Today on Blogcritics
Home » Vote None of the Incumbents

Vote None of the Incumbents

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Brewster’s Millions is one of those silly B-comedies you must learn to love young or not at all. Still, there’s some ageless charm in the tale: it’s been remade at least five times since young Cecil B. DeMille’s original 1914 celluloid production.

In the 1985 version, “Monty” Brewster (black actor Richard Pryor) is a minor-league baseball pitcher who discovers he’s the sole heir to a long-lost (white) uncle’s $300 million fortune, but there’s a catch: Brewster must blow $30 million in 30 days, with no tangible assets to show for the money, to inherit the full fortune. Brewster finds some clever ways to waste the money, such as buying a rare stamp for several million and using it for postage. But my favorite gag is when Brewster declares himself a last-minute candidate for mayor of New York City, runs television commercials around the clock in every state declaring his opponent foolish and corrupt, and adopts the campaign slogan “Vote None of the Above.”

Until the United States Congress adopts term-limits, I plan to follow a slightly modified strategy and vote “None of the Incumbents.”

I’ve almost written this piece a half-dozen times over the past couple of years as I’ve grown more and more frustrated with the legislative fecklessness of Republicans. I won’t rehash their foolishness here. If you’re conservative, you’ve heard the litany; if you aren’t it’d be meaningless anyway. From steel tariffs and Medicaid to Social Security reform and agricultural subsidies to overall spending, Republicans have utterly abandoned conservatism.

I was a college senior in 1994 when Republicans wrested control of the House and Senate from Democrats. The wise words of my faculty adviser, Dr. Marvin Folkertsma, have returned to me many times since. He agreed the Republican takeover was one of the most remarkable and unexpected political events of his lifetime, but cautioned that it wouldn’t change much about how Washington works. He was dead right.

I believe that time spent in Congress is, in its own way, just as perceptually corrupting as being a famous actor, athlete, televangelist, or any other of the perpetually dysfunctional celebrities among us. That’s why I think it’s a disgrace that the Republican congressman for whom I was an intern, Frank R. Wolf, recently celebrated his silver anniversary in Congress and is now the senior member of Virginia’s delegation. I’d like all congressmen limited to a single term and their staffs, perquisites, and pay cut in half.

Serving should constitute a huge sacrifice with no incentive for careerism at that level. Not only would this reduce the direct attraction of public office to candidates motivated by self-interest, it would reduce the value of ex-congressmen to lobbyists (there’d be a lot more exes with a lot fewer connections) and thus the indirect attractions of public office as well.

What finally brought me to this point? The oil price-gouging legislation and demagoguery were the last straws. Republican leaders are spouting rhetoric that undermines the very foundation of American prosperity and fosters economic ignorance — already an overly plentiful commodity. All that distinguishes our economic policies from those of the degenerating powers of Europe are a few population points of economic simpletons; cultivate a few million more such larcenists and we’ll slip to the level of a South American banana republic like Bolivia or Venezuela.

Each time I’ve begun this piece, Democratic leaders immediately did or said something so childish and irresponsible that I changed my mind and decided voting against Republicans wasn’t worth the chance of Democratic rule. Not this time. I’ve now realized it’s time to “reload” and try again with a new Republican majority a few terms down the road. That’s why I’ll be doing my best to see that incumbent Republicans lose both houses of Congress in 2006. I’ll no longer financially support the Republican Party and I’ll only support Republican challengers, not incumbents in congressional elections.

Powered by

About Ashley Tate

  • Maurice

    Glad you wrote this. I have had the same thoughts and just abstained from the last election. I plan to always vote for the new guy.

  • Dave Nalle

    Why not follow this idea all the way through and vote against ALL incumbents. The Democrats are certainly as much of a problem as the Republicans. In fact, of the two parties I can think of only maybe a dozen democrats who deserve to remain in office and as many as 30 Republicans, so why not vote all incumbents out?

