Thursday, April 09, 2009
What's "My job"?
This one just makes my head want to spin around like Linda Blair in "The Exorcist".
Let's start simple.
I am a soldier. My job is to fight and win my country's wars. No matter what part I, individually, have in that mission. That is my job. I've been to war, as a "soldier-musician". Even as a soldier whose job it was to play music in a war zone, I had to qualify (prove that I could use to a certain level of competence) on my assigned weapon (the M-16 rifle). I was briefed, multiple times on the "Rules of Engagement", when I could shoot, who I could shoot, how I could shoot, what I could shoot, and the opposite of all of those things. AND, I was required to carry with me, at all times, a little card reminding me of the Rules of Engagement. That was considered to be a fundamental part of the job for EVERY soldier entering the Iraq theater (to include Kuwait). It was a working knowledge of the fundamentals.
Then there is our Congress.
(Remember "con-" is the opposite of "pro-" ... especially, in terms of the root word: "gress".)
This article points out that the AIG bonuses that everyone, especially several high ranking members of Congress (the leaders of the House and Senate committees in charge of the banking industry immediately come to mind), was up in arms about late last month were SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE STIMULUS BILL that Congress had passed only a few weeks earlier. In particular, the heads of the Senate and House banking committees were outraged by the bonuses. (These two people would be Senator Chris Dodd, and Representative Barney Frank, BTW.)
I find this very interesting.
Both of those gentlemen voted FOR the stimulus package. The sections of the legislation that covered those bonuses originated in the committees that THEY CHAIR.
I could go further into the "nuts and bolts" of how legislation becomes law ... and how this was either purposely included in the bill, or a case of willful ignorance.
But that, as a former First Sergeant of mine once said, would be "beating a dead horse ... to death."
Now, going back to the simple definition of one's job. What is the job of a member of Congress?
Simply, their job is to write, consider and debate proposed laws, and then, vote their opinion on whether they should be be enacted.
So, why didn't Senator Dodd, and Representative Frank, et al, not know those bonuses were PROTECTED by the legislation that they voted for?
You think, maybe, they didn't read the bill? Or have a staffer brief them (after the staffer had read it) on some of the potential problems in the bill? Maybe, just maybe, they were power drunk on the fact that their party has unstoppable majorities in both houses of Congress, and that the President, the Speaker of the House, and the Senate Majority Leader all wanted this bill passed as quickly as possible, no matter what was actually in it?
Read the article.
I want to highlight parts of two paragraphs:
The Read the Bills Act is as simple to describe as it will be difficult for Babka and his allies to enact. A draft they've prepared says that each bill must be read aloud before a quorum in the Senate and House of Representatives; that each legislator voting "aye" must file an affidavit saying they're familiar with the contents; and that laws that don't meet these requirements can be challenged in court.
The only hitch is that no members of the House or Senate have been willing to sponsor this legislation, which would, after all, curb their own power and result in additional duties. Babka says to check back with him in a few weeks for more news.
Think about that for a second.
Mr. Declan McCullagh, the author of this piece, implies that for a member of Congress to have a working knowledge of ANY piece of legislation that they are voting on is an onerous additional duty that they do not have, at the moment.
Here is the dilemma: What to be mad or frightened about?
A) That the people who create the laws of our land feel that it would be punishment, if you will, to be informed about the laws that they are creating?
OR
B) In the 221 years since the creation of our current government, no one has seen fit to make knowing about the laws they are voting on a job requirement for Congressman? Wouldn't that be a reasonable "working knowledge of the fundamentals" concerning their job?
Let's start simple.
I am a soldier. My job is to fight and win my country's wars. No matter what part I, individually, have in that mission. That is my job. I've been to war, as a "soldier-musician". Even as a soldier whose job it was to play music in a war zone, I had to qualify (prove that I could use to a certain level of competence) on my assigned weapon (the M-16 rifle). I was briefed, multiple times on the "Rules of Engagement", when I could shoot, who I could shoot, how I could shoot, what I could shoot, and the opposite of all of those things. AND, I was required to carry with me, at all times, a little card reminding me of the Rules of Engagement. That was considered to be a fundamental part of the job for EVERY soldier entering the Iraq theater (to include Kuwait). It was a working knowledge of the fundamentals.
Then there is our Congress.
(Remember "con-" is the opposite of "pro-" ... especially, in terms of the root word: "gress".)
This article points out that the AIG bonuses that everyone, especially several high ranking members of Congress (the leaders of the House and Senate committees in charge of the banking industry immediately come to mind), was up in arms about late last month were SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE STIMULUS BILL that Congress had passed only a few weeks earlier. In particular, the heads of the Senate and House banking committees were outraged by the bonuses. (These two people would be Senator Chris Dodd, and Representative Barney Frank, BTW.)
I find this very interesting.
Both of those gentlemen voted FOR the stimulus package. The sections of the legislation that covered those bonuses originated in the committees that THEY CHAIR.
I could go further into the "nuts and bolts" of how legislation becomes law ... and how this was either purposely included in the bill, or a case of willful ignorance.
But that, as a former First Sergeant of mine once said, would be "beating a dead horse ... to death."
Now, going back to the simple definition of one's job. What is the job of a member of Congress?
Simply, their job is to write, consider and debate proposed laws, and then, vote their opinion on whether they should be be enacted.
So, why didn't Senator Dodd, and Representative Frank, et al, not know those bonuses were PROTECTED by the legislation that they voted for?
You think, maybe, they didn't read the bill? Or have a staffer brief them (after the staffer had read it) on some of the potential problems in the bill? Maybe, just maybe, they were power drunk on the fact that their party has unstoppable majorities in both houses of Congress, and that the President, the Speaker of the House, and the Senate Majority Leader all wanted this bill passed as quickly as possible, no matter what was actually in it?
Read the article.
I want to highlight parts of two paragraphs:
The Read the Bills Act is as simple to describe as it will be difficult for Babka and his allies to enact. A draft they've prepared says that each bill must be read aloud before a quorum in the Senate and House of Representatives; that each legislator voting "aye" must file an affidavit saying they're familiar with the contents; and that laws that don't meet these requirements can be challenged in court.
The only hitch is that no members of the House or Senate have been willing to sponsor this legislation, which would, after all, curb their own power and result in additional duties. Babka says to check back with him in a few weeks for more news.
Think about that for a second.
Mr. Declan McCullagh, the author of this piece, implies that for a member of Congress to have a working knowledge of ANY piece of legislation that they are voting on is an onerous additional duty that they do not have, at the moment.
Here is the dilemma: What to be mad or frightened about?
A) That the people who create the laws of our land feel that it would be punishment, if you will, to be informed about the laws that they are creating?
OR
B) In the 221 years since the creation of our current government, no one has seen fit to make knowing about the laws they are voting on a job requirement for Congressman? Wouldn't that be a reasonable "working knowledge of the fundamentals" concerning their job?
Labels: AIG, Barney Frank, bonuses, Chris Dodd, Congress, incompetence, job description, Read the Bills Act, stimulus
