Millions upon Billions goes from one place to another seems funny how nothing really changes.

RAISE TAXES
CREATE NEW TAXES
DRIVE MORE PEOPLE AND BUSSINESS OUT OF THE STATE
GIVE DOWN STATE EVERYTHING THEY NEED

It's funny that the 800 billion stimulus federal package was borrowed from China. This is where most of the US jobs went due to free trade. Pretty ironic! Since we borrowed this from China it has been said that every American owes $35,000.00! It my stimulate now but it will kill us later! What has to be done is that America has to wake up 600 elected officials have screwed up America in Washington DC! People need to get involved! We need to go back to basics! The Constitution, Judeo-Christian principles etc,etc, etc.... Did you know that when we go to war Congress must declare it! Why? Because our founding Fathers were concerned personal interest would get involed. Look at Iraq and Halburton(Chenney former CEO of company). What are the odds? Come on! Than free trade psssed by Clinton(Hillary was on the board of Wal-Mart). It is said Wal-Mart is the biggest user of free trade. Did you know if a treaty is passed and doesn't effect the law makers like constituents the law makers should be impeached and the treaty is void! How many law makers lost their house, pensions, health insurance? How many law makers are in shelters with their children??????? We need to do away with free trade and get jobs back into are country than we maybe able to survive when stimulus money runs out! It's funny since the law makers are not effected like the constituents teh treaty is void and any stuff from China is here illegal. I asked Assemblyman Hawley what is he prepared to do about it and he said I agree with you. What kind of answer is this????? I asked Congressman Lee waht are you prepared to do about this?? His answer made less sense than Hawley. Finally I asked Schumer and he never replied!!!

Think It's bad-Wait till universal health care comes out-start ya off with a card-then a chip embedded in the skin-then elimation of money-this Is just beginning of the end of democracy
"long live the patriot"

as i have remarked in other threads; DO NOT vote for any incumbents next year. It doesn't matter if you agree politically with or don't like the challenger, vote for someone other than the incumbent. If they all get replaced, that'll send a message. How much worse of a job can a bunch of rookies do? Radical action is needed.

Great idea, Dave.

tell everyone you know, and they tell everyone they know and they tell....... you get the picture, we can do something.

Not voting for encumbrances won't accomplish a thing. The problem are the two entrenched political parties. That's also way term limits are such a waste.

Until we break up the power of the party structure, nothing is going to change. The parties exist for only one reason -- to perpetuate themselves, and once elected, any new member will be expected to conform and toe the party line and pledge him/herself to protecting party power.

Howard,.
In theory, legislating term limits sound like the answer. Isn't the very process of voting the best form of term limits? If the citizens are unhappy with those in office, they don't vote for them. Ergo, a term limit.
They are letting the politicians know, by their vote, when their time is up.

Well, I agree with some of what you wrote Howard, but I disagree with you on other points. Yes, we need to break the hold of the 2 parties, but first let's rattle the cage, voting out the ones who have power now will put a crack in the structure. Baby Steps.

It won't rattle anybody's cages. The power structure will go on and nothing will change. "New boss same as the old boss."

Look at California -- instituted term limits at least a decade ago and the state is in worse shape than ever. Nothing about how Sacramento operates has changed. There isn't a single member of the legislature who pre-date term limits. Every seat has turned over. The state is still run by party cronyism. Sacramento rival Albany for dysfunction and corruption. It was that way a decade ago, and it's that way today.

New people are gullible and less likely to think for themselves because they don't know how the system works. They also owe just as many favors to big donors as the incumbents do. Our political system is bad because of "We the People". We vote for idiots who manipulate us. We like catchy phrases and a slick talkers. The general public will believe anything, if you don't think so, go watch Fox News or MSNBC.

There is no fixing our broken system. Albany is dysfunctional because "We the People" are dysfunctional. They are a representation of us. We love free things but, don't think we should have to pay for them. People only talk about cuts to things they don't care about. It's Albany that's bad, not us... What a joke!

I laugh when I see these Tea Party's, if you are looking for something to throw in the water, throw yourself in and your neighbor too because, WE are the problem!

