Representatives Must Pledge to Represent the People
I get in trouble a lot when the discussion at home turns to politics and government. My wife is a pretty well-informed member of the voting public and I have been a current events and politics nut for going on 35 years. The typical discussion follows an agonizingly consistent pattern: She expresses her anger and all the reasons something should or should not happen, all based on what seems right, logical, or best for the country. Then so often comes the part where I tell her that all of “that” makes no difference because the decisions made by government are mostly based on politics, not reason or common sense. In America, the people argue the issues from right and wrong, patriotic vs. unpatriotic, fair to all vs. favoritism, payer vs. taker, citizen vs. non-citizen, free vs. unfree, etc.
The political class, however, regards this as naive and unsophisticated, the blathering of those who “don’t know how things really work.” To them it is the power game, both at the office-holding level and in the competition for position among themselves, which is the reality. Lying, strong-armed tactics, pork barrel bribery, midnight spending, personal privileges, and backroom corruption are all part of the game, and they admire those who do these things well. Within their ranks, it is most acceptable to act in a manner befitting a political aristocracy and to convey upon oneself the merit to belong in it. The rare politician who is driven by principle, and the one who really means the ethical statements he or she makes, is considered “a problem” to the leaders of their own party and a sop to the members of the other. So too the politician endeavoring to represent the wishes of his or her district against the directives of the party leadership.
In times past, a certain amount of moral corruption was considered acceptable if the politician got the big things right. Today, however, there is no longer any middle ground. The break between the political class and the citizenry in general became a chasm when politicians rigged the game so that incumbency was an almost complete guarantee of reelection. The divide was cut deeper when the major news media decided to view themselves players in the game rather than referees.
The people have never been more angry and afraid; nor has the federal government been more intent on doing whatever it takes to force their power over us at every level. Therein lies the question that will determine the direction America will take in the next ten years: who will win?
WOW! Mr. Pope right on.
This pledge is a not going to change anything. Career politicians will violate it as soon as they think no one is paying attention. Generally, that’s about two days after an election.
The only solution is to start a national grass roots, non-partisan movement to vote against any and every incumbent regardless of party affiliation or past record. Call it the Independence Movement of Independents or something like that.
The House of Reps and one third of the Senate out every two years no matter what. The president out every four. In eight short years (two presidential elections) the government would belong to the people again. Normal people should serve in government for a short time. The career civil servants will be the ‘corporate memory’ required for policy continuation.
Excellent point…though I have the feeling that the Tea Party is lumbering slowly in the direction of forming a new moderate party, since the political makeup is from BOTH major parties. I the main TP’s seem to lean slightly to the left on social legislation, while being fiscally conservative. I suspect that basically, the Tea Party movement can morph into a new party over the next few years if Congress continues to spend recklessly. But, next fall will tell how much of an impact the movement has if large numbers of incumbents are turned out of office. That’s why I support a 28th amendment to the US Constitution:
1. No citizen of the United States shall be elected to the House of Representatives to more than four (4) consecutive, two (2) year terms to office.
2. No citizen of the United States shall be elected to the United States Senate for more than two (2) consecutive, six (6) year terms of office.
3. No citizen of the United States shall receive any retirement benefits from serving in either the United States House of Representatives or the United States Senate.
4. Congress shall not exempt itself from any laws of the United States of America, in whole or in part.
“We have elected the enemy.” Jim Quinn (Quinn and Rose)
In everyday language that us morons can understand. Thank you Mr. Pope!
Jeff, your observations are spot on. I’ve spent many years in manufacturing myself and have suffered from the bad decisions made by our “leaders” that have resulted in the needless devastation of that sector of our economy.
Politicians should be limited to 2 terms; 1 in office and 1 in prison.
There is a organization (GOOOH.COM) that is trying to get a grass roots drive together to promote and support candidates that pledge to adhere to the very principles Mr Pope is suggesting. Please check them out and if you agree with their approach, make sure you forward their internet address to all of you friends and family. We can no longer sit back and allow corruption and special interests to rule our country.
Refreshing reading. I don’t know what your company manufactures, but if I needed it I would buy it from you. Do us a favor and write more articles.
Made a comment early this AM and am wondering if I violated a protocol I’m not aware of? Thanks.
