Give the people the home-court advantage
By Ralph Benko

We send our elected representatives far from home to conduct The People’s business. We send them to Washington, D.C. where they form what our flyboys (and flygirls) call “a target-rich environment” for the lobbyists and for the political party leadership.

We send them far from us … to conduct our business. There was no other way in the 18th, 19th, and most of the 20th century. In the 21st century, of course, this is absurd.

As things now stand, it is too easy for lobbyists and party leadership to “get at” our elected legislators. And too hard — impossible, on a concentrated basis — for voters to spend “face time” with their representatives.

We plain folks, and our representatives, would be well-served by changing the rule requiring our legislators to vote from the floor of Congress. And this could be done by a simple rule change, no legislation or constitutional amendment required.

The Constitution simply provides that “a majority of each [chamber] shall constitute a quorum to do business” and does not even specify “present,” much less what that would mean in the 21st century of webcams, Skype, videoconferencing, broadband internet or other technologies out there. The rules of both the House and Senate provide that a quorum is assumed unless a quorum call shows that it is not.

Sheer proximity is a very powerful thing. Lobbyists consider “face time” the crown jewel of their pursuit. Proximity is a soft force, but a powerful one. In sports parlance, it’s called “the home court advantage.”

By a simple rule change, our legislators could give themselves permission to vote from their district offices. Not require it. Simply permit it. From there, they could tele-speak, by Web, and tele-listen, by Web.

Now, they listen by closed circuit TV and speak rarely enough. They could speak more conveniently, and thus more often, by Webcam than they do now, and from home.

In fact, they could invite their constituents to form a “studio audience,” changing the chemistry rather dramatically.) They could make a district office home-base for most of their staff, instead of doing it backwards, as now. (Jobs for constituents! What a concept!)

Travel is such a hassle, the cost of maintaining two homes beyond the reach of most of our legislators. Under such a rule, it is highly likely that a lot of members would vote, more and more often, from their district offices. (Many of their wives, or husbands, would see to it!)

More time in the District means less in D.C., and it would be a lot harder, and more expensive (all that travel!) for the lobbyists to smooth talk them and for party leadership to twist their arms.

At home, they would be much more in touch with the people who they represent. With much less wear and tear.

Of course, they would still come in to “the office,” to confer with one another whenever useful, attend major ceremonial occasions, committee meetings when important issues are genuinely at stake, hear out the lobbyists, raise money, get on TV, even play poker or attend prayer breakfasts (depending, of course, on party affiliation) with their colleagues. This would tip a balance. Right now, it’s easy for the lobbyists to get at them in concentrated doses and hard for constituents to get heard.

Legislators! Give yourselves permission to vote from your district offices: Amend Rule XX. Only the (unfairly maligned) lobbyists and the (fairly maligned) party leadership lose.

For them … our pillows will be soaked with tears. For the people … and for you … it’s win-win. Give the home court advantage back to your homies!

Join the People Powered Congress social site here.

Ralph Benko, a principal of Capital City Partners, of Washington DC, is the author of The Websters’ Dictionary: How to Use the Web to Transform the World, the eBook of which may be downloaded without charge from www.thewebstersdictionary.com. He has given himself permission to work from a home office, where he gets far more accomplished than at “the office.”

From the Washington Examiner

Today’s Phoenix Business Journal ran the following article by Mike Sunnucks:

U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Mesa, has been quick throughout his tenure to oppose federal subsidies and special incentives. But the East Valley congressman is keeping mum on state and local proposals within his district to build a new Cactus League ballpark in Mesa for the Chicago Cubs.

The Legislature is considering a plan to impose 8 percent ticket fees on all Cactus League games and $1 Maricopa County rental car tax to help pay for the Cubs stadium. In addition, the city of Mesa will ask its voters to approve bonds and new spending for the $86 million project.

Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, the Arizona Diamondbacks and other Cactus League teams oppose the ticket fee idea. Instead, Gordon and D-backs officials would like to see special tax districts created around spring training ballparks and in downtown Phoenix to capture and dedicate sales tax revenue toward those areas, and perhaps bond against future expected revenue.

The Cubs have threatened to move to the Grapefruit League in Florida unless a new ballpark is built here by 2013.

Flake is not taking a stance either on the ticket fees or the tax district idea to help pay for a new stadium.

“We’re going to hold off on commenting for now,” said Flake spokesman Matthew Specht.

