Easier To Get In To Get Out

"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.

"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

I think we all need to be resigned to the fact that President Bush got us into something that's not going to be very easy to get out of.

Demcoratic Accomplishments

In one week, the Democrats got more accomplished than they did in six months.

Here's a nifty list of what the Democrats have done, and will no doubt campaign on next year, from yahoo news;

* The first minimum wage increase in a decade went into effect in July helping the lowest-paid workers. Republicans repeatedly blocked the pay hike when they controlled Congress.

* Republicans lost their majority in last November's elections largely because of the Iraq war, but also due to voter disgust with ethics violations that left some Republican lawmakers and aides in jail or under investigation. Democrats pushed through ethics and lobbying reforms that public advocacy groups applauded while also saying the provisions could have been stronger. Bush is expected to sign the bill into law.

* Congress passed, and Bush signed into law on Friday, a series of post-September 11 anti-terrorism steps that had been recommended by an independent commission in 2004. These include broader screening of cargo bound for the United States, allocating more federal grants to cities at high-risk of attack and improving emergency workers' communications systems so they can better coordinate during an attack or natural disaster.

* The House and Senate passed different versions of a bill to significantly expand child health insurance coverage for those in low-income families not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. Bush has threatened to veto either version, but Democrats may be able to override him.

* The House and Senate passed bills to help students handle soaring college costs and crack down on misconduct in the student loan industry. They likely will send Bush a bill in September that goes directly to the stressed wallets of middle-class parents.

* A popular measure allowing broader stem cell research that supporters hope will help cure Parkinson's disease and other incurable illnesses was passed a second time and Bush vetoed it a second time.

* Appealing to growing consumer fears of global warming and U.S. reliance on foreign oil, the Senate passed a bill mandating that cars get 40 percent better fuel efficiency and encouraging a dramatic increase in ethanol as a fuel. Democrats hope to send Bush a bill after the August recess.

* A fiscal 2008 budget plan passed with new controls that attempt to impose fiscal responsibility after years of huge budget deficits. Under the plan, any new tax cuts or spending increases would have to be paid for. Republicans complain there is no guarantee Bush's tax cuts will be renewed after 2010.

* After six years of mostly getting a free pass from Republicans, the Bush administration is facing oversight by committees with probes ranging from the Justice Department's firing of federal prosecutors to the Pentagon's handling of the death in Afghanistan of ex-football player Pat Tillman.

Secret Earmarks

One of the things that I HAVE to criticize the Democratic majority on is their contiuation of the GOP's policy of secret earmarks.

It's our money, we have a right to know and what you are doing is no better than what the crooks you defeated did last year.

CNN called every Congressman's office looking for their list of earmarks. Most did not return their calls, but 31 members of Congress did provide the information to CNN. The list runs the gambit of both conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats. Here's the list of our true heroes;

Robert Andrews (D-New Jersey)
Nancy Boyda (D-Kansas)
Kevin Brady (R-Texas)
John Campbell (R-California)
Kathy Castor (D-Florida)
Jim Cooper (D-Tennessee)
John Culberson (R-Texas)
Susan Davis (D-California)
Charlie Dent (R-Pennsylvania)
Rahm Emaneul (D-Illinois)
Tom Feeney (R-Florida)
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York)
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)
Gene Green (D-Texas)
Alcee Hastings (D-Florida)
Wally Herger (R-California)
Bob Inglis (R-South Carolina)
Kevin McCarthy (R-California)
Michael McCaul (R-Texas)
Thaddeus McCotter (R-Michigan)
Dennis Moore (D-Kansas)
Ron Paul (R-Texas)
Ted Poe (R-Texas)
Mike Pence (R-Indiana)
Tom Price (R-Georgia)
Adam Putnam (R-Florida)
Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin)
Christopher Shays (R-Connecticut)
Mark Sounder (R-Indiana)
Mac Thornberry (R-Texas)

Minority Leader Boehner, Melissa Bean (D-Illinois), Jeff Flake (R-Arizona), Nathan Deal (R-Georgia), John Shadegg (R-Arizona), Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), and Lee Terry (R-Nebraska) all have no requested earmarks.