TERM LIMITS!
TERM LIMITS!
TERM LIMITS!
” That Democrats place party loyalty above all else….”
Yeah, read the right wing comments on that RINO, Olympia Snow.
“The best weapon the people have is the vote….”
Sometimes. In 2000, the GOP’s best weapon was the Supreme Court. Today, well just keep totin’ them guns to town hall meetings!
Ooops! I spelled Ms. Snowe’s name wrong. But so did you, Jeff.
Didn’t Burke say to follow one’s conscience?
Rush vs Glenn = Reform the GOP vs create a new party. Problem: if history is an indication then we need only to go back to H. Ross Perot. He ran solely to suck GOP votes from George H. W. Bush. It was successful! Can you say, Slick Willie? The same thing will happen if we form another party. Our best chance to win is to forcefully take the GOP back: attend state party meetings, oppose RINOs being nominated, tell Steele we won’t support the RINOs; conservatism is always the winner because it most closely represents the sentiments of the people. Palin in 2012?
I have a modest proposal for a PLEDGE to be taken by any and all members of the republican party in order to save the republican from themselves. Frankly I agree with Ron Paul on a lot, but two parties is just the way that it works…
1.)I (elected official) PLEDGE THAT I WILL INTRODUCE ANY SPENDING LEGISLATION IN EXCESS OF TAX REVENUES GATHERED BY THE US GOVERNMENT.
2.)I (elected official) PLEDGE THAT I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR ANY LEGISLATION THAT ENGAGES IN DEFICIT SPENDING.
3.)I (elected official) PLEDGE THAT I WILL ELIMINATE THE PRACTICE OF ISSUING TREASURY BILLS THAT PLACE THE GOVERNMENT AND THEREFORE THE PEOPLE IN DEBT UNTIL THE US GOVERNMENT IS IN A POSITION OF REVENUE SURPLUS.
4.)I (elected official) PLEDGE THAT I WILL IMMEDIATELY RESIGN SHOULD I BE PROVEN TO BE IN DERELICTION OF THIS PLEDGE.
This is the thing that can return the Republican party to integrity.
I hereby propose the following as the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
1. No citizen of the United States shall be elected to the House of Representatives to more than four (4) consecutive, two (2) year terms to office.
2. No citizen of the United States shall be elected to the United States Senate for more than two (2) consecutive, six (6) year terms of office.
3. No citizen of the United States shall receive any retirement benefits from serving in either the United States House of Representatives or the United States Senate.
4. Congress shall not exempt itself from any laws of the United States of America, in whole or in part.
I proposed this on my blog a couple of months ago…then I tried to get some of the “real” bloggers to pick it up…to interest. But perhaps here someone “important” will notice and take up the cause.
Rich Vail
Pikesville, MD
http://thevailspot.blogpspot.com
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.–Thomas Jefferson
Another pledge will accomplish nothing, much as I approve the message. The one they take now to uphold the constitution is immediately ignored upon entering office, why should another make any difference.
Term limits is the answer.
I agree with the first piont of #2 Ken Fair. Pledges won’t change anything. The only thing that affects politicians is fear of losing their job.
I disagree with his point about always voting against incumbents. In the US voting against all present incumbents over a 4 year election cycle would theoretically produce a Republican dominated congress – a perfect mirror image of today’s house. Then, the next election cycle would produce a new mirror image Democrat majority, followed by a mirror image Republican majority congress… and so on. If everyone always voted against the incumbents, and there was no more redistricting) this tick tock of mirror images would last for all eternity. The Senate would also oscillate but on a six year cycle.
I think that term limits would be better, combined with some civilised way to make incumbents feel permanently insecure. Maybe pick a random sample of incumbents each year and put them under a public microscope for that year. Kind of a “citizens audit”.
It would be easier to do this at the Federal level in the US because in Canada we have a loose federation. The Provinces (States) are largely self governing and people often pay more attention to Provincial elections and governments than to Federal elections. For example, natural resources like oil, gas, timber, minerals etc are owned by the Provinces, not by the Federal Govt.
In Canada, it’s provincial (state) incumbents that we need to focus on.
