A Glimmer of Hope

Most Congressional hearings are not that scintillating. The ones you see on TV, with Roger Clemens testifying about steroids, Ben Bernanke, or some general back from the field, are the exceptions (and let's face it: they're pretty predictable too, with important people working hard to not say anything important). Mostly, it's a group of policy wonks or industry reps talking to members of Congress about some minutiae in a bill that may or may not go anywhere. At their worst, these hearings are scripted events where actors trot out their lines in order to move (or block) some legislation valuable (or hurtful) to their constituents.

At their best, however, a hearing can be a great example of good government in action, and as someone whose been testifying for years, let me tell you about one from last week that struck me as uniquely positive. My point is not simply to report on an unusually useful couple of hours in the halls of government. At the risk of over-extrapolating, I thought I saw a glimpse of what our political future might look like if we make the right choice on Nov. 4. And it provided a glimmer of hope.

The hearing was before the House Committee on Education and Labor, chaired by Rep. George Miller (D-CA). The topic was how to best craft a recovery package to accomplish two things: help those hurt by the troubled economy, and stimulate that economy back to life. The majority party gets to choose most of the witnesses, so this panel featured only one Republican witness and, uncharacteristically, not one Republican member of the committee showed up.

This sounds like glib snark, but I can tell you based on personal experience, that's one reason why this hearing worked well. Like I said, I've done these for years, and ever since Reagan, Republican witnesses in economic hearings almost always have one, and only one, theme: supply-side tax cuts (okay, lately they've added "drill, baby, drill," but that's a newcomer, and it's just about as compelling as their tax plan; oh yes, and "deregulation" shows up a lot too, though this is a bit of a non-starter right now, to put it mildly).

If you don't believe me, read the testimony at the above link by the R witness, William Beach from the conservative Heritage Foundation: high-end tax cuts (extend the Bush cuts, cut the capital gains rate, lower the corporate tax), find more oil, avoid "burdensome regulations."

That's almost all they bring to the table, regardless of the evidence, the topic, or outside circumstances. Case in point, this hearing was about a stimulus package that needs to move quickly off the mark, and Beach was pushing tax changes (extending the Bush cuts) that come into play at the end of 2010. It's the same supply-side agenda the Heritage folks push in good times and bad. Their only tool is a hammer, so it all looks like nails to them. Same with the oil thing. Does Beach not recognize that the price of gas is down well over a dollar nation-wide, yet we're still mired in recession?

As I wrote last week in this space, ideology that's impervious to facts is the last thing we need right now, and the fact that such thinking was vastly under-represented was one reason why this hearing worked.

The hearing began with testimony by Dana Stevens, a woman from New Jersey who's been unemployed since July. Since then she's applied for 143 jobs and gotten only seven interviews. She's an extremely impressive, articulate person, and she's even willing to take a pay cut, within reason given her financial needs.

But there's just no work out there. Hiring freezes are pervasive. Back in January of last year there were 1.5 job seekers per available job. Now that ratio has doubled--it's 3 to 1. Add in the six million people who are working fewer hours than they desire, and one in nine persons is un- or underemployed.

Economist Ron Blackwell and I presented facts like these, along with our views re the magnitude and composition of a recovery package. In order to offset a recession that is likely to drive unemployment to at least 8% by the end of next year (it's about 6% now), I think we need to spend roughly $50 billion to help strapped states, $50 billion on infrastructure (more on that below), and $50 billion on extending both unemployment insurance and food stamps. Beyond that, it might be useful to boost household incomes with direct payments, but that was the exclusive thrust of the last round of stimulus, and we should deemphasize such payments this round. Checks can help for awhile, no question, but people need jobs, and that's why many of us are bullish on infrastructure investment right now.

Here's where Professor Robert Pollin's testimony comes in. Do yourself a favor, and give this one a read (same link as above). It's a detailed road map of a vital public investment agenda, with an emphasis on green technologies. There are the usual candidates--schools, water management, roads, bridges--as well as building retrofits, smart grid electrical systems, and renewable energy. Moreover, Pollin shows that in terms of jobs, these investments get you a bigger bang for the buck than tax cuts, military spending, or "drill, baby, drill" (see his figure 1).

