Who IS in charge?

Great Debates
1

Thanks to the Internet, we now have ample, if somewhat confusing, access to the opinions and rants of hundreds of thousands of various people on many, many subjects along with postings and sites to give us accurate information on things we probably would not have traveled to the local library and spent days tracking down.

Time and time again, I spot postings on the web concerning thing our government is doing – and remember, we voted them INTO office – and being fully aware that not everyone has the same opinion, and some are just nuts, I take things with a grain of salt. Yet, when I start spotting the majority of the people talking out against or for something, no matter how they phrase it, I assume that the general public opinion is either for or against the topic in question. (Rarely, however, does the news media seem in step with the Internet opinions or inclined to state the whole story.)

Lets just say that the general public, in the majority, is for the enforcement of truth in advertisement laws, which includes manufactures having to disclose all ingredients on their products. (No more buying a bag of cholesterol free chips and then spotting the little section telling you to call the company for full cholesterol disclosure.) The major food corporations, of course, will be against it.
I mean, would health conscious Americans buy a product which has a small percentage of trans-fatty acids in it – which are NOT cholesterol but, upon being consumed TURN INTO IT? (Sheds Spread and any margarine product which remains solid at room temperature.)

So, the people want disclosure, but the powers in congress turn down the bill. So, WHO is in charge here and why to we let this go on?

There are 3 places in the States which produce all of the French fries for major hamburger places, like McD’s and Burger King and even KFC. The process does not use all of the potato and the waste is high in certain natural chemicals which decomposition release, as well as the skins being loaded with agricultural chemicals. The plants are poisoning the ground water for several hundred thousand people. The people want it cleaned up, but the process is expensive and the spud makers don’t want to do it because it might take a few bucks from their profit picture and the spud farmers don’t want anyone to rock their financial gravy train and Congress is dragging its heels on the whole thing. Local senators are trying to block any bill enforcing a clean up.

O.K., WHO voted them into office anyhow and who can vote them out? (By the way, the information is in the site of Citizens Against Government Waste, in the area of Pork Barreling.)

We suddenly have a few billion in unused funds, which came from our National Debt, which turns out to not have been a debt after all, but a well hidden surplus and a great excuse for looting the public of more taxes to pay said illusory debt. A huge chunk of it was to go into Social Security and our rapidly faltering Social Services for the poor and disabled. The public agreed. Now, the assorted congressmen are trying to carve it up to help out major businesses, people who are in the upper class, and Special Interest groups. (Kind of like how much of the Promised Florida Lottery Funds, which were to help the schools, never seem to have gotten there.) They are ignoring the desires of the people who put them into office.

Who is in charge? Us or they and how long MUST we allow general corruption among our leaders? (I don’t give a shit who fucks who, who watches porn, who did illegal drugs ages ago, or who manages to get the inside scoop on a land deal before the general public and buys some.)

I don’t like the government making deals to keep the price of milk high, along with cheese, to satisfy the major, and VERY well off, daily concerns. I don’t like congressmen tagging things on a bill that have nothing to do with the bill, but, if it is passed, will go with it and if the President tries to remove them, then the whole bill fails. THAT is legalized extortion. I do not like the power American oil companies and car manufacturers have in the government. While I believe in free enterprise, I do not believe in the ability to screw the public in the cost of needed things – like needed medication, safety devices in your car, power costs and food quality.

When will we throw out the electoral college, who decides who will be out President even if the looser has the winning votes? When will we force congressmen to take office and act with reasonable honesty? How much longer do we have to put up with special interest groups with powerful lobbies ‘gifting’ and bribing congress into doing things for them and to hell with us?

Like, the ever controversial porn. The majority of the people either like it or have no problem with it within reason. It is a billion dollar a year business so SOMEONE must be buying the stuff. Yet the Moral Minority dictates what can be displayed or sold and where and every politician who gets on the election band wagon manages to attack strip bars, porn sellers and so on even though it has been proven that the MAJORITY has no problem with the stuff.

