There's been lots of discussion about things we don't like about what's going on in Congress. But if we back off and look at the broader view, I for one like at least one thing that I see happening.

The big lobbyists are taking a beating. Things are not going their way, for sure. If I count up the lobbyists that seem to have lost control of Congress, I'd have to include the lobbyists hired by...

• The banks and investment banks
• The insurance companies
• Mortgage originators and brokers
• Hedge funds
• The auto industry and suppliers
• The drug companies
• The AMA
• The big hospital lobby

One lobby that seems to still have influence is the NRA. They got an amendment attached to today's credit card bill in the Senate that reinstates the ability of dealers to sell and people to buy automatic weapons.

I don't like the gun amendment, and I certainly don't completely agree with all the legislation that Congress has passed or is talking about passing this session, but I sure do like the apparent reduction in the influence of the K Street gang in governing our country. Maybe this falls in line with Ronald Reagan's "if I can get 80% of what I want..." theory.

So far, 80% of what's been done is, for the most part, OK with me. Reducing the influence of lobbyists was very high on my list. So are improvements in the education of our kids and somehow getting healthcare insurance for all Americans. Legislation on those things seem to be underway. I also like today's order from the White House to determine whether anyone in jail is illegal and deport those that are. A small step maybe, but other than building a shoddy fence that doesn't work, it's a lot more regarding immigration than anything prior administrations have done. In time, we'll find out whether the stimulus plan will foreshorten the economic crisis. So far, at least the stock market seems to like what's going on. That's a good thing...for all of us.

I sure don't like the "love" being shown the unions, but maybe I can't have everything. I also don't like the wild spending going on, but I believe that the capacity of the debt markets for U.S. debt is going to introduce a discipline that the 'electeds' can't seem to embrace themselves.

But, the Prez still has one strike as far as I'm concerned. We'll see how the next couple of years work out.

More campaign contributions are funneled through K Street than anywhere else. Never underestimate the impact that has on any politician or party.

Again, when the state can decide which persons or entities can have access those state employees who write or vote on laws and regulations, then the state can also decide that only the party inner-circle or faithful have that right. This is an "all or nothing" issue, because any restriction can lead to total elimination.

Just thinking we are "smart enough" to insure that won't happen is folly.

VK,
Well, that makes me feel better about the incredible debt (increasing with every socialist program O can find) our grandchildren are going to inherit!

I get tired of all the negatives I hear and read. Can't never could do anything. If government really does become more transparent and less behind closed doors that will be the best thing yet, as no matter how you feel on an issue you can't know who to vote for if you don't know what they are up to.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

There's been lots of discussion about things we don't like about what's going on in Congress. But if we back off and look at the broader view, I for one like at least one thing that I see happening.

The big lobbyists are taking a beating. Things are not going their way, for sure. If I count up the lobbyists that seem to have lost control of Congress, I'd have to include the lobbyists hired by...

• The banks and investment banks
• The insurance companies
• Mortgage originators and brokers
• Hedge funds
• The auto industry and suppliers
• The drug companies
• The AMA
• The big hospital lobby

One lobby that seems to still have influence is the NRA. They got an amendment attached to today's credit card bill in the Senate that reinstates the ability of dealers to sell and people to buy automatic weapons.

For the most part, these have been taken over and / or intimidated by the administration. The lobbyists for the government have not been slowed down. On the contrary they are more powerful than ever.

Be careful what you wish for. Without a lobby to attempt to influence our law makers, you, I and we will not be heard save our squeaky peep of our 1 vote each.

The AARP would be useless.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

Lobbys are part of the process. So long as it is all open and in full view of all of us who care to look. Full disclosure is what I want. If senator A is getting a mil project for his district in exchange for voting for senator B's bill I understand that is how it works but we have the right to know.

There are some good things happening in Washington- And, to paraphrase Michele Obama- I have never been so proud as I am now to be an American. I have always been proudto be an American, I'm just proud of 80% of what's coming through the government now as well.

There will always be corruption, inaction, cowardliness and self-interest in government. Let's face it, even the Founders were animated by "enlightened" financial self-interest. BUt for the first time in a long time, our government is addressing the environment, credit card usury, our dependence on oil from our mortal enemies, education, physical infrastructure, veteran's benefits, honest FDA inspection of food. On and on it goes.

I realize many conservatives feel that government is growing so huge that it will "Take over" everything, but hey, give this some time. The economy seems to be levelling out, and pressure from the market, as it should, will end TARP a lot sooner than people expected.

I read that Glen Beck & Michele Malike were complaining that the new fuel standards will cost $1,300 per car. Here's a good example of a knee jerk reaction to "liberals" and not thinking it through. First off, the improved fuel economy will deprive those who we are unhappily dependent on for oil- Saudis, Venezuela & OPEC of a year's worth of oil revenue. How many terrorists or anti-American mouthpieces will benefit from that- NONE!
Secondly, the improved fuel economy will SAVE $2,300 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle. By then, we may be so used to hybrids or electrics that even these newer fuel-effcient cars will be considered gas hogs.