In a similar vein, Chris Hansen made a solid case for including the expansion of high speed broadband networks in an infrastructure agenda, providing access to areas that are still off this grid, a serious economic and social disadvantage in today's world.

(A related point in my testimony is that infrastructure investment has often been dismissed in the context of stimulus as having too long a lead time. Not so. There are tons of productive projects in all of these areas ready to go, if not already underway but starved for resources.)

But beyond the good information exchange, what stood out in this hearing was the discussion between the members of Congress and the panelists. These exchanges can too often reduce to partisans getting "experts" to confirm their biases: "Mr. X, you noted in your testimony that 2+2=5. Could you elaborate?"

In this case, members were genuinely seeking our insights into how to structure a recovery package, and providing their own amplification as to what parts made most sense to them. Reps. George Miller and Lynn Woolsey, clearly motivated by the deteriorating economy and rising unemployment, wanted to hear about ways we might extend unemployment insurance benefits to meet the needs of people like Ms. Stevens, including upping the "replacement rate"--the share of salary replaced by UI benefits (it rarely breaks 50%; I think now's a good time to go up to 70%, at least temporarily).

John Sarbanes (D-MD) picked up on a great Pollin point about "crowding in"--how sometimes government investment creates untapped markets that later draws in private investment. The internet is, of course, a classic example, and green technologies create the same possibilities, with even greater potential benefits.

Other members, like Dave Loebsack (D-IA) stressed how the recession is cutting into their state's revenues, and wanted to learn more about the actions states were taking. Unlike the Feds, states have to balance their budgets, and they're actively cutting services (and jobs), as well as raising fees and taxes, actions that will only serve to deepen the recession. Thus, unlike the earlier stimulus package, this one must include state fiscal relief.

Like I said, I don't want to get all starry-eyed here, but I couldn't help but wonder if the dynamics of this hearing--creative, open-minded thinking about solving problems in a progressive, even green, way--might be a tiny harbinger of a new era, where government actually works to solve problems, not create them. Is this, I asked myself, the way things might operate in an Obama era?

I know, this election is by no means over, and despite the favorable polls, I'm not one iota complacent about the outcome. It's just that this hearing revealed what may be a light at the end of the tunnel. Unless that's the headlights of the Straight-talk Express headed right for us.

(Note to readers: I'm going to take a break to work on the paperback edition of Crunch. I want to thank Ms. Huffington and the HP blogteam for the chance to post here on Sunday PM/Monday AM. See you after the election. I'm sure we'll have a lot more to talk about...)

Comments

[jeanrenoir]

Your hope is fully justified with Obama. It says it all that Obama, symbolically and literally, surrounds himself with Buffett and Volcker, two of the most brilliant, practical, and highly respected realists in the history of the American economy. After his annihilation of the Clintons, McCain, the neocons, and the entire Republican Pary, Obama will be in the most powerful position of any president since Roosevelt at least. Unlike Reagan, Obama will be a truly free agent who will not be a tool of the special interests whose money elected him. Having revolutionized campaign financing so brilliantly, and having neutered the K St. lobbyists in the process, Obama can do the intelligent thing, instead of the politically expedient thing vis a vis the lobbyists who normally control presidents. This could absolutely revolutionize the way DC works. Obama will have the kind of popular mandate Reagan did, and will remain every bit as charming and likable as Reagan ever was, but with a first-rate intellect to match his upbeat, HOPEFUL temperament. He'll have everything going for him that BOTH FDR and Reagan combined had. And he'll surround himself with first-rate pragmatists. This should be quite an administration, and the most amazing 180 since '32 itself.

[stevespelling]

Here's the link to Obama's 2001 interview on public radio in Chicago where he says the Supremem court was not Obama stated it's a "TRAGEDY THAT "REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH" was NOT PURSUED BY SUPREME COURT". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

More information that the Democratic party including it's Main stream media can suppress about Obama's radical left wing views!

[wheresthebeef]

Try to focus.

[TheLar]

I'm skeptical that anyone in the country is really against "redistribution of wealth" - the latest buzzword making the rounds in the Bush Admin talking points faxes. Especially not the Republicans. Do they really NOT want taxpayer money redistributed to their businesses for contracts and/or bailouts?