Our schools need funding and fixing. WHO has the money? The government. Who is stalling the money? The congressmen. Why? Because private schools have become big business now and lobby congress. Plus, any funds not dumped into the schools can go to special interest groups. Currently, going to a public school is rapidly becoming only for the poor who cannot afford private ones, and who gives a shit about the poor? Since public schools are tending to the poor, why dump millions into them for better teachers, equipment and buildings when those funds can be used to underwrite private schools, which will make millions? The public wants the public schools fixed but congress is ignoring us.

How do we make the leaders listen and how to we start getting better representatives into congress? It seems that the crooks know how to get THEIR favorites in there, so how about us honest folk?

Now I have been reading about companies which will run schools in a for-profit way and guarantee your child a good education. Congress is considering it. Now, we have all seen what happened when hospitals went to being for-profit – they started dumping sick, poor people out of the doors and windows to stew in their own juices. Then they trimmed down vital staff and ran into shortages when patient loads became high – but they SAVED money.

Japan has about a 95% recycling level and they seem to be doing quite well. I wondered why, over here, in the biggest garbage producing nation in the word, we have about a 50% level, and that drops from time to time. I also noticed that often we pay more for products which have a percentage of recycled material in them, like the stuff is expensive.

Then I discovered, that, with government approval, companies who haul trash have to PAY BY THE TON to give the stuff to the recycling centers. ??? What’s this? We HAVE to recycle, recycling places SELL their produce, many make their own energy to run their equipment from the garbage AND even have surplus to sell to power companies. New businesses BUY the recycled garbage to process it into usable form for other new businesses.

So, why to garbage haulers have to pay to give recycling places the very stuff the place is going to make a buck on? Have you ever had a supplier of goods pay YOU to take their product, which you will resell at a profit? So, it is cheaper for haulers to dump the garbage into a landfill. (Oh yeah, many cities are now making it illegal for people to REMOVE garbage from a land fill, which means they cannot salvage recyclable goods.)

This is approved of by our government.

Who is in charge here?

Who approved the original sloppy building codes for wooden framed houses in storm zones, knowing they would not hold up? The government. Who not only approved the development of housing in natural flood zones BUT set up an assistance fund to help out those who loose their homes when the flood zone floods? The co

2

Al Haig.

3

For the sake of balance, I’ll respond with a short post.

Elected governments come and go. Bueaucracy is forever. Who do you think is in charge?

4

I’ll follow up Wally with another (not quite so) short post.

People’s attention spans come and go. But a corporation with money at stake pays people to pay attention, and to make that attention felt, on a continuing basis and by a variety of means. We may get weary and forget to write our congressmen on this or that issue - or we may never hear of it in the first place. They will hear, they will know, and they will act and make their presence felt.

I don’t mind when politicians pay attention to ‘special interests’ composed of flesh-and-blood human beings, even if I find them objectionable. But when those ‘interests’ are nonhuman legal entities, I think they should be shoved right out of the political process.

Within that process, us v. them in influencing our legislators is like us v. Deep Blue in chess.

5

Great post, Rainbow.

I think in present day America, the word “lobby” can safely be replaced with the word “bribe” in most cases. Ours is among the most corrupt industrialized nations on Earth. And the masses don’t know/care/understand this. A good sporting event or church service will keep them from having to think about those nasty things.

Politicians are corrupt. That’s the way it always has been and that’s the way it always will be. Have you ever seen pictures of some of these guys in Congress? They’re beady-eyed thugs! If I gave you pictures of 50 Congressmen and 50 child molesters, I bet you couldn’t tell the difference.

“Politicians aren’t born. They are excreted.”

  • Cicero, 43 A.D.

Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.
-Napoleon

6

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

7

Uhh, I’m sorry, but whoever told you that little gem needs some basic education in finance/economics. The National Debt is quite real - as of January 27th, 2000 (the last day for which the Treasury has calculated that figure as I write this), the National Debt was $5,631,796,000,000 (they report this statistic in millions - hence the trailing zeroes). This was taken from the Treasury Department’s Daily Treasury Statement, which they post on the web ( http://www.fms.treas.gov/dts/index.html ). Yes, we’re currently running a bit of a surplus - but it takes a long time to make a serious dent in a $5.6 trillion dollar value.

