Third Party & Independents Archives

Done.

Posted by: womanmarine at May 20, 2009 03:25 PM

womanmarine, good for US. The internet is just waking up to this issue, but, the buzz is beginning to spread like wildfire. This is a very big deal for 10’s of millions of Americans. If even 5% of them will do as you have, we might just be able to influence Pres. Obama to do the right thing by those who voted for him.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 20, 2009 03:32 PM

Done David, And thank you for your Blog. I will send out emails to everyone i can think of and ask they do the same.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 20, 2009 04:01 PM

David I agree another fine example of the best Congress money can buy, and did buy. I have followed your link to Obama and requested the bill be sent back to Congress unsigned, to complete the work.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 20, 2009 04:46 PM

Done.

Posted by: Rich at May 20, 2009 07:01 PM

Just got the wife and daughter to leave their own messages with Pres. Obama. I am proud of them, and we all here deserve a pat on the back for acting like our input matters, whether it will or not.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 20, 2009 07:20 PM

Well, he signed it. Perhaps we could write our representatives for an addendum?

Posted by: womanmarine at May 22, 2009 07:20 PM

womanmarine,

Yes. And worse, I just heard the reforms don’t take effect for another 9 months, giving the CC companies ample time to screw their customers royally before the new provisions kick in.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind now, that at the very least, Obama is ignoring the secondary issues in favor of concentrating on his primary priorities. That is not what the voters elected him to do - be a partial president on a select few issues. At worst, the banking lobbyists have built their roads into the White House as they have into the Congressional Houses.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 22, 2009 07:28 PM

Greed, greed, and more greed.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at May 23, 2009 06:40 PM

That “shining city upon a hill” Lost some of it’s shine it’s like a hit to the gut you lose your breath for a while only to get it back with more fury, thank you David R and d.a.n. for fighting for “We The People” This just reinforces the need for Article V.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 23, 2009 08:47 PM

Rodney Brown said: “This just reinforces the need for Article V.”

And the need to remove enough incumbents each election to put the others on notice that they will be next if an Article V convention, or comparable reforms, are not forthcoming.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 24, 2009 12:31 AM

Rodney Brown, Thank you.

David R. Remer, you’re right.

Article V is only part of the solution, as is stopping numerous other constitutional violations.

The other bigger part of the solution is up to the majority of voters.

Unfortunately, at the moment (at least until it becomes too painful), too many voters are not only failing the nation, but they are failing themselves, and they will reap what they sow.

• (01) First of all, there are the root causes (i.e. basic human traits, with some overlap, which all boil down to short-sighted selfishness):
  • (a) laziness, apathy, complacency, resigning to futility, negligence, ignorance;
  
  
  • (b) greed, gluttony, lust for power and control, envy, pride, and exploitation of others and things (e.g. lawlessness, wealth, usury, unnecessary wars, taxation, etc.);
  
  
  • (c) irrational fear, fear mongering, anger, intolerance, hatred, prejudice of others and things (e.g. religion, race, gender, color, ethnicity, etc.);
  
  
  • (d) delusion (deception and self deception), misplaced loyalties, partisan-warfare, misplaced compassion, misplaced priorities;
• (02) 40%-to-50% of voters don’t even bother to vote all.


• (03) Too many voters blindly pull the party-lever, without even knowing the candidates on the ballot, much less knowing the candidates’ voting records.


• (04) Too many voters don’t even know who their own Congress persons are, much less their Congress persons’ voting records.


• (05) Too many voters refuse to consider challengers which are usually in the OTHER political party, which results in high re-election rates for incumbent politicians. Clever, eh? See how it works?


• (06) Too few voters understand that 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent by a very tiny 0.3% of all voters that make 83% of all federal campaign donations: www.opensecrets.org/pressreleases/DonorDemographics02.asp


• (07) Too many voters simply vote for the candidate that spends the most money, resulting in 90% of elections that are won by the candidate that spends the most money.


• (08) Too many voters don’t even know who their own Congress persons are, much less their Congress persons’ voting records.


