Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, September 18, 2008

Incumbents to blame

September 18, 2008

Advertisement

To the editor:

Lipstick and a new administration will not solve the nation's problems of energy, Social Security, illegal immigration, health care and the federal deficit. Incumbent senators and congressmen are the real problem. Both parties in Congress have been negligent in solving these problems for years. They have failed our country. Their time is spent at partisan bickering and raising money for re-election.

How long have they been in office? How many senators and congressmen are multimillionaires? Have they ever used lobbyists' money for pet projects and re-election? Do they have sons and daughters serving in the military as they cast their votes to fund wars?

Incumbents sat on powerful oversight committees when the secretary of the Treasury nationalized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Were they all sleeping when the secretary added $5.4 trillion to the U.S. debt over a weekend? Foreign nations are dictating our financial policy, and it comes at an inappropriate cost to the taxpayers.

It takes incompetent incumbents from both parties to make these kinds of decisions. The congressmen that created these problems are still in power. Is it any wonder that current approval ratings of an unpopular president are still three times as high as for Congress? Future generations deserve better. I plan to write each entrenched incumbent that represents me and ask them to resign from office for the good of the country. I urge you to do the same.

Joe Herynk,
Lawrence

Comments

Flap Doodle 6 years, 1 month ago

Change America needs: Dump the Pelosi/Reid Democrat Congress!

0

Flap Doodle 6 years, 1 month ago

merrill's recycling posts again. Too bad we can't harness all that copy/paste energy.

0

Richard Heckler 6 years, 1 month ago

Bogus pre-emptive multi trillion dollar wars are reckless and fiscally irresponsible!Another nightmare on Wall Street: Dow down 450 About $700 billion in investments vanished.CRIME: Who has history with financial institutions going south such as the savings and loan scandal? Republicans!Neil, George Jr., George Sr., and Jeb BushThe Savings and Loan industry had been experiencing major problems through the late 60s and 70s due to rising inflation and rising interest rates. Because of this there was a move in the 1970s to replace the role of S&L institutions with banks.In the early 1980s, under Reagan, regulatory changes took place that gave the S&L industry new powers and for the first time in history measures were taken to increase the profitability of S&Ls at the expense of promoting home ownership.A history of the S&L situation can be found here: http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/s&l/What is important to note about the S&L scandal is that it was the largest theft in the history of the world and US tax payers are who was robbed.The problems occurred in the Savings and Loan industry as they relate to theft because the industry was deregulated under the Reagan/Bush administration and restrictions were eased on the industry so much that abuse and misuse of funds became easy, rampant, and went unchecked. Additional facts on the Savings and Loan Scandal can be found here:http://www.inthe80s.com/sandl.shtmlThere are several ways in which the Bush family plays into the Savings and Loan scandal, which involves not only many members of the Bush family but also many other politicians that are still in office and still part of the Bush Jr. administration today. Jeb Bush, George Bush Sr., and his son Neil Bush have all been implicated in the Savings and Loan Scandal, which cost American tax payers over $1.4 TRILLION dollars (note that this is about one quarter of our national debt).Between 1981 and 1989, when George Bush finally announced that there was a Savings and Loan Crisis to the world, the Reagan/Bush administration worked to cover up the Savings and Loan problems This information was kept from the media until after Bush had won the 1988 elections.http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htmMcCain-the-most-reprehensible-of-the-keating-fivehttp://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1989-11-29/news/mccain-the-most-reprehensible-of-the-keating-five/1

0

jmadison 6 years, 1 month ago

The current financial collapses stem from the sub-prime mortgage mess which was abetted by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Over 350 of our fine legislators took money from these outfits and consequently blocked any meaningful oversight of their shady accounting gimmicks which have put us in the place we are now. This mess is bigger than Enron's collapse, yet I have yet to hear any calls by our fine legislators to investigate the accounting practices of these two entities. Presidents can only serve 8 years, perhaps that should be the limit on length of service by our legislators.

0

Richard Heckler 6 years, 1 month ago

How will the rest of the U.S. economy be affected if the republicans social security privatization plan is enacted?Put simply, moving to a system of private accounts would not only put retirement income at risk--it would likely put the entire economy at risk.The current Social Security system generates powerful, economy-stimulating multiplier effects. This was part of its original intent. In the early 1930s, the vast majority of the elderly were poor. While they were working, they could not afford to both save for retirement and put food on the table, and most had no employer pension. When Social Security began, elders spent every penny of that income. In turn, each dollar they spent was spent again by the people and businesses from whom they had bought things. In much the same way, every dollar that goes out in pensions today creates about 2.5 times as much total income. If the move to private accounts reduces elders' spending levels, as almost all analysts predict, that reduction in spending will have an even larger impact on slowing economic growth.The current Social Security system also reduces the income disparity between the rich and the poor. Private accounts would increase inequality--and increased inequality hinders economic growth. For example, a 1994 World Bank study of 25 countries demonstrated that as income inequality rises, productivity growth is reduced. Market economies can fall apart completely if the level of inequality becomes too extreme. The rapid increase in income inequality that occurred in the 1920s was one of the causes of the Great Depression.http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2005/0505orr.html

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.