get serious about changes in governance. Why wait?

We could productively use our time time now to openly discuss the needed reforms to address the real problem: Failed American governance.  The reforms do not need to be limited to (ignored) legislative changes, or (watered down) rule making.

This governance model has run its course, and exhausted reasonable patience. This crew and this failed governance system needs reform.  However, the lesson since 2001 is this crew is not willing to reform from within.

The American public need not silently endure the ravages of a financial crisis or economic depression.  We the People must lawfully impose the needed changes from without, and return to the business of oversight, not blind deference.

Yes, we can responsibly secure the blessings for ourselves and future generations.

You're invited to share your views on what the new governance model would look like, and how we'll proceed to ensure this abuse of power ends. If you suggest that this "isn't possible," make the case that the public should have -- on the back of five (5) disasters -- confidence in what has failed.