• (09) Too many voters are one-issue voters, and are easily bribed with their own tax dollars, and fooled by the myth that we can all live at the expense of everyone else. Too many voters want the government to take care of them from cradle to grave. Little do they know, the more they ask government to do, the more bloated, inefficient, corrupt, and wasteful it becomes. Also, any government powerful enough to give voters anything they want is also powerful enough to take it away.


• (10) Too many voters prefer to wallow in the hateful blame-game and the circular partisan-warfare, because it is easier to blame the OTHER party than admit that THEIR own party ain’t much (if any) better.


• (11) Too few (if any) voters can name 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable, but too many voters still continue to repeatedly reward THEIR irresponsible and corrupt incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, rather than ever consider a challenger (since the challenger is usually in the OTHER party), thus making most incumbent politicians’ cu$hy and coveted incumbencies more secure. What do they say about doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result?


• (12) Too few voters understand, nor want to understand how too many corrupt and irresponsible incumbent politicians capitalize on the voters’ laziness, blind partisanship, blind loyalty, delusions, apathy, complacency, hatreds, and ignorance. Too many voters are too easily fooled. As a result, the voters are used, abuses, and exploited (e.g. usury; illegal immigration for profits and votes; voting fraud; unfair trade practices; corruption and greed in an increasingly FOR-SALE, bloated, wasteful, corrupt, plutocratic/kleptocratic federal government, unnecessary wars, inflation, unfair and regressive taxation, vast unfair advantages for incumbent politicians; insufficient and declining quality of eduction; increasing lawlessness and constitutional violations; etc.).


• (13) Too few voters appreciate the importance of Education, Transparency, and Accountability. May 1st was “Law Day”, yet what did we see in recent years? We saw millions of illegal aliens protesting and demanding rights. Lawlesssness and crime are on the rise. There are many constitutional violations. Yet, while most Americans want secure borders and reject another amnesty like the one in 1986 (which more than quadrupled the problem), most incumbent politicians still flagrantly refuse to enforce existing laws and continue to push for antoher anmensty. These politicians are despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for votes and profits disguised as compassion (severely misplaced compassion, at best). Yet, too many voters still reward those incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, despite dismal approval ratings for Congress. Why?


• (14) Too many voters focus only on the office of President and Vice President, and continue to repeatedly reward irresponsible incumbent politicians in Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, which sabotages the next President by saddling the president with the same dysfunctional, irresponsible, incompetent, FOR-SALE, corrupt Congress. As a result, the nation’s pressing problem continue to grow in number and severity, threatening the future and security of the nation. Total fiscal and moral bankruptcy continues to grow nearer. The only consolation is that we are drawing closer to the pain and misery needed to finally provide the voters their much-needed education and motivation to vote more responsibly (such as unhappy voters did in year 1933 when the voters ousted a whopping 206 members of Congress, and hundreds in the elections (1929:108, 1931:123) leading up to year 1933).


• (15) Too few voters understand that the voters are culpable too, and we have the government we elect, and deserve. If the voters aren’t culpable, then who is? Who is left to stop the corruption, abuses, and deteriorating economic conditions? Too few voters understand it now, but they will, when failing to care to understand finally becomes too painful.


• (16) Too few voters understand that Congress’ refusal to stop so many abuses is no coincidence. And so many abuses did not all come about and persist by mere coincidence, and decades of those abuses has resulted in numerous deteriorating economic conditions today, which have never been worse ever and/or since the 1930s and 1940s. The $11.4 Trillion National Debt (as of May-2009) per-capita has never been worse (65% higher per-capita than in year 1945 after World War II). The voters mostly have themselves to thank for it. Ignorance is not an excuse. It is merely an invitation for more abuse by cheaters who are all too happy to oblige.


• (17) Too few voters understand the damage that can be done during the 2, 4, 6 years of politicians’ terms in office, and it will be another 2, 4, or 6 year before it can be corrected, so the voters should not take this duty lightly. Otherwise, it could have disastrous consequences for millions of Americans (e.g. unnecessary wars, deteriorating economic conditions, numerous abuses, usury, unfair taxation, inflation from excessive amounts of new money, growing corruption, massive debt, fiscal and moral bankruptcy, illegal immigration, unfair trade practices, a severely bloated federal governmnet and debt growing to nightmare proportions, and numerous other manifestations of unchecked greed).


