Change the Senate tax bill

The 13 of December, 2010 - by Donny Shaw

The Senate is in session and they are about to start voting on Obama plan to extend the Bush for all levels of income tax cuts in return for extending unemployment benefits for 13 months and some other things. You are planned to move easily and will be sent to the Assembly for action tracking, probably on Wednesday. Democrats camera have virtually given up the idea of walking away agree that not nearly unanimously of agreement, and make that reductions in taxes about to expire. Instead keep votes on amendments and see if a majority may agree to the changes. If not, pass as it is.

National Journal explains how the Assembly will elect amendments to vote on:

Steny Hoyer, D-MD. majority leader., said today that it is "inevitable" camera, which last week refused to adopt the agreement tax for a vote - Democrats to commit themselves in the package. But Hoyer said he hoped will try that liberal Democrats camera to amend the Bill in the Senate, noting that many are directed to the size of the estate tax. Hoyer said that they have caused "great dismay" ranks of his party.

Ongoing discussions on how to make this change in the Senate Bill. Options include the Division out of this facet of the Bill so that members can vote separately, or an amendment to the master Bill.

The camera about rules and Ways and Means committees will have an opportunity to propose an amendment to the Senate Bill. If do them "we have votes on amendments", stated Hoyer.

If none of these amendments passed Bill will have to return to the Senate for a vote. But may sufficient support for the draft bill approved by Senate Republicans camera have and centrist retire Democrats to keep it from being modified. Opposition tax commitment is also growing on the right, however: a leading group of tea, tea party Patriots party launched a petition against the agreement tax unit today.

The members of the Committee on ways and means and Rules Committee will first decisions of what will be and not get votes. An amendment to be considered, you will need to be proposed by a member of the committees and will then need to be approved by a majority of the Commission. This is what is known as a structured rule. It shall not permit any modification of the general staff on the floor of the House, only the previously approved by the Commission on the rules of procedure. If it is the Committee on ways and means, the President of the Rules Committee, Republic Louise Slaughter [D, NY-28], pictured above, will also reach agreement to include as part of the package of regulations for discussion.

Therefore, these are key pressure points now to change Bill: 41 members of the Committee on ways and means and the 14 members of the Committee on the rules of procedure.

View the original article here

Allocate the hypocrisy in the best

The 15 December 2010 - by Donny Shaw

Jamie Dupree has a large screenshot of a conference held today by Senator John Thune [R, SD] and [R, TX] Senator John Cornyn press bash omnibus spending bill. Together, Thune and Cornyn (pictured) have sponsored several earmarks 71 100 million dollars in the bus, but you are trying to play both sides of the coin: requesting earmarks, and then a prominent announces that it would vote against Bill containing them, despite the fact that know you is going to happen.

Reporters at the press conference don't miss the irony here, and drilled Senators about it quite heavy. Read the painfully clumsy transcript below:

"The draft law contains many requested earmarks," told a reporter, starting Q & A.

"Do you pardon me?", says Cornyn.

"I will vote against those earmarks since the American people sent a message on 2 November," said Republican Texas.

"Senator Thune, I was watching the list of requests for booking you have requested this year and adds up to more than one hundred million dollars," said another reporter asked - which has been spoken as a presidential hopeful - South Dakota Republican if he would strike those earmarks.

"Support to projects, but I do not support this Bill," answered Thune.

Time for another question.

"Goes through this Bill, there are reserve after reservation of the two, millions of dollars in earmarks," asked another notary with a jab.

"Why have any credibility on this?"

"Because we are going to vote against the draft law," replied Cornyn.

"It seems that you are saying one thing and do another," another reporter pressed.

"Not at all," said Cornyn, as Thune also intervened to defend its position in the omnibus.

"We have to leave it there, we need to work," said an Assistant for GOP, trying to put an end to the press conference and quickly realize the Senators at the door.

"Were wrong when you put these earmarks?" asked a reporter, ignoring the staffer.

"Is and missing the story if you think that it is almost earmarks," Cornyn protested, trying to turn the focus towards leaders democratic lead this huge bill to the floor with little time for review.

"Thank you guys." Thank you very much, "the same staffer quickly interjected as Cornyn finished his answer, try again put an end to the press conference."

A reporter asked: "is an acknowledgement of receipt that was wrong to make the earmarks first?".

"Asked about five times and I have tried to respond to the best of my ability," said something Cornyn, irked that file then compressed by the door.

View the original article here

The week in the future

If congressional leaders have their way, this will be the final week of the 111th Congress. President Obama and most Republicans are hoping the Democrats will end their four years in the majority by passing a full extension of the Bush tax cuts for all income levels. To that end, the Senate is set to take a big cloture vote this afternoon on an amendment to the House’s bill to allow the tax cuts to expire for income over $200,000 (H.R. 4853) that would change the bill to extend all the tax cuts, lower the estate tax, extend unemployment benefits, and lots more. If today’s vote passes, as is expected, the bill will be sent back to the House by Tuesday evening for follow-up action. That’s where things become less clear.

The House would have two options. They could accept the Senate’s changes to their bill and hold a vote on agreeing to the amendment, or they could attempt to add another amendment of their own and send it back to the Senate for more votes. Some House Democrats are looking to add a new tier of unemployment benefits for 99ers, but most are focused on increasing the lower estate tax rate that is in the Senate amendment.

The most likely scenario is that the House will hold votes on a couple amendments, but if they don’t pass it’s sounding more and more likely that Democrats will allow Republicans and a few dozen Blue Dogs to just sign off on the Senate deal and send it to Obama. Rep. Chris Van Hollen [D, MD-8], one of Speaker Pelosi’s close allies in the House, suggested so several times in an appearance on Fox New Sunday. “We’re not going to hold this up at the end of the day,” he said. Van Hollen also told the Wall Street Journal that the House is “very focused on getting a comprehensive tax compromise passed by the end of the year.”

Needless to say, we’ll be watching the developments here closely. For now, let’s have a look at what’s on the Senate and House schedules for the week.

First, the House:

First Vote Of The Week: Tuesday 6:00 p.m.
Last Vote Predicted: Friday p.m

MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2010
On Monday, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. for pro forma session. No votes are expected in the House.

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2010
On Tuesday, the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for Morning Hour debate and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business with votes postponed until 6:00 p.m.

Suspensions (14 Bills)

S. 2906 – A bill to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to modify a provision relating to leases involving certain Indian tribes (Sen. Cantwell – Natural Resources)S. 1609 – Longline Catcher Processor Subsector Single Fishery Cooperative Act (Sen. Cantwell – Natural Resources)Senate Amendment to H.R. 1061 – Hoh Indian Tribe Safe Homelands Act (Rep. Dicks – Natural Resources)S. 1405 – Longfellow House-Washington’s Headquarters National Historic Site Designation Act (Sen. Kennedy – Natural Resources)S. 1448 – A bill to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to authorize the Coquille Indian Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw, the Klamath Tribes, and the Burns Paiute Tribe to obtain 99-year lease authority for trust land (Sen. Merkley – Natural Resources)S.Con.Res. 72 – A concurrent resolution recognizing the 45th anniversary of the White House Fellows Program (Sen. Brownback – Oversight and Government Reform)H.R. 6205 – To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1449 West Avenue in Bronx, New York, as the “Private Isaac T. Cortes Post Office” (Rep. Crowley – Oversight and Government Reform)S. 3794 – FOR VETS Act of 2010 (Sen. Leahy – Oversight and Government Reform)H.Res. 1743 – Congratulating Gerda Weissmann Klein on being selected to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom (Rep. Mitchell – Oversight and Government Reform)H.R. 5446 – To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 600 Florida Avenue in Cocoa, Florida, as the “Harry T. and Harriette Moore Post Office” (Rep. Posey – Oversight and Government Reform)H.R. __ – To make technical corrections to provisions of law enacted by the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (Rep. Oberstar – Transportation and Infrastructure)H.R. 6510 – To direct the Administrator of General Services to convey a parcel of real property in Houston, Texas, to the Military Museum of Texas (Rep. Jackson-Lee – Transportation and Infrastructure)S. 3984 – Museum and Library Services Act of 2010 (Sen. Reed – Education and Labor)S. 1275 – National Foundation on Fitness, Sports, and Nutrition Establishment Act (Sen. Warner – Education and Labor)

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2010 AND THE BALANCE OF THE WEEK
On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. for legislative business. On Friday, the House will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business.

Suspensions (12 Bills)

S. 3036 – National Alzheimer’s Project Act (Sen. Bayh – Energy and Commerce)H.Res. 1600 – Supporting the critical role of the physician assistant profession and supporting the goals and ideals of National Physician Assistant Week (Rep. McCollum – Energy and Commerce)S. 30 – Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009 (Sen. Nelson (FL) – Energy and Commerce)S. 3386 – Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (Sen. Rockefeller – Energy and Commerce)S. 3199 – Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act of 2010 (Sen. Snowe – Energy and Commerce)H.Res. __ – Supporting a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and condemning unilateral declarations of a Palestinian state (Rep. Berman – Foreign Affairs)S. 987 – International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010 (Sen. Durbin – Foreign Affairs)H.Res. 20 – Calling on the State Department to list the Socialist Republic of Vietnam as a “Country of Particular Concern” with respect to religious freedom. (Rep. Royce – Foreign Affairs)H.Res. 1757 – Providing for the approval of final regulations issued by the Office of Compliance to implement the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998 that apply to the House of Representatives and employees of the House of Representatives (Rep. Brady (PA) – House Administration)H.Res. 1377 – Honoring the accomplishments of Norman Yoshio Mineta (Rep. Honda – House Administration)S. 3860 – A bill to require reports on the management of Arlington National Cemetery (Sen. McCaskill – Veterans’ Affairs)H.R. 4337 – Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act (Rep. Rangel – Ways and Means)

Possible Further Action on H.R. 3082 – Making Further Continuing Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2011 and the Food Safety Enhancement Act (Rep. Obey – Appropriations) (If amended by the Senate)

Possible Further Action on H.R. 4853 – Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010 (Rep. Levin – Ways and Means) (If amended by the Senate)

Conference Reports may be brought up at any time.Motions to go to Conference should they become available.Possible Motions to Instruct Conferees.

