United States Congress – District 3

L-A-K yes CRA policy results in bad loans but (a) it had broad bi-partisan support and (b) the effect was on the fringe – this is a matter of the cost of funds being controlled entirely by the Fed and being held so low for so long that the high risk loans appeared to be moderate risk and the moderate risk loans appeared to be low risk, at least from a portfolio management perspective.

Its hard to see the problem if your part of it.

Government is the problem not the solution.

I’m sorry I’m not intelligent enough to understand whose ‘Jai Ho’ is it in those Congress campaign videos? India’s or Indians or economically backward Indians or Congress party or Sonia Gandhi or Slumdog millionaire movie…….I mean whose Jai Ho are we supposed to do?

Whose pictures do you see most of the time in the video? Of course it is Jai Ho for Sonia Maino and the clan Let them keep saying Jai ho for themselves but then one cant hide facts, here is the real JAI HO

In a startling revelation a British new website carried the report of Slumdog Millionaire child star Rubina Ali’s father trying to sell her. In a sting operation conducted by the website it said that in a bid to escape poverty and life in the slum Rafiq Qureshi had put Rubina up for adoption demanding a whopping 200000 pounds from an Arabian family.

….. set a record for the fewest number of days worked — 218 between the House and Senate combined.

There were 15,832 earmarks totaling $71 billion in 2006. (In 1994, there were 4,155 earmarks totaling $29 billion.)

Their Congress passed budgets that resulted in deficits of $318 billion and $250 billion.

The typical Congressional work week was late Tuesday to noon on Thursday.

They eliminated the Perkins college loan program and cut Pell Grants by $4.6 billion.

In a debate last year over the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee abruptly cut off the microphones when Democrats began discussing the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

They stripped detainees of the right of habeas corpus.

Passed an energy bill that showered $6 billion in subsidies on polluting oil and gas firms while doing little to curb energy demand or invest in renewable energy industries.
Allowed Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) stay in Congress for a month after pleading guilty in the Jack Abramoff investigation.

Didn’t investigate Tom DeLay and let him stay in Congress as long as he wanted.

There were just 12 hours of hearings on Abu Ghraib. (There were more than 100 hours of hearings on alleged misuse of the Clinton Christmas card list.)

Passed a $286 billion highway bill in 2005 stuffed with 6,000 pork projects including the $233 million Bridge to Nowhere.

Refused to swear in oil executives testifying about high prices.

Not a single non-appropriations bill was open to amendment in the second session of the Congress.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/06/109-congress/

Yes, I also find it amusing because they keep pointing out that currently Congress has a lower approval rating than Bush, but they never look at the disapproval rating of the Republicans vs. the Democrats. The Democrats are in the majority and they still aren’t as despised as the Republicans right now.

Republicans – Disapproval 58%
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm

Democrats – Disapproval 49%
http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm

Maine Becomes First State in Nation to Reject Real ID Legislature Passes a Resolution Refusing to Implement the National ID Card FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, January 25, 2007 Augusta- Maine became the first state in the nation to reject the federal Real ID Act today. The Legislature voted this morning in favor of a resolution refusing to implement the Real ID Act. The Senate vote was unanimous while only four members of the House voted in opposition. At a press conference today, the bipartisan sponsors of the resolution celebrated a victory that they say will save Mainers from paying millions of dollars to fund the program, becoming easy targets for identity theft, and dealing with endless bureaucratic snafus. The Real ID Act, which mandates that by 2008 states turn their driver’s licenses into national ID cards that will be part of a 50-state shared database, faced broad bipartisan opposition in Maine. The federal government may be willing to burden us with the high costs of a program that will do nothing to make us safer, but it is our job as state Legislators to protect the people of Maine from just this sort of dangerous federal mandate, said Senate Majority Leader Libby Mitchell (D- Augusta), the lead sponsor of the resolution in the Senate. As a Mainer, I am proud that this state has led the way in taking a stand against Real ID. The broad bipartisan opposition in Maine to Real ID shows just how problematic the law is, said Representative Scott Lansley (R- Sabattus), the lead sponsor of the resolution in the House. It wouldn’t make any sense to implement a program that is opposed by so many people from both sides of the aisle and doesn’t seem to have any real benefits for the people of Maine. Real ID has gained the ire of privacy advocates, who say linking driver’s licenses and state ID cards to a national database will create a goldmine of accessible information for identity thieves. The Real ID Act requires the cards to include a computer-readable zone, which privacy advocates say will allow anyone with a reader to collect the personal identifying information of anyone with a card. Real ID is a real privacy nightmare, said House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree (D- North Haven), a sponsor of the resolution. It won’t make us any safer, but it could make us vulnerable to identity theft. Real ID has also caused concern over the amount it will cost states in taxpayer dollars. While the Real ID Act is a federal law, it doesn’t come with federal appropriations. In order to adopt Real ID, states will need new technology and an increase in Bureau of Motor Vehicle workers. Experts have estimated the initial cost of implementing the system at $11 billion to the states, and Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap said the cost to Maine would be $185 million over the first five years. Real ID means huge costs, huge bureaucracy, and a huge threat to individual liberties, said Shenna Bellows, Maine Civil Liberties Union Executive Director. It creates a virtual one-stop shop for identity thieves. Maine did the right thing to oppose this. The resolution passed by the Maine Legislature resolves that, in protest of the treatment of the states by the President and United States Congress, the State of Maine refuses to implement the Real ID Act and implores the United States Congress to repeal the Real ID Act. The resolution is the first of its kind in the nation.
nonalcoholic2: I am fully aware of what is supposed to happen if you do not have a Read ID card. I also know that other states will not allow the Feds to bully them into implementing this foolish and assinine law. It will not stop terrorism. Do you think Gun control stops criminals from buying guns? No way in Hell.
They can not prevent Us the citizens of maine from flying on an airplane, entering a federal building, receiving federal benefits, etc. if we are exercising our constitutional right to privacy and if our state has said no to the law.