• (18) Too few voters understand how their own negligence, and irresponsible voting habits will lead to painful consequences for most Americans … that is, until it is probably too late to mitigate the damages. Thus, too many voters must repeatedly learn the hard way. Too many voters fail to learn from history. The only consolation is that things may finally get better when things get too painful.

That list above may offend some voters, and some voters may believe they are not culpable, but those comments above are not said with malice. Those comments are offered as constructive criticism in the hope that enough voters will remember that they are culpable too, and will reap what they sow.

Millions of Americans are being cheated and abused, and it will only get worse until enough voters act responsibly and do their job too.

The first simple step is for enough voters to simply stop repeatedly rewarding bad politicians with perpetual re-election, stop blindly pulling the party-lever, and stop wallowing in the blind, distracting, divisive, circular, distracting partisan-warfare.

Perhaps when enough voters are …

• (1) deep into debt (on the loan-shark hamster wheel),


• (2) jobless (and debt also being used against some people looking for work),


• (3) homeless,


• (4) and hungry,

… as a result of incessant these numerous abuses and these deteriorating economic conditions, enough of those voters will finally (hopefully) question their repeatedly rewarding corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at May 24, 2009 07:28 AM

A list of 1,817 weak banks and thrifts with D+ or worse ratings, and a list of 871 weak insurers with D+ or worse ratings (all in the U.S.).

Posted by: d.a.n at May 24, 2009 12:46 PM

Is it irony that the profits garnered from those who are the victims of usuary are paying the quid pro quo to Obama and members of Congress?

Posted by: jlw at May 24, 2009 12:55 PM

d.a.n said insightfully: “(01) First of all, there are the root causes (i.e. basic human traits, with some overlap, which all boil down to short-sighted selfishness):”

This statement of yours explaining why our government results do not reach their potential for effective governance, strikes to the heart of the philosophical debate conducted in the late 1700’s amongst our founding Constitution signers and delegates.

On the one hand, those who are lazy, indolent, and unmotivated by anything other than immediate gratification, pose an enormous risk to democratic processes should their numbers amongst the voting population reach critical levels. However, as our voting turnout rate seems to indicate, by and large, such folks don’t vote at all, and therefore the threat of ignorant mob rule is mitigated.

On the other hand, if one accepts that human nature is largely based on the attributes you state above, then nothing short of authoritarian rule by the educated and magnanimous is warranted. We however, have no way to guarantee magnanimity in any authoritarian selected to rule us.

This was an enormous philosophical difference between Hamilton and Jefferson. I believe the resolution of these philosophical differences lies in Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments in which it is posited that there is a general tendency to shun and avoid the indolent, lazy, and greed driven in our society and that our culture has a responsibility for teaching its citizens willing to learn, the benefits of enlightened self-interest, which stipulates that one’s actions are best decided when the short term gains are not negated by longer term consequences resulting from that action.

In short, I think Adam Smith offers the way to better governance through education of its citizens in the rational decision making processes rooted in mathematics and statistics and history which provides an account of what has worked and what hasn’t so as to avoid reinventing the wheel and repeating history’s mistakes.

Human beings are born dependent and needy, but, they are also born hardwired for social congregation and interaction for security and safety. Hence, to the extent that individuals can be made aware of their obligations to their society as necessary to insuring personal security, our citizens can be taught the benefit of decision making which benefits the society as well as one personally in appropriate proportion more often than not, and that such decisions are ultimately in their best enlightened self-interest.

What every other major economic nation has, that America does not, is a national educational design and standardized curriculum which promotes the interests of the individual and society simultaneously. America’s individual and specialized vocational oriented education system is failing to teach our citizenry the rational process of making decisions which insure both personal and national interests simultaneously from personal finance to public service.

This fact, more than any other, is responsible for America’s decline in standing and rank amongst other modern economies along many measures, and threatens America’s future in the 21st century and beyond.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 24, 2009 03:54 PM

David R. Remer wrote: d.a.n said insightfully:

• “(01) First of all, there are the root causes (i.e. basic human traits, with some overlap, which all boil

  David R. Remer wrote: d.a.n said insightfully:

  • “(01) First of all, there are the root causes (i.e. basic human traits, with some overlap, which all boil down to short-sighted selfishness):”

  This statement of yours explaining why our government results do not reach their potential for effective governance, strikes to the heart of the philosophical debate conducted in the late 1700’s amongst our founding Constitution signers and delegates.

