THE COMPOSITION OF THE "HOUSE" MUST CHANGE.
Or nothing else would change.
If the Democratic Party members would not win back all the seats that they had lost during the 2010 mid-term elections that have swept the Republicans to power in the United States House of Representative, then their time would have been wasted on unessential events that dealt mainly with local issues.
In many of the swing states, like Ohio and Pennsylvania, unemployment was at the basis of the Democratic losses, but now, they have been vindicated by lower rates of 5% and 7% respectively; and that, though, joblessness occupied the minds of voters then, it was now below the national average of 8.3%, and therefore it (unemployment) should not be the only issue to determine how people in those states should vote.
The Republicans have come to gain a majority in the House, via a scurrilous, vicious campaign that the government was on a spending spree that would bankrupt the country; and that has led to the formation of the "tea party", which dwelt on President Barack Obama's stimulus spending to boost the economy as a waste of money.
However, the economy would not have started to pick up steam, has it not for helping the motor industry, for example, that many politicians wanted to see it dead. Obama and the Democrats saw that the car making industry was an American initiative, and so they would use the bailout for its survival, than to lose it to countries like Japan and South Korea.
The stimulus also helped the clean energy industry; and in spite of Solyndra's failure, many of the newly created companies were functioning and employing people.
On government spending that the Congressional Republicans were screaming so much about, it was not the programs, like Social Security and Medicare, that ballooned the annual expenditure. There were two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to be paid for.
"Current military” includes Dept. of Defense ($653 billion), the military portion from other departments ($150 billion), and an additional $162 billion to supplement the Budget’s misleading and vast underestimate of only $38 billion for the “war on terror.” “Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt." (meaning the National debt). (http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm).
All in all, National Security came first, and that was where the bulk of the Obama administration spending was, and still, going to; however, the Republicans would rather double down on welfare, food stamps and other social programs, such as Medicaid, as being where or what the money was spent on.
Those "new" members of Congress that have come on the train of "excessive government spending" should therefore be replaced once more for the dysfunctional behavior of the House to stop.
It was after the 2010 elections that compromise became a dirty word; and that led to so many debacles, like the debt ceiling and deficit reduction talks breaking down, after which a Special Committee was formed on a bi-partisan basis, but that too came to nought.
The credit rating of the U.S. was downgraded, which has since affected the recovery of the economy, and thus has added to the high unemployment rate that Obama was still battling against.
Without a change in the composition of the House, as the ousting of the "tea party" members, who had come in under false pretences, that government spending on social services and other entitlement programs was the cause of the country's problems, and that they (social services) must be drastically cut, according to Paul Ryan's budgetary plan, to ease the fiscal tension that the government was under, Congress would remain dysfunctional.
Voters have the right to check for facts of the state of the nation before they vote in the 2012 general election, no matter what the politicians told them. To know now would be better than to have regrets later.
No comments yet.