And here’s what we know about the Senate:

Convenes: 2:00pm

Following any Leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to concur with respect to H.R.4853, the vehicle for the tax compromise. The time until 3:00pm will be equally divided and controlled between the two Leaders or their designees. At 3:00pm, the Senate will proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R.4853, with the Reid-McConnell amendment #4753 (tax compromise).

View the original article here

99Ers crisis about to get much worse

The 14 December 2010 - by Donny Shaw

I have tried to make the point that problem 99er - people exhausted all unemployment benefits without finding a job, is about to get much worse because we are approaching 99 weeks since the worst part of spike in unemployment of recession. Congress does not plan to add more weeks of unemployment benefits and the Fed is projected to stay fairly unemployment is for next year. Putting everything together, this means that in the foreseeable future, there will be without jobs and without government support 99ers million.

This chart, showing three years of job losses calculated risk makes it very clear: millions of people who have lost their jobs in the deepest part of the recession are about to cancel a cliff:

Adding insult to injury, 99ers are not tracked even by the Government. The form of employment, when people go unemployment statistics system works are not considered part of the labour force and do not have account numbers for employees or unemployed. This is why we have no firm 99ers, and that number is so easy to ignore this crisis of responsible.

Wait for homelessness, the rate of suicides and offences related to the despeartion to spike. And remember to look at this when the consumer recovery wouldn't be as optimistic as expected in the next couple years.

View the original article here

Reaches the Senate omnibus

The 15 December 2010 - by Donny Shaw

At the top of the Prosecutor vs. "Don't Ask, don't Tell," the DREAM Act and the Treaty of nuclear weapons, Congress has to pass the legislation by the end of this week to keep the Government financed spending and avoid Federal employees permissions. The Assembly passed legislation last week to simply continue the current levels of funding for the remainder of the fiscal year, but the Senate wants to do it in a similar manner the regular appropriations process. This means that we're looking at thousands of earmarks, pet projects and policy on budget adjustments.

The Senate last night released details of its appropriations bill omnibus. Combining divisions of 12 credits is usually done separately in a mega-invoice 1.1 trillion $ 1, 924-page.

In front of the reserve, first analyses indicate that a 6,178 elements addressed in the Bill at a cost of around 8 million dollars Congress expenses. This is really much less than usual assignment: last year, for example, appropriations bills contained 9,499 earmarks to 15.9 million dollars, but a lot of people is still calling it too because they see as having been about spending midterm elections.

Higher in the omnibus earmarkers are the [R, MS] Senator Thad Cochran with 230, the [R, MS] Senator Roger Wicker with 199 and the [D, WA] Senator Patty Murray with 172.

Beyond appropriate earmarks, the bus contains projects pets which members have been pushing but have not yet succeeded. E.g. there jobs Bill again forest that would mandate registration in some national parks, increased funding for border patrol agents a new Office of ocean energy management, regulation and implementation, and the new nuclear loan guarantees.

The Hill reports that several Republicans in the Senate plans to support Bill, you should spend more later this week when it comes to a vote:

"That is my intention," said retiring Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) when asked if he would support the package.

Bennett said earmarks in the Bill could give some of his GOP colleagues why doubt but does not affect their vote.

"It is difficult for some, but not for me," he said.

GOP Sens. Kit Bond (MO), George Voinovich (Ohio) and Susan Collins (Maine) also told The Hill on Tuesday that could consider voting for the omnibus but you want to review it before taking a final decision.

"I hope to be able to vote in favour of one," Bond said the omnibus. "We must look at what is in it."

Pictured above is the Senate assignments to Senator President Daniel Inouye [D, HI].

View the original article here

Dems home take the lead in the repeal of "Don't Ask, don't Tell"

The 14 December 2010 - by Donny Shaw

While Obama Bush tax cuts stews of agreement in the Senate, Democrats in the House are Whenkickstarting desperate to pass a repeal effort of "Don ' T Ask Don ' T Tell" before of the lame duck session ends. House Majority Leader representative Steny Hoyer [D, MD-5] and Republic Patrick Murphy [D, PA-8] are now introducing an independent derogation will be identical in stand-alone drafting Bill in the Senate (S. 4023) law and plan to take it to a vote in the House on Wednesday before they are passed to tax cuts.

The camera has already proved to have the votes to approve a law repeal, having voted 234-294 on a similar amendment in the spring. Unless any trickery movimiento-a - recommit, this should be a matte.

He is studying the Senate will hold a debate on the START Treaty again after the end of the tax debate, so time is very tight in the upper House as senators are hoping to lift on Friday for the holidays and remain suspended until the next session. But after the first action on don't Ask, don't Tell t House repeal will exert pressure on the Senate to act on. The Senate will consider a draft law can be sent directly to Obama become law, rather than something to be sent to the House where things could get stumbled and cause your effort is wasted. In addition, after Democrats to complete his capitulation on the Bush tax cuts will probably eager to pass something like this to placate their base.

Washington module has more information about the planned legislative maneuver:

In a statement, [Servicemembers Legal Defense Network Director Aubrey] Sarvis said the leadership of the Chamber intends to take a vote on the repeal in the House on Wednesday and submit legislation to the Senate as a bill "privilege".

With the vote in the first place in the House and send Bill to the Senate as a "privileged" legislation would allow the Senate would be able to take action without a closure vote the motion to proceed. Even so, the Senate would have 60 votes for final approval of the legislation.

"This 'privilege' of House Bill will be necessary to pass the full, and then move to the Senate," said Sarvis. "While we avoid a closure vote to continue and save time on the floor of the Senate, still need 60 votes to complete Bill and send it directly to the desktop of the President." "Repeal supporters need to contact their members of the House to vote for the repeal of the morning".

The Senate must have the votes. Independent Collins-Lieberman bill introduced last week already has 41 co-sponsors and some Republican senators who voted against including the repeal of last week's language law is warming to the idea of passing the derogation as a stand-alone Bill. Still, this is going to be filibustered, probably by Senator John McCain [R, AZ], so you have the 60 votes to pass. This means that the Democrats still need flip one of the 39 Republicans who did not vote "" last week, or Senator Joe Manchin [D, WV], the only Democrat who voted "no". Yesterday, Manchin aims at supporting the repeal, but said that he didn't think about it enough yet to vote "Yes".

UPDATE: Rep. John Larson [D, CT-1] told MSNBC today Lieberman told him that there are more than 60 votes in the Senate to do so.

UPDATE 2: Representative Nancy Pelosi [D, AC-8] speaker announced on Twitter will vote on the Bill tomorrow, adding that "the Senate action in # DADT is long overdue".

UPDATE 3: And, at the beginning of the day, Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid [D, NV] announced that if Housepasses repeal Bill will keep the Senate in session until you take a vote tracking. More Wonk room.

View the original article here

Black Caucus opposes A tax Deal, wants to help to 99ers

The 12 December 2010 - by Donny Shaw

Hot on the heels of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] Declaration on Thursday on the floor of the House which should be an extension of insurance for unemployment added to Congressional Black Caucus Obama tax agreement 99ers has announced that add 99ers relief is essential to gain the support of its members.

"CBC has come to a consensus on three areas that we believe that we can unite behind," http://www.opencongress.org/person/show/400364_Robert_Scott">Rep. "Bobby Scott [D, VA-3] said at a press conference on Friday."First, we support the extension of 13 months of unemployment insurance benefits, but we all agree that we should also extend benefits to the so-called 99ers - who are depleting the benefits they have. "

View the complete press conference here.

The deal negotiated by Obama and Congressional Republicans would extend to the four levels of unemployment benefit which expired on December 1, but would not create a new level of benefits for those who have moved on these levels are still unemployed. Four levels provide up to 99 weeks of benefits in some States, and we are now more than 99 weeks out of the worst consequences of the financial crisis of ' 08. This means that, before they expired levels, a wave of people who have lost their jobs as a direct result of the imprudence of Wall Street and regulatory incompetence began being left out of the database of the federal insurance programs. There is no estimate how many official 99ers already exist, but most estimates place the number of around 5 million.

Congressional Black Caucus has 42 members, that might not be enough to force a change in the distribution of taxes. If all the camera Republicans vote for Bill, only 39 Democratic votes would be required to ensure the passage. In September, 31 conservative Blue Dog Democrats wrote a letter to the Defense leadership for all the Bush tax cuts to expand, so it can be considered probable yeses. According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama management currently works for rounding up the final votes needed by lame duck Democrats in the House who lost his re-election in November and already are not accountable to the voters of lobbyists.