    Dave

  • http://bilges.blogspot.com Ashley Tate

    Dave, that’s exactly what I said:

    “Until the United States Congress adopts term-limits, I plan to follow a slightly modified strategy and vote “None of the Incumbents.”

    Ironically, my current congressmen are *all* first-term Republicans!

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    If they’re first-termers how bad can they really be? You’re essentially voting against the results of your community’s efforts to do exactly what you’re advocating. That suggests you don’t actually much like the results of throwing out the incumbents.

    dave

  • http://jpsgoddamnblog.blogspot.com JP

    Good post, and I can agree that today’s Republicans have abandoned fiscal conservatism, though in other ways (gay marriage, for example) their conservatism has become more oppressive than ever.

    I’m in a state that became much more red in the last couple of elections (Georgia). Unfortunately, neither Chambliss nor Isakson is up for re-election, so I cannot cast a vote against them this year.

  • Blue Meanie

    Actually, it sounds more like those first termers have been a part of the rubber stamp crowd, and that the Poster is advocating they are part of the problem.

    But Dave’s own agenda is well known, he never tries to hide it (a credit to his honesty if not judgement). He displays is in this statement:”The Democrats are certainly as much of a problem as the Republicans.”

    The flaw in that bit of opinion is that the democrats don’t hold any power in the Capitol. No committee control, no control of House, Senate or White House and thus cannot even get a Bill to the floor, or force a Vote on anything.

    So no good attempting to blame the minority party for the sins and deficiencies of the current Administration, as the original Post clearly states from a dissatisfied republican.

  • http://bilges.blogspot.com Ashley Tate

    Dave,

    I said I believe congressmen should be limited to a *single* term.

    There’s a bit of a paradox concerning congressional approval ratings: for various reasons most people dislike Congress but like their own congressmen, especially their representatives. Because they’ve built various incumbent advantages into the system (homogenous districts, free constituent mailings, staffs large enough to provide constituent services, pork projects, etc.) challengers have a rough time making headway. But if a significant percentage of the population (perhaps just five or 10 percent) simply started automatically enforcing term limits regardless of their ideological leanings many more races would become competitive, and I believe that would be a good thing.

  • Arch Conservative

    Very good post Ashley. I whole heartedly agree that today’s GOP has abondoned all fiscal restraint and logic. This is no longer th eparty of Ronald Reagan.

    I also think term limits are an excellent idea and would indeed weed out those on both sides of the aisle who are just in it for thier own personal gain.

    However I would not go so far as voting for a Dem in the upcoming elections. I’d sooner cut off my hand than use it to vote for a Democrat in 2006 America.

    Blue meanie gives the Democrats a pass because as he claims they have “no power” This is of course rediculous as the minority party always has power. The Democrats certainly had power when they made a media circus of Tom delay didn’t they Blue?

    Who do yo think has more pull in the mainstream media to get thier message out and shape public opinions Blue? Dems or reps? The Dems want us to believe that there is absolutely nothing good doing on in Iraq and the mainstream medias answers to this desire lock step.

    The dems don’t have as much representation in congress as the gop but they do have enough to be obstructionist, which they have done. The Democrats care nothing for actually making progress unless they can take full credit for it while blaming the GOP for the problem in the first place. The dems are on a mission to avenge the losses of gore and kerry, which they believe were “stolen”

    To be sure, as I have already stated, the GOP members in power now just aren’t cutting it but handing the reins over to the Dems would be even worse.

  • Blue Meanie

    AC asks:”The Democrats certainly had power when they made a media circus of Tom delay didn’t they Blue?”

    Well now, it appears that DeLay did most of this to himself with a little help from his own friends, don’t you think?

    No need to shape public perception when your buddies and staffers cop guilty pleas. If the Dems had so much “power”, then I ask you…

    Why wasn’t DeLay taken out years earlier?

    I’m not really giving Dems a pass, just pointing out the fact that since they have no majority, they can’t even bring a motion to the floor, much less pass a Bill or supeona a person for an investigation. So rail and bitch all you want.

