Posts Tagged US House Of Representatives
Senator Elizabeth Warren, Banks, And Student Loan Rates
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on May 11, 2013
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is a treasure to behold, and the legislation she has just introduced, to give college students the same low loan interest rate that the big banks get from the Federal Reserve when they borrow money, is a wonderful idea!
Instead of a doubling of student loan interest rates from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent, Warren suggests that the rate be what Wall Street gets from the Federal Reserve–0.75 percent!
Why not, as the big Wall Street banks have caused the Great Recession of 2008, and are still victimizing mortgage holders and credit card owners with outrageous rates, and also forcing many into bankruptcy by intimidation and manipulation?
The big banks need to be put under tight regulation, but of course the Republicans in the House refuse any such thought, and if this is not enough to convince sane people that the GOP is out for the wealthy alone, then what will?
Warren should be applauded for her effort on student loan rates, and fight for fairness, even though it is a long term battle!
And if Hillary Clinton decided ultimately not to run for President, then Warren needs to become the alternative female candidate for President of the United States! She would be an inspiring leader for the American middle class and the poor!
South Carolina Becomes The Worst, Most Embarrassing State In America!
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on May 7, 2013
South Carolina, and particularly, its more “advanced” area, Charleston, had a chance to prove that they have moved beyond the Civil War, and they have failed miserably tonight!
In bringing back the political life of disgraced former Governor Mark Sanford, putting him back in the Congressional seat he held in the 1990s, they have proved that South Carolina is the worst, most embarrassing state in America in the year 2013!
Certainly, South Carolina has had competition from states, including Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Arizona, but a state which could elect such individuals as Governor Nikki Haley, Senator Lindsey Graham, Congressman Joe Wilson, and former Congressman Tim Scott, appointed to replace an equally horrible Senator, Jim DeMint, wins the competition hands down! Now Mark Sanford has been added to the mix!
Meanwhile, the state remains way behind the national average economically and socially, but no worry, as the voters throughout South Carolina seem willing to stick in their Civil War mold, and support the Tea Party Movement, which wishes to bring South Carolina back to the “glory days” of Strom Thurmond, and even further back, John C. Calhoun!
Mark Sanford Vs. Elizabeth Colbert Busch: The Race To Watch On Ability To Overcome A Sex Scandal!
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on May 6, 2013
Former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, the center of a lurid sex scandal, is trying to restart his career by going back to the Congressional seat in Charleston which he held before he became Governor.
Once having Presidential ambitions, which fell by the wayside once he was involved with an Argentine beauty, and disappeared for days without explanation, Sanford now faces the challenge of the candidacy of Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch, the sister of Stephen Colbert, the comedian on Comedy Channel, who is one of the best political comedians in America, along with Jon Stewart of the same channel.
The race is very close, but if Sanford wins, his political career would be revived, and if he loses, he is done with politics, and would go back to his former real estate career.
Can a disgraced politician survive a sex scandal? Well, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana has done so, but that is an exception.
Of course, former President Bill Clinton did so, although not running for office again.
Former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner is considering running for Mayor of New York City, which will be another test of ability to come back from a sex scandal.
Realize that in almost all cases, a sex scandal destroys the career of a politician for good, so the Sanford and, possibly, Weiner cases will be very telling to see if the voters are willing to forgive, if not forget, their transgressions.
We shall see regarding Sanford tomorrow night, and Weiner making a decision to run in the next month before the deadline to file for the New York Mayoralty!
If Hillary Clinton Decided NOT To Run For The Presidency, What Other Women Would Be Potential Presidential Nominees?
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on April 29, 2013
It is assumed by everyone that Hillary Clinton, former First Lady, former New York Senator, and former Secretary of State, will run for the Presidency in 2016, and has an excellent chance to be the first woman President.
But nothing is certain at this point in 2013, and were Clinton to decide NOT to run, the question arises as to whether any other woman politician would be a potential Presidential candidate, and possibly the first woman President.
While Republicans may imagine that New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez or South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley could be future Presidents, or that Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota might try again for the Presidential nomination, one would have to be delusional to the extreme to believe that would be an eventuality in the real world. There is no Republican on the horizon who could be seen as a future, serious candidate for the White House!
However, there are four Democratic women Senators who should be looked at in a serious manner, IF Hillary Clinton were to decide to bow out of the Presidential race, and two of them could be considered serious potential future candidates, even after a two term Hillary Clinton Presidency.
The two women Senators who have an opportunity for 2016 but not in the next decade, due to age, would be Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Claire McCaskill of Missouri.
And the two longer range potential candidates are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.
The most exciting possibility would be Elizabeth Warren, who Wall Street hates, and who is most loved by the liberals in the Democratic Party, with McCaskill, seen as more moderate, and Klobuchar and Gillibrand seen as to the left of McCaskiil, but not as much to the left as Warren.
As long as Hillary Clinton decides to run, these women will be in the background, but all bets are off if she ends up deciding to continue speaking for $200,000 a speech, and to write her memoirs, and avoid the political fray.
The Senate In Crisis A Century After The 17th Amendment
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on April 21, 2013
The US Senate was a very undemocratic institution a century ago, controlled by special interests, including the oil, steel, banking and other trusts and monopolies, and its membership selected by the vote of corrupt state legislatures across the nation.
The Senate was exposed for its faults and corruption by David Graham Phillips in his article in 1906 in Cosmopolitan Magazine, which has been reprinted in 2012, an article of 108 pages, a small book, exposing the corruption of Senate Majority Leader Nelson Aldrich of Rhode Island. This was followed up by other articles in muckraking periodicals, exposing the corruption of other US Senators.
These articles motivated a reform movement, leading to the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, establishing popular vote elections for the US Senate. It did not mean that every Senator elected was brilliant, or a positive force, but at least the people had the final say on who would represent them, as in the US House of Representatives!
Now, a century later, the US Senate is in paralysis, greatly due to the abuse of the filibuster system, which now requires 60 Senators to end a filibuster, while it used to be even worse, 67 before reforms in 1975. The filibuster was originally utilized to stop civil rights advancements, but now it is used to prevent any action on many nominations and many bills, effectively hamstringing any progress or change on anything controversial.
But also, it is clear that special interest groups, similar to those a century ago, but more such groups and more widespread, have made the US Senate captive again.
And with growing differences in population in coastline states, as compared to states in the interior, we are finding the concept of each state having two US Senators, whether they represent millions of citizens, or just hundreds of thousands of citizens, becoming one where states with few people, are able to stop what the majority of the American people want!
Four Democratic Senators, scared to death of the National Rifle Association, end up refusing to support the end of the filibuster on extended background checks on gun sales, and yet these Senators represent small populated states (North Dakota, Alaska, Montana, Arkansas) which represent only about 5.4 million people, out of a national total of 309 million people, meaning they represent 1.6 percent of the people, in a nation in which up to 90 percent, including gun owners, want extended background checks on gun sales.
We allow the 49th 48th, 45th, and 33rd states in population to hamstring the rest of the nation, absolutely insane when one thinks about it, and this is not just true on one issue, but many!
This problem of small populated states,the abuse of the filibuster, and special interest groups (including major corporations) is a situation which threatens resolution of ANY major issue facing the nation in the 21st century, unless, somehow, some kind of reform of an outdated system of the 18th century is brought about, which is extremely unlikely!