Ultimately, if or additional weeks to 99ers can not be added to the draft law is up to the Republic President Nancy Pelosi [D, AC-8] and the House Democratic leadership. He is expected that the Senate to pass Bill early this week, and Pelosi and crew have the option of pass as is, or pass it with an amendment. Even if Pelosi will be with an amendment, it is possible that would address other elements: the estate tax or the length of the extension of the current levels of unemployment and not try to add anything to the 99ers. As the WSJ reports today, Pelosi is "walking a dangerous path" by attempting to meet at their Democrats who firmly oppose the operation, while at the same time trying to somehow pastor treatment at law for the tax cut debate is not backward to the next, more Republican session of Congress.

View the original article here

Obama-GOP to pass tax bill set the House today

The 16 December 2010 - by Donny Shaw

UPDATE: Leadership of the camera has drawn the word rule. Votes should not be there pass to discuss the vote an amendment which allows. Now it is not clear whether the rule will be changed to disallow any amendment, more votes on amendments that satisfy the Dems or votes on amendments favored by the Republicans. Anyway, it is likely that this is a temporary setback and things are probably still on track for the step.

Original post below. I te successive updates in this post, so please check back again soon for more...

The regulation Committee of the Assembly met last night to forge the rule that will govern the Parliament debate today Obama-GOP tax bill and, as expected, being protected by allowing only a vote on the amendment. There will be no vote leave high-income tax lapse rates, providing payroll less regressive tax, lengthening the extension of unemployment insurance filing or add an additional level of benefits for the 99ers. Only allowed voting will be an amendment to raise the tax from the estate of very low Senate for almost-as-low 2009 level as defined by Bush and leaders of the camera are lashes against this, because you don't want to have to pay back Bill to the Senate.

In spite of the Democratic caucus last week who oppose the operation of Obama-GOP internal almost unanimous vote, establishing democratic Obama below is doing everything possible for this on the ram. According to the Republic Pete DeFazio [D, OR-4] Obama has requested until Dems camera warning that not to approve the draft law would mean the end of his presidency.

The vote will spend this afternoon, about 5 p.m., and the most likely scenario is that you rejected the amendment of the estate tax and underlying bill passes with Republicans almost all vote "Yes" along with a few dozen Blue Dogs and new Dems. If Democrats manage to stay together on amendments to the tax of heritage and passing it, Bill must be sent to the Senate for follow-up action. Senate Republicans have pledged to reject changes to provisions, Bush tax cuts, including the estate tax so it is the only chance of things get stumbled. But it is not likely to occur. According to The Hill, "camera leadership aides said private doubted that Pomeroy proposal [i.e., the estate tax amendment] spent, in view of the pledges for Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats to oppose changes."

View the original article here

Is Congress Regulating each credit card policy?

Although it sometimes seems as if the credit card companies have dominance over everyone, Congress continues to remind us that they have the last word in the way things are running. With Congress looking at various problems arising in connection with credit card companies, is sure to be some kind of regulations about the policy in the coming years.

As the Internet continues to evolve, more and more people use credit cards for a range of different things. Credit cards are used for everything from buying clothes or computers for online gambling and online auctions. With the freedom that so far, Congress bound to step in and start regulating online policy.

Unidirectional Congress helps people with credit cards is now by the fair debt collection practices Act. This is a law passed by Congress that governs the methods debt collection agencies can use to collect money from debtors behind on their payments. For example, debt collection agencies are not allowed to get in touch with relatives or employers of a debtor, and they may not contact the debtor by phone for 8 hours or after 21. 00

Although it is essential that you try and so much of your debt may pay, sometimes debt piles up on you. With the FDCPA allows you to buy some time trying to come up with the money without legally be contacted if you elect not to pick up the phone. If a collection agency is one of the set of rules breaks, you have the option to take them to court.

One of the most important areas of concern for the Congress is Internet fraud and identity theft. Through the online auctions, gambling and online shops there are thousands of credit card transactions per day. However, there are also hundreds of reported identity theft around the world every day. In fact, identity theft has climbed to the number one crime in the u.s.

Congress continues to look into what protections online sites offer their customers with and what rules will have to make. The further development of the Internet, the more websites go to suit the needs of their customers. While things are good at the moment, will many sites not good enough in time with a growing number of people buying items online.

What kinds of regulations Congress will make protection of you and your credit card is still unclear. There is constantly researching and discussions about how Congress will make things safer online and only time will tell what kinds of rules which they lay down.

Cricket and Congress!

Cricket in India enjoys enormous popularity. Cricket and cricket administrators are often accused of frustrated the growth of other sports in India. Although this is far from the truth is, I find popularity of cricket in India is strikingly similar to the Congress party gets support in India. Both are thriving in this country, especially since there are not faring better competitors. Let's analyze the situation in a little more depth.

Congress is of course the first political party formed in India. With the stalwarts such as Tilak, Gandhi and Nehru as its leaders, enjoyed it, of course, enormous support from the citizen who led to independence. After independence, however, gave rise to many national and regional parties. But, apart from a few years, Congress has the party in power has been for most of the period. So, even after almost 60 years, Congress has a nation wide appeal.

Cricket also immensely popular from the days of Pentangular tournaments. Other sports have patches have dominance. Such as Hockey enjoyed its golden age in the fifties and sixties. Tennis reached its peak in the late 1960s as India Davis Cup finals twice. Indian football was in his Prime in 1962 Asiad and 1960 Olympic Games. But leave apart these anomalies and you Cricket pronunciation of the hearts of Indian fans constantly.

So what is it in cricket and Congress that keeps people interested? Congress has better leaders than opposition? Is the policy of Congress more pro-people than the opposition? Cricketers Are more talented than other athletes? Is BCCI more transparent than other sports bodies?

The fact is that both are thriving standard. The people in India throw every now and then the mandate to Congress more out of disgust to opposition than as an endorsement of policies and programmes of the Congress. Cricket catches people imagination mainly as a result of anarchy that at run time of other sports.

Congress is also a divided House if the opposition. Similarly, BCCI also has a long history of bitter power struggle. But it all boils down to choosing a lesser evil. It's not that the chance to the other party did not come. In politics in India gave people a chance to non-Congress formations for at least three times only disillusioned. Also in the sport came also glory in non-cricketing sports a few times. India won the Hockey World cup in 1975. But rather than captalising on Indian Hockey Federation itself killed by the struggle for power. Indian football team reached the semi-finals of the Olympic Games in 1956, but then the interests of club owners overpowered the national interests. So had the people in India for their faith and their support for Indian Cricketers who won the world cup in 1983. The smart marketers like Dalmiya, now Lalit Modi have since seen that cricket is a company and the global nerve center of cricket.

In politics, they say that there are no permanent enemies. Politicians have been known to protect of mutual interests of friends even in the opposition. Same thing here in BCCI where we have a Arun Jaitley of BJP siding with NCP Supreme Sharad Pawar and Congress spokesperson Rajeev Shukla and national conference leader Farooq Abdulla all find belonging to different parties. So what's the real truth? Politics is like a game of cricket or Is Cricket the political Akhada?

Congress Show who's Boss!

Congress is not working, and that is mainly due to the fact that her reelection rate is 98%. Why should they rock their boat when they always get re-elected?

Important national issues such as our need for energy remain unaddressed, while gas is approaching $ 5/gal. Russia, Venezuela, China, et al., are all rushing to fill the demand at our expense. To solve this coming energy crisis, could Congress just voted to remove the restrictions on domestic drilling in the ANWR, from our coasts, our slate in the Rockies, nuclear power, etc.. And stop fool inefficient biofuel push!

But they will not, because our special interest groups, particularly the "Greens" and far left, who fund their re-election campaigns and the giant farm-companies who want ethanol plants, would be disrupted. On the other hand, the American people, who are hurt by gas prices and the resulting economic slowdown, are confused, unorganized, and don't know what to do.

We, the majority of the American people, need to get organized to protect ourselves.

Any idiot can see that America is its own worst enemy in the deliberately not producing his own fossil energy that we have in abundance. Except the idiots in Congress!

And any idiot can see that the American voters are own worst enemy, is because he continually reelects the idiot Congress that prevents America produce its own energy.

The solution: in 2008, the American people must electoral slaughter Congress on both sides of the aisle with a one-time landslide sales to show Congress that boss!

We are tired and we're not gonna take it anymore! We are gonna stop reelecting them!

What we need is a popular uprising, such as a 'congres do not place any Member ' campaign, which wholesale damages, the incumbent will inflict in Congress, to show that the American people still in cost, not the special interests.

So let's throw them all out! At least once in 2010 and maybe again in 2012 2014 and 2016.

That'll learn 'em!

About Iraq, Congress needs to put up or shut up

Since the President first his new strategy for Iraq unveiled on 10 January, there is no shortage of critics claim that the plan was doomed to fail, even before the Department of Defense began to work on their implementation. Using the cover of article II, section 2 of the Constitution, which vests in the President sole authority as Commander-in-Chief, some senators have claimed that they are powerless to stop the President "escalation" of the war, and that their only recourse to express their dissatisfaction by means of a non-binding resolution.