    You just can’t blame this stuff on the democrats, they have their own stuff to be blamed for.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    In 2004, I tried to get Jews to abstain from voting for president and vote for all other officials on the ballot, given that for us, neither candidate was acceptable. Hah – I sure was successful.

    Good luck trying to get people to vote for “none of the above”.

  • IgnatiusReilly

    Why should Congress have term limits? If people are unhappy with their representatives, they need to become more active rather than waiting for arbitrary rules to kick in. I’m against anything that contributes to the apathy of the citizenry. It’s a responsibilty and if you shirk it, you get no pity from me.

    The media just loves scandal. They don’t care who it’s about. It’s about rating not ideology.

    “This is no longer the party of Ronald Reagan.”

    You right about that, AC. Wasn’t it the great Reagan who ushered in numerous illegals with his amnesty plan.

  • Baronius

    “This is no longer the party of Ronald Reagan.”

    It never was, completely. He oversaw a coalition of moderates, anti-communists, pro-lifers, gun nuts, southern Democrats, and opportunists. He worked with whomever he could. I respect the idea behind this article, but I think you have to choose the best of what’s available, at least in the general election. If you want to shake things up, the best time is during the primaries. The primaries are the most underutilized tool for change in politics.

  • http://bilges.blogspot.com Ashley Tate

    Baronius,

    Very true and that’s why my only political donation in 2004 was to Pat Toomey, who barely lost the PA GOP Senate primary to Arlen Specter by 51-49 percent, despite being outspent nearly 4-1 by Specter and having his effort torpedoed by Bush at the last minute.

  • Dave Nalle

    But Dave’s own agenda is well known, he never tries to hide it (a credit to his honesty if not judgement). He displays is in this statement:”The Democrats are certainly as much of a problem as the Republicans.”

    I appreciate your noting of my honesty, but I think you don’t quite get what I’m saying here.

    The flaw in that bit of opinion is that the democrats don’t hold any power in the Capitol. No committee control, no control of House, Senate or White House and thus cannot even get a Bill to the floor, or force a Vote on anything.

    They hold the power of being the opposition party and of being able to define a position which the GOP has to either respond to or adapt to if it’s out there for consideration. They have failed utterly in their obligation to do this. They are, effectively, not there as an opposition, because they just will not put forward a coherent agenda, presumably out of pure fear of being pinned down. Instead of seeking a moral high ground and explaining how they could do things better, or at least differently, they choose to take the low road again and again with their hypocritical moralizing and pointless attack politics. They never offer anything new or desirable or productive, and because of this they have utterly failed the American people in a way even worse than the Republicans.

    At the very least they could function as a conscience for the nation, and they just refuse to take any principled stand on major issues.

    Dave

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Ashley,

    I said I believe congressmen should be limited to a *single* term.

    Think carefully about what you are saying. Under the present system incumbency rewards a given legislative district. That is perecisely why pople hate legislatures as a whole but exempt their own legislator.

    If you want term limits of one term per legislator, how are you going to modify the rest of the rest of the system? Where does Joe Six-pack benefit from half conscious legislators who barly know their way around capitol hill before their term is up?

    At this point, local folks in Washington, known as “handlers”, take over the legislator from the moment he deplanes. At least under this system, the legislator has the opportunity to figure out how he wants to be “handled” and actually accomplish something. That is what incumbency buys, along with benefits for the legislator’s home district.

    With your suggestion, the benefits for the home district disappear, the ability of the legislator to resist “handlers” diappears and only the “handlers” gain in power. How do you assure that the local Washington types, the handlers, who were elected by nobody, but who wield their knowledge over the elected officials, lose their power too?

    One of the most essential points to understand in all of this is that you are dealing with a dynamic system – in plain English, this means that a whole bunch of ambitious people are constantly struggling for power. Change one element in the system and you change the whole system. Who gains from the changes? Where does actual power lie.? How is it really wielded? Think of this before you condemn those empty people in congress who seem only to waste your money and do you no good.