You are in charge. I am. We only have to put up with corruption among our leaders until we vote them out of office. If we’re not voting them out, then we’re simply not trying hard enough (or, if you prefer to acccentuate the positive, other people are trying harder).

The basic problem is that recycling in general just isn’t profitable - it costs more to process the junk than you receive for the results. There are exceptions to this - aluminum, for example. The fellows who replace the aluminum siding on your house sell the old siding to recycling centers for a fair amount of money. When contractors pulled off the aluminum siding from my house a few years ago, they had to fight off several people who showed up with pickup trucks and tried to “help” haul the old stuff away.

8

Permit me to suggest that some of the information in the OP given is not, perhaps, of the most accurate or the most relevant.
In a world in which people believe that zinc lozenges cure colds, that copper bracelets cure arthritis, and that hydrogen-powered cars will cure global warming, it is perhaps not surprising that food processors resist disclosure of some ingredients. Indeed, when some believe that trans fats are the Devil’s instruments and will lead to death, damnaton, and a Republican president, whereas avoiding them means eternal life and the triumph of the “Third Way” into the foreseeable future, it is only to be expected that some organizations will hesitate to provide information that leads to attacks by the ignorant, the misinformed, and those with agendas other than the ones that they disseminate for public consumption.
Indeed, it has been noted that a lie can circle the globe twice whilst truth is still putting on its shoes. Nothing is simpler than putting up a web site with gross misinterpretations, or even outright falsehoods, and then tto circulate the rumor whilst a thousand researchers slave away in anonymity to determine if there is any fact in it. The compendium of ULs attacking this or that product, circulating in an age when journalists acted, however imperfectly, as gatekeepers for information flows, suggests the nature of the era to come, when it is confidently expected that to say a thing is have it taken for the truth, and only imperfectly and belatedly can it be refured to that small group that has the wit and education to understand the refutation.
That there are externalities attached to every action is hardly deniable, and to deny some of them may not have been anticipated, had their impact estimated wrongly, or were even concealed is a position that is no more defensible. Yet the alternative is one in which same errors of fact and judgment are made by that alternative’s advocate, with perhaps the less excuse for them and us in that we have already seen the results of such an attitude, but are quite willing to tolerate it on the bare word of those who claim it will not be happening.
*It should, perhaps, be remembered that economics is often called the “dismal science” because it purports to be the study of how to allocate finite resources in a world where there is an infinite demand for them. It is said that one can never be too rich or too thin; I daresay that we can add to that dictum that one can never be too healthy, too educated, or too safe. Yet none of these are available for free, in unlimited quantities (save, I suppose, that the dead do indeed have an unlimited amount of safety, or at least of invulnerability to whatever misfortune may come their way); they must all be bought and paid for, if not necessarily in the common currency which some would pretend is all that exists. “The best things in life are free”; no, it is true that they are not found in the marketplace, available for a dollar a bushel, or even a hundred yen for a liter, but those who think that they exist to be plucked as if from trees, with no effort on their part, will find themselves sadly mistaken.
We should – and despite the imperfection that all work of the hands and minds of men are heir to, we often do – have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Unfortunately, there are not wanting those who publicly conflate “the people” with “the majority”, whilst in their hearts they continue to identify “the people” with “the right-thinking people – like me”.

It is often said that “anything is possible”. In fact, very few things are possible, and most of them have already happened.

9

WillGolfForFood wrote:

Actually, it’s even worse than this. The $70 billion Federal Budget “surplus” of FY 1998 is only counted as a surplus because FY 1998 saw a $100 billion Social Security windfall. This $100 billion Social Security surplus cannot be used to pay off the national debt, or to pay for “on budget” items such as national defense or interest on the debt; it must, by law, be re-invested into the Social Security system. So what is reported as a $70 billion surplus for the total Federal budget is actually a $30 billion deficit for the part of the Federal budget that affects the national debt.

This is why, despite having Federal “surplusses” for the past couple of years, the national debt has continued to increase. Fortunately, FY 2000 is predicted to have an on-budget surplus as well as a total surplus, so the national debt may finally start to go down.