Before proceeding, I must agree with the idea that the President plan to deploy an additional 21.500 troops into Baghdad and al-Anbar province is somehow a "escalation" of the war. Since the invasion in March 2003, his troops levels have risen and fallen in response to the level of violence in the country. As an army captain in Iraq in 2003 and 2004, I sat by numerous briefings that talked about force levels and where we had to be in response to the situation on the ground.

At the beginning of 2005, such as the rebellion was really starting to hit his stride, American troops in Iraq numbered approximately 130,000. In the end of 2005, in preparation for the elections in december, troops levels increased to nearly 160,000 with the expectation that violence would spike as the democratic process played itself out. During 2006 were the force levels steadily between 120,000 and 140,000. At the moment the number of troops in Iraq is approximately 130,000.

The point of all this is that the President's plan for the deployment of additional troops nothing more than a response to the violence in Baghdad that remain will force levels lower than they have been in the past. It is an attempt to a certain degree of safety, so that the Iraqis can work towards a political solution that will solve problems of the country.

But it's time to move on. The Senate will soon consider different non-binding resolutions that claim to show the will of Congress and the American people that we are not more soldiers to fight and die in Iraq. Senators Biden, Levin and hail have suggested a these Congress convictions, already made by the Commission. Senators Warner, Coleman, Collins and Nelson have proposed a similar measure that very soon will be taken over. The Hill reported that senator Clinton has also its own version that the number of troops of this month level would cap unless president Bush license of Congress for an increase in the attempt.

Since these resolutions are without obligation, no carries the same weight as a law adopted by Congress in an attempt to reduce troops or change the behavior of the war. So what's the point? What are they trying to achieve with this symbolic vote?

It's really quite simple. These senators know that such a resolution will be passed on by the President and will change nothing to his plan for the deployment of more troops. What in the past two weeks has unfolded, is nothing less than political posturing to improve personal power and influence at the expense of an unpopular President. Some of the opposing run Senators make for the White House in 2008. Some will only fight for their political survival. By the introduction of some distance between himself and President Bush, they may have recourse to public dissatisfaction with no substantive action of their own country.

The problem with this approach is that it undermines the President in carrying out its constitutional duties as Commander in Chief of the armed forces. If the President's strategy is to have any chance of success, it needs the support of Congress. Partner if the leaders of Iraq perceive by Mr Bush as his hands and feet tied, they will not undertake with us to set security and move from their country, right to suspect that they cannot in support of the us. Without at least the perception of confidence at home, by Mr Bush strategy will indeed fail.

None of the senators in open against the President's plan would be responsible for what happens in Iraq because of the political consequences. But if they really believe, deep in their hearts that what the President is doing wrong for this country, they have an obligation to the American people to stop wasting their time with a non-binding resolutions that are meaningless and to exercise the power entrusted to them by the Constitution.

Senator Edward Kennedy try is to lead the Congress on this road. He wants to use the power of the purse to demand of the President to additional funding from Congress before he can add more troops. But Congress may go a step further. They could act equal to the rhetoric that they have pushed to the American people. They can put their money where their mouths and cut off from the funds for a war that they claim is unnecessary, reckless and may be illegal. Unless they're willing to do so, they should back off and let the President do its job as Commander-in-Chief.

The need for the limits of the term in Congress

There is a crisis of epidemic areas in this country, and it continues to attack of the American people. This growing epidemic has the ground zero in Washington, d.c. and the center of origin is Congress. This epidemic is not likely to begin and at night, the slow and under our very noses has grown. In fact, that the American people have played a huge role in the growth of these pathogens. We have run rampant greed and ambition in the capital of our nation.

The every American has not yet really taken the time to really look at the people in Congress, how long they've been in Office and what they have done or not done for this country. The average American is doing to try to keep a roof over their head, food on the table and keep their accounts paid. We are so busy trying to live our lives that we Congress and the White House have let get away with too much.

While generations past term limits on the Cabinet of the President, had they not the foreground site to do the same for members of Congress. Unfortunately That has come back to haunt of the current population and will continue to haunt of future generations. Congress is no longer in the business of the American people to represent, but in the business of greed, political favor and their pockets. Greed and corruption are more likely than honor and duty.

There are members of Congress who have served for more than 50 years. While it's true that voters put them there, you have to wonder if the American people would have been better served as their mandate of service limited to a total of 2 terms. Perhaps there are less partisan and more bipartisan within both the House and the Senate.

Special Interest Groups, huge campaign donations, back room deals, Congressional hearings that are for display; all speak to Congress is out of control and out of touch. Lawyers make up the majority of the Congress, with this type of majority, how can their really represent the American people. Where are the doctors, businessmen, farmers and others who could speak for the population. Why is the reform of the campaign never fully treated? Could it be that money talk?

Congress members will receive a salary of between $ 150,000 to $ 250,000. That's quite a bit more than the average American. They will also receive a pension for life, even if they are on a term of 2 years serving. They are voting itself raises, without the consent of the taxpayer. Our founding fathers served in Congress for nothing! They also make not a career.

Congressional leaders will never this issue because it is their job and they want the perks that go along with it. It comes to taking the American people to express their objections against this abuse of power. The American people should vote from each sitting and Congress wake up and realize that change will take place.

Both major political parties should be aware that the Americans across the country are getting tired of the lack of leadership that exists. Conservatives, moderators and Liberals in both parties must be a wake up call. Americans want real change, not the blame game that continues to play out in the media. Americans want their jobs back. Those who Congress allowed to leave for other countries. We want our industrial base back. We want our elected representative to do their work or out of the way and let real leaders taking a shot at it. The American people are tired of "business as usually" mentality that seems to prevail in Congress and in Washington.

Politics can no longer be for a couple. Every American regardless of where they live, should be involved. We need to stop looking at colour, religious preference or any other barrier. We must be involved and informed. We need people who we can and we must be leaders.

If a working wife and mother, I am very aware of the difficult times that we live in. With a high level of unemployment in this country to find families in difficult to make ends. Our political leaders in local, provincial and federal levels are too far from the average American to understand our concern.

Time and time again we express our opinion and the media ignore us or simple view us as simple minded. We tell our so-called legal representatives what we want or don't want and they ignore us or bend to special interests.

While a person may not turn the tide, I have the correct ad opportunity to speak of a perspective on the current political and social sphere in this country.

A description of the project for the Congress

Recent polls show that Americans aren't at all impressed with our U.S. Congress. Really. I know you're shocked to hear it, but it's true. In fact, a recent AP poll shows that 73% of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing, while only 22% approve. These are the lowest numbers in decades. Oh, and in case you're wondering if the question was "leading", it wasn't. Here is specifically what people were asked:

"Overall, do you approve, disapprove or have mixed feelings about the way Congress is handling its job?"

I don't know about you, but I don't think there are a lot of ways to misinterpret that question.

So what's behind all this crankiness? Well, I think a few key factors are coming together in a sort of "perfect storm" for members of Congress. What are they? I'm glad you asked.

Reason # 1: Candidates About promising

In the 2006 elections, with Democrats eager to take over the House and Senate, there were a whole lot of promises made by candidates about getting the U.S. out of Iraq quickly. If you haven't noticed, we're still in Iraq. In fact, most of the increase in disapproval ratings comes from annoyed liberal Democrats who assumed that once Democrats took over Congress, all would be well (from their perspective).

Here's the thing, though. Frankly, there's no way in heck that any single member of Congress can have any impact at all on an issue of such national scope-much less quickly. In the legislative process it takes a minimum or 271 policy makers (½ the House plus ½ the Senate plus the President) to reach agreement on anything before it can be implemented. 271 people simply aren't going to make quick decisions.

Clearly, candidates and incumbents alike do a dis service to their constituents when they promise things that, because of the nature of the institution, they can't deliver. As citizens, we have a responsibility to call them on it every once in a while, right?

Reason # 2: No One Understands What "The Job" Is

But the problem isn't just with unscrupulous politicians making promises they can't keep. In fact, a major part of the problem is that very few people-candidates and citizens alike-have any idea what "Congress ' job" is! When asked, most people would say that it is Congress ' job to pass legislation. Period. So naturally it's disappointing when we hear that of the 10,000 bills introduced in a Congressional session, only about 4% pass.

The truth is, though, that while Congress as an institution is the branch of our government designated to make laws as necessary and appropriate, it is the job of individual members of Congress to represent the interests of the district or state they've been elected to serve. More often than not, these two objectives are at odds. It's like asking United Airlines to run a national flight schedule while count individual pilots they can fly wherever they want (granted, this summer it's felt a little like that).

It seems to me that to clarify the position for candidates and citizens alike, we need a job description for members of Congress, maybe something along the following lines:

Wanted. Genial, ethical, trustworthy, highly intelligent, photogenic worker who plays well with others. Must be willing to fight tooth and nail for the interests of his or her region while also maintaining a national perspective. Will be responsible for approximately 750,000 to several million customers, depending on the region. Must be able to work independently, but not TOO independently.

Duties include responding to several thousand to several million communications per month, meeting with customers as requested, introducing and pursuing policy initiatives and attending meetings as called at random by institution leadership. Must be willing to work 24 hours per day, seven days a week. Will need to raise own funds to maintain position (on own time).

Benefits include salary that must be used to maintain two households, full health coverage and pension, the occasional under $ 25 lunch and the thrill of being called "The Honorable." Workers will also be treated with deference by many (and with derision by many more). In addition, effective workers will have the ability to make a difference for people in their communities

OK, I'll grant that this doesn't include a full description of either the duties or the benefits, but it does, hopefully give us a different perspective on what Congress "does." I'll be the first to admit that many current members of Congress are under qualified for the position, and that's why we have elections.