    Ashley, your intentions are good, but your solutions will only get you the opposite of the popular sovereignty you seem to desire.

  • http://bilges.blogspot.com Ashley Tate

    Ruvy,

    First, you have my intentions completely backwards. I am not a populist; I believe we’d be better off with less democracy, such as a return to selection of senators by state legislatures.

    Second, the idea that legislators are led around by “handlers” is completely false in most cases. Most new congressmen hire their staffs from among friends, long-time associates, and campaign workers. They also typically receive campaign advice from political consultants–which is not nearly the same thing as being “handled”.

    Third, one reason our system “works” better than most is that it dissipates political energy in a way that limits the damage inflicted by legislators. It does this by spreading power across three branches that are often in opposition. This attribute of the system certainly wouldn’t be damaged by new, confused legislators every few years.

    Finally, a possible (not certain) ancillary advantage to single-term limits might be that legislators would worry *less* about handing out favors to their home districts to help them get re-elected and more about dealing seriously with national issues–once they’re beyond the confused state, that is. ;)

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Ashley, I disagree with you about handlers. I’ve heard too much about their influence. But, if you’r going to introduce change into the system, you might as well do it intelligently.

    TWO four year terms for congressmen – four fifths of whom elected from districts, and one fifth of whom elected on proportional representation. There would be a total of 500 congressmen. TWO six year terms for senators, elected by the state legislators of each state, in accordance to the terms of the state’s constitution.

    Advantages: This introduces the concept of term limits all around, but allows the legislator to firure out how to get to the bathroom before the next elections are scheduled. It allows for ambitious congressmen and senators to develop some understanding of the congress before launching the race for president. It allows them to actually accomplish something before being replaced. It allows for the development of small parties that can represent small groups of people without destroying the stability of the two party system. It cuts down on (but does not eliminate) the log-rolling and pork-barreling of the present system.

  • http://www.politicalpartyresearch.com Millie
  • http://grandpanate.com Nate Hughes

    VATI VATI

    AS MIGHTY ROME FELL, AMERICA COULD DIE.
    WHETHER IT FALLS OR NOT, IS UP TO YOU AND I.

    I worried and stewed, but by—and—by,
    came up with a plan, where you and I,
    can put America the a road, to a brand—new high.
    Just blame the politicians, get blood in your eye,
    and vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    Now just voting won̓t do it, we̓ve got to vati.
    That̓s v, a, t, i, with a long “a”, and a long ‘i’.
    Vote against the incumbents, and you vati.
    Things will never get better, until we vati.
    Vote against the incumbents, Vati, vati.

    There is no time, to just set and sigh.
    America will fail, without you and I.
    The time has come, we must do or die.
    We must all vote, and we must vati.
    Vote against the incumbents, Vati, vati.

    Things won̓t just get better, by—and—by.
    Unless the apathetic voters, you and I,
    hit those poles with blood in our eye.
    And not only vote, but wisely vati,
    Vote against the incumbent. Vati, vati.

    We dare not buy, some political lie,
    the America we love, is about to die.
    Politicians no longer, serve you and I,
    but all acquiesce, to the powers that buy.
    Vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    The newly elected may want to serve you and I,
    until that powerful pac—money catches their eye.
    Then party loyalty becomes, their big lie.
    As they vote with the pac, for their piece of the pie.
    Vote against the incumbents, Vati, vati.

    Our Congressmen and Senators, are nigh as apt to die,
    as meet defeat at the poles, by you and I.
    They know we’ll vote for’em, they don’t have to try.
    America is declining, as democracy goes awry.
    Vote against the incumbent. Vati, vati.

