Lobbyist are not the problem....

....Representatives, Senators and Presidents who act and legislate on their behalf that ARE the problem.

 

Lobbyists and those they work for are engaging in lawful/constitutional activity.  Congress and the WH are at the very least are being unethical.  Surely they are not representing the people when they act on behalf of lobbyists to the exclusion of others.

What makes Earmarks Despicable

What makes earmarks so insidious is that they are placed into funding legislation nearly covertly and most of the time at the last minute.  Often there are quid pro quo deals between legislators - I'll sponsor yours if you sponsor mine.  Certainly some to the expenditures are worthwhile and beneficial.  So why so much secrecy and deceit?  This is not that hard.  These "items" are not last minute thoughts.  So......let's just make some rules

1. Specific funding items need to be posted publically for at least two week OR it does not get any consideration in the legislation.
2. Each specific funding item posting needs to address:
1. Description
2. Cost
3. Type of Funding: one time, ongoing, etc.
4. Benefit to Local Community
5. Benefit to USA
3. One week before the Funding vote, sponsors are called before Public Hearing of the Earmark Committee, to respond to one question, of their choosing, from each Committee member.
4. The Earmark Committee votes whether or not to include the item in the Legislation.

As I said, its not that hard.  Let's make federal funding more transparent.  Write your Representatives/Senators in Washington D.C. and tell them how YOU want your money to be spent.  Don't leave this exclusively to the President, Congress, lobbyists, Dems and GOP.

 

P.S.  Most Americans think that the President's Budget is what determines what gets spent.  Actually the President's Budget is the administration's opinion on what money to appropriate OUR money.  The US Constitution states that the Congress is to appropriate funding, which the Executive Branch (the President) is to manage/expend those funds appropriated.

Not Leadership

I'm getting the impression that the Obama administration is not leading but managing by the polling and responding to uncomplimentary "editorial" comments.  

 

This would explain why Gibbs, the WH Press Secretary, attempted to rebuke CNBC Financial CBOE reporter for his "Tea Party in Chicago" rant.  It also explains the use of trial balloons and reactionary response that have become the norm.  They are either clueless or they have a big agenda.

Just imagine

If the government increases spending and raises taxes outside of stimulus legislation when the economy is way down, just think what they will do when things start to get better.

Don't mention it

Janet Napolitano while testifying in her first outing as Secretary to the Senate Homeland Security Committee she did not utter the words "terrorism" or "terrorist" in her opening statement.  This supports one of my concerns of an Obama administration - that they would be isolationist, in addition to protectionist. 

 

But perhaps this was a condition of Hillary Clinton taking the reins of the State Department - Everyone else stay within the borders, I demand total control on everything outside the borders.

 

This would constitue a fear more than fear itself.

No MORE Earmarks!!......

......except in the $787B Stimulus Bill and the $410B 2009 appropriations Bill.  This does not bode well for the first Budget (2010 appropriations) to be unvieled later this week by the Obama administration.

 

What hypocrisy from our President in his first 45 days, who for two years promised Change in Washington, D.C.  "Yes we can" seems to be sliding down the slippery slope towards "Yes we won".

Daily CIA Economic Intelligence Reports

Is that anything like Daily DOD Pharmaceutical Production Reports?  Maybe there was a mix up by the person running the teleprompter.  More than likely this just another case of miscommunication from a rookie administration.  Apparently the smoothest transition in history still wasn't enough.  President Obama needs to have breakout session with his Cabinet - "C'mon people, let's hear it....Yes, we can lead this country!"

 

And speaking of intelligence.  Will someone tatto the name of the WH Stimulus website on the palm of  VP Biden's hand.   Everyone fears him, but sometimes he forgets things, easy things, like Recovery.gov.

 

Is it Just me?

When President Obama indicated that he intends to reduce "the deficit left to him" to ~$500B by 2013 (one year after the next Presidential election).  Does he mean that: 1) the overall deficit will be ~$500B OR 2) the overall deficit will have been reduced by ~$500B.   

 

I'm in a quandary, because:

    Deficit left to the Obama administration =      $1.3T

    Obama Administration adds to the deficit = ~$1.7T

    Promised deficit reduction =                        ~0.5T

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Deficit in 2013 =                                         ~$2.5T

    ======================================

    Delta =                                                      ~$1.2T.  

 

AND if the overall deficit is truly going to reduced to ~0.5T then where does the ~2.5T of revenue (above and beyond the federal government "costs") come from?  President Obama indicated that they have already found ~$2-3T of cost savings.  That would be great - however sounds kind of inconceivable.

 

I learned the new math - but this seems to be a NEW, new math.

 

 

Busy, busy, busy

There is a huge economic AND financial crisis. Iran is reported by the UN to have enough material for one atomic weapon and is working to create more. Things in Afghanistan/Pakistan are worsening. Some of the legislative response:

Senator Diane Feinstein introduces this legislation: S.Con.Res. 7: A concurrent resolution honoring and remembering the life of Lawrence "Larry" King.

Rep. Lois Capps introduced this legislation H.Con.Res. 52: Honoring and remembering the life of Lawrence "Larry" King.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg introduced this legislation S.Res. 40: A resolution designating September 2009 as "Campus Fire Safety Month".