This is the idea of long-term thinking for problems, rather than short-term fixes. Say what you will about the political differences, one of Obama's main promises- and premises- was to get our government, and our nation, to start reinvesting in the longer term. It won't be cheap,and at a certain point, he's bound to push a boundary that people say, "enough!"

But for now, give it a chance, don't try to sabotage everything simply along partisan lines- and stay proud of this great country!

Originally Posted by ptownrob

There are some good things happening in Washington- And, to paraphrase Michele Obama- I have never been so proud as I am now to be an American. I have always been proudto be an American, I'm just proud of 80% of what's coming through the government now as well.

There will always be corruption, inaction, cowardliness and self-interest in government. Let's face it, even the Founders were animated by "enlightened" financial self-interest. BUt for the first time in a long time, our government is addressing the environment, credit card usury, our dependence on oil from our mortal enemies, education, physical infrastructure, veteran's benefits, honest FDA inspection of food. On and on it goes.

I realize many conservatives feel that government is growing so huge that it will "Take over" everything, but hey, give this some time. The economy seems to be levelling out, and pressure from the market, as it should, will end TARP a lot sooner than people expected.

I read that Glen Beck & Michele Malike were complaining that the new fuel standards will cost $1,300 per car. Here's a good example of a knee jerk reaction to "liberals" and not thinking it through. First off, the improved fuel economy will deprive those who we are unhappily dependent on for oil- Saudis, Venezuela & OPEC of a year's worth of oil revenue. How many terrorists or anti-American mouthpieces will benefit from that- NONE!
Secondly, the improved fuel economy will SAVE $2,300 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle. By then, we may be so used to hybrids or electrics that even these newer fuel-effcient cars will be considered gas hogs.

This is the idea of long-term thinking for problems, rather than short-term fixes. Say what you will about the political differences, one of Obama's main promises- and premises- was to get our government, and our nation, to start reinvesting in the longer term. It won't be cheap,and at a certain point, he's bound to push a boundary that people say, "enough!"

But for now, give it a chance, don't try to sabotage everything simply along partisan lines- and stay proud of this great country!

It feels great to see the country moving in the right direction again.

I agree. Saddling our children and grandchildren with new trillions of debt we can't even pay the interest on is a pretty good direction. If you add in bankrupting the government, nationalizing banks, nationalizing the American car industry, crippling our counter terrorism agencies and taxing everyone into the poor house (which is coming), we have a winning combination. Your right, it does feel good.

With any luck they will take over health care and put it on the same track as social security and medicare. Oh wait, those are going broke too. A job well done.

Originally Posted by dklassen

I agree. Saddling our children and grandchildren with new trillions of debt we can't even pay the interest on is a pretty good direction. If you add in bankrupting the government, nationalizing banks, nationalizing the American car industry, crippling our counter terrorism agencies and taxing everyone into the poor house (which is coming), we have a winning combination. Your right, it does feel good.

With any luck they will take over health care and put it on the same track as social security and medicare. Oh wait, those are going broke too. A job well done.

What's wrong with our kids and grandkids taking over the payments of the national debt?

In comparison to the last few generations, the under-45's have it pretty good. No draft, plenty of toys, a better standard of living than we all had, longer life span.....I could go on and on.

Add to this grandparents are raising more grandkids than ever, so the under-45s can "find themselves" or "be themselves."

There are a lot of complaints that the national infrastructure is decaying, but it still is more expansive and serviceable than what existed 40-50 years ago.

We paid off debts incurred (and foreign aid due to) World War II, Korea and Vietnam. They now have GulfI, Iraq and Afghanistan - much smaller cost-wise in comparison).

We've gone through our ups-and-downs economically, so the problems of today are no worse than what we have weathered in the earlier decades. The only real difference is there is better press coverage of today's woes to keep people whipsawed.

Considering the "value of a dollar" today in comparison to past times, they are no worse off than we ever were. Also, considering they want government to do more (national health, more welfare, etc.), that costs, and if you want it, you pay for it.

All in all, they have it better (and cheaper) than we did. So they don't get a totally free ride at the expense of our labor and have to pay for running the nation and its recent expenses. That's just the way it goes, and has gone, since 1779.

I suppose that's one way to look at it but I don't see it that way. I'm still in the work force and will be for at least another 10 years or more. This all directly effects me and even more so our kids.

We're not talking about adding on a little to the national debt like we have in the past. We're talking trillions and trillion of dollars. More than all years combined since our founding including an attempt to totally socialize our country.

You think our standard of living will be maintained like is has been in the past? I don't think so. If it continues we will not leave our children a better nation like our mothers and fathers left us.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

What's wrong with our kids and grandkids taking over the payments of the national debt?

In comparison to the last few generations, the under-45's have it pretty good. No draft, plenty of toys, a better standard of living than we all had, longer life span.....I could go on and on.

Add to this grandparents are raising more grandkids than ever, so the under-45s can "find themselves" or "be themselves."

There are a lot of complaints that the national infrastructure is decaying, but it still is more expansive and serviceable than what existed 40-50 years ago.

