ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Draining The Swamp

Updated on May 10, 2017
jackclee lm profile image

Jack is currently a volunteer at the Westchester County Archives. Jack has worked at IBM for over 28 years.


The election of President Trump in 2016 promised a new direction for American politics. This included the draining of the swamp which is referring to political hacks that live in DC.

- May 2017


The question is who are these people that are in the swamp. Members of a previous administration top the list. The obvious candidates are lobbyists who makes a living influencing policy coming from Washington. Also on the list are government bureaucrats who spent a whole career in Washington but accomplished very little. They include members of Congress who have been re-elected year after year and yet had very little impact. Finally, the political pundits or talking heads who appear on TV news and commentary programs and spin the news of the day.

Obama Hires...

Talking Heads...

Naming Names...

Here are my list of names in Congress who needs to be voted out. They are from both parties but have stayed way longer than they should.


  • Chuck Schumer
  • Bernie Sanders
  • Dick Durbin
  • John McCain
  • Mitch McConnell
  • Lindsey Graham

House of Representatives:

  • Nancy Pelosi
  • Maxine Waters
  • Elijah Cummings
  • John Conyers
  • Steny Hoyer
  • Darrel Issa
  • Paul Ryan
  • John Sensenbrenner
  • Don Young
  • Chris Smith

What Does It Mean?

The term "draining the swamp" encompass not just the people who are doing wrong or using their power for self benefit. It includes people who are in power who has done very little or accomplished anything. The lack of results is as bad as doing nothing. In the new Trump administration, results mattered. People needs to be held accountable in Washington. It is the only way we can move forward.


It is no secret I am a conservative. I have no allegiance to either party. I do believe in the Constitution and a limited government. I also believe strongly in term limits. Part of the problems we have in Washington DC is the ruling class. These people who may have good intentions when they started, but after a few years in DC, becomes comfortable with the money and power that comes from ruling. The very thing we were warned about by our founders. The reason George Washington step down from President is the reason we need to have term limits. If not by law, at minimum by vote. If someone is voted to Congress, it should be an honor to serve but it should not be a career. IMHO.

© 2017 Jack Lee


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Perspycacious profile image

      Demas W Jasper 9 months ago from Today's America and The World Beyond

      I was surprised to not see Senator Hatch on you Senate list. Any particular reason for his omission? I am both in favor of term limits and concurrently a Constitutional Convention, and I am convinced that despite the odds there will be one, not tomorrow, but one day.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 9 months ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      That last comment seems more humor than truth. Control of the Senate means a person will get appointed without extreme hearings and vetting? Hmm, I am only 59 and I never saw that at all. There is never a person, democrat or Republican that got appointed without hard core nasty vetting by our legislatures.

    • fpherj48 profile image

      Paula 9 months ago from Beautiful Upstate New York

      I see I missed something quite noteworthy~~ Mike Russo!! Your last statement is the single-most hilarious remark you have made on HP!.....The "people can decide by looking at qualifications FROM A BI-PARTISAN VIEWPOINT??"

      Mike..OMG! YOU couldn't have a bi-partisan viewpoint with 6 guns pointed at your head from every angle!!! YOU or leslie or Cuckoo AP!!! WHO the hell are you trying to kid?? You have proven here beyond a doubt that you think, speak & breathe Preach, push and pull LEFT....You walk, eat and bleed LIB LIB LIB.....C'mon Mike....YOU, bi-partisan?? ROFLMAO!! Yeah right....back to the drawing board my man. Your idea would never work....precisely because of LIBERAL warriors like you! Have you ever supported or voted Right in your life? Never mind, don''t answer. I would not believe you. No way in hell by your current fierce LIB blindness, could anyone believe you.

      But I'll tell you, I have voted Bush Sr...Clinton, Twice...Bush Jr....Obama twice..That is someone who is NOT insane with Party-loyalty! I can't believe you said what you said!

    • fpherj48 profile image

      Paula 9 months ago from Beautiful Upstate New York

      And that goes for BOTH parties that control. So what's your point Mike?

    • peoplepower73 profile image

      Mike Russo 9 months ago from Placentia California

      Jack: When there is one party controlling the senate, it makes it very easy to approve the presidents picks.

    • breakfastpop profile image

      breakfastpop 9 months ago

      I see you put Chris Smith on the list. I applaud you for that!

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 9 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Eric, I struggled with this for a long time about term limits. Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that it is better for all if we restrict the term served for every official even if that person is well qualified at what he does. The decision came down to what is best to avoid undue influence. By keeping terms limited, we prevent money from playing a big role in government. Today, too much is being influenced by "pay to play" when most the time is spent on fund raising and not enough on legislating.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 9 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Mike, you are miss characterizing what the current system is. The president choose his cabinet but the Senate has to vote on the approval. There is some checks here. I believe the President should choose his cabinets and other top officials in all agencies. That is part of his job. His accomplishments or lack there of includes how he does with his picks of people that implements his agenda. The American people voted for one person to lead. Like it our not, it is our system. Given that opportunity, it is his job to do the best he can to succeed. When a new administration is voted in, it is only fair for that person to change guards and start in a new direction if he chooses.

      The swamp needs to be drained once in a while just to remove the dead wood. IMHO.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 9 months ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack this is quite interesting. You make good points. Here is a little problem I have. I want every other voting district to have term limits. But I want a extremely talented and someone who knows the ropes for my district. I want her to be able to run circles around newbies to get more for my district.

      Yes it is kind of strange but I am a realist.

      But did I just read a comment suggesting that the common man knows better how to pick an expert in a field better than the presidential staff. And that the top exec should not be able to decide who works for her?

      There is a thing called "direct democratic anarchy", or perhaps we should all vote 3 days a week on new legislation?

    • peoplepower73 profile image

      Mike Russo 9 months ago from Placentia California

      Jack: "Draining the Swamp" is a euphemism that means different things to different people. I have heard liberals say that Trump drained the swamp and then filled it with alligators. Meaning that they don't agree with his choice of cabinet members.

      I think having a president being able to shape his cabinet his way is one of the biggest problems in government. Each president gets to appoint the members of his cabinet , but also gets to fire them. They serve at the pleasure of the president. I believe cabinet members should be nominated by the public. In this way, there would be a diversity of ideas instead of one sided group thinking at the highest levels with the fear of always knowing that you can be fired. And further, the public could decide who was qualified and who wasn't by looking at their qualifications from a bi-partisan viewpoint.