Reason # 3: Citizens Expect Too Much

Finally, fueled by the combination of candidates about-promising and a lack of understanding about what Congress does, citizens have come to expect too much from Congress. There it is. I've said it. I know that many people will tell me that "we pay their salaries" and that "we have a right to expect more" and I agree! We should expect a great deal from our representatives in government.

What should we expect of them? We should expect them to represent the interests of the region they are elected to serve in the best way they can during the consideration of legislation. And what should we expect of Congress as an institution? We should expect Congress to very slowly and very deliberately, with much rancor, debate and compromise, pull all the various interests together into one cohesive whole.

Hmm, seems like that's what's happening. Maybe it's a little too much "rancor, debate and compromise" for the majority of Americans and, if so, it's definitely time to look at how the institution is structured. Because believe me, the U.S. Congress will never become a lean, mean, policy-making machine without some major changes.

All that said, it doesn't seem reasonable or responsible to leave it at "gee, that's how Congress." I mean, we all want a government that we can approve of and believe in, right? So, how can you and your organization make a difference? Here are a few ideas:

* Help advocates understand what Congress can and cannot do for them. There are some resources on my site that may be useful. Or you can download our advocacy checklist in our Article Vault. Another great resource is Open Congress

* Please note that candidates know that making promises they can't keep is grounds for dismissal. At the same time, be clear about your criteria-one great way to do so is through a candidate survey. If you're considering running one, let us know! We might be able to help.

* Vote! If you think a member of Congress doesn't live up to the job description, find someone who will. Register to vote at http://www.beavoter.org

* Come up with your own ideas for reform-if you want a Congress that will "get things done" and/or is "more responsive" then help take the steps necessary to get there (recognizing that those goals may be mutually exclusive). Do you think we should have fewer Representatives? A different process? More public participation? Share your ideas and your enthusiasm!

Armed with your ideas, support and positive advocacy efforts, perhaps we can make Congress an institution we can all be proud of-or at least not be really, really annoyed at!

Follow a Bill through Congress

Error in deserializing body or reply message for operation translate. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 8, position 675.

The United States Congress is a bicameral legislature. It is the Legislative Branch, which is the law-making branch of the three branches of the federal government. Our representatives act in certain ways and the houses act in certain ways-creating legislation that, in turn, may or may not become the law of tomorrow.

The term "congress" just seems to comfortably sum up the two units that make it up. Many just think of the congress being a "whole" unit. Historically, the House of Representatives has been more of the "people 's" house of congress. It was the only part of the three branches of government to be elected by a direct election of the people. The Senate, which had been constitutionally elected by state legislature, is elected by direct vote today as a result of the 17th Amendment in 1913.

The House of Representatives is tied a little more closely to the people than the Senate. Mike Thompson is a Democrat, however, in California's 53rd district, he was not just elected by California's traditional Democratic Value's. In a Valley District, there is a lot of conservative thinking that runs with agribusiness. He has a full load to balance when voting. At one time he can't cut school benefits, however, it would be the end of his career if he cut money for farm subsidies. Every two years he is up for re-election.

Senators, in general focus on their state and the nation in their six-year term. They help write and push bills that get them seen well in the eyes of their constituents, and, in the eyes of the nation. Senators stand on the breast or national office and are often jockeying to launch further careers into politics with the policies they write and vote for.

Congressmen log-roll with colleagues. If a republican voted on a farm-reform bill that Thompson wrote, Thompson may vote republican against his party line to protect his ally. One does not burn bridges. If a congressman has not researched a bill, he will simply vote with his or her because allegiance to the party tops all else. Often President of the United States, lobbyists, and Political Action Committees who have funded the campaigns put pressure on which way the voting goes, as well.

The two houses of congress act quite differently, however, they are quite similar, as well. The House is composed of 435 members as compared to the Senate's 100. We are currently in the 110th Congress.

On the surface, they look very similar, as both the House and Senate are broken down into a bunch of committees and sub committees. Standing Committees are always in existence, such as the House Rules Committee. Special Committees handle investigations such as impeachments. Joint Committees co join the house and the senate on big projects such as global warming. Lastly, there are Conference Committees, which position temporarily but are always in existence. These make dis simi lar bills similar to be given to the President for signing.

Due to its size, alone, the House of Representatives must be much more structured. The most important committee in the house is The House Rules Committee. It works under the direction of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D) APPROX. She decides in which order, if at all, bills will be heard. She can schedule a bill early or "table" it so that it is never heard.

The house has limited debate. Pelosi can issue three types of rules for debate. One is open rule-once the bill is on the floor, any member can offer amendment. Another is closed rule-only those that sponsored the bill can amend it. Lastly is the Restrictive Rule, which is anything the Rules Committee wants it to be. In the house, all amendments must be germane to the bill.
The Senate has unlimited debate and is not as partisan. The majority leader looks at legislation, it is asked, "All in favor say 'aye, ' all opposed say, ' no, '" and the Senate either works on the bill or not based on a simple majority.

In the senate, the attach riders to bills. These do not have to be germane. An Agriculture bill can have an amendment about deep space exploration. Senators begin to debate in a "filibuster," so that a bill they do not like eventually dies on the floor when it hits a "hold" period. A cloture vote or sixty senators can end this filibuster. For six years, democrats have been filibuster ing Bush's nominees.

When we look the process, we can see why only about ten percent of bills become law. Out of 11,000 proposals, there are about 150 laws each year. A bill originates in a senator or representative's respective chamber of congress. A bill raising taxes must originate in the house.
If the house committee approves, it goes to the Speaker of the House. Right there she can table the bill, where it must wait two years for reintroduction. If introduced, it gets a number.

Once the bill is introduced, the appropriate committee looks at it. Say it is a trade bill. (A) committee on foreign affairs might look at it. Right there the bill might end if this committee disapproves.

It may get approved and/or amended where it is marked up and testimony is heard. Most lobbying is done to kill bills. The bill is likely more trouble than it is worth. Here the bill may that to a "no" vote.

Again, it goes to a full standing committee, where again it can that, be amended, or voted on. Except in times of war, such as the patriot act, a bill can take fifteen years to become law.
If the bill has made it thus far, it then goes to the rules committee, where Pelosi decides what kind of debate, if any, the bill will get. If it gets none or is placed at the bottom of the list, again, it could die. Even if it goes fully through the debate, without a simple majority, which is the yes or no we see on CNN, the bill dies.

If it passes the house, it gets a number, HR--. The house author finds a senator to sponsor the bill. It becomes SR----. In the senate, the bill gets all kinds of riders attached to it, and, again, it must pass by a simple majority. From here, if it does pass, it goes to a conference committee to reconcile the two bills. Again it can die for another two years.

From here the bill goes to the President. He can sign the bill; here it becomes law. He can veto the bill, where it takes a 2/3 supermajority of both houses of congress for the bill to become law. He can do nothing, where, after ten days, the bill becomes law. He can also do a pocket veto if he is given the bill within ten days of the end or Congress's session. Here, if he does nothing, the bill dies. Congress and Presidential approval were intended to be an elaborate filter or indirect democracy.

Portland Salsa Congress-A hit or Bust?

Usually when one thinks of salsa congresses, they think "big events with big names kept in a well known hotel and close to a major airport-right? One can expect from a three days (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) non stop Salsa workshops, performances and dancing until the early hours of the dawn; enough to meet any Salsaholic desire.

I recently attended the Portland Salsa Congress. Although I haven't been to as many conferences as some of my other colleagues, I have enough (Chicago, Seattle, Salt Lake City) to know, that all the previous descriptors the Portland Salsa Congress was not with the exception of the big names. The fact that the only thing the Portland Salsa Congress had going on, was the big names, does not necessarily make it a bad thing, though. On the contrary, this was just as much of a positive for the event, than negative.

Yes, the Portland Salsa Congress the greatest weakness, the small location, the Tiffany-Center. Since there is only one main hall, it means that there is only one area to dance in, practice, practice and lessons. Whereas in the larger conferences there are multiple rooms so that all of this could occur at the same time. On top of that there was no air conditioning-so it was sometimes a bit cramped.

But if you choose to look at the glass half full, you will realize that the Tiffany Center, is an older, picturesque and "charming" building with hardwood floors. I compare it with the century Ballroom in Seattle, or the Ballroom Willowbrook in greater Chicagoland area. Big enough for a few hundred people.

This location promoted a more intimate and friendlier generally positive experience. During the event I had the privilege of organizing the performers before they went on stage. And you know what? For the most part, these stars of the event were approachable, you know man. And as the Congress the more down to earth progressed, just like you or me, they were.

As the Portland Salsa Congress was wrapping up I started to get that feeling when you realize you that something good is about to end. Having spent a whole 3 days non-stop dancing and to me that it is probably going to be a while before I get to see some of these people-get was I'm going to miss these guys? (Well I get it-I will stop with the Mummy; p).

So for those of you who didn't attend, missed your a relatively small Congress, with good music, great performance and a good amount of Salsa dancing (that's for the PDX-area). But in the middle of the presences of internationally renowned Albert Torres, Christian & Liz lira, John & Liz of Salsamania, and finally, Eli & yen that brought the House down, believe it or not, you have a missed chance to interact with some of the best, friendliest, Salseros around.