Yawn. Another buzzword bites the dust. Keep flailin' Palin. GO OBAMA!

[contemporarymom]

You're skeptical that anyone in the country is really against "redistribution of wealth"?

Are you serious? That is at the heart the difference between the 2 parties.

While Repubs want the wealth to "trickle down", right or wrong, Dems believe what is mine is yours and yours is mine.

[breezyholler]

The concentration of wealth in the top 10 % of any society has never worked.and it is obviously not working now ,,Except for the greedy pigs at the top who can never get enough..
Of course we now need a redistribution , and it needs to begin by prosecuting these fat cats who've been collecting $100,000,000 salaries ,,while every one else takes a hit..And now the Bush Admin. has these same foxes guarding the hen house. this is a profound time we are in ...GREED v. TRUTH....THE TRUTH IS COMING OUT ON TOP !

[sarah2012]

Think this will be on Hardball tonight? ha

[mannwich]

So taking up to $1-$3 TRILLION of taxpayer dollars to bail out the uber powerful and wealth corporations isN'T "redistribution of wealth?" Please do get a clue. Do some research. Stick to reality.

[flossophy]

folks, the bailout is all about keeping the markets liquid, so they can function... every human on Earth benefits from a healthy market.

[HyperInfluential]

I'm just curious, how do you work yourself up to sincerity in criticizing "redistribution of wealth," when it was President Bush himself who proposed the recent $700 billion Wall Street Bailout plan? Is it hard to maintain that cognitive dissonance? Did the Republican party give you any special self-hypnosis techniques to keep the mental compartments separate?

[Samalabear]

I really enjoyed reading this. The possibilities -- yes, it all makes sense. It just enhanced how vitally important this election is. I was hearing John McCain's mantra against the Dems of tax-and-spend, tax-and-spend -- and it seemed just so laughable considering our situation, because we all know it's not just tax and spend -- it how tax and how you spend that counts -- and that's what I'm looking forward to in an Obama situation. I am all for checks and balances, but it looks like we could have a one-party majority all around this election and I say try it on for size and give it a chance. The Republican Party seriously has to examine itself and find what it stands for. This has been the ugliest (and in many ways the most ridiculous) campaign I've ever seen in my life -- I'm 52 years of age. The ugly and the ridiculous has come almost exclusively from the Republican side with McCain/Palin -- the old worn-out mantras over and over again, regardless of whether America is imploding or not, a resistance to change and embrace new ideas. Grand Old Party -- therein lies the problem -- old, stubborn and gridlocked.

[anandakos]

Samala,

I LOVE it: Gridlocked Old Party! Well done!

[contemporarymom]

You are right, its how its spent and what is taxed.

I'm always amazed when folks complain about how ugly a campaign is, every time it's the worst it's ever been. This is just something the media likes to talk about to fill air time.

It gets nasty because it works - just like we dont like to admit we feed those nasty gossip rags by buying them - the nasty campaigns work to fill news air time and be honest many believe whatever is being said.

So instead of complaining about how nasty the campaign has gotten - search out the truth and see whats real and whats not - you'd be amazed at what a lousy job the media has done for both candidates.

[thismachinekillsfascists]

Negative campaigning USED to work, before the days of the internet and fact-checking. This election is going to go down as the YouTube election

[Erdgeist]

For a long time the Republicans, as you say, have had an "ideology that's impervious to facts" which "is the last thing we need right now." Such facts are historical facts, I hasten to add. One such fact these Republicans are completely impervious to is that free-trade actually causes depressions. This is an historical fact brought forth by the economic historian, Paul Bairoch, in his book, "Economics and World History" who deconstructs a lot of economic myths -- one myth being that free-trade is good. Frankly, I have read all the arguments in favor of free-trade. They always manage to gloss over one central nail that cannot be pounded down: wages drop across the board in the example of the U.S. Moreover, free-trade, by and large, profits corporations -- not the average American -- who are outsourcing jobs, otherwise called labor arbitraging (hence the profitability made off the backs of labor).