The city of Mesa is a prime backer of the ticket fee and car rental tax increase to keep the Cubs from moving.

A bill that would impose ticket fees and the car rental tax has been approved by committees in the Arizona House of Representatives. House Bill 2736 is not yet scheduled for a full House vote.

“This is budget week, and the Cactus League bill is on hold for this week,” said House Majority Leader John McComish, R-Ahwatukee.

The invisible Gabby Giffords, who perpetually proclaims herself a “fiscal-conservative-blue-dog-democrat-who’s-always-looking-out-for-the-residents-of-Arizona”, just announced yet another bill to balance the federal budget.

Snort of the day: Not wanting to put too much pressure on herself and her fellow congressmen, the bill would not take effect until 2020.

WASHINGTON – “Arizona families and businesses struggle every day to make sure their expenses don’t exceed their earnings,” said Giffords. “Balancing a budget is not a complicated concept. Yet over the last decade it has proven difficult for the federal government to grasp. This amendment is intended to change that.”

Giffords is one of 33 original co-sponsors of legislation introduced today that would make a balanced federal budget a requirement of the U.S. Constitution. Arizona and 48 other states have a similar requirement in their state constitutions.

The amendment would:

• Require Congress to produce a balanced budget every fiscal year beginning in 2020.

• Require the president to submit a balanced budget in his or her annual transmission to Congress.

• Prohibit outlays for a fiscal year from exceeding total receipts for that fiscal year unless Congress, by a three-fifths roll call vote of each house, authorizes a specific excess of outlays over receipts (in cases of emergencies).

Read the whole thing here.

And don’t forget that Gabby is also a big supporter of PAYGO. Again from her website:

Giffords, who last week was named the most centrist member of Arizona’s congressional delegation by the respected National Journal, has been a strong supporter of pay-as-you-go legislation. Known as PAYGO, the legislation requires future spending increases or tax cuts to be paid for with either cuts to other programs or new streams of revenue.

And that’s working out really well too.

This video was captured on October 2, 2008 prior to the Presidential Election.

What is stunning is how John McCain criticizes the establishment and system and then turns around and votes for it!

and,

For a man who claims that he was “misled” he sure seems proud of his vote for the Porkulus.

The Obama Ministry of Truth continues to blatantly lie and denigrate all who oppose them.  But if one would take the time to turn off Idol for one night, you might find out the the “Party of No” has been working their collective butts off coming up with idea after idea.

The virtual embargo on reporting Republican legislation has allowed Democrats and their allies in the media to keep up the “Republicans have no plan” attack. Just hours after the president’s speech, for example, the Democratic National Committee released a new commercial claiming that Republicans “refuse to offer a plan” to reform the health care system.

Just for the record, in case you want to check them out, these are the bills proposed, so far, by Tom Price [Head of the House GOP Study Committee] and his allies in the House:

• H.R. 77 The Health care Incentive Act

• H.R. 109 Americas Affordable Health Care Act of 2009

• H.R. 198 Health Care Tax Deduction Act of 2009

• H.R. 270 TRICARE Continuity of Coverage for National Guard and Reserve Families Act of 2009

• H.R. 321 SCHIP Plus Act of 2009

• H.R. 464 More Children, More Choices Act of 2009

• H.R. 502 Health Care Freedom of Choice Act

• H.R. 544 Flexible Health Savings Act of 2009

• H.R. 917 To increase the health benefits of dependents of members of the Armed Forces who die because of a combat-related injury

• H.R. 1086 Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2009

• H.R. 1118 Health Care Choices for Seniors Act

• H.R. 1441 Ryan Dant Health Care Opportunity Act of 2009

• H.R. 1458 Comprehensive Immunosuppressive Drug Coverage for Kidney Transplant Patients Act of 2009

• H.R. 1468 Medical Justice Act of 2009

• H.R. 1658 Veterans Healthcare Commitment Act of 2009

• H.R. 1891 Sunset of Life Protection Act of 2009

• H.R. 2520 Patients’ Choice Act

• H.R. 2607 Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2009

• H.R. 2692 CAH Designation Waiver Authority Act of 2009

• H.R. 2784 Partnership to Improve Seniors Access to Medicare Act

• H.R. 2785 Health Care Paperwork Reduction and Fraud Prevention Act of 2009

• H.R. 2786 Patient Fairness and Indigent Care Promotion Act of 2009

• H.R. 2787 Medical Liability Procedural Reform Act of 2009

• H.R. 3141 Strengthening the Health Care Safety Net Act of 2009

• H.R. 3217 Health Care Choice Act of 2009

• H.R. 3218 Improving Health Care for All Americans Act

• H.R. 3356 Medicare Beneficiary Freedom to Choose Act of 2009

• H.R. 3372 Health Care OverUse Reform Today Act (HealthCOURT Act)