It is a shame that the Democrats refuse to take a proactive leadership role on this issue. If they wish to keep their majority, they need to stop acting like the minority did when they were the majority.

Kagen: Jefferson Should Resign

Freshman Congressman Steve Kagen (D-Wisconsin) has called for William Jefferson (D-Louisiana) to resign from Congress amid his indictment on corruption charges;

Kagen, part of a Democratic freshman class that ran on pledges of creating a more ethical Congress, said Rep. William Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat, is entitled to a presumption of innocence. However, Kagen, D-Appleton, said "all members of Congress must be held to a higher standard. Congressman Jefferson should consider resigning for the good of the Congress and for the good of the nation."

Nobody says Republicans are naturally corrupt and Democrats are not. They both can be equally corrupt and the GOP only got that way by becoming too comfortable in the majority. Republicans lost partially on their problems with corruption, but that also came from the lack of Republican outcry against other GOP members who were corrupt. A Democrat trying to force out a corrupt Democrat is a good thing; It's what the Republicans never did.

Jefferson should resign or he should be expelled. Forget about how if affects the Democratic Party. I would feel this way if it were a Republican, it's only fair to give equal treatment to creeps on both sides of the isle.

GOP Wants Jefferson Out

And they should be calling for his head

Democrats can do nothing better than joining the Republican in doing what the GOP never did with DeLay, Ney, or Cunningham; expelling this clown from Congress. He doesn't deserve to be a cashier at the cafeteria in the Rayburn House Office Building, much less a Congressman.

New Orleans needs new representation.

Rep. Jefferson Indicted

On 16 counts.

I despise this guy. The people of New Orleans made a mistake sending this guy back to Congress, but it's their mistake. He should, and may have to, resign.

We cannot have these types of people in Congress, Republican or Democrat

Democratic Debate Part Deux

The Second Democratic Debate on CNN in New Hampshire didn't surprise me at all. Nevertheless, here are my thoughts on what I saw;

-Hillary Clinton drives me crazy. I'm scared of her blowing the election for the Democrats. I think she's too polarizing to be the Democratic standard bearer. Yet, everytime she gets up there, she sounds so presidential. She doesn't hurt herself at all. Occasionally, she even helps. She makes me think; "You know, if you weren't Hillary Clinton, you'd be running away with this."

Still, there is something that tickles me wrong about her, but I like her more as a candidate than I did when she announced.

-Obama did well tonight. Again, if he was the second term Governor of Illinois, he'd be running away with this, no matter what his race.

-Edward's Iraq rant annoyed me a bit. He voted aye on the war resolution and did not read the report, yeld scolded Clinton for doing the same thing and not apologzing. I'm glad he apologized, but it doesn't make it ok to scold those who didn't.

-Biden showed his expertise, especially on foreign policy. To be honest, I think he'd make a good VP now

-Richardson got off to a slow start and never recovered. I don't think he hurt himself, but he sure didn't help. I love Bill, but I'm tired of hearing "As Governor of New Mexico..." We know you're Governor of New Mexico, thanks.

Live Free or Vote Democrat

Democrats are going into the 2008 Presidential primaries with an advantage they haven't had in contemporary American political history;

A leg up in the first primary state of New Hampshire.

The Granite State has historically been a GOP stronghold, and even until recently, a "pink" state, but since 2004, the New Hampshire GOP has been in complete disarray thanks to the ideological divide between New Hampshire voters and the GOP nationwide.

In 2004, John Kerry carried New Hampshire with 50.2%, making him one of only three Democrats to win a majority statewide in the last 100 years. (The other two being Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and FDR in 1940 and 1944, all three won landslides nationwide.) Kerry was also the first Democrat to win New Hampshire, but lose the election in post Civil-War American history. That same year Democrat John Lynch defeated one-term GOP incumbent Craig Benson 51%-49%, the first time a Democrat defeated a one term incumbent since 1924. New Hampshire voted for George W. Bush in 2000, after going to Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 with a plurality. Before that, Republicans won the state from 1948-1988 with the exception of Lyndon Johnson's landslide win in 1964.