[NamelessGenXer]

You make an excellent case for why the Neo-Conservative Ideology is finished for good, soon to be marginalized if not completely ostracized, and the Republican Party is finished for at least a generation.

[flossophy]

umm... wanna bet?

I would argue the inverse. The historical record does not bode well for socialism... conservatism has won almost all of the arguments of our modern era. The US has been on a steady course rightward since the 70s.

But it may require another Carter presidency for a younger generation to understand the pitfalls of left-leaning policies.

Perhaps consider Obama a socialist hiccup... if he wins.

Erdgeist, free trade is good wherever it's found... welcome to 2008.

[tangie]

I'm not a politician, economist or particularly interested in the inner workings of government, but I know hope when I feel it, and I'm feeling it now.

Some leaders demand respect, others expect it. But the rare few inspire; those are the ones who become great leaders.

Obama inspires.

Just a little longer to wait. Obama/Biden 08

[loveu2]

Please let it be so! Vote early!

[Pupadup4oBama]

Great comment Tangie.

It's a gut feeling to truly recognize a great leader, and to feel hope that things will work out. Will it be a rough road - of course it will, but with perseverance and great leadership, we'll all come out of this together, and we'll all come out of it o.k.

[LeonBNJ]

I think one of the ideas that needs to be persued and can be relatively quickly is to encourage conservation by higher taxes on excessive consuming, tax rebates and deductions.
Tax incentives and rebates to encourage conservation improvements for homes from more insulation, to replacing windows and doors with more efficient ones, more efficient heating furnaces/boiler, as well as air conditioning systems, better weather stripping, timer thermostats. Encouraging such conservation improvements can all save billions of dollars a year as well as employ many to do the work, keep the 'Home Depot' and makers of the needed materials busy.
We may have to increase the state and federal gasoline tax (not diesel as mainly would affect businesses and diesel is higher in price vs. gasoline due to various factors) to discourage consumption as we saw with the run up in prices we had earlier this year. Significant taxes on 'fuel guzzlers' could be used to offset incentives to purchase USA/Canadian made small cars and trucks.

[MsDoc]

I also live in NJ and have been trying to find a way to convert my all electric home ( 30 years old ) to anything else. I was particularly interested in natural gas since a gas line was run down my street several years ago and solar panels are pretty much out of the question given that I live in a heavily wooded area.

To put it simply, the cost is simply prohibitive. Without some kind of substantial tax incentive, I simply can't afford it... and that doesn't take current loan interest rates if, in fact, at my age I could even get one.

This is clearly a place where the government could step in relatively simply, but I'll bet they won't... there are still too many hands in the piggy bank...

The same goes for the automotive industry... but that's not very se xy either.

[loveu2]

If the drug companies would lower the prices on my insulin, I'd have some money left to use for consumer goods, which would help stimulate the economy!

[NTO08]

George Stephanopoulis stated the obvious to Rahm Emmanuel Sunday morning: you are NOT going to balance the budget in four years...(the Democratic majority Congress in tandem with an Obama presidency)...

It is a pipe dream to imagine Obama being able to do all he promises when there is NO money to do it with...why do the liberal media insist on advancing his agenda that is clearly doomed by the practicalities of the economic downturn that was brought about by numerous guilty parties, political and non-political?

[loveu2]

Does that need to be stated? We all know NOBODY can do what they're promising in this economy. What they CAN do is foster a climate of cooperation and look for REAL solutions to some of our problems, instead of fighting in Congress all the time. The MSM just has to fill the news cycle with something about the election. Instead of tax rebates, IMO the govt. should invest that money in the development of green energy. Let's GO, Pres. Obama.

[tckdan]

It's true that a quick fix is a dream, but I don't see McCain's proposals doing anything other than letting the economy dig itself deeper into its current troubles.

[greeniefromOH]

I don't think you even read the article. Do you understand that we have been spending TONS of money for the last eight years, mostly on defense (the war) and have nothing to show for it? Whereas infrastructure, for example, is an investment that will more than pay for itself.

[wheresthebeef]

You assume that President Obama would fall prey to the same bias against "fact-based reality" that the Republicans have displayed for the past eight years. (By the way, wasn't it Senator McCain who, until very recently at least, was promising to balance the budget by the end of his first term?)

