Breaking gridlock: How about term limits for all Washington lawmakers?

America has term limits for the office of the president, governors and a plethora of local offices. However, the Congress and Senate have escaped the boundaries of term limits. The ability to spend a literal lifetime in the US Senate and Congress may be at the heart of the recent legislative paralysis that has crippled the US government. If all politicians knew they were out after two terms, perhaps they would spend less time electioneering and more time governing.

Fighting among lawmakers in Washington has produced frustration for the electorate and both the democratic and republican parties.  Moreover, infighting has bought the legislative process to a screeching halt. Jockeying for position on powerful committees has kept senior members of the House and Senate focused on reelection for control of key committees, because that is where the true power lies.

Now take the same picture and remove career politicians. For one thing, lobbyists would have to change their strategy. It would cost them a lot more money to fund an unknown candidate, every two years for Congress and six years for the Senate. With new lawmakers being part of the rule instead of the exception, deeply entrenched power-brokers would be forced to give up their powerful seats on everything from the Armed Services 

Committee, to budget and commerce committees. And the list goes on.

The advantage to voters is not only faster changes in a notoriously slow legislative body, but it may put a dent in the corruption process.

Change is what Americans vote for when the country is heading down the wrong path. However, change brings false hope when elections merely exchange one well funded career politician for another with little more than a different name or party label.

While not the ultimate solution, term limits for every elected office in the Unites States would take America a long way toward weeding out career politicians who have grown too comfortable in their deep seats of power. It would also bring American government closer to the design of the country’s founders.
 

Obama makes deal: Unemployment extension in exchange for tax cuts for millionaires

Image by Barack Obama via Flickr

President Obama has struck a deal with republican lawmakers who had promised to block all legislation unless the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were extended. The compromise announced by the president on Monday, includes a 13 month extension for unemployment benefits and a 2 year extension of the Bush tax cuts for all Americans, including the wealthiest top 2%.

Other parts of the Obama deal include a 2% reduction in the employment tax. However, the president said he was not happy about extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich because they will increase the federal deficit.

Republican leaders claimed that increasing taxes during a recession would have a negative effect on the economy, and that the wealthy are the ones who create jobs.

In September, the National Bureau of Economic Research announced that “The recession ended in June 2009, 18 months after it began in December 2007,” according to the Washington Post. ” Yet there is little physical evidence to suggest that the statement is supported. The US department of Labor said the national unemployment rate increased in November to more than 9.5%.

If the tax breaks for the wealthy the republicans pushed so hard for do not create the promised jobs, they may face serious political fallout in the 2012 elections.

Related articles

• Obama signals compromise on extending tax cuts (thehill.com)

President Obama leaning toward the Tea Party agenda?

Op-Ed

President Obama is beginning to look like a republican who is only pretending to be a democrat. On Thursday, his departing democratic congressional majority passed an extension for the Bush tax cuts for the middle class only. Incoming Speaker of the House John Boehner called the Lame Duck Congress’ swan song, “chicken crap.” 

The republican mantra has been glued to an all-or-nothing tax cut policy, which includes extending tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, despite a recent report on MSNBC's The Last Word that says less than 40% of the American people want to give the wealthiest segment of the population any more money.

The White House response to the only bit of backbone democrats have shown in recent days was to immediately cave in on their principles and offer republicans another compromise to ease the tax-burden of the wealthy.

President Obama did not appear to see the congressional move as a victory, even if only symbolic since the Senate is unlikely to pass the measure. Instead, the president now seems ready to favor of adding $700 billion to the deficit for top 2% tax breaks.

On his path to alienating as many democrats as possible, President Obama made a great stride on Thursday. His dwindling supporters must now be avoiding thoughts of which direction he will take after the republican majority seizes the House in January. Will he become Obama the Tea Party guy?

Obama tax policy: Take from the poor and give to the rich

Image via Wikipedia

It could be called the worst form of corporate welfare in American history. At a time when the working class needs the leadership in Washington to stand up for them, President Obama seems ready and willing to sell out the base that elected him with a tax plan that looks a lot like steal from the poor and give it to the rich. 

 As such, Obama has made it clear that he is not acting like the liberal, socialist Democrat his Republican rivals have been accusing him of being. A loyal Democrat would not surrender on tax breaks for millionaires without a fight. But that is exactly what President Obama appears to be willing to do.

Obama admits that extending the Bush tax cuts for the richest people in America, “won’t significantly boost the economy, and it’s hugely expensive so we can’t afford it.” But instead of fighting for what he admits is not best for America, he is hiding behind verbal gymnastics by claiming that extending the Bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires is just fine, as long as they are not “permanent.”

The White House has not yet announced the details on exactly how long “temporary” is, but whatever length of time is finally decided, it will still be unfunded and add about $700 billion worth of borrowed money to the $13.7 trillion debt, on top of the $1.4 trillion dollar deficit.
The Republican Party and Tea Party candidates that ran on a fiscal responsibility platform are proving to be carpetbaggers who put one over on the American electorate. So much for “change” in Washington.

Related articles 

Newt Gingrich pushes GOP to cut Food Stamps as more Americans go hungry

 'Who will stand up to the superrich?' (americablog.com)  

Paul Krugman: Obama Didn't Fight Hard Enough Against Tax Cuts For The Rich (huffingtonpost.com)  

Deepwater Horizon: Oil spill disaster destined to be repeated