  David, Thanks!

  I’m confident the voters will (most likely) figure it out eventually. The sooner the better.

  David R. Remer wrote: On the one hand, those who are lazy, indolent, and unmotivated by anything other than immediate gratification, pose an enormous risk to democratic processes should their numbers amongst the voting population reach critical levels. However, as our voting turnout rate seems to indicate, by and large, such folks don’t vote at all, and therefore the threat of ignorant mob rule is mitigated.

  As you wisely stated, short-sighted selfishness (instead of enlightened self-interest) is not smart, because it leads to pain and misery. I intend to incorporate that phrase of “enlighted self-interest” in some web-pages.

  I’m confident the voters will (most likely) figure it out eventually … I’m only worried how long it will take.

  We still have serious many deteriorating economic conditions, growing in number and severity, debt, and abuses.

  David R. Remer wrote: On the other hand, if one accepts that human nature is largely based on the attributes you state above, then nothing short of authoritarian rule by the educated and magnanimous is warranted. We however, have no way to guarantee magnanimity in any authoritarian selected to rule us.

  Well, that can happen sometimes. History shows us that democracy is sometimes lost (for a while).

  We might ought to keep that in mind.
  There are no guarantees.
  

  • It takes a lot of degeneration before a country falls into dictatorship, but we should avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings. ; Sandra Day O’Connor

  David R. Remer wrote: This was an enormous philosophical difference between Hamilton and Jefferson. I believe the resolution of these philosophical differences lies in Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments in which it is posited that there is a general tendency to shun and avoid the indolent, lazy, and greed driven in our society and that our culture has a responsibility for teaching its citizens willing to learn, the benefits of enlightened self-interest, which stipulates that one’s actions are best decided when the short term gains are not negated by longer term consequences resulting from that action.

  That’s interesting. Also, Frederic Bastiat wrote about it a lot too, and how an understanding of human nature was crucial.

  David R. Remer wrote: In short, I think Adam Smith offers the way to better governance through education of its citizens in the rational decision making processes rooted in mathematics and statistics and history which provides an account of what has worked and what hasn’t so as to avoid reinventing the wheel and repeating history’s mistakes.

  I strongly agree with that too. We will get our education. The only question is how, and will it be sooner than later (later = more painful)?
  • Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability
  • Corruption = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability
  Where …
  • Virtue = the source of moral and ethical judgment; a sense of right and wrong; a sense of caring. A good conscience and Virtue is not merely knowing what is right or wrong, but caring enough to do what is right, and provides the motivation to seek the balance of Education, Transparency, Accountability, and Power required for any successful society, government, or organization;
  • Education = an understanding of the importance of: Education, Transparency, Accountability, Power, Responsibility, Corruption, and the fundamental human desire to seek security and prosperity with the least effort and pain, and that some will resort to dishonest, unethical, or illegal methods to obtain it;
  • Transparency = visibility and simplification of cleverly over-complicated processes to reveal and identify abusers, create outrage, reduce opportunities for abuse, and discourage abuse and dishonesty;
  • Accountability = consequences needed to encourage law enforcement, encourage ethical behavior, and discourage abuse and dishonesty;
  • Power = force required to enforce the laws, discontinue abuse, ensure consequences, punish abusers, and discourage abuse and dishonesty; but unchecked Power without sufficient Education, Transparency, and Accountability breeds Corruption.

  David R. Remer wrote: Human beings are born dependent and needy, but, they are also born hardwired for social congregation and interaction for security and safety. Hence, to the extent that individuals can be made aware of their obligations to their society as necessary to insuring personal security, our citizens can be taught the benefit of decision making which benefits the society as well as one personally in appropriate proportion more often than not, and that such decisions are ultimately in their best enlightened self-interest.

  Yes. You have a background in psychology, and you recognize these human tendencies.