    Waxing fat on the apathy, shown by you and I,
    our politicians became hogs, and Washington̓s a sty.
    But we can change all that, in the blink of an eye,
    if we just get off our apathy, and dutifully vati.
    Vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    If just one out of twenty, of us would vati,
    we̓d get nigh a third of that Washington sty.
    Now that might he to few, to help you and I,
    But we’d darn sure make, the rest of them shy.
    Vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    And when; “Foul, foul,” the politicians cry.
    And charge that; “great careers will sadly die.”
    Stand up and look them, straight in the eye,
    And vow; “Losing only makes the truly-great try.”
    Vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    From the County Coroner, to that Washington sty,
    if you don’t love the incumbent, always vati.
    Help turn America toward, a brand—new high.
    Teach your kids and your friends, they must vati.
    Vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    If the state of America, makes you want to cry,
    then help start a revolution, no one has to die.
    Our party loyalty sent elections go so far awry.
    And we can fix that error, just revolt and vati.
    Vote against the incumbents. Vati, vati.

    Part your 2nd and 3rd finger; that “v” means vati.
    Send this to a friend, who you think will comply.
    Let’s all band together, and give̓em a black eye.
    Vati, vati, and hearty bye-bye.

    Grandpa Nate @ Rawlins, Wyoming.

  • http://voteagainsttheincumbents.blogspot.com/ nate hughes

    Vati Vati

    Vati = Vote Against The Incumbents.
    [That’s v-a-t-i, with a long A and a long I.]
    The present state of America makes me sick. It actually makes me nauseous to ponder how far this once magnificent country has slipped into mediocrity. When I was a young man, fifty years ago, you could mention just about anything: And America was best at that. Back then, America enjoyed the best health care, the best schools, and the best working conditions on Earth, while we worked fewer hours, made more money, and enjoyed a life style never before seen upon this planet.
    Our coal mines were producing more coal, our steel-mills smelting more iron, and our assembly-lines led the World in the manufacture of beautiful automobiles, refrigerators, wash-machines, dryers, and the hoard of smaller appliances and gadgets (which eliminated most of the drudgery of our daily chores) and introduced mankind to the life-of-ease, we all now enjoy. Now, American High School Graduates rank only average (whether tested in Mathematics, World History, Language, Science or any other critical field of expertise) and compared with the student’s test scores, from the other industrialized nations.
    Our so-called health care system stinks, it is without question, the most dysfunctional conglomeration of nonsensical laws bureaucrats have ever assembled. It assures illegal aliens and greedy politicians unlimited free health care, while it renders millions of hard working honest citizens incapable of obtaining any kind of health insurance. The new Social Security Drug Plan deducts a premium for drug insurance, which you can bet will double every year (for at least the next two years) from the social security checks, of subscribers. A great many drugs are not covered by this new plan, and it only pays a maximum of about 70% on any drug, a lot less on most. When the total drug bill (what the retiree and the government pays) reaches $2250.00, Grandma gets cut off, has to pay it all herself, until her total drug bill reaches $3500.00. Obviously if Grandma can not afford her drugs, her bill will never get to $3500.00, so she will go without her drugs for the rest of the year. Of course the monthly premium will still be deducted from her Social Security Check. The drug companies formulated this drug bill, got it enacted, and only the drug companies are going to benefit from it. (Our government gives them the premiums.) In short, this Shaft Our Grandparents Bill is nothing but a multi-million dollar windfall for the drug companies.