[HyperInfluential]

Just because someone is a famous pundit, that does not give them godlike powers to see the future. There is no particular reason why we couldn't balance the budget in four years, we just have to stop throwing our money away, and increase our national income by starting our factories back up. If we actually work hard MAKING THINGS instead of pushing paper around, we can sell those things for whatever we can get for them. If we make a next-generation windmill or solar panel that the rest of the world loves, we could make a lot of money. I for one am glad someone so intelligent will be at the helm; I'm sure he'll see very clearly how we can make the most money as a country, working together, making things once more as we did in our glory days.

[OldKnute]

Dear Jared,

Some facts to consider.

In 2006, 50 Billion in overall sales of Alternatives.
2007, 150 Billion over all.
2008, Should break 250 Billion.

Lets look at other areas where this type of growth was seen.

Home Improvement. 1986 to 1996. With the popularity of shows like Home Improvement and This old house, the Home Center retailer was king. A $1000 investment in Home Depot in 1984 would have meant over a 1 Million Dollar return by 1994. (off the top of my head)

Markets will always be a combination of customer awareness, product value, and increased manufacturing capacity and efficiencies.

Nay Sayers, will tell you that It can take as long as to years to take deliver of wind turbines. WRONG. Those are those HUGE Propeller types systems, much like is seen in the Boon Pickens Ads. Not the light industrial or home-based type “Vertical Axis” systems.

Home based “Combo”, Wind and Solar, is now in the $15,000 range, replacing all your energy needs for a 2,000 sq. ft. home. Many states offer direct payment for extra output back-fed into the grid, some offer a one to one exchange. Either Model allows for the elimination of costly batteries of a home or small business based system. The existing grid becomes your repository. (Battery)

Incentives will help that is for sure, but the free market is more responsive than Government ever could be.

JMO

All the best

Knute Neo-LIB

[loveu2]

I loved your post. I had no idea all this was going on, especially the individual wind turbines. Can you post a link where I could go to get more information on that? Thanks

[OldKnute]

I use Hufington Post,,, Green Section.

Right here. Huff-Po Try the search function for Wind and Solar.

I hope this helps.

Also one of the Vertical Axial wind turbine company is an advertiser here. I think the Article also featured Jay Leno using this same company. See also Ed Bagly Jr. article Huff-Po in the Green section.

All the best

Knute Neo-LIB

[Pupadup4oBama]

BTW - I'm beginning to think Fiscally Conservative is an oxymoron.

[OldKnute]

Pupadup, this is one of the main reasons I left the Republican Party.

Read Jareds Article. What do we hear from the McCain Camp, Drill Baby Drill, Win in Iraq at all costs, 40 Billion for Palin’s Pipeline so vulnerable to terrorist attack, Big Oil backing of the Campaign. Canadian Oil Shale at 2 and a half times per barrel of today’s crude oil pricing, maybe more now that oil has droped.

We not only need to invest in alternatives that give FREEDOM from the dictatorship of foreign oil producers, but save what we do have of domestic oils for more positive industrial uses such as solvents and resins for carbon fiber technologies. (Coal)

Carbon fiber products for car bodies, tractor frames, trucking shells, hydro-electric turbine blades, bicycle frames, appliance housings, wall panels, building and framing members, bridge construction beaming and high-rise construction members. Studs, doors, siding, flooring in a thousand colors and textures, the possibilities are endless and 100% recyclable and GLUED together.

Oil companies do not go out of business, coal companies either, we just stop burning up what the earth has provided us. We just use it in new ways.

McCain has voted down every Alternative Energy proposal that had crossed his desk for 26 years. Since 1982. Now we are at war again.

The Obama plan means JOBS, new industries, new products for export, new manufacturing, new clean energy for our Nation.

All the best

Knute Neo-LIB

[anandakos]

Knute,

The vertical axis machines are great for folks in the exurbs and full country, where there is free flowing wind. They don't work well in more densely developed areas because of wind blockage. In medium density "young" suburbs with few large trees solar is a better alternative. Even in cloudy areas an unshaded roof can provide ample hot water.

That said, it would be wonderful if most people in areas with good wind access all had eggbeaters.