Two years later, John Lynch led the Democratic Party to a statewide landslide of monumental proportions, winning nearly three out of four New Hampshire votes. Both GOP Representatives in the House of Representatives, both moderates, were defeated by staunchly anti-war Democrats Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter. The latter's victory came totally unexpected. The 110th Congress marked the first time since 1914 that New Hampshire was represented in the House of Representatives by two Democrats. The New Hampshire General Court, which had been in GOP control for over a century, flipped to the Democrats.

The muscle Democrats seem to be showing in the approaching election doesn't bode well for the state's junior Senator; John Sununu. Sununu narrowly defeated then-Governor Jeanne Shaheen in a controversial election in 2002, a Republican year. Next year, he may face Shaheen again, and if not, Democrats seem ready to throw their support behind Portsmouth mayor Steve Marchand. Either way, Sununu is a top target of Democrats, and a depressed New Hampshire GOP does not help their chances of keeping the seat and flipping the narrow control of the US Senate.

With 2008 approaching, Democratic Presidential candidates are drawing bigger crowds, more donors and more enthusiasm than the GOP hopefuls.

According to the Boston Globe on May 31st, Democratic candidates have averaged $22,224 from 193 donors, while the Republican candidates averaged $20.028 from 144 donors, more than half of that being from Mitt Romney, the former Governor of neighboring Massachusetts. A recent poll showed 47% of Democrats extremely interested in the upcoming primaries, while only 25% of Republicans are very interested. CNN reported on June 1, 2007 that 2/3 of New Hampshire Independents, who make up a plurality of registered voters, plan to vote in the Democratic primary.

What's destroying the GOP in New Hampshire? Well, the war is obviously unpopular nationwide, especially in New Hampshire, but it is New Hampshire's political history of being the "Live Free or Die" state that has hurt the GOP. For years, the GOP has been able to win over New Hampshire by opposing issues associated with the Democratic Party; the welfare state, big government, taxes, spending, gun control, etc. Now, the Republican Party is supporting issues New Hampshire Libertarians oppose; parts of the PATRIOT Act, Warantless wiretapping, the religious right. Government intrusion on people's lives is not a popular thing in New Hampshire, never was. Remember, this is the state that vehemently opposes mandatory seat belt laws. Previous to this administration, it had been the Democrats who had been branded as the party who intruded into privacy, but today, the Republicans appear to be that party and it has hurt them in the land of Live Free or Die.

New Hampshire and the first caucus state of Iowa are key swing states in the general election. Democratic strength in the New Hampshire primary gives a good indication as to who would be the favorite in the general. Democratic strength indicates the possibility that Democrats will again win New Hampshire in the general and steal all of New England again. As if it wasn't bad enough the Republicans have pretty much lost the rest of New England, losing New Hampshire would essentially turn the Northeast US into a region that will balance out the Republican south...assuming the south stays Republican.

The Political Factor

You wonder why the Republicans are so gung ho to prevent any attempt to allow illegal immigrants to become citizens.

This is a pretty good reason.

Clinton, Obama Support Cutoff Date

Both top Democratic Presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton both have signed on to support a bill cutting off all funds for the Iraq war after March 31, 2008.

A risky move if you ask me. Either one of them could be the nominee and the GOP an attack them for the chaos that will ensue after that date.

It is, after all, the only way Congress can stop the war. You want to war to end, you want Congress to do it, then funds need to be cut. That's the only way they can do it. It's not a fun way, it's not anything to celebrate about, but that's how the war ends

Congress Has GOT To Do Something

In the first 100 hours, the House of Representatives passed bills enacting the 9/11 commission recommendations, raising the minimum wage, funding stem cell research and reforming lobbyist/politician relationships.

Since January, none of these has made it to the President's desk. They all have been choked in the nearly equally divided Senate and Iraq has since taken the attention away from the Democratic agenda.

It's not even that the President has vetoed everything, he hasn't even gotten the chance to sign or veto everything.

Democrats ran on the concept that the Republican congress did nothing except the few things the President wanted. That "do nothing" label is part of the reason why the Republicans lost their majority (Iraq being the most prominent reason.)

The Democrats have GOT to do something and soon before the people give up on them too. Now is the time to win over the American people and send the Republicans into a generation-long minority status.