• H.R. 3400 Empowering Patients First Act

• H.R. 3438 Access to Insurance for all Americans Act

• H.R. 3454 Medicare Hospice Reform and Savings Act of 2009

• and H.R. 3478 Patient-Controlled Healthcare Protection Act of 2009

Obama is right, other than these 32 bills, [all written in 2009] the GOP has absolutely no ideas to present.

“It’s frustrating,” Price says. But Republicans believe that in the end, the public won’t buy the administration’s line. “The American people are smarter than that,” Price says. “They know there are alternatives out there. That’s what August was all about.”

Yeah, and that is what November will be about too.

Gabrielle Giffords voted for approval of the $787 billion stimulus bill without reading it beforehand. The consequence of this omission is Giffords could not have known that the stimulus bill was back-loaded for 2010 and beyond. Only 30% of the stimulus bill was spent during 2009, the year we needed to see at least 70% of it spent.

 Giffords also voted for the so-called “cap and trade” bill, also without reading it or the related amendment. In her letter to constituents, Giffords proudly claimed that the bill will actually reduce the average household utility bill by seven percent.

 Energy rates are projected to increase by 90%. Even President Obama admits that energy prices will “skyrocket” under “cap and trade.” On average, the cost for electricity for my residence is about $200 per month for electricity.  Under ACES, the acronym for the “cap and trade” bill, my monthly rate will increase to $380. Gifford claimed that rates will decrease by 7% by 2020. 

 Although the rate will be much higher than $380 per month in 2020, let’s use $380 as our example. A 7% decrease in 2020 translates to a monthly rate of $353.40 or a 77% increase over today’s rate. I don’t know what kind of math Gifford used but it does not add up. There is no 7% decrease, only a 77% increase. Experts agree that rates for electricity, gas, and natural gas will almost double across the board under this bill. ACES is a massive tax increase on the American people and Giffords has participated in one of the largest hoaxes in this nation’s history.

 In the July 16^, 2009, edition of Arizona Capitol Times, Giffords was interviewed. In the interview she claimed that 50 million people did not have access to health care and another 20 million are underinsured. The numbers are estimates not facts. Further Giffords claim that 50 million people do not have access to health care is palpably false.  What these people do not have is health care insurance but they do have access to health care.

 Additionally, Giffords has followed Nancy Pelosi’s orders on not only the stimulus and “cap and trade” bills but also the so-called S-CHIP $33 billion expansion of government health care, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (a sop to trial lawyers), the Stupak antiabortion amendment compromise to the health care bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act adding $2 trillion to the deficit, the Medicare Physician Payment Reform adding more than $200 billion to the deficit, and the Permanent Estate Tax Act increasing inheritance taxes to 45% on estates larger than $3.5 million.

 In one of Giffords’ emails to her constituents, she wrote:

 ”I always appreciate hearing from constituents, like you, who are informed and interested in the important issues affecting Arizona and the nation.  My job as your representative is to help you connect with federal agencies, access services and get your questions answered thoroughly.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if you require assistance.”

 Giffords failed to mention that her most important responsibility is to represent her constituents. Gabrielle Giffords is not a Blue Dog. She’s Nancy Pelosi’s lap dog. So far, it appears that she has been doing Nancy Pelosi’s business rather than the people’s business: not a very good track record to run on in the next election.

Have you ever been asked to taste something that is different than your normal menu du jour?  Typically, this happens with things that might be considered gamey, wild, or offensive.  They have a certain allure, the challenge of the hunt, the novelty of being edgy and different but when you ask…”What does it taste like?”  the answer is…”Tastes like chicken.”

The food item might have a different name, a different species, an entirely different origin…but when you peel back the skin or pluck the feathers and the heat gets to it….it is very similar to something very familiar.