The truth, as always, is more complicated than that.

10

OK, correct me if I’m wrong – (No doubt you WILL) – but did not Pres. Clinton wipe out the national debt, or claim to, and suddenly we had all of this billions in surplus to dump into programs? I seem to recall several news programs about that.

We vote in our representatives, but under the current 2 party system, which, in my humble opinion, is drastically flawed, we can only vote for who THEY give us. Certain third party people can run for various low offices and get them but may NEVER achieve the Presidency nor get into Congress because they are NOT Dem or REP.

Now, with the backing of the general public and the then pretty free news media (in that they were not owned by like one of 5 major corporations who seem to own all news media these days) Ralph Nader forced through major concerns and got business to change its attitude. Then the EPA, pushed by the people, managed to force through even more changes along the way – though they did go overboard in some areas.

We have Chester the Molesters in congress, who have not been discovered and who blocked the public reporting of child molesters who move into your area, but the bill and law passed because of public fury. (Currently, there is a move in Congress to pull the teeth on this law and it looks like it will pass.)

Clinton, using Bushes previous attempts, got the line item Veto passed, which means he can remove unnecessary things from a bill presented to him, which have nothing to do with the bill itself. (Like, if I present a bill which will provide free medical help to the poor and it looks good, the Senator from Ohio might tag on a proposition to removed government financing from some government housing, and the guy from Florida might tag on a proposal to give a few million to chemical companies in case of a potential spill and if the bill passes, so do those propositions.)

Under the new way, those propositions may be struck out, which has congress all pissed off and they actually have managed to take some of the bite out of the ruling and currently extort the President into not using his line item veto very often. Like, if he heavily supports a bill or program that Congress has to approve, then they will send him a corrupt bill, full of crap that they want and if he vetoes most of it, they will not pass his program.

Citizens raged over the Love Canal mess and forced the government to force the responsible companies into cleaning it up and moving them elsewhere. When government failed, citizens got involved in class action lawsuits (and as much as I hate lawyers, several of these suits were necessary to force a couple of major companies to bear responsibility for their failings).

I’m still undecided over the Nixon thing, because he had not exactly done anything that several other Presidents had not done before him, except get caught but public outcry forced his resignation. (He was actually more for the people than President Johnson was, who had to be bullied into creating social systems for the disadvantaged instead of concentrating mainly on major business and his wealthy buddies.)

Public pressure forced the end to Vietnam.

Public pressure is forcing the major clean up of the corrupt LA police force and public pressure in the past forced the creation of the Safe Food and Beverages Act after so many people got tired of being poisoned by legally sold bad food and patent medicines.

Public pressure keeps our freedom of speech free, even if we do not like what a lot of nuts rant on about. (Like when Hurst tried to control the news media by buying up newspapers and making them print only what he wanted.)

So, the general public needs to get involved more. I do a lot of letter writing to Congress and a major amount of bitching and some of the things I have griped about have been changed, but not just because of me, but because of the several hundred thousand others who wrote in also.

11

I invite you all to use my voting strategy:

I look at the ballot. Any name I recognize, I vote for the other guy.

If I’ve heard of them, they’ve probably held an office and been subject to corruption. Get 'em outta there.

12

Sentinel wrote:

You’re wrong. :wink:

President Clinton wiped out the national deficit, or claimed to, and suddenly we had all of this billions in surplus to dump into paying off the national debt.

(Although, as I explained above, the kind of Federal “surplus” we have right now isn’t the kind that can pay down the national debt – that isn’t predicted to happen until FY 2001, as a matter of fact. I checked the Office of Management and Budget’s historical tables, and we’re still predicting a $12 billion on-budget deficit for FY 2000, grumble grumble grumble.)

13

Sentinel misstates:

Although it may have have escaped my attention, I believe that the City of Niagara Falls, protected as it is by the doctrine of “sovereigh immunity”, has never paid a cent towards the clean-up costs, alhough it designated the canal as a dumping site, seized it through a thinly-disguised use of force, and built the school and sewers that tore the site open.

It is often said that “anything is possible”. In fact, very few things are possible, and most of them have already happened.