  Humans, young and old, are naturally selfish to varying degrees.
  However, too much short-sighted selfishness leads to more pain and misery.
  Sometimes, it can take years and decades before the consequences of our actions are realized.
  That tremendous time-lag is why education is so important.
  Even though Mark Twain said:

  • “History doesn’t repeat itself - at best it sometimes rhymes” — Mark Twain quotes (American Humorist, Writer and Lecturer. 1835-1910)
  … is is hard to deny …
  
  • “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” — Notable Quotations from George Santayana

  David R. Remer wrote: What every other major economic nation has, that America does not, is a national educational design and standardized curriculum which promotes the interests of the individual and society simultaneously. America’s individual and specialized vocational oriented education system is failing to teach our citizenry the rational process of making decisions which insure both personal and national interests simultaneously from personal finance to public service. This fact, more than any other, is responsible for America’s decline in standing and rank amongst other modern economies along many measures, and threatens America’s future in the 21st century and beyond.

  You know something, you may be right about that.

  There are 10 major items on this unprioritized list of 10 major pressing problems and abuses in this nation, and Education is #10 on the list:

  • (01) Lawlessness
  
  
  • (02) Wars
  
  
  • (03) Plutocracy / Kleptocracy
  
  
  • (04) Illegal Immigration and Unfair Trade Practices
  
  
  • (05) Election Problems
  
  
  • (06) $11.4 Trillion National Debt , $57+ Trillion Nation-Wide Debt and
  
  
  • (07) Inflation / Usury / the Monetary-System is a Pyramid-Scheme
  
  
  • (08) Regressive Taxation
  
  
  • (09) Insufficient / Inadequate Education
  
  
  • (10) HealthCare or DangerousCare?
  However, we are going to get our Education one way or another.

  The big question is when and how?

  I hope it is before things get too painful, but the built-in self-correction mechanism (if any) is pain and misery.
  Pain and misery is a wonderful for improving humans’ enlightened self-interest and the perils of their short-sighted selfishness.
  Pain and misery is wonderfully effective at providing the much-needed incentive and motivation to stop doing the things that are causing the pain and misery.

  I think humans are capable of learning, but unfortunately, it is too often only after we allow things to deteriorate too much for too long.

  At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).
  

Posted by: d.a.n at May 25, 2009 03:21 PM

jlw wrote: Is it irony that the profits garnered from those who are the victims of usuary are paying the quid pro quo to Obama and members of Congress?

Not when a tiny 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly outspent by a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 (or more).

The federal government is FOR-SALE.

90% of all elections are won by the candidate that spends the most money.

Congress enjoys 85%-to-90% re-election rates.

Congress persons have numerous unfair incumbent advantages.

The result of all of this is a huge shift of wealth from the many to the few.
The wealth disparity gap in the U.S. has never been larger since the Great Depression:

• 40% of weatlh in U.S. is owned by a tiny 1% of wealthiest of 305 Million U.S. Population:


• 045.0% +—————————————-


• 042.5% +—o————————————


• 040.0% +-o-o—————————-o-o-
(40% owned by 1% of wealthiest)

• 037.5% +o—-o————————o——-


• 035.0% +——-o———————o———


• 032.5% +———o——o—o——-o———


• 030.0% +———-o—o——o—-o———-


• 027.5% +————o———o—-o———-


• 025.0% +————————o—o———-


• 022.5% +————————o-o————


• 020.0% +————————-o————-


• 017.5% +—————————————-


• 015.0% +—————————————-


• ————1—1—1—1—1—1—1—1—2—2


• ————9—9—9—9—9—9—9—9—0—0


• ————2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9—0—1


• ————0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0 YEAR

Another result is that the $11.4 Trillion National Debt per-capita has never been larger (69% higher than after World War II):

• ___ Per-Capita Debt (in inflation adjusted 2008 dollars) for $11.4 Trillion National Debt ____


