By: T.R. Slyder, TRSlyder@yahoo.com, AndyDisco on Twitter
I don't have a lot of time to write a bunch about this topic (or to research a few specifics, to be honest), but I thought I'd make a point that I haven't been hearing anywhere.
Most people think that our Congress is awful and has been awful for a little while now. While the blame for this often comes from partisan arguments like "Because the Blue Dogs are spineless", "Nancy Pelosi is incompetent", etc. I was trying to find a more institutional reason.
What I came up with were term limits. I don't think our founding fathers could have foreseen the inception of "career politicians" or the proliferation of lobbyists. The first politicians were more or less elder statesmen of business or industry, who after years of acquiring wisdom about how things work, would parlay that wisdom into a political campaign. That isn't the case anymore. Sure that's what the age minimum is for and it doesn't happen with every politician, but it's more of a problem than people realize. Not so much because politicians are too young or unintelligent, but because they have chosen it as a "career". They are n
ot looking to serve our country, they're looking to carve out a career- which is incumbent, among other things, upon self-preservation. If you're a lawyer and a firm offers you a job that will last only 8 years- you better really love that firm in order to take that job since in 8 years you'll be back at square one. But what you'd really prefer is a position that could last as long as you wanted it to last.
The notion of career self-preservation is what causes so many politicians to act against their own beliefs. They are fare less likely to do what they know/feel is right if it means they're less likely to have a job in 3 years- they've got kids to support! Instead of telling their constituency, "I don't care if you don't like it. You voted for me to legislate for you and that's what I'm doing. I'll be outta here in 5 years anyway." Instead, they're spinlessly saying, "Hey, I'm hoping to be here a while, so let's find a way to get along. And by 'get along' I mean, 'I'll listen to whoever gives me the most money, thereby increasing my chances of winning re-election.'. That's a big problem
That dovetails conveniently with lobbyists. If you were a politician and knew you were gonna be there only 6 years, you'd probably bust your buns to make your mark and do some good while you had the time. With only 6 (or whatever number) short years to build your legacy, every vote of yours counts. Nowadays with Congressmen being in Congress for 15+ years, they know all the lobbyists and all the lobbyists known them. They've gone skiing in Vail for the past 10 years with their lobbyist pals and wouldn't have it otherwise. Then those lobbyists tell their friends who lobby for other special interests that their politician is for sale, so others join in the feeding
frenzy. When this happens their campaign war chest grows in inverse proportion to their legislative integrity- the more of a whore they become, the bigger their campaign funds. The more campaign money they have, the more likely they are to scare off new political rivals, or to outlast those with smaller bankrolls, but more integrity.
The only thing that Republicans and Democrats can agree on is that our Congress sucks. Once you start there and work backwards, you see that term limits are a huge part of the reason why. What's odd is why no Congressman have proposed legislation to set term limits. Oh wait, that isn't odd at all- they have families to feed.
Since our politicians are such whores that they don't want to propose term limits, thereby serving the people and doing their jobs, it just proves how badly we need term limits.
I'm T.R. Slyder, and that's how you Tangueray.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Does Anyone Really Oppose Congressional Term-Limits?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
How is the "Public Option" scary? It's an Option.
By: T.R. Slyder, TRSlyder@yahoo.com, AndyDisco on Twitter
I just read about a group of conservative liberals who would not vote for a Health Care bill with a public option. Why would anyone vote against something that you don't have to do?
If you offered me the "option" to drink gasoline and I accepted, that doesn't mean I have to drink gasoline. It means I have the option to drink gasoline if I choose to. Even if I don't wish to drink it, accepting the option to drink it does me no harm.
That's obviously a silly example since no one would choose to drink gasoline. Some options are not as black and white, but the point is that an option means exactly that- option. You don't have to if you don't want to. If it's dinnertime and you aren't very hungry and someone asks if you'd like the option to eat dessert, what have you got to lose by accepting the option? It's not forcing you to eat it if you don't want to. Conversely, if you decline the option then change your mind, you won't be allowed to have any dessert. Declining the option is illogical.
There are members of Congress who refuse to let Americans have an option that they do not have to take. Shouldn't they approve of the option and let us decide whether or not we want it? The irony is that the decliners of the public option are the ones telling us that our government is getting too big.
Update: (rant continued)
Furthermore, the entire disagreement is about facts. Nearly all of the dissenters dissent because of what they were lead to believe are facts. They think that the public option is socialist, that it includes a death panel and that it pays for abortions.
None of those are true.
So lets not blame the misled, lets blame those that mislead. Where is this information coming from? It's coming mostly from FoxNews and some from Rush Limbaugh. They disseminate the false information because it is entertaining and they are paid entertainers. Their listeners tune in looking to find fault with the Democrats' ideas and Fox and Rush provide them. They just aren't accurate.
So what's holding up health care for Americans that deserve it? The Profits of FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh. By spreading entertaining lies, they are getting wealthy and we are getting unhealthy. Healthcare reform is literally a matter of life and death.
But so what if Rupert Murdoch and Rush get rich and their influence grows bigger? At least the government is not getting bigger. That could lead to bad things.
I'm T.R. Slyder, and that's how you Tangueray.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Wondering If Your Congressmen Sucks?
By: T.R. Slyder, TRSlyder@yahoo.com
Here's the list of the 228 Congressmen that voted "No" on the bailout bill HR 3997 yesterday (the list including the YES votes can be found here). The "No" list could also be titled "Congressional Suck List" because whatever partisan squabblers voted against this have no idea what's going on and is another indelible example of why this congress has an approval rating of 10%. Kudos are also not in order for John McCain who, so maverick-ly suspended his campaign to pass this bill, failed to rally his party enough to pass this bill. Maybe if you'd been in Hanoi for longer, you'd have more respect among your own party, or something. Thanks for coming out, John. Better luck with political posturing next time, I guess.
One can be certain that this was a case of political egos getting put before the best interest of their constituents, because Sen. Minority Leader John Boehner cited House Speaker Pelosi's partisan speech as a reason the vote was killed. With that language, Boehner is saying that the no votes were out of spite, and not some fundamental disagreement with the bill. What a scrotum. Oddly, Boehner voted for the bill to pass, yet failed to express disappoint when it did no pass. Way to cover all angles, Johnny. Have fun waiting for a spine and/or balls donor, because it's obvious you have neither.
Thanks to Boehner and other iconoclasts of logic, we've successfully told the rest of the world that America is finished being the economic leaders of the world.
So here's the list. Republicans are in italics, Democrats in standard Roman font, and Independents are underlined.
NAY 228
| Abercrombie | Gillibrand | Ortiz |
Posts