We are currently enduring the presidency of a man with great oratorical skills, who can take a message and spin it well.  He is able to affect dialects of various regions without giving away that it isn’t really his at all.  He talks a good game.  His rhetoric and running “against” rather than “for” was enough to get him elected POTUS.

Most of us know of his record.  Not much to it, lots of “present” votes and little else.  Well, then there is that ugly little matter back in Illinois when he voted for late term abortions.  But…he managed to spin that right out of the public eye.  How did he do it?  He deflected, deferred, marginalized, and with his exceptional rhetorical continues to blame others for all that is wrong and he alone can, and will, make it right.

Lately, I’ve had this nagging notion of déjà vu.  What was it?  It was like I was seeing something so familiar but…different.  Then, watching the video of JD Hayworth at the LD21 meeting…it hit me!

JD Hayworth  is the latest version of “tastes like chicken”!

Can JD talk a good game?  YES HE CAN!

Heck, he talked about games for years before running for office.

Can JD captivate an audience? YES HE CAN!

He was paid for his ability to maintain ratings while a sportscaster. What great training and experience that must have been.  Then all those years on drive time radio, where he controlled the mike, the dialogue, and the subject…who could ask for a better venue?

Can JD market himself to appeal to the consumer?  YES HE CAN!

He has been working on it ever since he was booted from office in a district with an 18% Republican advantage.  He had to; his job was to create an image that would appeal to the market his boss served.  If along the way he made a great living and elevated his chances of returning to DC… just a perk.

Can JD spin a news cycle with the best of them? OH, YES HE CAN!

He has marginalized his own record by pointing out the flaws in others and done so with such grace as to make it appear like business as usual.

The guy is good.  He has made a living out of it.

But, what did he do while in office.  What reasonable expectation can the voter have that he will be more than a great voice with exceptional speaking skills?

Well, let’s look at that….. Congressman Dick Armey, who was House Majority Leader for 8 years of JDs time on The Hill had this to say recently:

….J.D. had a fairly short, undistinguished congressional career with virtually no initiative on his part.”

No initiative?  That’s not good.  But, that’s not all….

As I recall, J.D. was on the Ways and Means Committee and I didn’t really see him make any distinguished effort, for example, like people like (Arizona GOP Reps.) Jeff Flake and John Shadegg in terms of creative ideas and legislative initiative,” Armey said. “Certainly nothing on the cost-control front. But John McCain was the first guy to understand the need to get earmarks under control. He took a real leadership role, as did Jeff Flake.”

So, what about his record?  JD Hayworth is deeply tied, unfortunately, to the two things that have caused the prairie fire of anti-Washington and anti-GOP sentiment….corruption and spending.

I will be the first to say unequivocally… JD Hayworth was exonerated of any wrong doing.  However, there is no denying  Hayworth was involved with former “super-lobbyist” Jack Abramoff and the largest recipient of campaign money from the now-convicted Abramoff.

No “illegal” activity.  But what about judgment and desire to win at all costs?

On to spending…..boy, this could fill a page! So, how about the highlights?

The 2002 Highway Bill…the pork-laden bill that gave us the Highway to Nowhere and filled the pockets of lots of folks with money taken directly from ours.

The unfunded Medicare bill, $7 trillion in debt bequeathed to our children.  Yep, he voted for it.

He supported the 527 campaign loophole bill that created more problems than McCain-Feingold.

And while you are on the bi-partisanship never got us anywhere kick…how about his support of the Dem sponsored, job killing, small business impeding  Sarbanes-Oxley Act?

Yeah….definitely, taste like chicken!

Along a party-line vote, Arizona Democrats approved a $50 million purchase of land for a new National Park.  One one problem, it’s on an island 1000 miles from the United States.

If you are hoping to visit the newest crown jewel in America’s park system chosen by Congress, throw away the car keys and open up your wallet. The 2,900 pristine acres of beachfront property were not cheap — or even in the United States.

The property soliciting accusations of “pork” from critics is the Castle Nugent National Historic Park. It’s in the U.S. Virgin Islands, about a thousand miles from Miami and an expensive jet ride to get there.

Two weeks ago, on a near party line vote, a huge Democratic majority in the House agreed to spend $50 million to buy the former cotton plantation on the island of St. Croix.

The mixture of dry forest and rangeland offers picturesque views of the Caribbean Sea, but good luck getting there. Critics in Congress say the purchase is wasteful and irresponsible, especially with unemployment at 10 percent and the nation in debt.