Random thoughts
“I will represent the interests of my constituency and that of Americans as a whole first,…”
Therein lies the conflict (aside from not being able to believe a politician or hold them to their pledges until they have served their term, during which they can do a lot of damage, as we are seeing today). If the constituents want entitlements, and the majority of Americans do not want them, then the pledge becomes a Catch-22 situation. SNAFU
“America is a country based on freedom and the rights of the individual.”
It is based on the rights of the individual as defined in the Constitution, not imaginary rights ginned up by activists for their own benefit.
I suggest that we ban all State control over the private lives of the citizenry. I also propose that the Socialist Party, Communist Party, and similar organizations and their actions to control the people be banned. They will remain free to speak, but not act. The Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, but not freedom of expression, as “expression” includes actions.
I suggest that we recognize the fact that no two people are equal. While the Declaration of independence states that “all men are created equal”, it does not say that all men must develop equally or have equal abilities. We should rejoice that people are different in their abilities, because if we were truly equal, what would we be other than robots? As long as people think that everyone is equal (except themselves, of course:)) , terms like “fairness” get distorted, thus denigrating hard work and merit as a means of advancement. Is it fair that a capable person gets bypassed for someone that is not as capable, or in some cases incompetent?
In order to even consider the pledge items, the entire education system must be overhauled. Children need to be taught how economics and politic must be considered together,while leaving it up to them to make up their own minds. Children must learn that failure is a part of life, but not trying again is the real failure.
If we could come up with a mechanism that enables the people to toss the pols immediately upon violating their pledge or any part of it, then a pledge would make sense. Perhaps online plebiscites in which a majority of the voters must vote to remove the pol immediately. The security and software flaws in this proposal are known and understood. If it becomes feasible, then perhaps a trial term of 1 year followed by a vote. Some might say that this will make pols be very wary of legislating and not much would get done. I say that is a good idea. The less the government does, the better.
One of the main problems with pledges is We the People. We will still vote the liars back into office if we see that the liars give us a few tidbits during their term.
We should a,lso be able to reward pols for what the majority see as good work (which in the case of pols can mean no work or very little:)).
Let’s face it, people are biased, no matter what they claim, unless they are completely indifferent to everything that goes on around them.
Last note for now: Every pol should pledge that they will not tell the people what to do. The Rule of Law is necessary to prevent chaos, but that doesn’t mean that all laws are good. No law should ever be passed that is aimed at a particular individual or group, and the impact of which can be forecast (F.A. Hayek)
I thought getting elected for a certain party was a pledge to do that party’s work. that’s what the people that voted for the person thought….Specter, Snow..are recent prime examples of people not having to answer to anyone, no ethics and the people at home should be able to immediately recall them.
Swearing, signing in blood won’t change the people in Washington. Washington, well, politics period, seems to change people. they actually believe they are more important then the people they represent.
Instead of term limits, we need to stop the gerrymandering of congressional districts that guarantee safe seats. Moreover, if seats were not as safe, congressmen would have to answer more to their constituents.
It sounds good, but here is where your pledge fails: Let’s say Joe Blow runs for office, signs your pledge, and wins the election. Then he fails to live up to his pledge. In the next election his opponent is Anita Dunn. Who do you vote for? This has been the problem for all these many years. To the barricades!
I would like to see some exploration of conservative responses to further unconstitutional action by congress.
Normal people need to work together to send a message to our government. It should be legal, decentralized, and have an unmistakable impact.
What can we do? A work strike? Have everyone drive 10 mph under the speed limit? I don’t think a pledge is going to have much effect, especially since the current leadership is skilled at playing shifty word games.
Short of an actual revolution we need to be prepared for when government finally steps over the imaginary threshhold between democracy and oligarchy.
Yeah, things have never been worse. A useless, illegal war that killed tens of thousands and a lack of regulation which led our country to this precipice. But its only now, with Democrats in charge that we need actually do anything about it. Yeah, its not about party anymore, even though all of the personages you mentioned are the very thesis of unaccountable Republican autocrats. What a bunch of crap, dumb even for this site.
I see many practical problems here, but to mention just a few.
First of all, developments are taking place at a much faster pace than they were when the Constitution was written, and the interval between elections for Congressmen—2 years and Senators—6 years, were set. During the time until the next election, a crooked, unscrupulous, cheating, lying, ideologue and his fellow scumbags can do incalculable harm; our predicament today is a case in point.
