Word of the Day: USELESS

Two days ago, after much political maneuvering, the U.S. government was shut down.  Once again. 

This is not the first time a government shutdown has taken place.  The U.S. government has been shut down a total of eighteen times, including this shutdown, over the past thirty-seven years.  While polls, for what they're worth, show that most Americans blame the Republican party for the current shut down, it is easy to make an argument that such a move is usually mostly one or another party's fault.  Such an argument is easy and lazy.  Historically, it is a mixed bag.  Ten out of the eighteen times, the President has been a Republican, while Democrats have controlled the Congress half the time during shutdowns.

The first government shutdown was in 1976, during the Gerald Ford administration, and lasted ten days.  In the 1970's, the average length was around eleven days, with a total of six shutdowns.  In the 1980's, the average length was roughly two days, but the number of shutdowns increased to eight.  The 1990's saw only three shutdowns, but the average number of days went up to ten. 

The 1990's average is so high with the fewest number of shutdowns because that decade saw the longest government shutdown in history, three weeks, running from mid-December 1995 to early January 1996.  This number is often coupled with an earlier shutdown in mid-November 1995 that lasted for five days. 

The 2000's saw no government shutdowns, but the same is now no longer true for the 2010's.  The current shutdown is in day three as of this posting.

This shutdown is based on House Republicans wanting to attach a defunding or delaying of the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) to a spending bill that would also raise the debt ceiling.  A short, pointed statement by President Obama on the afternoon of September 30 did nothing to stop the shutdown from happening at midnight that night.  A meeting at the White House yesterday between the President and congressional leaders to find a way to end the shutdown proved fruitless, with some news outlets saying it did nothing but cause both sides to dig their heels in deeper.  It is being reported today that President Obama issued a challenge of sorts to House Speaker John Boehner to allow a vote on an already-Senate-approved spending bill which has no strings attached to the Affordable Care Act.  My speculation is that Speaker Boehner will not bring the bill to the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote.

If nothing is done soon, the benefits and government employee paychecks that are cut-off will be added to by Social Security benefits not being paid out as well as other services being stopped.  (Let's not forget that the Congress recently voted to cut billions of dollars from the food stamps program.)  With my mother on Social Security, living on a fixed income, I do not want to see that happen.  A CNN online article hihglights that members of Congress -- not their staffers, just members of Congress themselves -- still get paid, no matter what.
        "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives,
        shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened."
That is the 27th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and it means any change in congressional pay cannot happen until the mid-term elections in 2014. After that, it cannot happen again until the presidential election year of 2016.

Minnesota Representative Rick Nolan has introduced a bill in Congress which would stop congressional pay during the entire stretch of a government shutdown, calling for common sense to be used in governmental operations.  I think it is a great idea, but it cannot be implemented until at least next Fall at the mid-term elections.

Now that I have presented all this, let me get down to brass tacks.

As great of an idea Representative Nolan's bill is, do you think it has any chance of passing?  Seriously, do you?  Politicians agreeing to have their pay stopped?  Politicians willing to accept their "just desserts" and operate under the same standards as you or I do?  Politicians working around the clock to fix a manufactured crisis that they themselves manufactured?  I could say that I would believe it when I see it, but that seems pointless.  I doubt Representative Nolan's bill, or any bill similar to it, will get anywhere in Congress.  If it does, there will be so many additions, exceptions, loopholes, and conditions included within that it will be watered down from the get-go.

I ask you, is it a sensible expectation that those who hold the power to screw over the American public without any likely repercussions to themselves, other than possibly not getting re-elected, are completely willing to do the right thing all the time, or completely willing to admit they screwed up and to fix it, and completely willing to restore the integrity of government that government had generations ago?  My response is it is not a sensible expectation at all.

Again, for what polls are worth, the public's congressional approval rating is down to a pathetic 9-10%, depending on whose information you read.  Whether it is that low or even a little higher, it is clear that Americans hate Congress and it job it is isn't doing.  I cannot blame them; I wholeheartedly agree.

Are you as sick and tired of hearing terms like debt ceiling, fiscal cliff, sequester, defunding, and delaying, year after year, as I am?  They are nothing but advertising buzzwords for ideological squabbles and agenda advancements at the expense of the American.

This is the oath of office taken by U.S. senators and representatives: "I do solemnly swear/affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."  How does this shutdown support or defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies?  (Is President Obama the enemy or, more importantly, are the American people?)  Are we to assume that the shutdown is an example of discharging the duties of office well and faithfully?  (Are ideological battles and agenda advancements part of those duties?)  And they want God to help them benefit themselves while allowing Americans to suffer?  (What does that say about their religion and their personal religious beliefs?)

It is not hard to imagine those in politics for centuries have received perks that they should not have or that they have made deals to benefit themselves.  This is not to say doing that is okay, but it has been even more obvious for many years that the benefit of themselves, and their business interests, is standard operational procedure.  That increased obviousness has led to an increase in America's dissatisfaction and disillusionment with Congress.  It may or may not be hard to accept that those in power receive perks, but the willful intent to do so is not part of what those in Congress were voted in to do.  

However, I find it unacceptable to engage in obstructionism and see it as what those voted into office are supposed to do.  I find it unacceptable that a faction of one of the two political parties controls that entire party, and even steers the entire country directly toward actions like a government shutdown, is what those in office are supposed to do.  I find it unacceptable that those who can take paychecks and benefits, as well as access to public places and health care, away from both federal and non-federal employees suffer no consequences for their actions is the way that things are supposed to be.  And yet, these are the things that have been, and are, happening.

Therefore, Congress is useless.

Terry