Hastings International Chess Congress

The Hastings International Chess Congress is an annual chess Congress in Hastings, Sussex around the beginning of the year. The main event is the Hastings premier tournament, which is traditionally a 10 to 16 player tournament held in addition to an open challengers event.

History of Chess in Hastings

The Norman introduced Chess to Hastings-William the Conqueror was a chess player and famous broke a chessboard above the head of his cousin, Louis after accusing him of cheating. Fortunately, the current organizers for chess in Hastings is no longer possible this kind of behavior.

The Hastings International Chess Congress grew out of the huge interest in Chess among the educated classes in the 1880s. In 1882 an advertisement appeared in the local newspaper that read: "a meeting of who bought chess will be held in the Albert Temperance Hotel, Queens Road, Hastings on Wednesday 28 June 1882".

The meeting was attended by a group of professionals and businessmen who formed the Hastings and St Leonards Chess Club. Herbert Dobell was elected Secretary and his continuing tireless engagement meant that regular regional competitions were held, resulting in County matches are played on Hastings for the first time.

By Herbert Dobell father, a jeweller with a shop in Robertson St, was the first Treasurer of the newly formed club. Herbert inherited from the jewellers on his father's death and ran it for the rest of his life. Although only a teenager at the time that Herbert was appointed Secretary went on a temporary basis for 6 months but in order to keep the post for 25 years. Herbert was Club Champion 4 times and later served as the President of the Club from 1921-1938 when he died in Office.

The first Hastings International Chess Congress was held over the Christmas/new year in 1920/21 and with the exception of a break during World War II has taken place since each year. 2009/10 was the 85th Hastings International Chess.

The fact that the Hastings Congress takes place every year, thanks to the tireless organizing Committee and the commitment of the Hastings and St Leonards Chess Club. The broader chess community continues to Hastings Borough Council of gratitude for their continued support along with various local sponsors.

In addition to the main premier event that is by invitation naar's the world's top players, there is the challengers portion, which is open to all players. The winner of the challengers event deserves an invitation of the following year at the Prime Minister.

In addition to the annual international tournament at the Congress of Christmas, Hastings has also host international tournaments at irregular intervals in the summer Congress.

The Congress took place in Hastings Town Hall, Waverly Hotel, White Rock Pavilion, Sun Lounge in St Leonards, Falaise Hall and Horntye Sports Centre.

Reflections on 2006 midterm elections: USA or World Congress?

Weeks before the Congressional midterm elections, was much has been said and written about the possibilities and consequences of the outcome of the election, 2006. There was great indignation in the u.s. among both Democrats and Republicans; campaign tracts, meetings, and TV shows got everyone in the us leaving about what's going to happen on 7 November. However, compared with previous elections was not a new thing of the USA. The polity went that its usual way, the only difference with the last Congress elections after the cold war, was the rise of foreign policy as the main concern in the u.s. elections. The issue of foreign policy, although worthy in terms of acting as a turning point for Congress trend, is not the concern of this article. Instead, the global responses to the elections and in particular the role of the Congress in global affairs.
Between branches who are active in the Government of the United States, namely the legislative, Executive and judiciary, the Executive Branch and the President responsible for Foreign Affairs. The Constitution also gives power to the Congress and the judiciary to curb the Executive adventurous decisions by means of legislation and the budget. A very important matter which Congress against the President was the war Power Act (1973), after the fiasco of Viet Nam, which limited the ability of Presidents to enter into a war without congressional approval.

9/11 and the emergency status in the u.s. allowed Bush to get the go-ahead from the Congress to the war against terrorism (specifically at that time about Afghanistan).
The next war, as was clear then, had it not been for the defence of the security of the United States and dealing with the Iraqi threat. War from a global Emperor attracted so much criticism both within and outside the United States. This led many countries feel threatened by the hegemonic power in both hard and soft power sort of deal with the so-called global insurgents "axis of evil". The elections of 2006 was an end to the support of the population of the "war" and many people outside the US was glad to see Republicans los.

Now among the many consequences of this difficult "no" to Republican aggression, one can watch the election and the global responses from a different point of view that globalisation. Opponents of neoliberal globalization attack the way that globalization is more benefits to hegemonic powers (particularly the US) and call for the restructuring of the domains or abolition of international organizations in the name of a more worldwide single Parliament and organization. Regardless of their criticisms on the way to today's organizations, the solutions proposed are far from being real and there is no road map proposed by the anti-globalisation movement. Of course, some scholars such as Walden Bello proposed "deglobalization", which again is far from what would be the actual process.

In reality, the writer believes that the u.s. Congress international organisations such as the United Nations has replaced. For example, compare the war against Iraq, if Congress would not allow the President to conduct of the war, Bush would be in real trouble, but UN censure not so many problems.
The result of this replacement showed himself in two areas regarding congressional elections, the global attention for the 2006 elections and the lobbying effort to each point available in the election.

If we look at the fear existing in the pre-election period and the response to the results, there is certainly a high amount of global concern. Some places like the Middle East and Latin America responded as if the election was theirs. Watch it was another way, there is so much talk about biracials and so-called non-Americans entering into Congress. One might refer to Hispanic-Americans, Afro-Americans or even Muslim-American to specify how you globalised (or some would say multicultural) VS Congress tends to be.

There are some uncertainties in terms of this global Congress if the amount of the global justice present in, or the question of how Congress would react to his past that always left Congress on internal rather than external problems of the United States? And many other questions that would even deny such a universality. But what is obvious is the worldwide status and that Congress has probably the 2008 presidency would get.

How to Fix a Failing Congress

Approval ratings for Congress are at an all-time low. Seventy percent of Americans polled believe that Congress is doing a poor job. Most Americans believe Congress is failing and not bad in running our country. Why? The growing federal deficit is undoubtedly the main reason, but there are many other reasons. Lobby groups seem to control Congress in the eyes of the Americans. We like to think we choose a member of the House or the Senate and that they represent our interests, but it is clear that the lobbies in the driving seat in Congress has become the most. These groups help fund, Congress elections and therefore, they are able to influence Congress more than voters. Legislative surplus is another.

Americans see Congress as nothing more than an invoice making machine. A law shall be adopted after the other. Idleness is another problem inherent in our bi-cameral legislative branch. Democrats and Republicans never seem to see and the byproduct of this Congress is a stagnant. The few things we want to Congressional action, just never seem to get get accomplished. The reform of the tort in the healthcare, balanced budget legislation, simplification of the tax. The list goes on and that nothing is done in the Congress with the exception of those that seems to be directly to the deficits or benefits from special interest groups. Americans are just tired of Congress and our patience has run out. So what can be done?

The heart of the problem:
The real problem with Congress is not the representatives that we choose to Office. The real problem is the workings of Congress. The infrastructure must be reformed. The fact is, most in Congress put an inordinate amount of time raising money from special interest groups and lobbyists. They spend less time on legislative efforts than in the campaign. Why? Because they need money to be re-elected. Campaign takes a lot of their time. If we want to minimize the amount of time spent by the Congress raising money for their campaigns should we need to campaign for re-election in the first place. How? Term limits. By term limits this campaign we can increase machine shut down once and for all. In my opinion is the best way to do this to limit of members of the House and Senate for a term of six years. We would spread term limits for elected representatives every two years.

For example, a third in 2012 would be elected for a term of six years; in 2014, the second a third and in 2016 the third a third party. By the spread of the term of six years, we assure that one group (i.e. Democrats) would not be swept into Office all at once, and the Americans are stuck with a partisan group for six years.

Term limits would eliminate the need to campaign for re-election. Campaign requires a lot of time. Often as much as 50% of the elected official time is spend on the campaign. How would term limits eliminate this wasted time? Elected officials would have a term of six years and that's it. They have six years to get the job done. Since there would be no need for campaign, we would minimize the special interests of influence and pressure groups currently enjoy. As a bonus, if Congress had no campaign for reelection, should they spend most of their time in the legislative field. We would, in fact, a Congress that 100 percent of the time on the legislative front, instead of only 50% of the time. We'd get twice the work for the same pay. Sounds good, doesn't it?

Congress would, of course, never agree to this. They want the existence of special interest groups and interest groups. Why? Because many in Congress going on in order for these groups to work and to millions in exchange for influence peddling. Term limits would the removal of a very big payday for members of Congress. The only available means to change the infrastructure of the Congress by the creation of term limits is via a constitutional amendment to the grass roots level; the State legislators. And it would be leadership at the highest level in order to put on the map. We had to choose a President running on a platform of congressional reform through the creation of a constitutional amendment. Although unlikely, it is possible, given the very low approval ratings that Congress now endures. The reality is, if we have the infrastructure of the Congress did not change, we never the influence special interest groups and lobbyists can eliminate about them. And this influence often overrides the good of the country.

Congress should veto of CAP and trade and Healthcare reform legislation

server temporarily unavailable

In deze onzekere en fragiele economie moet het duidelijk dat de besluiten goedkeuren of afwijzen van voorgestelde wetgeving van Cap en handel en Healthcare hervorming mogelijk onder de meest kritische dat onze wetgevers hebben gemaakt in decennia. Het goede nieuws is dat met elke dag die voorbijgaat de kosten en voordelen van elk voorstel worden steeds duidelijker en een groeiende consensus is dat elk voorstel moet nadrukkelijk worden verworpen door beide huizen van het congres gebouw. Elk stuk wetgeving vertegenwoordigt het ergste van de liberale agenda van deze regering, dreigt te duur van onze economie en haar beoogde doel niet zal bereiken.