“Now is not the time to spend up to $50 million dollars of the taxpayers’ money to buy nearly 3,000 acres of beachfront property on a Caribbean Island,” said Rep. Doc Hastings, (R-Wash.), ranking Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee. “We can’t afford a price tag for a new park in St Croix, just as many Americans will never be able to afford a visit there.”

Democrats approved the purchase, even though the National Park Service has yet to complete a study on the purchase.

Read the role call vote here.

Heads up Arizona, Only Harry Mitchell voted against this.  Funny, with all the concern over budget deficits and possible federal and state parks closing, our elected officials have no problem spending $50 Million [that we don’t have], on a island park that most of us will never go to see [Unless you can catch a ride from Nancy Pelosi].

via Liveshots.

For Immediate Release: February 2, 2010

The Arizona Republic reports today that Gabrielle Giffords is increasingly vulnerable for supporting President Obama’s agenda 90 percent of time since he took office, providing a rubber stamp for record spending policies.

According to an analysis by the non-partisan Congressional Quarterly, Giffords voted with the White House 90 percent of the time. The only other representatives in Arizona who have been that loyal to Obama are veteran incumbents Ed Pastor and Raul Grijalva.

“Although Democratic Reps. Harry Mitchell and Ann Kirkpatrick are considered vulnerable, they are less closely identified with Obama at a time when his priorities have been losing support in public-opinion polls and at the ballot box,” the Republic reports in a story titled, “Giffords’ re-election bid could be hurt by Obama backlash.”

Of the state’s three vulnerable Democrats, Giffords is the only one who voted for all three of the president’s signature policies.

Giffords voted for the nearly $800 billion stimulus spending bill — a violation of her pledge to “pay-as-you-go” and a policy that has only led to higher unemployment claims.

Giffords voted for the government-run health care bill, which cuts Medicare benefits to seniors who have already paid into the program by a whopping $500 billion.

Giffords voted for the “cap-and-trade” bill, which is estimated to raise utility costs by at least $1,800 a year for Southern Arizona families and seniors.

“Gabrielle Giffords likes to tout the fact that she voted against raising the debt ceiling. But I’m here to tell her, you can’t have it both ways,” Jonathan Paton said. “If she’s going to vote for this kind of spending, she’s going to have to raise taxes to pay for it. Her votes are forcing the nation’s debt ceiling higher and higher. And her record is a complete violation of her pledge to ‘pay-as-you-go’ and balance the budget. The president’s policies are on the verge of costing the average American $10,000 in new federal red ink.”

The Republic analysis follows the wildly-respected, non-partisan Cook Report downgrading the race from “Likely Dem” to “Leans Dem.” Just two months prior, Cook had graded Congressional District 8 from “Solid Dem” for Giffords.

“The latest drop came shortly after Republican state Sen. Jonathan Paton announced he was joining three other GOP candidates to challenge Giffords,” the Republic reports.

“With one party running everything in Washington, Gabrielle Giffords has shown her true colors,” said Jonathan Paton. “This year she will have to explain her record to her constituents. We need a check-and-balance on this record spending.”

For more information on Jonathan Paton, go to patonforcongress.com

For Immediate Release: February 2, 2010

TUCSON, AZ. Representative Gabrielle Giffords should immediately resign as Chair of the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee. She has a clear conflict of interest from the tens of thousands of dollars her campaign has received from the aerospace industry. She took in over $10,000 in one day alone from people at large corporations such as ATK, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and United Space Alliance. These are companies who stand to make or lose millions of dollars based on decisions made by her subcommittee.

Jesse Kelly stated, “It is disgraceful that Representative Giffords has allowed herself to be compromised by special interests. How can she possibly look out for the taxpayers in District 8 when she is receiving money from the very corporations that she is supposed to oversee? It is no wonder she supported an over-budget and misguided program like the Ares 1 rocket.”

A December 20th article in the Orlando Sentinel explored a possible conflict of interest with her husband’s line of work. Now we realize the true conflict comes from large campaign donations by corporate special interests.

Representative Giffords should immediately resign from the Space and Aeronautics subcommittee or return the donations from all corporations that have business before the subcommittee.

Jesse Kelly is a candidate for Arizona’s Eighth Congressional District in the southeastern region of the state. For more information on the Jesse Kelly campaign please visit VoteJesseKelly.com.