Rep. Rep. John Conyers introduces this legislation H.Con.Res. 50: Honoring and saluting Motown Records of Detroit, Michigan, on its 50th anniversary.

A Big Program with a lofty Goal

Candidate Obama talked incessantly about big programs that would lead the US to greater things.  Indicating the best example of this being President Kennedy's goal of putting a man on the moon.  Now, President Obama is suggesting that we build a high speed rail line from Disneyland to Las Vegas.  It will be interesting to see what scientific and engineering wonders are going to spin off of that effort and if indeed their will be any simulative effect to the nation.

The "Trust me, I'm not President Bush" Gambit

I'm willing to give President Obama a chance, but I shouldn't have to blindly trust him or any politician.  I find it strange that for 8 years Dems warned Americans about blindly following President Bush.  Now the Dems seem to be asking for everyone to line up behind President Obama as a patriotic duty.

 

To paraphrase a commercial by the actor, John Houseman: President Obama needs to earn the trust.  Let's hear some commitments, definitive/measureable forecasts and some performance.

SHUT UP!

For heavens sake, Senator Dodd, will you shut up!  And tell the rest of your fellow Senators from their respective "great states" to shut up!

 

You are not smart, therefore, quit trying to demonstrate that you might be.  You are powerful, however, because you are not smart, you are dangerous.  So....Shut up!

Cowards?

AG Eric Holder may have a point. If he meant that in general Americans are cowards for avoiding talk about race - he's wrong. If he meant that political correctness is/has stifled meaningful dialogue on race - he's correct. Political correctness is cowardly. Many keep their thoughts to themselves rather than make the effort to stay politically correct. Political correctness has erected walls between people who might otherwise engage in meaningful, helpful discussion on many topics. Pick one from the A-word to the Z-word.

Now Can We Talk Waste Cuts?

Now that a huge emergency spending economic stimulus has been signed by President Obama, can we next start looking at ways of saving wasteful expenditure of our tax dollars?

 

Let's skip the subpoenas for corporate executives, sports figures, and former administration officials where Representatives and Senators take shots at them, as if they are shooting fish in a barrel.  I understand the Populist thing.  But how about popular legislation and popular examination of government programs to uncover unpopular waste.  This would support popular and proper spending to stimulate the economy. 

 

Surely our legislators have time for more than "show" trials, press conferences and crisis.

Our Stimulus Dollars

Help those that were deceived.  Reward the prudent.  Punish the greedy and stupid.

 

Those who were prudent with their lending and savings should be not only be recognized.  They should be rewarded.  The prudent will use funds more effectively to stimulate the economy.

Stimulus Data?

Today, I did an Internet search for data on The Stimulus.  Not much in the way of definitive information.  One breakdown, found did not add up to $787B.  The CBO report is broken down into "legislative speak" categories.

 

Seems like funding legislation should be as simple as a spreadsheet - four columns - Description, Amount, WHY?, Performance Indicator.  Since its mostly lawyers in the legislature, I'm sure they'll want to add more columns.  But regular Americans only need the four pieces of information.

 

That would be change I can believe in.

Oh - I'm back

I've been away for a while.  I was "employed".  I wouldn't call it work, as I enjoyed it.  Well, most of it. 

 

The declining economy put an end to my employment, however, I was sort of looking forward to retiring again.  So, for the meantime, I'm happy to be unemployed.  Hopefully, the economy will pickup in time for me to find something to do to alleviate the boredom that will surely return.  I enjoy being part of team that is intent on accomplishing something.  At this point of my career, the monetary compensation is gravy.  Work is finally "fun".  And past savings, planning and being in the right place at the right time (luck) have made it possible for me to concentrate on enjoying work, rather than chasing after a certain sized, regular paycheck.  I'm blessed.

What Americans Want from Our Leaders.....

....Leadership and Action.  Political parties have a tendency to think that Americans want them to be "in charge".  Both parties look for confirmation, spin current events, handout taxpayer bonuses (earmarks) and make promises for the next term to convince the Americans and reassure themselves that they are in charge and/or are relevant.  These political parties spend much time and money trying to convince Americans that change Americans should make is in the number of Democrats or Republicans that are in the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary branches.

 

However, Americans, don't want either political party "in charge".   Americans want leadership and pragmatic action to solve problems and provide for the common defense.  Americans will and should judge our leadership and their actions by watching for and evaluating results.  Americans must be careful not to confuse rhetoric with action, nor hopeful promises with action.  Americans want leaders who take stands and action.  The mistakes of leaders will be taken as honest efforts (action) towards stated goals.  Political dithering and finger pointing over mistakes will not be tolerated for long periods of time.

 

The American government has by design and law: three branches.  Often the "press" is mentioned as a fourth, unofficial branch.  From the Judiciary, Executive and Legislatives branches Americans should look for and demand - leadership and action.  From our media - all the facts and unbiased analysis of the other three branches.  These are the areas of which Americans are looking for and hoping for change. 

 

Two years for Representatives, four years for Presidents and six years for Senators is more than enough time to judge leadership and "action" performance.  If performance is not there - its time for another change of leadership, which leads to real or different action.