Cap- and -Trade is bedoeld om te verzachten globale opwarming van de aarde. Die werd berecht en gefaald in Europa en zonder deelname door China, India en andere opkomende industriële economieën, ditmaal ook zal het mislukken. Echter, de scherts vertoning zal veroorzaken elektriciteits kosten opblazen van de kosten van vrijwel alles wat die we consumeren te omhoogschieten. Het zal ook het stimuleren van de industriële bedrijven van de v.s. om te verplaatsen in het buitenland, waar ze kunnen voorkomen zijn zware beperkingen en onze banen met hen nemen. Op dit moment gunst Healthcare hervorming voorstellen enige vorm van regering gecontroleerde of gesponsorde programma. Die voorstellen zal waarschijnlijk failliet van de natie. We moeten de hervorming van de gezondheidszorg die zal uitbreiden van verzekerings dekking voor iedereen en verbeteren van de kwaliteit en beschikbaarheid van de gezondheidszorg voor al onze burgers. Die hervorming moet ook voorkomen dat kosten rijzen de pan uit op lange termijn te betalen voor zichzelf.

Sommigen van mening dat het in behandeling faillissement van Californië, New York en New Jersey, bastions van het liberalisme en gratis overheids uitgaven voor decennia, bieden een glimp van de toekomst van Amerika, als een stuk van de wetgeving, zoals voorgesteld, wet wordt. De lid staten proberen om hun staat wetgevers verantwoording voor hun respectieve predicaments en sommige overweegt her schrijven van hun staat grond wet ter voorkoming van onverantwoordelijke overheids ing rij pen in de toekomst. Wij moeten het Amerikaanse Congres ook verantwoordelijk voor haar daden houden voordat het te laat voor onze gehele natie is.

Het is een zielig feit van het leven dat Congres kan niet altijd worden vertrouwd om te handelen in ons eigen belang en nog meer pathetisch dat onze enige toevlucht als een natie is te stemmen van de leden van de kantoor jaar na de schade is gedaan. Na meer dan twee honderd jaar wieden van het slechte via verkiezingen, is het beste dat wij erin geslaagd om te doen plaats biedt aan een Congres dat is moeilijk te houden van onze eigen wetten en handhaving van het vertrouwen van het publiek. De trieste waarheid is dat veel te weinig uitzonderingen na, veel van deze mannen en vrouwen zou kunnen tijd in de gevangenis dienen als ze niet is gekozen om tijd te dienen in het Congres.

Echter, als trustees van onze regering, Congres heeft een verplichting tot handelen in het beste belang van de natie. Ik begrijp niet hoe overhaast rammen via beide stuk van duizend-pagina-plus belangrijke wetgeving, vooral zonder het lezen (zoals ze deed het stimulus plan eerder dit jaar), is in het beste belang van onze natie. De ingangs datums voor de meeste vereisten opgelegd door ofwel-Cap en handel of hervorming van de gezondheidszorg-is vele jaren in de toekomst, dus wat is de haast?

Afwezig een echte beroep, congres dient te "eten eigen koken" uit de eerste hand in de gevolgen van zijn acties. Het moet worden gedwongen om de gevolgen voor de opwarming van de aarde van haar leden jetting uit om bij te wonen frivole beurten. Als congres acties niet onze economie, moeten haar eigen gelederen en miljoen dollar kantoor begrotingen, betaald met belastings dollars, dienovereenkomstig worden gestroomlijnd. Bovendien, congres pensioenen moeten krimpen als sociale zekerheid en Medicare voordelen krimpen en congres dient te worden belet hun salarissen te verhogen tot de economie aanzienlijk herstelt. President Obama campagne hebben gevoerd voor hervorming van de gezondheidszorg door ziekte kosten verzekeringen voor iedereen vergelijkbaar met die van de leden van het Congres voor te stellen en ik hoop dat hij zijn belofte houdt. Als een versie van de huidige gezondheidszorg voorstellen in recht gaat, kijk ik uit naar het chatten met mijn lokale Congres lid als we in lijn voor uren wachten te zien van onze artsen.

Why Congress fails Americans?

The founders of our nation and the Framers of our Constitution certainly did not foresee the day when the Federal Government three branches, the public would have the least confidence in Congress. In fact, the audience a little less confidence in Congress than in HMOs. At 14% is the Group of Americans with "large" or "a lot" of confidence in the Congress the lowest in Gallup's history of this measure--and the lowest of any of the 16 settings tested in this year's survey confidence in institutions. The Supreme Court received 34 percent trust and the horrible Presidency of George w. Bush 25 percent — nothing to be proud of.

The Congressional elections of 2006 showed that switching between the two major political parties an act of utter futility. We have a dual failure of Congress to fulfil its constitutional responsibilities and to serve the public. In the end, Democrats may have a different style, but like Republicans also incompetent, corrupt and arrogant. Things are so bad become institutional and cultural that our way of a dysfunctional and destructive Congress do not vote, as long as the duopoly of the two parties its grip on our political system maintains.

We no longer have a significant number of members of Congress that above the partisan political priorities to the good of the nation and the integrity of our Constitution.

Our Constitutional Republic really work Congress needs the courage and integrity to use of its constitutional powers to protect American freedom, security, health, safety and welfare. Even the most distracted and cynical Americans now see that Congress has done next to nothing to comply with its constitutional responsibility.

Worst of all, Congress has allowed the Bush Presidency to accumulate many more power than our Constitution permits. Even after years of arrogant disrespect by Bush and Cheney for our Constitution and the Congress itself is Congress is too cowardly to do what they are supposed to do to the structure of our Federal Government. It does not have the constitutional remedy of impeachment-used not to punish Bush-but for the preservation of constitutional limitations for the Presidency.

Add: the failure to protect the rule of law; the failure to control spending and reduce our debt; the failure to control our borders and protecting our national sovereignty; the failure to stop the insane war in Iraq; the failure to stop the many forms of corruption of the Congress itself; the failure to restore public confidence in our elections; the failure to stop the excesses of globalisation that destroys our middle class; the failure to address rising economic inequality; the failure to solve our broken health care system; and much more.

All this has led to the horrific runaway politics. Get elected, power grab and enjoy the benefits of the Office asset reign. Hundreds of members of Congress in the House and Senate-his mental midgets, painful blowhards, chronic liars, outright Crooks, corporate lackeys and elderly buffoons. They are the protectors of the plutocracy over the defenders of democracy. And that too many think they should president.

So what can the 86 percent of Americans without confidence in Congress?

Set aside partisan positions and stop re-electing members of Congress. Only a handful of the incumbents deserve to be re-elected. A very few who never supported the war in Iraq, do not use a pork spending to reward their supporters and have worked to accuse of Bush, for example.

Now it's time to choose from independents and third party candidates to Congress. If your lens is the extremely low quality of both the Republican and democratic members of Congress sees shows that even a random selection of ordinary Americans would probably do better. But we have thousands of Independents and third party members with substantial social and elective office experience that deserve the chance to recover from the representative democracy. How can we do worse? Let's throw the bums and real change a chance.

We also need much greater public awareness that Congress for a very long time, the part of article V of our Constitution that gives us the right to a Convention to propose changes to obey the Constitution. Such an article V Convention was created by the Framers as an alternative to Congress amendments. They made this Convention option-a temporary fourth estate give us a direct democracy-in the case that Americans a day lost confidence in the Federal Government. That day has arrived!

Even Congressman Ron Paul, self-proclaimed champion of the Constitution, the Treaty of an article V not supported.

There are many constitutional amendments that public discussion, especially the ones to make our Government work earn they way our Constitution intended to work. We have our Constitution to prevent power-hungry Presidents, useless congresses and Supreme Courts to try out new public policies.

In addition, the one and only required that an article V Convention specified has already been met, because much more than two-thirds of the State lawmakers have called for such a Convention. More information about this Congress disobedience of the Constitution on http://www.foavc.org, the website of the new national, nonpartisan group of friends of the V Treaty article.

Why did Congress Americans failed? Because Americans have allowed that the failure of them. Now it's time for Americans to claim their sovereign constitutional power and take back their country. That means you!

Congress, Arizona Real Estate

Arizona history and real estate are two topics that have long been interested in both Arizonans, and those of other countries. Wickenburg, Arizona is a somewhat famous town not far from Phoenix, Arizona, referred to as the Dude Ranch capital of the world. Just northeast of the city, but not nearly as well known, is a smaller town known as Congress. Congress has approximately 2000 inhabitants and is situated near the southern edge of Yavapai County. The city for a brief period in the late 1800s was characterized by a booming gold mine. The mine has since closed and there isn't a large, vibrant company. Of the city is relatively high at about 38 square miles, with a very low population density.

For those interested in real estate in Congress feeds the city in the Phoenix-based Arizona regional Multiple Listing Service (ARMLS). A recent MLS search turned out to be about 60 homes available on the market, four pending deals and seven deals over the last six months had sold. The median price of active listings was approximately $ 235,000, but the median price of the sold listings was approximately $ 101,000 if the bottom three sold listings were all mobile or manufactured homes. Rough plots were on the map.

