Fix Congress First

[yeahwho]

What both Democrat and Republicans on here both seem to agree on is the election process and money spent on elections is out of hand.

At least I think we may agree on this. It would be absurd to let professional politicians continue on down the road (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327814/Mid-term-Elections-2010-Politicians-spent-4-2bn-adverts.html) as they have in the past few decades and particularly this past year when mid-term elections generated $4 Billion dollars (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101105/el_yblog_upshot/2010-was-a-4-billion-campaign-and-other-fun-facts-about-tuesdays-midterm-elections)in campaign funds.

So here is a group of folks trying to do something about it. Fix Congress First (http://www.fixcongressfirst.org/)

We are beholden to corporate interests, if you do not believe this I cannot help you with the fantasy world you have built yourself. If you realize you are in the bottom 90% of wage earners in this Country then perhaps a group such as Fix Congress First will intrigue your patriotic duty.

[ericg]

congress should wear their sponsors like race car drivers. i heard that the other day and thought it was right on.

[kaiser soze]

congress should wear their sponsors like race car drivers. i heard that the other day and thought it was right on.

I agree

[yeahwho]

congress should wear their sponsors like race car drivers. i heard that the other day and thought it was right on.

I agree

I agree retro-actively from 9/17/2010 (http://bbs.beastieboys.com/showpost.php?p=1743021&postcount=9)

[ericg]

yeah but i said it better.

[yeahwho]

Lame Ducks Gone Mad (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/opinion/02collins.html?hp)

and consequential replies (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/opinion/02collins.html?sort=recommended),

Probably the only reason the Republican senators actually buckled and passed a food safety bill is because they have to eat too. So far, science hasn't been able to genetically engineer food specifically for the digestive tracts of millionaires. If it had, the GOP would scoff and say of the hoi polloi: "Let them eat salmonella".

Actually, what really enrages Republicans is the thought of little children eating at all. They're blocking a bill that would provide an additional 20 billion after-school meals to needy children (in today's economy, at least a quarter of all children would qualify). School districts would be reimbursed a whopping six extra cents for each balanced, wholesome meal. Of course, Sarah Palin has tweeted against the bill too, noting it's just another effort by a bloated government trying to dictate healthy eating. Sarah is the champion of every parent's right to stuff cheap sugar down their kids' throats to stave off the hunger pangs. Plus, since it's Michelle's pet project, it's also un-American.

Let's face it - the Republicans are sociopaths. They would have us starve so their real constituents can wallow in caviar. They are reveling in their own villainy. Who cares if they voted against rotten eggs? The sulphurous stench of corruption emanating from their Washington echo chamber is more toxic than all the contaminated factory farms in America.

[kaiser soze]

yeah, these guys are fixin' shit

:rolleyes:

why do they hate America?

[p-branez]

^ No kidding.

What a joke... this most recent "bi-partisan compromise" on Bush tax cuts. Sure, the proposal hasn't passed in either the House or Senate but it has the stamp of approval from Obama and Republican leaders, so it will certainly pass. And everyone gets a little of what they want.
Republicans get extended temporary tax breaks for the wealthy, a business investment credit, and a lower rate with a higher threshold on the inheritance tax. Democrats get their extended unemployment benefits. Maybe Democrats call the business investment credit, the lower social security tax rate for a year, and the extension of other tax breaks as some sort of "economic stimulus."

What is all this? A transfer of wealth from future generations to this generation. Consume today; it's other peoples' problem in the future. It's short-term growth based on consumption to improve GDP numbers. No sacrifice for politicians; each Party gets a little of what it wants. They do some extensions and bargains and put the real issues off for a couple more years.
Oh yeah, of course last week all the politicians were harping on the importance of the deficit and the tough sacrifices Americans have to make. But that was last week. Now we're back in the short-term political arena... and the compromise? Less revenue and more consumption spending. Who's screwed? Oh yeah, the young people in the U.S. Well, they don't vote, so who cares about them.

The tax-cut-as-economic-stimulus theory hinges on the assumption that people spend that money and then the money multiplier kicks in. Do they spend, especially in recent hard times? No, they save (http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/01/10/bush-stimulus-may-have-only-modest-effect/). And we don't need any more savings because banks are sitting on mountains of reserves.

And the White House says the tax deal won't add to the deficit. (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0728012120101207) Honestly, how can they believe that tax cuts and spending increases aren't going to add to the deficit?
Here's what the White House says:
"These are responsible, temporary measures to support our economy that will not add costs by the middle of the decade,"
Right, they will just add costs beyond the middle of the decade.
Here's the real story: "The CBO said renewing the rates will boost the economy in the short term but be harmful in the long term."

If only the "bi-partisan compromise" listened to the advice of experts in a nonpartisan and independent agency.

[yeahwho]

Here's what the White House says:
"These are responsible, temporary measures to support our economy that will not add costs by the middle of the decade,"


Like my dad said and his dad said,

there is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program

Simple math: No tax hikes, more debt