A Rare Political Posting!

Good morning everyone! I'm up early, first of all because Thomas woke up and needed to be changed and fed, but secondly because I'm having a difficult time sleeping in these last days before the election. And, with the financial crisis we're facing in the USA, I can't seem to stop thinking about how all of this mess has happened. There is so much media spin and finger-pointing at one party or the other, that it is nearly impossible to discover the facts. That is now my mission!

My first line of research is going to be getting myself up-to-speed on Congress and legistation--it's been way too long since I tried to understand all that goes on in Washington. There is news all around us, but it all just gets so muddy; I'm going back to basics! Why am I starting here? Well, because I'm completely outraged at the $700 billion bail-out. It can't be just me, is it? Why isn't there a collective movement of us little people out here to get our broken legislative system fixed? Or, perhaps there is, and I'm just in the dark. I feel like that very often--but maybe that's how the "powers that be" want us to feel so that we don't rock the boat!

Anyway, it wasn't only the bail-out itself that has me so angry (though that's a major sore point!)--it's how it happened. At first, I was amazed and excited that the citizens of our great country made so many calls to our representatives in opposition to this plan that the lawmakers voted it down. I thought I was seeing our representative government at work--our leaders were listening to what the people wanted! Well, fast-forward to two days later. The bail-out became $800 billion, and went from 3 pages to 1,000 pages of pork-barrel spending--and congress passed this!!! What?!!! OK, I understand this is nothing new, but this was such a blatant example of our broken system, that it finally got my attention. So, here is the very beginning of my research--my first question: Why isn't there a line-item veto? Apparently, the Supreme Court struck this down as unconstitutional back in 1998--to the chagrin of President Clinton and the Repulicans, Here is an exerpt of the news from "All Politics CNN," June 25, 1998:

The line-item veto had been a hallmark of the GOP "Contract With America," when Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, and was the only plank of that agenda that Clinton supported

In a written statement, Clinton said: "The decision is a defeat for all Americans, it deprives the president of a valuable tool for eliminating waste in the federal budget and for enlivening the debate over how to make the best use of public funds. ... I am determined to do everything in my power to continue to cut wasteful government spending, maintain fiscal discipline and create opportunity through continued economic growth."

In addition to allowing him to strike specific projects from spending bills, Clinton said the line-item veto was useful as a negotiating tool -- a weapon to discourage Congress from adding pork-barrel spending to legislation.

Key Senate supporters of the veto power, Sens. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) said they would try to work around the court's objections, perhaps by requiring each spending item to be sent to the president as a separate bill.


"This is a temporary defeat -- a temporary defeat for the American people, for fiscal responsibility. But anyone who knows John McCain and anybody, hopefully, who knows Dan Coats knows that this is one battle in a war to address the issue of fiscal responsibility and to represent the American taxpayer so that the light of day can be shed on the way in which the Congress spends their money."

McCain had suffered an earlier blow last week as his tobacco legislation was scuttled in the Senate. Even so, the former Vietnam prison of war was able to keep a light view of the defeats.

"I would just like to point out that this has been a wonderful two weeks for me personally," McCain said to laughter during the press conference. "I'm really on a roll. I really haven't had quite so much fun since my last interrogation in Hanoi."

We need this option, or I like the idea of all of the bills needing to be sent to the president separately. That is also a big part of my frustration about knowing how our law-makers voted--it's impossible to tell if they voted one way or another because of the main bill or because of some other new law buried in the legislation. We and our lawmakers should be able to vote on something because we believe in it or not, rather than having to accept "the bad with the good, or the good with the bad." Let's just call it what it is--bribery.

Now, I'm going to have a lot more to share in future posts as I continue my exploration, but since we're only a day away from voting in a new president, I'm going to tell you my opinion and one of the reasons why--we need John McCain. He is the one talking about the broken system and the pork-barrel spending that needs to stop. His opponent is not addressing this, and in fact has participated in this practice during his years in the Senate (beginning January 2005), asking for earmarks of $931.3 million. John McCain appears to have asked for $15 million in his entire 24-year career in the senate (both of these numbers are according to PolitiFact.com).

Another reason I've voted for Senator McCain is because I'm vehemently opposed to the "steal from the rich and give to the poor" mentality. It goes against everything we believe in the United States. Every single person here should want to strive and achieve their own goals--not be encouraged to believe other people should work to support them. I'm not saying that there aren't people in this country who need help--there are, and, as a country, we devote tax dollars as well as our own charitable funds to support those truly in need. But, this will need additional research for another time! In general, those of us blessed to have able bodies and minds are better off in every way if we take care of ourselves and our own, rather than relying on "the government."

My humble two cents!

j