• She is categorized as a "run-of-the-mill Republican", voting over 90% of the time with the GOP caucus. The "run of the mill" label based on voting record then could be applied to just about all Members of Congress, including the President-Elect and the Vice-President-Elect, as well as all Democracic Party congresspersons from Florida. The label seems unfair.

• She's missed about 10% of the votes she had the opportunity to make in the House. That's a much better record than the President-Elect had in any year he was a Senator, or Sen. McCain had during the same time frame. Compared to the rest of the House, her attendance record was quite high.

• She serves on the Financial Services Committee (Barney Frank's committee that we read so much about). And as a member-in-minority was a thorn in the side of the Chairperson the entire time. That's not a negative.

• She serves on the Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises sub-committee (that's the committee with oversight responsibilities for companies like the invesrment banks, AIG, Fannie and Freddie and the companies that offer--or don't offer--homeowner's insurance here in Florida). See above.

• She serves on the Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit sub-committee (that's the sub-committee with oversight responsibility for the banks and finance companies). See above.

• She's actually the Ranking member on the House Oversight & Investigations Committee. Again, not a negative. A person can be the ranking member (a seniority item) BUT not be chairperson of the committee and thus not have control of what comes before the committee.

• The latest report shows that she has accepted about $600,000 in campaign contributions, about 50% of which came from banks, insurance companies and real estate companies (those that her committees have oversight repsonsibility for).This is as questionable as the moneys received by the President-Elect's campaign committee, Rep. Frank's, Sen. Dowd's and others from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (much higher numbers). For some reason, there seems to be no problem when these esteemed individuals, especially the chairmen of the oversight committees, receive moneys from similar sources.

• She voted against the proposed Financial Stimulus (Bailout) bill twice, and complained afterwards saying the bill, "... would send hundreds of millions of dollars to foreign citizens, including residents of Puerto Rico and territories like Guam." (Residents of Guam were declared American citizens in 1900 while Puerto Ricans were granted citizenship in 1917.) When confronted on her egregious lack of knowledge about the United States, she refused to apologize and tried to "spin" her statement that she meant something else. That's like trying to make a big deal about the President-Elect's "57 states" statement and the resulting protection spins on that. At least she had the guts to vote for what she saw as right and not party direction.

All that being said, her performance as a representative has been fairly decent. However, I'm hoping she doesn't run again because she would then find herself becoming another "career congressperson" a la Rep. Pelosi, Rep Frank, and a slew of others from both parties who stay forever and become the problem versus the solution. If there is ever to be "change" in Congress, those who have spent 15-20-30-40 years on 2-year stints need to go.