By the time Obama & Co. and their Democratic wrecking crew put in place the main agenda items of their mad rush for “Change” i.e. a Socialist/Fascist/Marxist Revolution—probably major, hard to reverse changes before the 2010 elections and certainly before the 2012 Presidential elections – the damage will have been done, and that is their intent.
If GM and Chrysler go under, can they be recreated and reanimated? If the dollar looses a substantial portion of its value and ceases to be the world Reserve Currency, can it—other than by years or decades of painstaking work—regain that status? If private insurers are to be driven out of business by a lower cost, richer featured Public Option backed by unlimited public funds to absorb losses, and government interposes itself between patients and their hospitals and doctors, to control all aspects of medical care, can such a withering away of the private insurance industry and such radical, sweeping changes in the health care sector be reversed? If Cap and Trade “puts the Coal Industry out of business”—companies closed, assets sold off and work force fired and dispersed–and sends energy prices “skyrocketing,” could such a Coal Industry be reconstituted and prices returned to lower levels?
Currently, there is no recall provision applicable to members of Congress.
Why would anyone think that someone who violated his signed pledge would just resign and quietly go away?
The percentage of the citizenry who are dependent on government handouts of one sort or another and have been—in essence—bribed is ever increasing. Certainly Obama & Co. want to use the tax code and “tax credits” i.e. disguised government welfare checks, to push the percentage of citizens who pay no Federal or State taxes from the current high 38% up to almost 50%; thus ensuring a permanent, dependent voting block who want to and will vote to keep the Obama & Co. gravy train rolling on.
Our educational system had been taken over by the Left, and they have succeeded in producing two generations of increasingly propagandized but generally badly educated citizens—most deliberately “graduated” with no comprehensive, unbiased knowledge of or love for History, American history, logic or rhetoric, graduates, many of whom, are innumerate, and only barely functionally literate; thus, citizens who are easily fooled and easily led; hardly the best candidates for rebellion, throwing the rascals out, and a return to the fundamental ideals of America’s founding.
How can our representatives swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States while at the same time joining the American Socialist Party which swears to destroy the Constitution of the United States? I just can’t understand it!!! Where have the press gone that they continually ignore the hypocrisy? At one point you could click on a link on the ASP web site and go to a list of the members of Congress who had embraced the Socialist party. That link was removed several months ago but I am so glad that I cut and pasted it to an email I sent to my brother. Waxman, Waters, Frank, DiLauro, Pelosi, Larson, Lee, the whole group who went to Cuba to fawn over the Castro brothers, and the movers and shakers who are trying to pass the “health reform” bill and the cap and trade fiasco based upon faulty science. If you visit the American Progressive Caucus you will also find several members of the Socialist party. For some reason, they are going underground – to hide their true allegiance from those who voted for them. Why are those who are fighting for our future making these names known so that voters have a choice. They must choose from Republican, Socialist, and Democratic – and probably a few Communist candidates. They deserve to be aware of the true nature of their choices. These ideologues will try to lead us from democracy to socialism, communism, whatever term you want to use – but a government in which the will of the people is second to the will of the government and wealth will be redistributed, health care will be redistributed, and life will be redistributed. We are in such dire straits. Where can we move?
I agree completely with Mr. Pope’s analysis. It’s well reasoned and, from my viewpoint at least, accurate.
I do have to get off the bus when he reaches his conclusion. I disagree that a candidate’s pledge will make one whit of a difference to the cynical professional politician. Before any election, he’ll tell you anything – anything – he calculates will get him reelected. After his reelection, don’t get between the politician and plausible deniability. You’ll get run right over.
My short list of solutions:
1. Term limits. No person should be allowed more than 12 years in office.
2. Committee Rotation. No person should be allowed to serve on the same committee for more than one congressional session.
3. Campaign Contributions. Campaign contributions should be subject to strict limits and should be restricted to individual voters. No contributions should be permitted from businesses, lobbying organizations, labor unions, PACs or any other non-voting entity.