We paid off debts incurred (and foreign aid due to) World War II, Korea and Vietnam. They now have GulfI, Iraq and Afghanistan - much smaller cost-wise in comparison).

We've gone through our ups-and-downs economically, so the problems of today are no worse than what we have weathered in the earlier decades. The only real difference is there is better press coverage of today's woes to keep people whipsawed.

Considering the "value of a dollar" today in comparison to past times, they are no worse off than we ever were. Also, considering they want government to do more (national health, more welfare, etc.), that costs, and if you want it, you pay for it.

All in all, they have it better (and cheaper) than we did. So they don't get a totally free ride at the expense of our labor and have to pay for running the nation and its recent expenses. That's just the way it goes, and has gone, since 1779.

Steve you make some great points. Many of us are now children of the children of the Great Depression. We have never really experienced the traumas of what those photos of men standing in line, hat in hand, or of people selling apples on streetcorners to get a little cash actually went through.

We have really never lived without some sort of national debt or major project going on, but there is a valid point about Bucco's question, "How much is too much?" Democrats were always labelled with the deficit issue, then after Clinton & a bi-partisan congress balanced the budget, everyone started saying, "well, maybe that's not really so important after all, except as rhetoric."

But again, how much is too much?

Originally Posted by ptownrob

There are some good things happening in Washington- And, to paraphrase Michele Obama- I have never been so proud as I am now to be an American. I have always been proudto be an American, I'm just proud of 80% of what's coming through the government now as well.

There will always be corruption, inaction, cowardliness and self-interest in government. Let's face it, even the Founders were animated by "enlightened" financial self-interest. BUt for the first time in a long time, our government is addressing the environment, credit card usury, our dependence on oil from our mortal enemies, education, physical infrastructure, veteran's benefits, honest FDA inspection of food. On and on it goes.

I realize many conservatives feel that government is growing so huge that it will "Take over" everything, but hey, give this some time. The economy seems to be levelling out, and pressure from the market, as it should, will end TARP a lot sooner than people expected.

I read that Glen Beck & Michele Malike were complaining that the new fuel standards will cost $1,300 per car. Here's a good example of a knee jerk reaction to "liberals" and not thinking it through. First off, the improved fuel economy will deprive those who we are unhappily dependent on for oil- Saudis, Venezuela & OPEC of a year's worth of oil revenue. How many terrorists or anti-American mouthpieces will benefit from that- NONE!
Secondly, the improved fuel economy will SAVE $2,300 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle. By then, we may be so used to hybrids or electrics that even these newer fuel-effcient cars will be considered gas hogs.

This is the idea of long-term thinking for problems, rather than short-term fixes. Say what you will about the political differences, one of Obama's main promises- and premises- was to get our government, and our nation, to start reinvesting in the longer term. It won't be cheap,and at a certain point, he's bound to push a boundary that people say, "enough!"

But for now, give it a chance, don't try to sabotage everything simply along partisan lines- and stay proud of this great country!

You clearly have overdosed on the koolaid.

Yes, $1300 per car doesn't seem like much but you don't get a whole car. We the people want trucks, SUV s, and big "Florida cars." Why can't we have those if we are willing to pay for them? The Prez took over GM in part to force them to build cars that nobody wants nor will buy.

Why is the government involved in the environment other than National parks. The states seem to do a pretty good job? OOps, I said the "S" word.


We are dependent upon the Saudis ETC because the tree huggers, liberals etc won't let us use our own oil, build nuke plants etc. Side note: The ethanol industry is loosing money. Their solution, lobby for a mandated 15% in gas rather than 10% as now. Is that a bad lobby PT?

The President promised that people depending on oil would pay dearly. PT, who do you think the people are?

Fix public education with more tax money (double shot of Koolaid.) Public education sucks. That is the nicest thing that I can say about it. The administration has no intention of fixing it. The are not doing away with it or allowing the people to have vouchers to spend on private schools. We have the most expensive and poorest performing public education system in the world.

I give up. PT are you on DeValue Patrick's payroll?

Yoda

A frustrated member of the loyal opposition.

Some are just blind. Some cannot hear. Some are liberals.

Originally Posted by ptownrob

...............
But again, how much is too much?

The amount has to be taken into context with the "value of the dollar."

When I was 18, the super-goal was a "5-figure income." The minimum wage was less than $1 per hour, and a top-of-the-line new car was in the $2,500 range (+ $500). The very first house I ever bought, brand new 3-bedroom, was $14,400, and I can't even get a decent car for that today.

So, when we look at the debt, the real question is whether the debt of today is higher or lower (significantly so) in the ratio of past-debt-to-past-income. If the debt ratio is higher, then it also has to be compared to various tax rate ratios (income, gas, death, etc.) of today versus yesteryear and the government services available now versus then. If we don't do that, we have no true picture of the "state of the union."

You guys are splitting hairs. The government is broke, their programs are broke and they are still on a spending spree the likes of which we have never seen before. Do you honestly think that's a good thing for anyone?