They can do it, they just got to either take the focus off Iraq for a little while or just work a little bit harder. They need to have something to show for the people next year when they're campaigning again.

Notes on the Democratic Debate

-Why can't Hillary Clinton just answer a question. I agree with her points, but just answer the question. Do you agree with Reid or not?
-"Not a game show, not a win or loose" Good explanation from Biden
-Kucinich is right about one thing; Congress has no obligations to give President Bush anything, yet I still disagree about funding.
-Richardson's plan is a hard sell, but it's specific, it's a plan and it's logical.
-"This administration treats diplomacy as if it were a gift to our opponents, a sign of weakness, not a sign of strength"- Dodd-i l gets a key soundbite.
-Mike Gravel will apparently play the role of the frustrated liberal in this race. Still, his advice to the Democratic Senators is one you would hear from a Senate alumnus. Still, Senator Gravel, they don't need you, they got Robert Byrd. He's a manual.
-Clinton keeps stating the obvious
-I like Senator Clinton, she's my Senator, I gladly voted for her, but I feel like she's too Party and not enough Person. I'm not so sure I want someone in the White House who's allegiance is more to the his/her party. Isn't that what we have now?
-Senator Biden CAN be a man of few words, and he has a wit.
-Gravel frightens me
-Clinton really scores some points with me in how she responsed to why people hate her. She is surprisingly strong.
-Obama is right, bring the focus off the divisive abortion issue and bring it on the issues everyone agrees on; reducing teenager pregnancy, adoption etc.
-Dennis Kucinich had a gun...really?!?!
-Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43 were ALL Governors, so, yes, Richardson should remind everyone that he, unlike everyone else, IS a Governor.
-Message to Obama, he asked about the Confederate flag, you already talked about black infant mortality.
-"Mistakes about Health care and believing a President" I like a person who can admit his/her mistakes, good job Hillary.
-People, what does one sentence mean to you?
-"We have no important enemies." Senator Gravel, I hate to bring this up, because I don't like to dwell on it, but, hello, 9/11, people aren't going to agree with you with 9/11 in mind.
-I totally agree with Edwards on education in the Middle East. Education is the biggest reason Islamic fundamentalism exists.


There were no fireworks, no battles, no tension, although Gravel attempted to create it, not even really a clear winner in tonight's debate.

There didn't need to be. The Democrats were all united on the major issue that will definite whether one of them will inhabit the White House from 2009 until at least 2013...Iraq.

With a vast majority, nearly a super majority of the country opposed to Iraq and disapproving of President Bush, everyone wins by taking shots are him and his leadership and the way the war is going.

The Democrats have not yet perfected the art of laying out plans, but they seem to be getting at it. The fact is now that the public is paying attention to them and dismissing Republican plans as failures, the Democrats now have the oportunity to actually convince people their plans work, and they need to start doing that soon.

Right now the 2008 race will be another tight one, but if they get their act together and put forth good and specific plans, they can easily seal the deal and win a Presidential landslide for the Democrats not seem since 1964.

And The People Side With...

The Democrats.

A vast majority of the American people agree with the Democrats in the Iraq War Funding debate. That's doesn't guarantee victory for the Democrats, as popular opinion can't change veto power, nor will it likely sway the opinion of a lame duck president.

It does, however, set the stage for the next elections...in 18 1/2 months. At some point it will force a few Republicans to crack.

The Party Of The Young

The Democrats may be the dominant party in this country for a generation.

Rasmussen polls show Democrats leading by 30 points among voters under the age of 30, confirming what I have long believed, that social conservatism and "favor the rich" policies don't work among accepting, struggling college and post-college aged Americans.

Talk about realignment.

PS: Democrats hold a four point lead among men, fourteen points among women and 10 points overall.

New York's Primary is February 5th

Governor Spitzer signed into law today a bill that will move New York's Presidential Primary up one month to February 5th. Here's what Governor Spitzer says in support of the new law;

"Moving the primary date to February, we will help secure New York's large and diverse population an influential voice in selecting the 2008 presidential nominees."

As if New York didn't have enough influence on this race already.

Clinton and Giuliani are almost assured of victories here, which would be one of the largest primaries and will be so early in the year.