4. Earmarks should be called what they are: one step away from malfeasance in office. They should be permitted only if publicly reported each quarter and clearly traceable to the individual sponsors. The American people have a right to know who is sneaking their tax dollars out the back door and to whom. Ripping off military ammunition and training dollars in the dark of night for clearly non-military porkbarrel projects is reprehensible. The John Murtha International Airport is even worse. All such earmarks must be publicly explained in open session by their author and viewable on C-Span. This is our money. It does not belong to Congress.
5. With the exception of matters of national security, no bill should be eligible for voting until it has been made available for public viewing and public comment for at least 72 hours.
6. Any member who votes on any legislation is required to read it in its entirety in its final form and be held accountable for the bill’s contents. Last minute amendments at 3:00AM reset the clock. Failure to meet this requirement should be treated as willful malfeasance in office. Repeated violations should be grounds for expulsion or recall. The Stimulus Bill and Cap and Trade would not have passed the House if this requirement was in force.
7. No legislator or staff member is eligible for employment with any organization whose primary purpose is business with the federal government for a period of 10 years after leaving government service. Any government employee who leaves public service for malfeasance, conviction or expulsion is permanently barred from such employment.
8. Public funding and preferential treatment of purely political not-for-profit organizations should be completely prohibited. These organizations should be funded directly by public donations, and they should be barred from directly or indirectly serving as representatives of the government, such as census taking.
9. Legislators must be of good character and conduct themselves in a manner becoming of a member of Congress, as originally intended. Eligibility for election should exclude all persons convicted of any crime, as determined by the same court system used by everybody else. Congressional membership does not confer diplomatic immunity for the majority party, nor does it justify a kangaroo court for members of the minority party. Equal justice for everybody.
Just wait ’til I’m king…
Moho @ 25 said (semi-coherently): “….dumb even for this site.”
Which is always what you say. Okay. We get it. You think we are stupid. Please go back and play with your version of the smart kids and leave us dummy’s alone. Dipstick.
(IOW, I have tried to think like Moho and the other PJM Libtrolls but I cannot hold my breath that long to approximate anoxia.)
“This isn’t about party anymore”
Oh – isn’t it?
“That Democrats place party loyalty above all else is not new, just more blatant”
Yes, I see that it is.
“The best weapon the people have is the vote, but the ACORNs of the world are even corrupting that”
Erm – you have evidence that ACORN was involved in actual vote fraud? That’s interesting.
As for the rest – Moho’s already written the best possible response.
Dear Cousin Bobdog:
I have seen a lot of interesting comments in this thread… some I have held, but never seen before expressed by others. I think Cousin Bob has a good starting outline.
I differ:
1) Term limits of 12 years is fine for a Senator… it should be 4 years for a Representative. This is ONLY if the 17th admendment is reversed and Senators are appointed by the individual state legislatures. The many states no longer have representation in the federal government. We now have two Houses of Representatives. We need a house to be insulated from the people, as set up by the founding fathers, to make the hard decisions to govern properly.
3) Big disagreement here on campaign donations. Any person or group should be able to donate as much as they want to whomever they want. Only requirement is immediate full disclosure on the internet or whatever information services may develope in the future. Campaign donations are political speech. No bars. Groups and businesses are at the mercy of the government and they should be able to defend and influence just as individuals should be able to do.
4) Any earmark that doesn’t pass strict constitutional muster should be prohibited, no matter how much “good” it would do.
5) All bills should also be written in plain English. If a person with a high school education can’t understand it, send it back.
7) I think restricting someone’s employment after government service is a violation of their freedoms. Full disclosure protects the rest of us.
9) Most people of good character don’t bother with politics anymore because the MSM has no problem trashing them out of shear hatred, so this won’t work. Besides, people do learn from mistakes made while young and become productive members of society. Full disclosure by an honest MSM would take care of this.
10) May I add one… delegation expenses are the responsibility of the state being represented. I think we would have far fewer foreign vacations at the expense of tax payers. I think we wouldn’t need quite so many aides, clerks and lawyers. This would also include no FEDERAL retirement benefits.
11) Big one here… elimination of the “winner takes all” in presidential elections. Combine this with a huge increase in the number of electoral votes per state. This way, a third pary candidate who earns 1% of the vote, should have a 1% say as to who their supporters votes should go to. Right now, a third party candidate hurts the mainstream candidate closest to their ideology. This does not serve the interests of Americans.