• $40.0 |————————————


• $37.5 |———————————o- $37K per-capita


• $35.0 |———————————o-


• $32.5 |——————————-oo-


• $30.0 |——————————-o—


• $27.5 |—————————-oo—-


• $25.0 |—————————-o——


• $22.5 |————-o————o——- $22K per-capita


• $20.0 |————o-o———-o——-


• $17.5 |————o-o———-o——-


• $15.0 |————o-o———o———


• $12.5 |————o—-o—-o———-


• $10.0 |————o——-oo————


• $07.5 |————o———————-


• $05.0 |————o———————-


• $02.5 |——o-o————————-


• $00.0 +o-o———+————————-YEAR


• ______ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2


• ______ 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0


• ______ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1


• ______ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

• ____________ NATIONAL DEBT (NOMINAL) ______________________
• $11.5T |————————————————————————x ($11.4 Trillion
• $11.0T |————————————————————————x MAY-2009)
• $10.5T |———————————————————————-x-
• $10.0T |———————————————————————-x-
• $09.5T |———————————————————————-x-
• $09.0T |———————————————————————x—
• $08.5T |——————————————————————-x—-
• $08.0T |——————————————————————x——
• $07.5T |—————————————————————-x——-
• $07.0T |—————————————————————x———
• $06.5T |————————————————————-x———-
• $06.0T |————————————————————x————
• $05.5T |———————————————————x—————
• $05.0T |—————————————————-x-:—————-
• $04.5T |————————————————-x—-:—————-
• $04.0T |————————————————x——:—————-
• $03.5T |———————————————-x——-:—————-
• $03.0T |——————————————-x———-:—————-
• $02.5T |—————————————-xx————:—————-
• $02.0T |———————————-xx——————:—————-
• $01.5T |——————————-xx———————:—————-
• $01.0T |————————xxxxx-:———————:—————-
• $00.5T |xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx———:———————:—————-
• $00.0T |———————————+———————+—————-
• ______1——1——1——1——1—1-1——1——1—1-2——2—22-
• ______9——9——9——9——9—9-9——9——9—9-0——0—00-
• ______6——6——7——7——8—8-8——9——9—9-0——0—00-
• ______0——5——0——5——0—3-5——0——5—8-0——5—89-

Another result is that the $57 Trillion Nation-Wide Debt has never been larger (in (a)size, (b)per-capita, and (c)as a percentage of GDP):

• ____ Nation-Wide Debt Growing Many Times Larger Than GDP______


• $60.0T |——————————————


• $57.5T |—————————————-D (Debt=$57 T)


• $55.0T |—————————————D-


• $52.5T |—————————————D-


• $50.0T |—————————————D-


• $47.5T |—————————————D-


• $45.0T |—————————————D-


• $42.5T |—————————————D-


• $40.0T |————————————-D—


• $37.5T |————————————D—-


• $35.0T |———————————-D——


• $32.5T |———————————-D——


• $30.0T |———————————D——-


• $27.5T |——————————-D———


• $25.0T |——————————D———-


• $22.5T |—————————-D————


• $20.0T |—————————D————-


• $17.5T |————————-D—————


• $15.0T |————————D—————-


• $12.5T |———————D——————G (GDP=$13.86T for year 2007)


• $10.0T |—————-D—————G——-


• $07.5T |———-D————G—————-


• $05.0T |-D——-G——————————


• $02.5T |-G—————————————


• $00.0T +(1956)————————- (MAR-2009)YEAR

And unfortunately, GDP for year 2008 and 2009 may be less than the $13.86 Trillion for year 2007, making the percentage larger.

And how about that Chris Dodd (Senator from Connecticut)?
Will voters reward Chris Dodd with re-election in 2010?
Chris Dodd first lied about any knowledge of the AIG loophole.
Then one day later Chris Dodd admitted to knowing about it, and then tried to blame it on someone else.
And many voters (many who re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect Chris Dodd and similar ilk) now appear incredulous as to why so how much corruption and greed is possible, millions of Americans are jobless (14-to-34 Million unemployed), homeless (3+ Million foreclosures per year), bankrupt ($57 Trillion of nation-wide debt), and hungry (over 10% of Americans now receive food stamps)! ? !

Perhaps when enough voters are:

• (1) deep into debt (on the loan-shark hamster wheel; many victims of usury),


• (2) jobless (and debt also being used against some people looking for work),


• (3) homeless,


• (4) and hungry,

…, then perhaps enough voters will have enough education to finally (hopefully) question their repeatedly rewarding corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at May 25, 2009 04:01 PM

It could become too complicated to reverse credit card interest rates that are based upon past ‘raping.’ Credit card companies have already made financial calculations based upon the money they expected to get from those ‘rapes’ or shall we say transactions. lol

It would destabilize the financial sector to try to undo everything they built their house of cards on.