Here's what former Governor Pataki has to say about it;

"It's great having New York be relevant, but what I do have concerns about is when you have a dozen states or more doing it at the same time. The idea of a primary season where you have to go from state to state or region to region and respond to what has happened in earlier states is of value."

For once I agree with the Republican Pataki and not with the Democrat Spitzer...stranger things have happened I guess.

Nevertheless, I understand Spitzer's point. Today, the primaries have become less of a long race where delegate leads change hands like back in the 1960's and more about "Well, I'll just vote for the guy who won in Iowa."

Congressional Wedding Bells

I guess even in the halls of Congress, there are intermarriages, like in Hollywood.

This past weekend in Brookings, South Dakota, Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth (D-South Dakota) and former Congressman Man Sandlin (D-Texas) tied the knot.

Sandlin served as a Congressman from Northeast Texas representing a district that was based around Texarkana until his defeat in 2004. He was one of the Texas Democrats defeated in Tom DeLay's gerrymandering of Texas.

Stephanie Herseth is a member of a political family in South Dakota. She won the seat of Republican Bill Janklow in a special election in 2004 when Janklow was sent to prison, and was reelected in the 2004 election and in 2006.

Herseth will now go by the name Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, which should go over well when she runs for Senate (God willing.)

A New Democratic Era: Importance of 2008

I said earlier that we would probably have to wait until after 2008 to see if the Democratic majority sticks and officially puts an end to the 26 year-old conservative era. I mean that more than just if a Democrat gets elected President in 2008, but the entire election in general.

First, it's important to realize the Republicans have the upper hand in 2007 elections. Three gubernatorial races are to be held, all in red states. Only Kentucky looks to be really competitive. Republicans have a huge chance for a pickup in Louisiana and look safe to reelect Haley Barbour in Mississippi. Kentucky really depends on the GOP primary, and even then, it appears to be a tossup.

In 2008, however, everything is up for grabs, the entire House, many of the most competitive Senate races, a slew of competitive gubernatorial races, and of course the crème de la crème, the White House.

Democrats, barring any major mishap, will probably keep their House majority. They will likely lose a few seats and gain a few they didn't gain in 2006. The important thing about the 2008 House Races is what will happen to the Democrats elected in Republican-leaning districts. Many of these Democrats are rather moderate to conservative and play well to Republicans in their district, but 2006 ushered in a whole gang of progressive, liberal Democrats in districts Bush won. Democratic freshmen, like Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire, John Hall of New York, Zack Space of Ohio, Steve Kagen of Wisconsin, Ciro Rodriguez of Texas, Nancy Boyda of Kansas, Harry Mitchell of Arizona and Jerry McNerney of California all have voting records in their first months much farther to the left of their predecessors and sit in districts that have leaned Republican in the past. Their survival, coupled with how the Democratic nominee for President plays in their districts, may help judge the future of the Democratic majority and may confirm if there is in fact a New Democratic Era. Also in question is the survival of GOP House members who barely made it through last November. Republicans like Jim Gerlach of Pennsylvania, Christopher Shays of Connecticut, Jim Walsh, Peter King, and Randy Kuhl of New York, Mike Ferguson, Jim Saxton, and Frank LoBiondo of New Jersey, Mike Castle of Delaware, Deborah Pryce and Jean Schmidt of Ohio, Robin Hayes of North Carolina, Vern Buchanan of Florida, Heather Wilson of New Mexico, Peter Roskam of Illinois, Barbara Cubin of Wyoming, and Dave Reichert of Washington all sit in seats that either lean Democratic and/or were nearly taken by the Democrats in 2006. These incumbents are going to be the Democrats' biggest targets in 2006 and many are facing the same competitive Democrats they barely defeated this past year. Some of these Republicans may retire, but if many of the aforementioned Republicans do not survive reelection campaigns in 2008, it could be a bright neon sign that the Republicans are looking at a long minority presence.

The Presidential race steers all else. A strong Democratic candidate may very well pull off a Democratic version of 1980, pulling many of the mentioned GOP House seats, competitive Senate races, such as the ones in Maine, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, Virginia and possibly North Carolina, Texas and Oklahoma, while defending their potentially competitive seats in Louisiana, Arkansas, Montana, and South Dakota . Democrats can also use the nominee's coattails to defeat Republican governors in Missouri, Indiana and Vermont who may face close races, and protect their incumbent Governors (or open seats,) in Washington State, Delaware, North Carolina and West Virginia.