Beauxdog
Beaudog -
Good points. We may be onto something here.
Change is coming this I know, we no longer need anyone like Olympia Snowe. Change is here and was spoken of clear but no one lent an ear. In just five short days we will transform America. The ONLY thing he said that’s true. Defend the Constitution, not, transparency, not, bill out for 72 hrs. for all to see before he signs, not, listening to the people, not, keeping true to HIS agenda? YES
He lies so much he believes himself. Messiah, NOT!!
One good thing coming out of his adminstration is; We The People are uniting as one and are up in arms over the blatant disreguard towards We The People and our Constitution. We’re finally reconizing that we have to take a stand before losing our Great America!
We The People, the sleeping giants are now awaken. No one, can mess with We The People of the United States Of America, not even it’s Government!
We need GOD fearing people in our government once again like those that founded our country. We have seen GOD removed from our schools and our government day by day. It’s been GOD out, evil corruption in, Killings and Dishonesty.
Take an oath on (who’s word?) holding your hand on a Bible and not having a reverential fear of GOD, means nothing.
We need to start with GOD fearing MEN and WOMEN!
That’s Change We Can Believe In! Bring GOD back in the picture is truly all we need. TRUTH! and INTEGRITY!
The Sarah Palin’s and Newt Gingrich’s of the world! Rediscovering God in America. Yes this is first and foremost! Then when someone takes an oath, they just might keep it!
For an interesting attempt at right-of-centre people power follow the fortunes of the Wildrose Alliance in Alberta – http://www.calgarysun.com/news/columnists/rick_bell/2009/10/18/11440101-sun.html
Alberta has a long serving center right government that has lost its way. A new party to the right of the present government is trying to replace it. Not to recommend third parties as a solution everywhere, but Alberta has a history of new right wing parties coming out of nowhere to form the provincial government and stay there for years until the next revolution. Can a party with a goofy name (the wild rose is the provincial flower) and one elected member overturn a sitting government?
Wait. What? Who says Jack Murtha doesn’t represent his constituents? I have a friend who lives in that district, and she says those immobile, entitled, blue-collar, uneducated lunks are proud of the guy and love him for bringing home bacon.
And who says Nancy Pelosi doesn’t represent the San Franciscans who continually re-elect her?
Sadly, the enemy is us. Look around at your fellow Americans.
The Gipper : We really miss him even more especially at times like now facing this unquestioned move toward radial Socialism .
The Gipper Hated and fought against all of his adult life
.
A Reagan speech in 1982 . (hardly any words Obama would use since he sees America as a guilty evil and bad country .
“You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream — the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order — or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism.
Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, ‘
The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.’ The Founding Fathers knew a government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.” –Ronald Reagan
Bobdog and Beauxdog, BRAVO!
Good luck getting any of those crooks, communists,socialists,and fascists in Congress to sigh that pledge. I’d bet there are less than ten honest Senators and thirty honest Congressmen and women. If I were young enough I’d join an armed rebellion. At my age, all I can do is support one.
Someone above mentioned term limits. I’d suggest three for a Representative and one for a Senator. Also, we need to repeal the Amendment (I forget which number) that changed the appointment of Senators from their State Legislatures to the popular vote.
Beauxdog, Re your point “4) Any earmark that doesn’t pass strict constitutional muster should be prohibited, no matter how much “good” it would do.”
What about this:
In addition earmarks should be limited to a (preferably tiny) percentage of the amount the citizens of a state pay in federal taxes. Thus no Senator could ask for earmarks for his stat using money coming from another state.
Seems to me I recall a humongous Wall Street bailout of the banks started by the Bush Administration and it appears the current Administration is in a lot of ways continuing backing Wall Street bailouts. This is what you all are missing here. Party affiliation no longer matters Corporate $$$$$$ has taken over our so called Democracy.
Try looking outside of your standard party affiliation hate and look at what has happen. Name off a time when the Government funneled money into your party affiliation for it was just tooooo bbbbiiiigggg to fail? Face it all the Corporations own Washington and they are not going to give up one penny and will fight like mad to keep the status quo. We have gone from Democracy to a Corporate Feudalism.