Posted by: politico08 at May 25, 2009 07:52 PM

President Obama will nominate federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104530389

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 26, 2009 09:38 AM

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, “I don’t believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it.” She’s in i like.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 26, 2009 09:42 AM

Can a law correct something that was legal, retroactively?

I linked and wrote, but I’m not so sure it would be legal to go retroactive on this. The nine month postponment is a valid issue, sending it back to Congress would have been good politics and an effective way to get a better bill. I let him know my disppleasure. Hopefully, if enough folks submit complaints, perhaps a new bill can be introduced…one with more teeth…sigh…

Posted by: Marysdude at May 26, 2009 10:11 PM

Marysdude,

Great question. The answer is, yes it can. Slavery was legal, but anti-slavery legislation dispossessed slave owners of their property legally obtained during legal slavery years.

Civil suits award remuneration and punitive damages for harms caused which violated no laws. Something doesn’t have to be criminal to be treated by the law as wrong and harmful, and remuneration or compensation for the wrongs dispensed by the law. There are many examples in our legal history.

Best example is the successful suits against the tobacco companies. Another achieved just in the last 2 weeks, in which the tobacco companies were forced to halt deceptive advertising practices involving Light, and Ultra-Light advertising. Advertising is by definition deceptive, highlighting strengths for sales and avoiding or minimizing weaknesses in the product or service. Deceptive advertising is not illegal until the government says it is. And when the government determines it is illegal, then retributive and punitive awards often follow, retroactively in some cases.

That is the nature of civil suits and justice.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 28, 2009 05:17 PM

Questions I sent to President, Vice President and congressional leaders:

Question about credit card measure:

From looking at the measure recently enacted it is beyond me why the credit card companies are so virulent about the bill. It does not seem to affect any past actions and does not seem to put a cap on the interest rates which can be charged in the future. It also does not set standards for fixing rates. This is left to the whim of the card companies.

Are they complaining because they know the measure will not affect them but want the constituencey to think that they are being “harmed” by the new measure?

Truthfully, what impact do you see from the actions taken by congress as having any affect on consumers. Lower Fed interest rates seem to be of no moment. They can borrow at 4-5% and charge 29%. They don’t seem to have any criteria for rate determination other than their own. That criteria will be aimed at making the most money they can without regard for their customers.

Please let me know how my perception errs.

Thanks

Posted by: BAS2 at June 1, 2009 07:11 PM

David,
What an optimist you remain. I agreed with nearly every sentiment but one. “…the only road to real effective reforms in Congress is the road that leads to massive removal of incumbents seeking reelection.”

As long as it takes massive amounts of money to win elections the promises of would-be reformers will mean as much as the incumbents. We need to start now with what we have because, as things now exist, it will not change through elections. The only hope I have is the outcry will become so deafening it can no longer be ignored. Hopefully, someone will champion our cause. Lets hope for the best. It is a little late to prepare for the worse.

Posted by: BAS2 at June 1, 2009 07:32 PM

BAS2, excellent questions posed and tactfully posed as well. Well done.

You comment above however, (and quoted below) is a circular argument.

As long as it takes massive amounts of money to win elections the promises of would-be reformers will mean as much as the incumbents. We need to start now with what we have because, as things now exist, it will not change through elections.

You start with the premise that the challengers MUST make the same mistakes that got their predecessors booted out by anti-incumbent action, by virtue of the money needed to get reelected. And hence, conclude that an anti-incumbent action won’t change anything.

Of course, that is false. The reality is, politicians require BOTH money and the plurality of the vote to get reelected. IF voters make anti-incumbent voting their mainstay, politicians will have no choice, if they want to get reelected, but to place a higher value on appeasing the anti-incumbent crowd, than on the money, since, the anti-incumbent crowd will constitute a greater threat to reelection than lack of funds.

Plus, there is the fact that a challenger actually is more dependent on fund raising usually, than an incumbent who is able to use tax revenues to promote their own reelection via their representative newsletter’s direct channel to constituents via email, and snail mail under the ruse of keeping their constituents “informed”.