Rahm Emanuel was right when he said it is important the Democrats do not blow it in 2008. Their majority is still fragile and young and has the potential to reformat itself into a generation-long majority if they choose the right people with the right ideas that appeal to the population as a whole, (think Ronald Reagan here.)

If not, their majority might be no more than a short-lived Indian summer, but right now, the wind is with the Democrats, they just need to raise the sail right.

A New Democratic Era.

It was only a few years ago when it seemed the Democratic Party was on the brink of complete collapse. Former Senator Zell Miller (D-Georgia) said in 2004 he believed the Democrats were going the way of the Whigs.

My, how times have changed.

Pew research now says 50% of the country identifies itself as Democratic or leaning toward the Democratic Party, while only 35% say the same about the Republicans. That differs drastically from 2002 when the two parties were tied in voter identification.

If this is in fact true, the Democratic Party has regain an absolute majority again, putting an end to the Conservative majority that has existed since before I was even born, going back to Ronald Reagan's 1980 election.

Does this mean the beginning of a new Democratic majority that will itself last as long, maybe longer?

We may have to wait until 2008 to find that out, but early signs look promising for Democrats. The population appears to be less socially conservative, fiscally conservative, and hawkish. They appear to be adapting more liberal ideas on the economy and on certain social issues. All this plays for a Democratic majority.

If this continues, Republicans like Rudy Giuliani are the only ones who will be competitive nationwide.

Pork, Yuck

I, for one, am not happy the emergency supplemental bill was loaded with pork by the Democratic majority. I understand why they did and I understand that's the way it's always done, but I don't like pork and the American people don't like pork.

They may have scored a victory in passing this bill, but the fact that they couldn't do it without loading it with more pork than an Easter buffet causes them to lose points in my book.

Bush To Congress; I Don't Have To Listen To You

You can't blame George Bush...he's not used to having Congress checking his power. He used to be treated like a dictator...whatever he wants, he gets. This is all new to him.

You know he's hit rock bottom when his only defense against the Democrats in Congress calling his staff to testify at the hill is that they are trying to gain political points, that it is a partisan hit job. Essentially he's stating; "The Democrats are using the fact that I am immensely unpopular for their own gain."

Still, Congress has the authority to investigate what they may believe to be illegal or unethical events in the Executive Branch. They use that authority to their discretion with the knowledge that if it is abused, it will cause a change to who controls the Legislative Branch. The Republicans did not use that power at all, which in part is the reason they're the minority party right now. If the Democrats abuse the power, they may go the way of the Republicans.

This is not, however, an abuse of power. Congressional Democrats have reason to believe an offshoot of the Executive Branch (the Justice Department,) made an unethical decision to fire federal prosecutors for political reasons. While this is not an illegal offense, it is an unethical one and Congress had the complete authority and in my opinion, the responsibility, to investigate it and make sure nothing unethical happened or those who did commit a violations of ethics.

It is not reasonable for a person involved in a possible ethics violation and possible abuse of power to come to the Hill and testify not under oath. The oath is what makes sure the truth is told, because to lie under oath is to end up like Scooter Libby. Congress needs to oath to make sure they are getting truthful testimony. The President would never accept less from Congress, so Congress shouldn't expect less from the President.

By acting like he's too good to talk to Congress, the President is playing to what's left of his base; those Americans who would support Bush if he had Democratic leaders arrested, tortured, and paraded around Washington in chains; these people who think Congress doesn't have a lick of power in the country and Bush is the end all, be all of the American government. These Republicans, and I say Republicans cause if they weren't a part of that party before, they sure are now, are dangerous to democracy, and they hold little to no power in national politics or in the voting population.

Bush is not going to win this argument in the courts; He may win the argument among the minority of the populace who think he is being abused by the Democratic Congress, but the country voted in November for a Congress willing to check the out-of-control power of the President and that's exactly what they are doing. The people are getting what they voted for.