Charlie; you say Albany is dysfunctional because "We the People" are dysfunctional. No argument there. But if there is no fixing Albany, then what are we supposed to do, just bend over and take it? I see Howard's point about term limits, even though I'd like to see them anyway. I just think not voting for incumbents is a good way to rattle the cage for now. Then maybe people will get interested. I refuse to give up

I'm not giving up, David, but long ago I decided not to give in to the two-party system.

I'm with you on that, I am not a member of any political party. But if there's noone other than a Dem or Rep on a ballot, why not vote for the other guy? All I'm sayin'

Dave,
...what happens when your entire slate of newbies screws it up? Will you take responsibility? I'm not saying it would happen, but what if?
What if, you are depending on them to hold the line on spending, but you discover that they are rubber stamping spending on many of the services you feel are not necessary.
Remember, you said not to pay attention to who they are, just that they replace those already in office. You are stuck with them for two years or more.
Who will you blame then?

Bea, I can anticipate Dave's response -- they couldn't possibly screw up any more than what we've got. That would be like expecting the dark side of the moon to get darker. Dave's proposition won't help, I don't think, but it certainly wouldn't hurt (though I think Charlie makes good points about the lack of experience making them gullible and easily swayed by party leadership).

New people do bring a fresh perspective but their lack of knowledge about how government works is a real downside. You have to understand where you are at to be able to change direction.

To fix things you really need to drain the money out of politics first and make all positions part time. Stopping special interest donations and making campaigns publically funded will put everyone on the same footing.
The public votes for names they remember, it does not really matter how well someone has done

We need term limits. People running year after year for office is the real problem. Most will do or say anything during their term to get re-elected. Political service was never meant to be a full time job, that has corrupted our system.

We'll see how strong people feel this year on voting out whowver is in. No need to wait for next year.

Like I said before, we have two City of Batavia council members running for re-election. One, Frank Ferrando, has served two terms and his record is very poor. The other is Tim Buckley.

Let's see how upset people really are over high taxes and all the rest?

The problem with eliminating donations is it's unconstitutional. Donations are a form of speech. They're political statements about whom you support. Americans have a right to make such statements.

Posted by Howard Owens on September 20, 2009 - 11:25pm
Bea, I can anticipate Dave's response -- they couldn't possibly screw up any more than what we've got. That would be like expecting the dark side of the moon to get darker. Dave's proposition won't help, I don't think, but it certainly wouldn't hurt (though I think Charlie makes good points about the lack of experience making them gullible and easily swayed by party leadership).


Howard,
There are instances where legislation has taken YEARS to get to the point where it can come to a vote. Perhaps not in local government, but certainly on the Federal level.
Members of congress, from all parties, have worked tirelessly to bring good ideas to fruition and we, the citizens, benefit from their hard work.
Wiping the slate clean every two years (for example) would mean that the work in progress might be swept under the rug while the new people propose what they feel are important. At the end of two years, while still working on them, those good ideas are swept away once again.
Even those who are opposed to government legislating anything, have to agree that this might not be best for our country as a whole.

Charlie makes a good point about money. Elected officials who take large donations from special interests tend to become shills for those donors. As long as we allow private enterprise to purchase the votes of our politicians nothing will change.

Charlie primarily used his own money to run his campaign and I think that's commendable. Not everyone has the kind of scratch it takes to run for office though and there are probably great candidates out there who never get a chance to run because of it. In a perfect world we would have publicly funded campaigns where all candidates spend the same amount of money and let the best ideas rise to the top.

My comments were directed towards national and state elections. For the most part local elections are small enough to get a person elected based solely on ideas. Most local seats are part-time and receive very little pay. Being a councilman or a legislator is not a career.

I know Charlie, I just thought that your Council race was a good example. I have been offered relatively large-ish donations from certain groups for my race, but I refuse to be beholden to anyone.

Bea; Howard anticipated well. As for whom I'd blame next, i'm not trying to point fingers; although I can see how I gave off that vibe. I'm saying that keeping the same people for 10, 20 even 30 years is the problem, and it's gotten to the point where we need radical action such as sweeping them all out. If the baby goes out with the bath water, I can live with that. Charlie, you are right, I believe the founding fathers intended for elected lawmakers to be part-time, do it a few years, then go back to your regular career or business. Not a career field. Anyway even though we all disagree on some points, everyone seems to agree that we have a problem.