14

Which was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional.

This thread has not been destroyed by SterlingNorth.

15

OK, and the debate rages.

How can vetoing riders on a bill be considered unconstitutional? Would it not be unconstitutional to be forced to pass a bill containing items on it that have NOTHING to do with the original bill? Last I heard, Clinton still had the line item veto.

Love Canal: the city.

As of 2 days ago, a docudrama on Love Canal showed where the inhabitants of the city were relocated to new homes elsewhere paid for by the government. There were several class action suits going against the initial corporation who dumped all of the crap in the site in the first place and never bothered to tell anyone about it.

A few years ago, I read of a cleanup going on at Love Canal, where the writer poked fun at the time and cost the process is taking because the French, with an even bigger clean up, accomplished theirs in less time, used less money and the place is now a public park, safe for all to use.

A short time ago, we had a senator investigated because he insisted on using a military aircraft to jet around the States with when he got the urge to go visiting. When the military finally put a stop to it, citing that he did not have that kind of authorization, a bill they presented in Congress was shot down by him and his pals. Abuse of power was cited along with the ‘revenge’ tactics of various congressmen.

Another Congressman was discovered using some of his States funds to equip his lavish mansion, complete with gold fixtures in the bathrooms. Funds designated for organizations for the poor. He was only reprimanded, agreed to pay back the amount he ‘borrowed’ and remained in office. (Anyone else would have been fired.)

The infamous LA cops are a good example of known corruption but for some reason not only is the local government dragging their feet on cleaning the mess up, but the federal government seems to be allowing them to take their time. Those with powerful political connections seem to be able to do as they please, which should not be allowed.

So, who IS in charge? The newer generation is coming to maturity and has had the example of past mistakes to get an eyeful of what went wrong but people STILL seem to feel that either they do not wish to rock the boat or feel that their vote means nothing. (A suggestion for the lack of voters was made in that absentee ballots could be sent out to registered voters, who could mail in their votes, which would probably bring the normal 30% voting population up to 60%, but nothing yet has been done to initiate this.) {The internet will never be used to vote with because it is too easy to corrupt and flood with fake votes.} It is the opinion of some that many political figures do NOT WANT many more people voting because the general public might wise up and start cleaning house.

16

Sentinel writes:

Actually, the statement that the corporation (Hooker Chemical, FTR) “never bothered to tell anyone about it” is completely wrong.
Hooker did tell the Niagara Falls’ school board, several times and in no uncertain terms, that the dump site was unfit to build a school on, or sewer lines through. The city (through the school board) however, insisted that they wanted that piece of real estate, and no other; if Hooker refused to sell it, the city would seize it by eminent domain, and Hooker could go whistle for any compensation. Hooker finally deeded the land over to the city for one dollar, warning the school board yet again that it was unfit to build on or under, and diclaiming responsibility for what the city did, and took a tax deduction for the estimated value of the land (USD2,000 and change, at that time nothing to sneeze at). The city, of course, immediately ignored the warnings that they had been given. Although release of chemicals injured a number of children long before Love Canal became infamous, Hooker insisted that responsibility had been transferred to the city via the school board, and refused to act save as it was specifically requested to do.
Was Hooker wrong in doing so? Very probably; they should have dragged their heels and made the board seize the property, so as to more completely disassociate themselves from its future. Moreover, taking the tax deduction was nothing but greed, as, despite the dangers which it didn’t question, it was willing to benefit from the transaction.
OTOH, was the city wrong in its actions? Even more certainly; they had opened the canal as a dump in the first place, knew in general terms (if not in the specifics) that the chemicals dumped there by Hooker were hazardous, insisted that it have the property, even threatening to seize it by force if it didn’t get its way, and ignored warning repeated over a decade about the hazards of building through it.
How does all this tie to the opening post?
Very simply; if a government employee or body does something evil or stupid at the behest of a for-profit corporation, he, she, or it will be castigated as corrupt and under the influence, if not in the actual pay, of the Evil Korporate Konspiracy. If the same evil or stupid act is committed at the behest of the peepul, or of one of the special interests that loudly proclaims that it wants unlimited influence and power to serve the great masses better, the act willl be ignored, and the witch-burners will go hunting a corporation to shuck off their blame on.
Who’s in charge here? Shucks, we know that; it’s Jeremy Rifkin.

