It's curious that a right-wing pundit such as your Rivrdog should abandon party politics one month before the general election, but this is the case.
In the congressional action on the recent bailout bill, the Congress, both houses of that bicameral body, completely failed the American Republic in both duty and honor.
I was in favor of the original concept of the bailout, a simple idea that would have required the Treasury Department to buy up instruments of issuance of bad credit and hold them, out of the mainstream of commerce, to improve the overall quality of commercial credit operations.
The public law which resulted does not resemble this concept, and it has, instead, become a pirate's chest of looted booty from the taxpayers.
That's not the worst of it.
In the days of the Founders, when Congress assembled in Philadelphia to do it's work, the Members had to bring with them the wishes of their constituencies, because the lines of communication back to their Districts were slow and tenuous.
Flash forward to the 21st Century - we have excellent communications that can and DOES convey, INSTANTLY, the wishes of the constituents to the Members of Congress. Accordingly, when the votes were being tallied for the first Bailout Bill, it was opposed by overwhelming numbers in almost all Congressional Districts. The House acted (as a body) like they were supposed to, and they rejected it. In retrospect, given that opinions supporting the bill far less than 5% (one twentieth) were expressed to the Members of the House, the Bill should not have garnered a single vote. It was barely defeated.
The original Bill had the basic concept and just a smattering of ancillary concepts attached (the one about CEOs not getting huge salaries and bonuses for running companies into the ground comes to mind), but NO EARMARKS.
When the second set of bills was introduced, it looked nothing like Secretary Paulson's 3-page proposal sent over to Congress last week. That proposal had ballooned modestly to a 10-page Bill for an Act. The second Bill was 350-plus pages, with an attached $100 billion worth of earmarks. I'm not going to go into the fetishist list of earmarks, you can find that by searching the internet.
What I AM going to rant about is the fact that while some push-polling showed attitudes towards the bailout bill softening, it was NOT favored by most folks contacting their Congressional Representatives and Senators, it was still opposed.
Taking the most expensive, non-war appropriation ever suggested, Congress hastily enacted a Bill that the US electorate had decisively rejected. It was accepted with a few paltry hours of debate.
It's time for a list.
Here's how I see the failure of the Congress:
- After the first rejection, it was Congress' duty to have additional hearings to require Secretary Paulson to explain why his idea, garnering so little support as it did, should even be reconsidered by Congress. Congress failed in that duty.
- After the first rejection, it was Congress' duty to go to their Districts and find out why American citizens were almost unanimously opposed to Paulson's idea. Congress failed in that duty.
- The leadership of both parties in Congress had originally agreed to not put ANY earmarked funding into the Bill, but in the hours between the first Bill's rejection and the introduction of the second Bill, $100 Billion worth of earmarks had appeared in that second version. This is a change of such magnitude that the Congress owed the American citizens a complete explanation of why that change was made. Congress failed in that duty.
- Even if Congress could be excused for taking Wall Street at it's word that the Bill was required to save the US economy (your Rivrdog accepted that theory), after three days of post-rejection trading, it had become obvious that the "must-bail-out" urgency was not holding up to scrutiny. With the urgency of avoiding complete economic collapse fading rapidly, Congress had a duty to be more deliberate in it's action. Congress failed in that duty.
If this sort of failure of duty with the Congress was a one-time thing, maybe we could excuse them, but it isn't. Actually, in ignoring the electorate they are sworn to represent, Congress has simply acted in their usual manner, with their usual attitude that winning a seat in Congress somehow makes them all-seeing and all-knowing, so the wishes of the electorate does not have to be considered when doing the business of the nation.
What to do?
The simple fact is that Congress, both houses of it, presently sits in complete contempt of the Electorate. The penalty for that offense is simple and swift: every sitting Member of Congress should be voted out of office (that is to say, the opponents of all sitting in Congress should be voted into office). The two major party candidates for President, and one Vice Presidential candidate are also Members of Congress, and they ESPECIALLY failed in their duty as to their roles in Congress, but also in their hoped-for roles as national Executives. None of them deserve our votes, either.
This is not about "party" anymore. This is about whether we are to allow a dictatorship of elite incumbents to govern our Nation, especially when they have so aptly demonstrated their Contempt for their own Nation, and the principles upon which it was founded, and their very oaths.
In one month, every adult citizen with voting rights will be presented a ballot on which to indicate who they want to govern this Nation. The incumbent Members of Congress seeking re-election will be prominently displayed on those ballots.
**************************************************************************
UPDATE: 100508: 1655 PDT: It appears that I am not the only one with the "throw the bums out" attitude. Thanx, Kevin.
**************************************************************************
It is the duty of every American voter to refuse to vote for a single incumbent Member of Congress. To break out of this dictatorship of elites, we must start with a fresh slate of Members of Congress. Some folks have been sounding this alarm for years. My own father was one of them, but never before now has the reason for the "throw the bums out" choice been so evident, nor the need for action so pressing.
OK, I'll modify my stance SLIGHTLY. If your congresscritter voted against it, BOTH times, he or she gets a second look. Now look at how much "pork" and "business as usual" that supposed-Representative or Senator has supported, and judge based on that.
...and Aaron, that procedure is known as "gut and stuff", and it has been in the back pocket of corrupt pols forever. My State Legislature does it several times at the end of the legislative sessions here in Oregon.
Posted by: Rivrdog | October 05, 2008 at 08:47
It'll be a pleasure to vote for Bill Sali again. He voted NO both times, and he was one who stayed behind when Pelosi shut them down rather than do an energy bill. My kind of representative. The rest can go hang.
Posted by: BillH | October 05, 2008 at 05:14
My Rep and both Senators voted for it, and I was one of many telling them to look at alternatives that don't put us $700bn into debt (and giving them some of those alternatives). I'll be doing my part to show them the door.
But you left one thing out, Rivrdog: Spending measures are supposed to originate in the House. The Senate took an unrelated bill that had passed the House, appended it with this bailout (and all the pork), and sent it back to the house for re-negotiation.
This should have never come up in the Senate, as the House rejected the bill originally.
Posted by: Aaron Neal | October 04, 2008 at 20:57
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance:
Check.
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
Check.
Posted by: Brick Oven Bill | October 04, 2008 at 16:57
No slow down there, Rivrdog. My Rep voted against it both times. He held the line against this atrocity. He's a good man who listens to the folks he represents. People should find out how their reps voted and THEN vote accordingly. If your rep and senators voted for the bailout, vote them out.
Posted by: 357fan | October 04, 2008 at 11:28