There were approximately 63 active listings, no current listings and five listings in the last six months had sold. One listing sold for over $ 900,000. This offer has been consulted for more than a 7 acre parcel of land with commercial potential, however. Some of the basic House plots that are listed in the Conference are available for as little as $ 40,000. There is one active offer of about $ 8 million. This includes more than 330 acres of residential country currently zoned for 4 hectare minimum lot. Some of the selling points for certain plots of land overlooking the mountains, large open spaces, large boulders and saguaros, natural vegetation, proximity Government country, city water and electric, possibility of horses to property, and minimum size requirements for site building built houses.

The North West Valley of Phoenix, surprise and Peoria were some of the fastest growing areas in particular during the housing boom. Some investors extrapolate that growth further Northwest in areas such as Wittman, Wickenburg, Arizona and Congress, although it might take many, many years before roads houses pop up in the area. The area see other property buyers simply as a cheaper alternative for ranches or second homes, compared with the high cost of Central and Northern Arizona markets such as Prescott, Payson or Flagstaff.

Most real estate companies who specialize in Congress are actually located in much larger Wickenburg, Arizona. However, a member can technically ARMLS Congress properties in the MLS or working with interested buyers in Congress. Offices that memberships in both Phoenix and Prescott MLS systems may have an advantage in dealing with Congress realty since they both systems in the property list. Nearby Yarnell properties tend to be displayed in the notification of Prescott and sometimes buyers will look at both of these areas.

In addition, the Arizona Association of Realtors Conference officially assigned to the Prescott system, although the actual data tends to indicate that the Phoenix MLS system (ARMLS) the MLS of choice. This is probably because of the close ties that Congress to Wickenburg, Arizona. Many residents of the Congress working and shopping in Wickenburg, Arizona.

We have a 100% turnover in Congress

A few years ago it became clear to me that political stinks, and that the stinkiest part of politics is the US Congress. Judging by the fact that the rise in all our elections from 40 to 50%, is apparently a great many voters, and just not voting

So I made myself a commitment to start a campaign to "Tro Da Bums Out!" (All)

First, I looked term limits. Because 75% of Americans term limits for the Congress like, I thought it would be easy. But ... we need to get a bill for term limits thru first Congress, which has never been not going to happen!

Then I looked at article v of the Constitution, which says that "the people" a "Convention for amendments". But this was already tried by Bill Walker http://www.foavc.org of, and returned by the High Council in 2004, wrongly (imho), and must be tried. But we have to wait for a more "originalist" Court.

Finally, after listening to many website discussions on this topic, I have come to realize that there is an unstoppable, foolproof method of achieving the objective of reform Congress. Simply put, we voters must never place everyone in Congress.

If enough voters cling to this simple principle through various election cycles, reelections in Congress would fall. This would make a great impact on the behaviour of all incumbents remain in Congress. In addition, it would be a lot of freshman elected in such amended electoral climate have no doubt that they will serve very concise unless they vote as responsible legislator instead of party hacks. And they would be much more likely to vote for a term limited amendment account just to more than one term.

The big question is: How do we get Americans to stop reelecting their bad Congress? We have not to succeed of 100%. Just enough to Parliament reelections of her current 98% to approximately 65% decline. Who get their attention!

And if we it up through 2010 and 2012 to 2014 celebrate, we will make a big difference.

When the media talks about it, many, many people who still will not start his voice again to vote because they see that they can make a difference.

A second question is: who should I vote if I don't want my sedentary place? Suggestions for both the Democrats or the Republicans:

1. If your man was against lost in your primary, vote for the man who beat him.
2. If he told during the vote of the primary, and won, for the other major party boy was.
3. If the other party of the big man also won a unanimous primary, then vote for a 3rd party.

What we want is a 100% turnover in Congress, on both sides of the aisle.

Please bear in mind that the goal here is to beat all incumbents of the two major parties, so the simplest decision is to vote for a 3rd party candidate. Or, when in doubt, rate 'em out!

Let's stop paying the salaries of the Congress

We can have more than $ 90 million per year to save Congress pay because they don't represent us; they are their major campaign contributors represent.

This year after a 2.5% salary increase, each of the 530 "ordinary" members of Congress deserve $ 169,300, the four majority and minority leaders are each paid $ 191,265, and the salary of the President of Parliament is $ 221,092.50-make their combined salary of $90,715 157.50. Moreover, Congress is scheduled for an automatic 2.8% increase in 2009. It will amaze you as these greedy careerists, this increase in these tough economic times accept?

Today in this environment, dollar-distorted represent democratic and Republican solons mainly their campaign donors at the expense of this nation and its citizens. American tax payers legislators with salaries, offices, staff, health care, generous pension schemes, and extensive perks, but we really need to be represented lobbyists.

It is a time consuming, difficult, full-time task raising money for the campaign for the elections. Members of the House of representatives have a relatively short time to raise money because they have to be running for re-election every two years. Even senators, whose elections take place every six years, find that most of their time cultivating clients and ask for money to spend. They build large campaign chests to discourage any opposition in the forthcoming elections. Donors expect consistent loyalty for their financing; their lobbyists carefully monitor the voting records of the beneficiaries. The Congress seniority system is a great motivator for these politicians to remain in function because membership and chairs of the most important commissions are earned by the length of time in Office. This Commission positions of power and perks, but just as importantly, facilitate attracting major campaign donations.

The progression self-serving politicians use to determine their vote on legislation is revealing:

Conducting surveys to indicate the will of their constituents; How will the impact of their interests; Please it will be in charge of their political party; It will present a case, for an opponent to introduce, in the forthcoming elections; Will it win a favor from a fellow legislators?

Note that there are no attention of: either the legislation is good for the United States.

Careerists, the ' to blame game ' use to distract attention from their performance. In the early childhood learning we quickly to others to escape responsibility. Members of Congress are guilt masters ' in the attention of their poor performance. When crisis by their obtuse micro-mismanagement, they accuse the other party. Other scapegoats are the CEOs of the industry and the heads of bureaucracies. This tactic is effectively polarized the country, so that the Americans condemn blindly the opposing political party instead of recognizing these guys and their selfish motives are the problem. Do not be misled by this divisive tactics, the fault lies with the candidates from both political parties.

The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fiasco was the direct responsibility of the Congress by encouraging to accept tax unhealthy mortgages; even raising the threshold of the allowable size of mortgages when it was clear that there was a serious subprime problem. The hypocrites of bank committees of both houses, behaves like South American caudillos, hearings to berate the heads of these two organisations to mask their debt.

Again, the big three car crisis was caused primarily by a series of legislation enacted by the years by this career solons. The National Labor Relations Act of the Wagner Act in 1935, providing the right to trade unions to organise and collective bargaining empowered the United Auto workers essentially over of these automakers. The corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) Regulation further hampered the big three automakers. Foreign automakers, with plants in this country, chose to pay penalties in place to comply with this restriction. Congressional hearings about bailing out General Motors, Chrysler and Ford provides a stage for this shameless legislators embarrassment of the CEOs of these companies.

Granted, each political party different philosophies. However, passing career politicians these principles when there is a conflict with a big campaign contribution of interests or if a problem enough popular with the voting public. Republican congressmen, supposedly for smaller government and against welfare programs, voted for the popular Medicare prescription drug program for fear of losing their seats in Congress. Democratic congressmen, supposedly for the little guy, against the school voucher program, are beneficial to the minorities and the poor, because the teachers Union voted against it. Lately, used special interests more subtle ways of influence on members of Congress as generously donate to the foundations of the family members of Congress members.

A telling example, where members of Congress priorities, is one of the 2100 allocated, including 8.5 billion dollars added to this year's Defense Bill. The Ministry of defence wanted to switch from M291 kit to a new, more efficient Reactive Skin detoxification lotion, the lives of American soldiers exposed to chemical weapons to save. Decontaminate powder in the old M291 kit is difficult to apply, messy, irritating to eyes and errors of the carrier gas mask. The new lotion, RSDL, that the FDA enthusiastically recommended, is easy to use and is seven times more effective than M291. Rohm and Haas, brought the Pennsylvania company that makes the resin for M291 has more than 2 million dollars lobbying Congress to prevent the Department of Defense to replace the M291-kits (including $ 7,000 senator Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and more than $ 47,000 to Senator Arlen Specter, R-PA). Truetech, the New York Corporation that mixed the resin and mounted the kits in Arkansas, also lobbied to keep the lucrative kit of outdated. Clinton, Schumer, and others a $ 2 million earmark for added D291 kits in 2007. Rohm and Haas got $ 1 million in 2008, and received 4 Truetech. $ 4 million in a secret appropriation of Clinton, Schumer, specter and others. Now, because the forces were forced to buy from the M291-kits that are not used, there are 2.2 million obsolete kits in stock, which will also include the cost of a considerable amount of money to save. This is convincing evidence that these senators will do everything in our power to their careers even at the expense of the well-being of our men and women in uniform.

Tragically, this is not an isolated incident. Earmarks and legislation in favour of campaign employees become the modus operandi of the Congress. We will remain a dysfunctional government to recognize that Americans these self-serving members of Congress their true motives have disguised by the nation to divide into two opposing political camps. Vote this misleading guys out of Office in order to prevent further damage to our wonderful democracy.