The money is a potent force. But, money cannot dispense with the logic and reason of an anti-incumbent mindset pervasive in the electorate, fueled by gross disappointment and disapproval of representation in general.

It always surprises me how alien the notion is to Americans that the vote is their power to change government that is failing them. And the polls demonstrate unequivocally, that the electorate disapproves and even holds in contempt, the majority in the U.S. Congress.

If and when the voters realize the power of their collective vote to remove incompetent, inept, and ineffective Congress persons en masse, America will have turned a monumental corner toward a better and more responsible future for themselves and their children, and their children’s children.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 1, 2009 08:22 PM

Thank you. It is good to have a reasonable discussion on issues as opposed to the dogma professed by the 2 parties.

You approved of my question posed to the President and congressional leaders as being tactful. Last year I posed Elizabeth Dole a question which was probably not very tactful. At the end of her advertisment attacking her opponent for accepting funds from “The Leaders of Godless Americans” group she asked “What has she promised them in return?” With this statement she acknowledges that special interest groups decide policy by financing elections. I looked into her top funding sources. Two of her highest were credit card companies. My question of her was “Is this funding for future considerations or payment in full?” Haven’t heard back from her yet. If I do though I will let you know.

Concession: The correlation between money and election is not as pronounced as my statement supposes.

Counterpoint: Information provided comes from “Americans for Campaign Reform” Policy Paper January 2008

Year % incumbents reelected to House

1992 95%
1994 92%
1996 95%
1998 99%
2000 99%
2002 99%
2004 99%
2006 94%

Money spent by winning challengers went from 1/2 million to nearly 2. Inflation during this period made a contribution - but not 300%. This does not constitute proof that the money spent directly affects the outcome of the election (unless we are talking about Illinois - sorry, that was an appointment not an election) but I feel it does suggest that it takes a lot of money to get taken seriously and to reach the public. Harry Truman may have kept the train moving by collecting from the people at his whistle stops but I fear those times are gone.

My earlier studies in political science (nearly 40 years ago) asserted that though the public decried Congress as being the problem with the country they still felt that their representatives were the right choice for their state/district. I think that this is still valid.

In my opinion, people no longer consider the overall policy/proposals of the candidates but focus on one or two issues and decide based upon those issues. Specifically, I think those issues are abortion, gun control, stand on gays, taxes and big government. This is a shell game played by both parties to obscure the real issues they can address. Washington will not pass new abortion laws, they will not pass any law beyond curbing automatic or semi-automatic weapons, they will not pass laws to put gays in prison or approve gay marriages, they will not change taxes to any degree and, surprise, big government is here to stay, but I degress.

Posted by: Barry Scheidler at June 2, 2009 11:17 PM

Barry, yes, the anti-incumbent sentiment is there, but the organization to move it to act en masse on that sentiment, has not yet reached the proportions it must.

Ironically, the distaste voters have for money in politics is strangling efforts of the very non-partisan organizations that intend to organize voters in such a fashion. Vote Out Incumbents Democracy is growing in supporters, but, not in fund raising. Of course, it doesn’t help that we are in a recession.

It is a conundrum that must be resolved before voters can become organized and reinforcing of the reality that it IS their own representative’s ineffectiveness at reforms that is the problem, and deserving of their voting for a challenger instead, in concert with masses of voters in other districts all across the country.

Clever ruse these politicians play, pointing to the other politicians as responsible and not their own ineffectiveness in bringing about the reforms most Americans can identify with. Such is part of the fundamental flaw of political parties, which the Founders failed to anticipate and address in the Constitution. Of course, political parties didn’t exist until after G. Washington was elected, so some fore bearance is called for on their part.

But, there is an order to this mess. Effective campaign finance and lobbyist reforms WILL NOT occur as long as the incumbent election rates remain as high as you quoted. Ergo, the first step to campaign finance and lobbyist reforms is organizing the anti-incumbent voting population to drop that reelection rate from the 90 to the 50% range, giving incentive and motivation to the newly elected challengers to actually challenge the reelected incumbents in the Congress to make such reforms a reality.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 3, 2009 03:35 AM