Thank God that at least one state has some sense. Why do we need a national ID? The only reason is to further enable the government to keep track of it’s own citizens. If illegals or terrorist want one they will just steal or forge one — either of which is easy enough done. Terrorist do not follow the law only good citizens do. We have to stop our government from encroaching further upon our right and privileges as citizens. They have forgotten they serve us not we them!

I’m having a lot of trouble trying to find a bill currently being considered by the house of representatives and a bill currently being considered by congress… Can someone give me a link to each one of those?
i’ve tried the library of congress website but i cant find the link to what they are working on now, that’s my question. anything more specific?

http://thomas.loc.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/bills/
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

In addition, how are bills processed through Congress and how do they become laws? Be sure to consider the politics of these processes as well as their procedural aspects.

An excellent source of information about the Congress of the United States is the Library of Congress website at http://Thomas.loc.gov

The Legislature (the Congress) is one of three branches of the Federal Government, which are designed to act as "checks and balances" on each other, so that no one branch can dominate government of the people. The other two Branches are the Executive (the President) and the Judiciary (the Supreme Court and other Federal courts).

The Congress is organized into two Chambers, the House of Representative and the Senate. Members of the House are elected every two years and each Member represents approximately the same number of people for a total of 435 Representatives. Members of the Senate are elected every six years and each of the 50 States has two Senators for a total of 100 Senators.

The House and Senate have the joint responsibilities of appropriating money to run the government and of passing laws to govern the people in all matters that have not been delegated by the Constitution to the individual States. Each Chamber organizes its members into Committees, which specialize in different kinds of lawmaking. For example, there are Committees on laws concerning National Security, Appropriations, Agriculture and Transportation.

The House has the additional responsibility to indict ("impeach") members of the other two Branches (the President and Judges), if they are accused of wrongdoing.

The Senate has the additional responsibility of trying those who are impeached and for ratifying treaties and approving those persons the President nominates to fill high political offices.

Precedures for processing a BIll: One simplified example of the process for passing laws to appropriate funds and to govern the people, begins with a bill (a description of the law to be created or changed or of the funds to be approved) being drafted and then "introduced" by a Representative to the House. Anyone can draft a bill, but only a Member of Congress can introduce it for congressional consideration.

The House then sends the bill to a Committee to review and report back on whether it is a good or bad bill. If the Committee reports the House should approve the bill, the House leaders set up rules for debate on the bill and then the House votes on the bill. The process is the same if a bill is first introduced in the Senate–except all appropriations bills which must be introduced first in the House.

Once the House has approved a bill, it sends the bill to the Senate, where the same process occurs. The Senate refers it to a Committee, the Committee reviews and reports back on the bill, then the Senate debates and votes on the bill. Frequently, though, the Senate will make changes to the bill, called amendments. When this happens, the bill must be sent back to get House approval for the amended bill.

