Archive for the ‘ House of Representatives ’ Category

Thank you Representative Huizenga! This is what the American people, all of us, expect out of Congress: Responsiveness to the people’s needs and a critical understanding of where our uncontrolled spending will lead: Bankruptcy of the United States.

Add This! Blogmarks BlogLines del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google Reader MyShare Ask.com Netscape reddit Sphere StumbleUpon Technorati Plugin by Dichev.com

Leave your Comment

As the threatened United States government shutdown continues to be avoided and the controversial collective bargaining bill passes the Wisconsin State Senate, the dire situation of crippling budget deficits at both the national and state levels is emerging as potentially the number one issue in the upcoming 2012 election season as we count down to New Hampshire and Iowa.

The Wisconsin State Assembly will take up the issue tomorrow morning at 11:00 am CST, as reported by the Wisconsin State Journal. Should Governor Walker’s collective bargaining bill pass, adjustments of the citizenry will be painful and most likely herald more to come in other areas, but Wisconsin will achieve a major success in learning how to live within its means—something our federal government hasn’t yet figured out how to do or realize the impending necessity.

Last Saturday, President Obama stated in his weekly address that: “We need to come together around a budget that cuts spending without slowing our economic momentum. We need a government that lives within its means without sacrificing job-creating investments in education, innovation, and infrastructure. The budget I sent to Congress makes these investments, but it also includes a 5-year spending freeze, and it will reduce our deficits by $1 trillion over the next decade. In fact, the cuts I’ve proposed would bring annual domestic spending to its lowest share of the economy under any president in more than 50 years. Over the last few weeks, members of Congress have been debating their own proposals. And I was pleased that Democrats and Republicans in Congress came together a few days ago and passed a plan to cut spending and keep the government running for two more weeks. Still, we can’t do business two weeks at a time. It’s not responsible, and it threatens the progress our economy has been making. We’ve got to keep that momentum going. We need to come together, Democrats and Republicans, around a long-term budget that sacrifices wasteful spending without sacrificing the job-creating investment in our future.”

Click to continue reading “Will “Downsizing” Be the Buzzword of the 2012 Election Season?”

Add This! Blogmarks BlogLines del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google Reader MyShare Ask.com Netscape reddit Sphere StumbleUpon Technorati Plugin by Dichev.com

Leave your Comment

NOW I understand…Eliminating a tax DECREASE is NOT a tax INCREASE. Thank you Speaker Pelosi.

Thanks for reading, or in this case, viewing.

–Matthew S. Urdan

Add This! Blogmarks BlogLines del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google Reader MyShare Ask.com Netscape reddit Sphere StumbleUpon Technorati Plugin by Dichev.com

Leave your Comment

Here at Inside Government our mission is to help explain and provide insight into how our government works and to help empower citizens to take action by providing tools to contact representatives or sometimes just to raise another voice.

Sadly, it is becoming increasingly common that when citizens do take action–when first time letter writers decide to contact their representatives such as over the first $800 Billion Bailout last October or when people like me who blog about the state of our government and the actions of our elected leaders–our elected representatives feel it’s acceptable to whip out a form letter and send it off via email or postal mail; in most cases totally ignoring everything that we had to say in our letter, and that we took time out of our busy schedules to write.

Such is the case with a recent letter I sent off to my State Representative in Michigan, Gail Haines. But before I get to that letter and Representative Haines’ response, some background. Gail Haines is a Republican, and I voted for her to represent my district because her predecessor was unresponsive to the needs of us living in Michigan’s 43rd District. I was also inspired by Haines’ campaign and what she promised the residents of our district. Unfortunately, she has proven to be no different than her predecessors, no different from any other politician, and thus, even a bigger disappointment.

Click to continue reading “When Representatives Don’t Represent Constituents”

Add This! Blogmarks BlogLines del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google Reader MyShare Ask.com Netscape reddit Sphere StumbleUpon Technorati Plugin by Dichev.com

Comments (5)

The borders of Washington, D.C.

The borders of Washington, D.C.

Off the radar but inside the corridors of the U.S. Capitol an attempt to give the nation’s capitol city, Washington, D.C., voting representation in Congress has been raging.  Supporters of voting representation in the House of Representatives for the Americans living in D.C. fall into two camps: those who seek full statehood for the District of Columbia with all of the rights statehood would provide, and those who just want a Congressman of their own to represent D.C. interests in the House. The latter group have enlisted the help of a somewhat unlikely ally in the form of the State of Utah.

The challenges of granting statehood for the District of Columbia are tremendous as the U.S. Constitution places some very tough requirements for adding an amendment and there are only four ways that a constitutional amendment can be added:

  • Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used)
  • Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used)
  • Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once)
  • Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)

The Founding Fathers made it difficult to amend the U.S. Constitution because they wanted to ensure that such additions were made only when the greatest numbers of people agreed, thereby safeguarding the Constitution as much as possible from immediate, but short-lived, political concerns.

Click to continue reading “Voting Rights for D.C. Take a Step Forward”

Add This! Blogmarks BlogLines del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google Reader MyShare Ask.com Netscape reddit Sphere StumbleUpon Technorati Plugin by Dichev.com

Comments (3)