    The above bill is sure not the worst medical bill our elected officials have ever enacted. It just happens to be the last that made me angry. Hundreds of anti consumer bills and amendments are on the books, which benefit only the medical and/or the drug industries. Foreign competition to American Drug Companies is nonexistent. If it was legitimatized, we could import drugs from reputable foreign drug facilities, for as little as 10% of the extortion we now forced to pay our American Drug Companies. Sad to say, but the Medical Cartels and Drug Companies, with their unchallenged power, are not the worst villains when it comes to manipulating our US Government [or our state governments] into giving them a license to gouge us. The international oil and gas conglomerates, the interstate utility companies, railroad companies, automobile and airplane manufacturers, the cable companies, international shipping cartels and a score of other business concerns all wield as much or more power over our Congress, Senate and President, than the drug companies do. Big Business is our real enemy. Big Business controls our government, and Big Business is the real reason America is losing ground on all fronts, the reason America is steadily slipping into mediocrity.
    The companies mentioned above, along with a score of Countries and a hoard of other mighty financial cartels, funnel billions of dollars, pac-money, annually into Washington, to influence the Republican and Democratic Party Leaders (Lords) to legislate on their behalf. The leaders of the Democratic and Republican Parties, the Party Lords, in the Congress and Senate, now have more control over their subservient Congressman and Senators, than any Marine General ever had over his troops. The political parties control the pac-money. And the pac-money is what decides who will get elected, or heaven forbid, smeared.
    These political Lords can’t just walk down on the floor and tell a congressman or senator that they are fired. But they can have anyone that fails to kowtow to the powers that be, ostracized, rendered powerless, and they can definitely keep anyone from being re-elected. It is very important that we all understand that these Party Lords have strict control over our congressmen and senators. And folks that’s not Democracy, that’s Bureaucracy.
    And if we are going to declare war against our greedy bureaucracy, prudence behooves us to learn all we can about our enemy. Now, I just pulled what I have written here off the top of my head. So if you find a mistake, don’t get excited, it is not that important, the overall theme of this opinion is correct. And furthermore it is also correct that with a minimum of research, anyone can ascertain for themselves that this greatest of all nations, is rapidly slipping into mediocrity. And even the United States of America, the greatest nation that ever existed, can fall from within, if we continue to allow misguided politicians the right, to barter away piece after piece of good government, to anyone who is able and willing to pay for preferential treatment.
    I have been telling people for years; when in doubt always Vati. But only in this last year has the urge to really push this concept become obligatory. Actually, Voting Against The Incumbents, is a very viable method of straightening out what is wrong with America. Many congressmen and senators win their seats by very small margins, less than 5%. So, if just 5% of the electorate would vati, we would probably get between 20 and 25% of the Congress and Senators. And you can bet we would get their attention.
    If as many people vatied, as voted for Ross Perot (he got 18.9% of the popular vote) we would unseat half of both houses. Folks this is a plan that definitely has possibilities. Politician’s egos are all wrapped up in their positions. Actually the only thing in the World politicians love more than pac-money, is their influential positions, their jobs. And on the very day our legislators learn that their electorate is actually going to vote them out of office, they are going to be magically stricken with a burning desire to legislate on behave of their constituency.
    The only question left is, where are you going to place your loyalty, to the political party that you have been blindly supporting – or to America? You can’t serve two masters, and be loyal to both. We have to take the power away from the political Lords, to the extent that it allows our elected representatives to vote the way we tell them to vote. Or in thirty years you are not going to be able to tell the difference between Washington and the corrupt Government of Mexico, or for that matter, tell the difference between America and Mexico.
    Grandpa Nate @ Rawlins, Wyoming.