It is often said that “anything is possible”. In fact, very few things are possible, and most of them have already happened.

17

RE: Akatsukami:

I see what you mean, even though I NEVER heard THAT part of the story of love Canal myself on any of the many documentaries concerning it. (Damn! It would be real damn nice if historical documentaries actually included ALL of the facts all at once instead of frequently going for sensationalism.)

Now, someone on the city government had to PUSH the others into selecting that particular plot of land for whatever reason. Those people had to have been informed of the problems and ignored them for whatever reason. So, while the plant itself may be somewhat responsible for the ensuing disaster, the local ELECTED officials of the city were culpable for the majority (up to and possibly including negligible homicide – though fat chance THAT charge would ever be proven).

Were THOSE people ever brought up on charges?

Along with Federal elected officials, it has been my experience that local elected officials within cities are often just as corrupt. Land around my city is somewhat valuable, especially when speculators arrive, planning to build malls and gated communities and such and some of us found it interesting that the Tax Collector along with various predominate people associated with him somehow managed to pick up large tracts of land for back taxes, BEFORE placing it on the required public auction, and, curiously enough, THAT land seemed always resold later to major property developers for a huge profit.

By the way, a ‘Public’ auction has to be posted for all to see, but can be posted in a public walkway in an area, say like basement steps, not often used. Plus a ‘public’ auction can be held consisting of the seller (the city representative) the buyer, another ‘buyer’ (who ALWAYS under bids) and a witness (usually an uninterested city employee) in a public place such as the first floor hallway of city hall, which is open to the public.

Such ‘public’ auctions can legally be held at awkward hours – say like when everyone else is working – so selected persons may acquire choice bits of land or property. (Like buying up a million dollar home and land for $50 in back taxes plus $1.00 as sales price.)

It has a tendency to annoy me that our political leaders can create various forms of ‘laws’ or legislation in order to just barely skirt illegal acts and still obtain what they desire.

What? Me worry?’

18

Ak -
I think the State of New York was required to pay part of the cleanup costs for the Love Canal site. IIRC, Hooker was the main PRP (potentially reponsible party) at that and other sites, but there were several others named, and the city and state were included. I’d need to look up the specifics in the EPA database to make sure, though. As for Hooker telling them not to build a school…in that day and age, the policy was for the company to COMPLETELY clean up the site when done to the highest standard available. Only recently has this changed, so a company could clean up to a lower level and zone the area for a parking lot instead of building houses on it. (Which is causing its OWN set of problems with public involvement, but I won’t go there.)

Finally…the relocation of citizens at Love Canal and other sites is only paid for by the government when the PRP refuses to pay. EPA makes EVERY effort to get the company responsible to pay, and only after that fails will government money be used, coming out of the Superfund Trust Fund.

And as a random comment…YES! I knew being an EPA contractor would pay off eventually. :slight_smile:

19

Ak -
I think the State of New York was required to pay part of the cleanup costs for the Love Canal site. IIRC, Hooker was the main PRP (potentially reponsible party) at that and other sites, but there were several others named, and the city and state were included. I’d need to look up the specifics in the EPA database to make sure, though. As for Hooker telling them not to build a school…in that day and age, the policy was for the company to COMPLETELY clean up the site when done to the highest standard available. Only recently has this changed, so a company could clean up to a lower level and zone the area for a parking lot instead of building houses on it. (Which is causing its OWN set of problems with public involvement, but I won’t go there.)

Finally…the relocation of citizens at Love Canal and other sites is only paid for by the government when the PRP refuses to pay. EPA makes EVERY effort to get the company responsible to pay, and only after that fails will government money be used, coming out of the Superfund Trust Fund.

And as a random comment…YES! I knew being an EPA contractor would pay off eventually. :slight_smile:

20

Aw hell…when I posted, I didn’t see it come up, so I went back and hit the submit button again.

Sorry for the double-post, y’all.