[OldKnute]

Dear Ananda,

You may want to research the Ed Bagely Jr. article. Type. Because of improvements in Neodymium Magnet technologies, these New-Gen Vertical Axial wind turbines start producing electricity in as low as an 8 mile per hour wind, barely enough wind to furl a flag fully.

Also they are small, and present a solid appearance profile to birds in flight and are silent in operation. If you live in a ravine surrounded by high-rise apartments, you can always pole mount them, up amongst the tops of neighboring trees. Hidden by the trees except for the upper most rotating element, they also do not detract from your view.

Such can also be dome with Solar panels when in a forested area. A friend faced such a dilemma in Northern California. He simply oriented twin cables between to tall trees and mounted his solar panels along the cabling, some 70 feet off the ground. There his Solar Panels were in the sun all day long.

Where there is a will there is a way.

You just need be a little creative.

All the best

Knute Neo-LIB

[pmag88]

OldKnute,

No one is suggesting that the 'government' should supplant the market. What most of us have been saying all along is that there is a place for government and regulation. The sooner the government assumes its proper role, the sooner we can all get back to growing our investments with the greatest assurance possible. We're on the same side here.

[OldKnute]

Please PGM88,

Kindly.

Don’t take a single sentence and infer that I would ever suggest a BIG Government only or No Government role.

Not so.

Please review my profile and other posts.


Umm? How can I explain how I see things and why?

OK,, save the whales? Have you ever stopped to think that John D. Rockefeller was ahead of Green Peace by nearly 100 years? His researchers developed kerosene, a clean burning alternative to Whale oils, primarily sold as lamp oil for lighting?

That as steam power was becoming accepted, the forest were being cut down at an unsustainable rate, in steps the Coal industry, encourages Irish and Welsh miners to immigrate to America. Our Easter forests were saved?

The flip side of that coin. Both the Coal Industry and Standard oil lobbied Congress and supported women’s suffrage and the temperance movements to pass a progression of prohibitions on Alcohol,, a competitive alternative to fossil fuels. The Ford Model T was designed to run on Alcohol. Gasoline was a waste product, full of shellacs and varnishes. Henry Ford resisted the oil company’s desires to expend into the Auto Fuels market, Henry himself a FARMER, knew his customers could make their own fuel AT HOME. From Bootleggers we have NASCAR,, cause the old shiners knew a little white lightening the tank, made an old Lincoln run like a stippid arse ape. Ever hear of AAA fuel dragsters?

A Balance.

All the best

Knute Neo-LIB

[Rhuaidhri]

Although not an economist I can't see why Governments have to replicate the worst tendancies of their citizens, running up debts when times are good and then not having anything saved for a rainy day.

When things are going good you need to target your spending and build up key infrastructure and supports to so that you can be competitive. You should be running hefty surpluses and reducing your debt.

Then if and when a down turn occurs you spend spend spend.

Why this way? Well first off if your government is in competition with the private sector for the limitied construction capacity your only going to drive prices and inflation up during the good times. However when a downturn occurs your be able to get your infrastructure built quickly and cheaply due to the unused construction capacity as well as providing a much need boost to the economy.

[Pupadup4oBama]

Well, dontcha know - that would make WAY too much sense!

[Overd0g]

Politicians get elected to deliver free goodies to their constituencies. That is why your idea will never, ever happen. Our predicament is our own fault, and we deserve to suffer.

[Hopeington]

Thank you Mr. Bernstein, All together enlightening and uplifting.
Through you I could hear the intelligent dialogue and see the positive interaction, that we believe is possible, with Barack Obama as our President.­.......and I think it's safe to say,,
We all sure hope it's the blinding light of realization that's comin' down the track!

[owlsocks]

I concur. The inspiration and intelligence of your experience came through in your writing.

Thanks for sharing.

[Hopeington]

You're welcome, always nice when someone responds. Let's me know people aren't blogging just to see themelves blog! Big up appreciated.. and back at cha!!

[MinerSam]

Tell me about it. Have seen hundreds of congressional hearings SINCE Democrats restored oversight and discovered that the Republicans turned Executive Branch Agencies into Central Headquarters of the Republican Party, deleted scientific documents, turned the Justice Department into a weapon against opposition, and pushed out thousands of non Partisan Civil Servents (contract netogitators) gave the business to their supporters. and madeDC the highest Per Capita Income City in the Nation.