If the House disagrees with the Senate amendment, then the House and Senate Committees meet in a Conference to work out the differences. When they have developed a compromise bill, it is sent to the House to approve, then to the Senate to also approve.

Once both Chambers have agreed to the same bill, it is sent to the President to sign. When the Bill is signed, it is "enacted" and the new laws in it will be in effect from the signing date onward (unless the bill specifically says to delay starting a new law for some reason).

Politics of processing a Bill: In the United States, there are two main political parties–the Democrats and the Republicans. The Congress is usually controlled by one party or the other. That is, more of the Members of the House and the Senate belong to one party or the other. Sometimes the House is controlled by one party and the Senate by another and sometimes one party controls both Chambers. Currently both Chambers are controlled by a majority of Democratic party members.

When one party in Congress has a larger majority of members than the other, bills that the majority party want to get approved are usually easier to get passed–but not always. Many times party members may not personally agree with every condition in a bill that their party favors. In such cases, the party leaders of each Chamber must persuade their party members to agree to the bill. Often the leaders have to compromise some of the terms and conditions in the bill to get enough party members to vote for the bill to be approved.

Sometimes, neither political party has a strong majority and so each party’s leaders in Congress must compromise with members of the other political party to get enough votes for approval of a bill.

If both the House and Senate agree on a bill that the President does not like, the President can veto the bill and return it to Congress. Then the House and Senate must re-approve the bill by a 2/3 majority of votes to "override" the President’s veto or they may amend the bill until the President agrees to sign it

People always complain about the influence of "lobbyists" and corporate interests in Congress.

But actually, candidates without corporate backing usually do extremely poorly in American elections.

Americans STRONGLY prefer to elect people who have the support of corporations and lobbyists.

Why is this? Are Americans just huge hypocrites, or is there something else at work?

Why is corporate opposition usually a death sentence for a political candidacy?
Would term limits change anything? Wouldn’t the new candidates also need corporate backing to get elected?

Because those are the only choices that are offered to us. Both parties are ‘corporate owned’ and they control the elections making it almost impossible for a third party or independent candidate to run. Check the ‘committee on presidential debates’ which was created in 1988 as a response to Ross Perot’s bid for presidency. The idea that an individual who wasn’t owned by a party could run scared the crap out of the establishment so they sowed it up.

There will never be another independent who makes a real run for office. ‘committee on presidential debates’

Was he Democrat or Republican?
House of Rep. or Senate?

The most raced by someone running for congress:

Blair Hull, (D) IL – Senate – $29,063,018.

The most raised by someone already IN congress, running for re-election:

Tom Daschle, (D) SD – Senate – $19,349,884.

The 2010 elections are getting closer and closer. Chairman Obama’s communist congress is crumbling. His regime emboldened by his Muslim Brotherhood is falling, the American people are seeing that he is a scam.

I know ACORN thugs and Black Panthers will be outside intimidating voters and pressuring them to vote Democrat and driving away true patriots from the polls.

When the American people choose freedom and vote Republican, I suspect Chairman Obama’s regime will crack down on dissent and try to destroy the remains of the country in a last ditch attempt to rule over the American people forever.

What are some survival tips and kit suggestions for the 2010 elections and the post-election timeline?

We will only have 2 years to save america, and come up with a damage estimate to repair all the damage Obama has done before he destroys us.

We must make the world safe for democracy, starting at home!
COMMIE LIBERALS DON’T YOU GET IT YET!

CHAIRMAN OBAMA POISONS YOUR MINDS TO DO WHAT HE DESIRES! HE CARES NOTHING FOR YOU! OR THE PEOPLE YOU HURT!

HE JUST WANTS POWER TO RULE OVER THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE GOVERNMENT!

We cannot bring back those that have died due to Chairman Obama, BUT WE WOULD BE BETRAYING THEIR MEMORY IF WE LET THEM WIN IN 2010!!!

Whenever people like you organize, you end up getting tried for treason. Don’t try it .

According to the consitution if a representative from a state or congress votes to raise the salary or power of a position or office that person cannot be appointed to or run for that office. As Senater Hilary clinton voted to raise the salary of the Secretary of state a extra $20,000.

Yes, article 1, section 6 states, "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."

CNN did a very short piece on it the other day, and they basically agreed that while it may not be Constitutional there’s almost no way to actually keep her from doing it. Who would have the authority to sue in such a case? They were actually laughing when they discussed how even though it would be wrong there’s no way to stop her from doing it.