  • http://voteagainsttheincumbents.blogspot.com/ GrandpaNate

    Vati Party

    VATI is the first letter in “Vote Against The Incumbents,” and that is what it means. Vati means you always vote against the person holding the office, the incumbent, regardless of political affiliation.

    The majority of our Congressmen and Senators have absolutely no fear of losing their offices. They know that party loyalty [be it Republican or Democrat] of their constituency will assure their perpetual reelecting. In the whole Senate you are likely to have only five or six seats [in the Congress less than 30 seats] that are not securely locked-up by one, or the other, political parties.

    And actually, nothing is gained when we do manage to send an occasional new representative to Washington. In short: They are simply gobbled up by the system. They are introduced to pac-money, and the powerful party leaders [Party Lords] and end up cuddling up to Big Business, and voting the party line, for legislation that enhances the Conglomerate’s bottom line, to the determent of their constituency, to the determent of America.

    Now, a large percentage of Congressmen and Senators win their seats by very small margins, less than 5%, so if just 10% of the voters Vati, we would likely unseat nearly 20% of our Representatives. If we could generate as much support as Ross Perot did, [according to the last election] we would kick out close to 90% of the House and Senate.

    But more important than just getting rid of some self-serving politicians, unseating just 10% of the House and Senate would definitely get their attention. And then we could demand drastic change. We could demand a clean break between our Legislators and Big Business. We could outlaw all soft-money, and make any contact between our Legislators and Big Business [except publicized discussion in an open forum] illegal.
    We can demand term limits. I am for an eight-year term limit, for all Government Offices. Let Senators serve one six year term or change the length their terms to four years. We can demand secure borders, and that everything entering our ports be inspected. We could demand a rigidly enforced alien worker program, which caters to America’s needs. And demand a viable plan which honorably ends the war in Iraq.

    We can let Washington know, anyone who votes against anything the majority of America clearly wants, had better start looking for a new job.

    Vatiing is a very viable method of voting to save America, to cure what is wrong with America, a viable way of stopping America’s rapid descent into mediocrity.

    The interest in “vote against the incumbents” is growing exponentially. Now we need to get organized, form a political party. Much like any other political party, except we won’t run candidates for office. Our challenge will be to make the other Parties Candidates legislate for American, and America’s People.

    If you have any ideas, comments, want to help get organized, or whatever, please leave a message at VATI

  • http://voteagainsttheincumbents.blogspot.com GrandpaNate

    THE DEAF WORLD
    I speak to a deaf world. And I know not how to gain her ear. America is degenerating at a rapid pace. We are now over $9,210,000.000,000 in debt. That is over $30,275 for every man, woman and child in this country. It would take us over thirty years to pay off this debt, if we installed sane representatives in Washington, and adhered to a balanced budget.

    Our schools now rank 28th [ 28th, that’s pathetic.]in the World. We are in a war that we can’t win, in the foreseeable future, and can’’t get out of. Our Government is broken. We are no longer functioning as a Democracy. We are operating as a Bureaucracy. The Party Lords tell our Congressmen and Senators how to vote. And Big Business, mostly International Conglomerates, give the Party Lords, which they bought with Pac-money, their orders.

    That should be enough said: Because I don’t really believe that there is anyone in America, who is old enough to vote, that don’’t know this country is in trouble.

    Every day the Republican and Democratic Party Lords work at enacting bills, which cedes one international conglomerate after another some financial quid pro quo, for pac-money received. And nearly all concessions to Big Business prove to be detrimental to America’s working people. Under the present system America will eventually have hungry masses without health care, millionaires, and no middle class. America, as we know her, is at this moment rapidly degenerating.

    Changing out Republican for a Democratic, or Democratic for a Republican, or just replacing a Republican or Democratic with what is deemed a better member of their own party, will not help the situation. The new comer will quickly learn how the ball bounces in Washington, and vote the Party Line, as the Party Lords dictate, and business will continue as usual. And that is not Democracy, but Bureaucracy.

    But all is not lost: America can still be saved. There is enough energy being wasted fighting for the various causes against our unresponsive government, to fix America twice. This is still America, and we can still vote. So let’s act like a Democracy, band together, vati, [Vote Against The Incumbents.] and send enough Congressmen and Senators home, to get the attention of those who are left.

    Our representatives usually win their office by vary small margins, less than 5%. So, if just 10% of us would vati, we would get between 20 and 25% of the House and Senate. If 20% of us vati, we would sent 75% of both Houses home. And you can bet; you’’d have your Representative’’s ear.

    It really doesn’t matter whether you want to save the spotted owl, secure our borders, protect the giant redwoods, or the North Slope, save some swamp, or clean up a river, or outlaw pac-money, it is going to cost Big Business money. And you won’t get it done until we take back the reins of government. And none of you have the power to do that alone. So the answer is simple; whatever your cause, fail, or band together and help clean up Washington. Save America, and then you will have an accommodating representative to help promote your cause. Time is essential, so start contacting other groups and get the ball rolling. You can do it, and it will work. Good Luck, GrandpaNate