After the Republicans lost in 2006 saw their advisors suggest the only job for the Republicans going forward was to make the Democrats look bad when the POOp of Republican actions hit the fans..

So Bush took out his RUSTY Veto pen, used the bully pulpit to claim that the Democrats have not acchieved anything, and the Republicans, dropped everything on the floor after 12 years as Majority Party TO AVOID AN ORDERLY TRASITION, and when the Democrats restored democracy they took advantage and began to fillubuster everything.

At hearing they ordinarily OBRSTUCT by repeating the weekely Republican Talking Points (socialism, Obama is the most liberal and the rest of the lies) THIS IS WHY IT IS CRITICAL TO HAVE A DEMOCRATIC 60 vote MAJORITY AND THROW THOSE BUMS OUT!!!

It is not the Democrats who have been partisan, The moderate republicans claim behind the scene that they are treated better by the Democrats than by their own (Redical RIGHT WING TOTALITARIAN party...(GOP Gas&Oil Pary)

Time TO DUMP THE JUVENILE DELINQUENTS and let the adults fix the damage!

[longtalldrink]

Totally agree!

[loveu2]

Don't you just get "tickled" when McCain starts blabbing about how bad things will be if the Dems. get control of Congress and the White House? "One party in charge of everything!" Guess it was o.k. these last 8 years, with the Republicans running everything, tho. I woke up every day expecting to see Bush and Cheney had declared that the Supreme Court was going to be part of the Executive branch from now on.

[Pupadup4oBama]

I do actually get "tickled"!
And the even funnier part are those people falling for it. Do they really not understand what's been going on these past 8 years?

[Overd0g]

It wasn't fillibuster proof. But yes, one set of idiots claiming that the other set of idiots will be worse. Who knows? We're screwed either way.

[PT6]

I heard an economist suggest today that we need to fund infrastructure projects that can be implemented immediately to boost the economy!

So long term projects are not what is needed to shock the economy back into gear!

[Tim303]

Infrastructure is a good word and a good thing.

[Pupadup4oBama]

Better than "Iraqi Occupation"

[jon999999]

i'm glad to hear a growing chorus calling for infrastructure investment. its been lacking for over 30 years and is great for stimulating the economy and creating lots of jobs plus it allows a future economy to prosper off of the investment like we saw with the post WWII era building off the New Deal and Interstate Highway investments. Infrastructure would also be a boon for the construction, engineering and architecture professions that have been hammered hard by the freeze on credit and falling home prices since very few can get the money to build now.

In addition to the infrastructure items mentioned above, I'd like to see to increased investment in high speed rail, Amtrak and mass transit.

[TN60]

After taking a road trip back from LA and to Maryland on the busiest Interstates in the world this last year, I second your motion to see investment in high rail and mass transit.

While gas prices were going through the roof, I was surrounded by big trucks, 18 wheelers comparable to being surrounded by skyscrapers in NYC. You take your life into your own hands while competeing with these lines after lines of massive gas guzzlers and you are in a tiny automobile.

I had a lot of time to think while on this journey and fighting for my life on the road! Why in the world do we have indivual trucks, by the thousands, hauling goods from point A to Z? Why not put those trailers on hight speed rail and have them picked up at or close to their destination? They are burning gas at a rate that belies the oil and green debate.

Just how dumb are the powers in Washington and just how dumb are WE to keep sending the same old dummies back there year after year?

[longtalldrink]

I agree. Maybe 20-30 years ago, highway driving was a pleasant thing the whole family could enjoy. Now it is stressful and not at all fun. I think you have a great idea for getting all those trucks off the road. Teach the truck drivers how to drive the high speed rails.

[loveu2]

May 2008 be remembered as the "Year We Woke Up". Between the gas-guzzling trucks and the money-guzzling, do nothing Congress, we really need CHANGE.

[Pupadup4oBama]

Wow, what a concept!!!

I've always said I wanted separate highways, trucks on bottom, cars on top...(at the time I wasn't really thinking of global warming).