There Ought to Not Be A Law
Aug15
By John Feehery
When you travel, you get a chance to get reacquainted with the USA today, and on the front page of that newspaper, the headline blared “61 bills, Congress is on pace to make history with the least productive legislative year in the post World-War II era.”
Okay, it’s a long headline. And the headline pretty much sums up the story by my friend Sue Davis. It should come as no surprise that the Congress and the current President found little to agree on.
And with the Senate pretty much taking the year off (they haven’t passed a budget in three years, for example), this story doesn’t necessarily fit into the “news” category.
Doug Heye, another friend, and the spokesman for Majority Leader Eric Cantor, appropriately pinned the blame on the senate, pointing out that the house has passed 30 economic growth measures only to see them die in upper chamber.
But a bigger question should asked. Don’t we have enough laws? Shouldn’t we start repealing some of the stupid laws that are already on the books? Don’t the American people already live in fear that they are breaking some law somewhere, without even knowing it?
In many ways, the fact that we have little legislative output from Congress is a huge testament to the political courage of house republicans, who finally said that enough is enough. They stopped the aggressive legislative assault from the democrats in the previous two years.
They didn’t make much progress in repealing stupid laws, but you can’t go in reverse until you stop the car. The republicans stopped the car. Now it is high time to end some really stupid laws.
I think that you have a valid point John of “repealing some of the stupid laws” BUT the country has to be governed when it is necessary! Our government cannot be in a constant stalemate where the can is just kicked down the road on MANY major issues that have to be dealt with (mostly at the last minute and mainly because “compromise” is a dirty word to the Tea Party). I agree that there is plenty of fault to go around in both parties but most of the fault in my opinion is because of the Tea Party (not the mainstream GOP).
If Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill could compromise, have bipartisan bill signing ceremonies, and be personal friends despite their political differences back in the 1980s, then can somebody please tell me why the same thing cannot happen today? Please read this excellent article and explain to me why we cannot get rid of the ideologues in BOTH parties (there are more of us than there are of them, they are just more active than us), tell them to come back when they can behave like adults, and do the same thing today that Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill could do so the government can truly function again:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/27/AR2006012701429.html
When Partisan Venom Didn’t Rule
House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill with President Ronald Reagan at a bill signing in 1983. (Barry Thumma – AP)
By David S. Broder
Sunday, January 29, 2006
The stench of partisanship is so strong in Washington these days that it is difficult to remember that it was not always the case that Republicans and Democrats were at each other’s throats. But, in truth, there was a time when friendship and simple human compassion were far more powerful than any political differences.
A wonderful reminder of that fact can be found among the oral histories compiled by two dozen of Ronald Reagan’s main associates that are being released Sunday by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. The transcripts are available at http://www.millercenter.org/ .
One of the tapes was furnished by Max Friedersdorf, who ran the White House congressional liaison staff for Reagan. Friedersdorf recounts in the interview what happened while the president was recovering at George Washington University Hospital after the assassination attempt outside the Washington Hilton hotel on March 30, 1981.
Reagan was seriously wounded by John Hinckley, and the day after the shooting, Friedersdorf got a call in the White House from James Baker, Reagan’s chief of staff, who was at the hospital. “Get over here,” Baker commanded.
“I went over to GW Hospital and went up to the president’s room,” Friedersdorf said, “and Jim was outside the room with Mrs. Reagan and her Secret Service agent. Baker said, ‘I want you to stay here until I tell you to leave.’ ”
What had happened, Friedersdorf learned, was that Nancy Reagan “was all upset,” because Sen. Strom Thurmond had come over to the hospital a few hours earlier and somehow had talked his way through the lobby, up the elevator and into Reagan’s room, where he attempted to chat with the gravely wounded president.
“Mrs. Reagan was outraged, distraught,” Friedersdorf said. So Baker directed him to take up the watch, and “if any congressman or senator comes around here, make sure the Secret Service doesn’t let anybody up, even on this floor.”
Friedersdorf said he remained on duty during daylight hours for the next three or four days, and then word came from Baker that the president had recovered enough to start to see people.
The first person to be admitted, Friedersdorf said, was Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill, the speaker of the House.
When the Massachusetts Democrat arrived, Nancy Reagan slipped out of the room and Friedersdorf retreated to a corner of the suite where he could remain unobtrusive. “Tip got down on his knees next to the bed, and said a prayer for the president, and he held his hand and kissed him and they said a prayer together . . . the 23rd Psalm.
“The speaker stayed there quite a while. They never talked too much. I just heard him say the prayer, then I heard him say, ‘God bless you, Mr. President, we’re all praying for you.’
“The Speaker was crying. The president still, I think was a little, he was obviously sedated, but I think he knew it was the speaker because he said, ‘I appreciate your coming down, Tip.’ He held his hand, sat there by the bed, and held his hand for a long [time].”
When I reached Friedersdorf last week at his retirement home in Florida, I asked him how it happened that Reagan’s first guest was the leading Democrat on Capitol Hill. “Well,” he said, “Tip was third in line of succession [after the vice president] and the fact he was a Democrat didn’t bother anybody. We didn’t even think about it. Tip had been calling constantly to see how the president was doing. And there was a bond there.
“I remember,” Friedersdorf continued, “the first dinner the Reagans had in the private residence was for Tip and his wife, and my wife and I were there. Tip and the president had a drink or two and started swapping Irish stories.
“Often, after that, Tip would say pretty harsh things about some of our legislative proposals, and the staff would want Reagan to answer him. But they trusted each other, and the president would say, ‘That’s just Tip,’ and let it go.”
I asked Friedersdorf if he could imagine that sort of relationship flourishing now between the Republican president and the top Democrats in Congress.
“Absolutely not,” he said. Sadly, I think he is right.
Any time our Congress is ‘doing something’ it is costing the people either; erosion of our freedoms, tax dollars, or -The Daily Double- both.
So, Congress: “Don’t just do something, stand there!”
I once wrote to my representative about the waste of time investigating Major League Baseball and got a letter back from her, that there was no other ‘investigative body’ authorized to look into MLB.
I have now come to realize that this kind of ‘work’ and National Hotdog Day type proclamations, cost us (The People) the least amount of freedom and dollars. Not a better use for the bunch.
Perhaps they should be forced to spend at least 25% of their time (50% would be great), reviewing and removing costly and useless, laws and statutes.
Well, there is no handing out special favors, tax breaks, and tax dollars to cronies, so as to get reelected (Lather, Rinse, Repeat…..)
One can dream.