Do Nothing Congress - Vote for Change?

**The Reaper** · 08-19-2008, 10:04

Didn't they promise to change things, work in a bipartisan manner, and have a checklist of legislation to pass?

Most of what I have seen passed this far have been raids upon the public till and preferential treatment to special interest groups.

TR

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1219...googlenews_wsj

As U.S. Economic Problems Loom,
House, Senate Sweat the Small Stuff
Members of Congress Love a Good Resolution;
Watermelons and Undertakers Fit the Bill
By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON
August 19, 2008; Page A1

WASHINGTON -- The 110th Congress, whose term officially ends in January, hasn't passed any spending bills or attacked high gasoline prices. But it has used its powers to celebrate watermelons and to decree the origins of the word "baseball."

Barring a burst of legislative activity after Labor Day, this group of 535 men and women will have accomplished a rare feat. In two decades of record keeping, no sitting Congress has passed fewer public laws at this point in the session -- 294 so far -- than this one. That's not to say they've been idle. On the flip side, no Congress in the same 20 years has been so prolific when it comes to proposing resolutions -- more than 1,900, according to a tally by the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense.

With the mostly symbolic measures, Congress has saluted such milestones as the Idaho Potato Commission's 70th anniversary and recognized soil as an "essential natural resource." As legislation on gasoline prices, tax fixes and predatory lending languish, Congress has designated May 5-9 as National Substitute Teacher Recognition Week, and set July 28 as the Day of the American Cowboy.

The resolutions, which generally don't carry the force of law, can originate in either the House or Senate. However, some types of resolutions establish the federal budget, authorize the president to go to war, or condemn actions such as the genocide in Darfur. Even among the 294 laws passed thus far, many were symbolic in nature. Many of the post offices named by this Congress honor servicemen and -women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the 435-member House, fully one-quarter of the workweek is typically devoted to debating and passing symbolic measures.

charlietwo · 08-19-2008, 10:53

Hahaha... Day of the American Cowboy. This would be great comedy if we weren't living in such dark times. Thank God I still have a sense of humor

**Roguish Lawyer** · 08-19-2008, 11:44

When you're ready to run, let me know!

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 08-19-2008, 14:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

When you're ready to run, let me know!

Most military folk do not make good congress critters primarily because they could give a rat's ass about building consensus without stepping on someone's little bitty toes. They see the problem, analyze possible solutions from gathered input, select a course of action most likely to succeed and lead from the front after making the decision and take responsiblity for their actions. Congress can't see the problem, analyze what they can garner for their constituents for supporting someone elses cause regardless if it is the right cause for the country, ask others to make the decision so they can claim plausible deniability if it goes south, push from the rear, and take responsibility for nothing.

Paslode · 08-19-2008, 19:07

A complete house cleaning is long over due, the entire lot of them needs to be thrown out like the garbage. Only problem is I am not sure we can find a landfill that will accept waste this toxic.

Sdiver · 08-19-2008, 20:44

This fits right into this poll over on Fox News dot com.

Quote:

President Bush Job Approval

Approve29.6%
Disapprove64.6%

Congressional Job Approval

Approve19.0%
Disapprove75.3%

Most everyone is saying just how bad a job the POTUS is doing, but by these numbers above, he's doing a good 10% plus, better job than this "Congress of Change."

"Congress of Change"....yeah right, a Change for the "Worse".

37F5V · 08-19-2008, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paslode

A complete house cleaning is long over due, the entire lot of them needs to be thrown out like the garbage. Only problem is I am not sure we can find a landfill that will accept waste this toxic.

I believe the Romans used to call it "Decimation".

GratefulCitizen · 08-19-2008, 22:17

We need a Constitutional amendment (done through the states to bypass congress).

Specifically:
-In election cycle off-years, there should be a popular referendum and a referendum of the state legislatures.

-The popular referendum would be an up/down vote for the entire House of Representatives.

-The state legislatures would do the same for the Senate.

-A down vote would remove all persons elected the previous year from office and disqualfy them from running for federal office for 5 years.

Watch how quickly they would put the nation's interests first.

**The Reaper** · 08-20-2008, 05:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

We need a Constitutional amendment (done through the states to bypass congress).

Specifically:
-In election cycle off-years, there should be a popular referendum and a referendum of the state legislatures.

-The popular referendum would be an up/down vote for the entire House of Representatives.

-The state legislatures would do the same for the Senate.

-A down vote would remove all persons elected the previous year from office and disqualfy them from running for federal office for 5 years.

Watch how quickly they would put the nation's interests first.

All that would do is to cause them to try and buy more votes by redistributing more money from the public treasury.

TR

SF_BHT · 08-20-2008, 06:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

All that would do is to cause them to try and buy more votes by redistributing more money from the public treasury.

TR

X10

That sounds like a Dem Party solution............

Guy · 08-20-2008, 07:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Most military folk do not make good congress critters primarily because they could give a rat's ass about building consensus without stepping on someone's little bitty toes. They see the problem, analyze possible solutions from gathered input, select a course of action most likely to succeed and lead from the front after making the decision and take responsiblity for their actions. Congress can't see the problem, analyze what they can garner for their constituents for supporting someone elses cause regardless if it is the right cause for the country, ask others to make the decision so they can claim plausible deniability if it goes south, push from the rear, and take responsibility for nothing.

We just had a meeting to schedule a meeting for a "future" meeting.

Stay safe.

Libertas Optima · 08-20-2008, 07:06

I am not so sure I see the problem, I thought we had the best politicians money could buy...

Richard · 08-20-2008, 07:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy

We just had a meeting to schedule a meeting for a "future" meeting.

Stay safe.

Aarrgghhhhhhhhh..flashback to my time as Host Nation Support Plans Officer for Western Europe. Those meetings were called "happy to glad" affairs because that was about all the seemed to get done amongst our NATO allies--deciding whether or not a correct word to be used in a treaty should be something as simple as "happy" or if "glad" would better convey the intent of the damn thing. Those guys were bureaucrats of the Nth degree in uniform who made careers out of moving like pond water...and drove us HNS guys (who were all combat arms branches) nuts!

However, when the balloon went up, our contacts throughout the bureaucracy would pay off and we could contact them directly to get waivers, gain support, and move like nobody else could...which is what we did in alerting, preparing, and moving Vll Corps (US) (+) to the Gulf in less than 30 days...which shocked the Iraqis and the Soviets.

Richard's $.02

GratefulCitizen · 08-20-2008, 22:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

All that would do is to cause them to try and buy more votes by redistributing more money from the public treasury.

TR

Fair enough.
It probably would bring out the baser instincts of most politicians.

I stand corrected.

Perhaps a better route would be to Constitutionally limit terms and/or repeal the 17th amendment.

Surf n Turf · 08-21-2008, 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Perhaps a better route would be to Constitutionally limit terms and/or repeal the 17th amendment.

For the life of me I cannot understand how the 17th amendment was passed. Direct elections of everyone --- except for POTUS, we still need the electorial college.

We could also have the "vote the incumbent out" act

SnT