What I enjoyed about voting last week (besides the 3 minute commute to my polling place) was that I had a chance to vote for candidates that will have some level of impact on me and my immediate community. Again, as a guy who has been voting in Morris County for the last 15 years, the people that I’ve been voting for have largely not been the Mayors, Town Councilors, Board of Education members, State Legislators, and Congressmen who have a direct impact on the community where I actually live. Last Tuesday, the votes that I cast were different in that they have a direct relationship to my daily life.

And the American in me enjoys the fact that I get to vote in the first place! Unlike most folks out there, I enjoy voting for people from both sides of the aisle – which I did last Tuesday. One of the great things about this country is that we have a choice. Frankly, I wish we had more that two viable choices and I really wish that the Libertarian and Constitutional Parties would grow to become larger players in American politics. But that’s okay – the people are beginning to realize that there are more than two answers to every political question and that it’s not such a bad idea to get people with different ideas involved.

As for the results from last week’s elections, well I didn’t think it was any big surprise. Of course the Republicans were going to run away with the Senate and increase their lead in the House – the majority of the places and states in this country are center-right and every political map proves that point. Yes, the cities and urban areas vote heavily Democratic and that’s where the President has his most ardent supporters, but most of this country isn’t filled with cities and urban areas. Thus the results from last week are no big surprise.

Plus, I’m a big believer in divided government. We have a Democratic President and I think it’s a good idea to have a Republican Congress to check his power. I thought the same thing when President George W. Bush was in charge – a Democratic Congress was good for him to have to collaborate with the other side (which he did very well at the beginning of his first term as well). The biggest “check” that I think will come out of the Republican Congress is their ability to conduct fuller investigations in the Senate. The talking heads on television suggest that there are a variety of scandals brewing from Benghazi to the fast and furious gun running issue to immigration and now to the fact that there were blatant lies told to the American people in order to get the Affordable Care Act passed.

While those are all issues that deserve fuller investigations, what I’m looking forward to knowing more about is the IRS targeting scandal. Folks, if the accusations are true – that the IRS targeted individuals and groups that they disagreed with politically – then that is going to be the biggest scandal in the history of American politics up through our lifetimes, I guaranty it. This is the exact type of issue that the colonists rebelled against back in the late 1700s and it’s the exact type of issue that makes our government ineffective in the 2010s. So… that’s what I’m looking forward to from the new Congress: a true investigation into the IRS targeting scandal.

In any event, last year I put myself on the mailing list for the Constitution Party. This party, as I understand it, supports a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution. Frankly, as an Adjunct Professor of Political Science I can certainly appreciate the fact that not many people in our society understand the basics of the Constitution nor the powers or limitations of our federal style of government.

Back up for a moment – I’ve also spent some time considering the words that politicians use in their campaigns and what the reality of their campaign promises mean through the vernacular of their campaign rhetoric. For example, then-Senator Barack Obama campaigned to be the President of the United States by making a lot of promises – some of which he simply could not fulfill. Obama promised that taxes would not go up “one dime” for anyone making less than $250,000 per year. Well, that’s not something that Obama can promise because in our system of government the President does not unilaterally make tax policy. More properly stated, Obama should have said, “I pledge to work with Congress and push a policy of not raising taxes on anyone making under $250,000.” However, who wants to hear a promise of “trying” to push a certain policy once elected? Exactly…

But words are interesting in politics and as someone who has been tangentially monitoring the Constitution Party over the last year, I find the survey on their site to be worthy of an entry on this blog. By the way, you can read (and take) the survey by clicking here. What do I find so interesting about it? Well, click on that link and take the survey.

Notice anything? How about the style in which the questions are written? Look at this question:

The undercutting of our free market system, begun by Republicans and accelerated by President Obama, has resulted in near government ownership of too many banks and industries. Do you agree that the Constitution Party (CP) should remain steadfast in opposing both parties’ push for more federal control over our financial sectors and businesses?

For those of you who study this type of stuff (i.e. communication), I’m sure you’re loving this question right now! How about that first sentence? Why not say, “This is what the Constitution Party believes about this particular issue and we’re going to ask you to agree with us in the next sentence, okay?” Honestly, this is a little bit disappointing from a third party that I think has some potential at the local and regional level of politics.

From what I’ve gathered, the Constitution Party is trying to present a real alternative to those in the Republican and Democratic parties who expect this country to be operated as the Constitution dictates that it must. That’s an honorable goal – especially in today’s hyper-partisan political climate where both the Republicans and the Democrats use interpretations of interpretations of interpretations of clauses in the Constitution as the base of their domestic and foreign policies. But where the Constitution Party does itself no good is to put up a “survey” that is packed with leading questions. Not a good strategy.

A better strategy for the Constitution Party would be to go to the 23rd District of New York and set-up camp. This is a district that provided 45.2% of the vote to a Conservative Party candidate. Imagine if the Constitution Party could legitimize itself to the voters in the 23rd District and make a real showing in future elections? Better yet, a good strategy for this party might be to recruit well-known candidates to run for office at the local level and build on local success. It’s almost like building a new business – you don’t just open up 50 Wal-Mart-sized stores in 50 states and expect them to be successful tomorrow. You need to build a brand.

But building that brand should not include time wasted on self-aggrandizing surveys.

Dear Joe:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to a government takeover of our health care system. I appreciate having the benefit of your views as I share them.

Clearly, any time a child or a parent goes without the care they need, it represents a very serious crisis for that family. And, I understand that health care costs are escalating every year. But as health care represents 17 percent of our total economy, we have to get any “reform” right. Unfortunately, the President and the Congressional Majority are not “getting it right.”

They seem intent on a government takeover of health care that would have devastating consequences for families and small businesses. Such a takeover will raise taxes, weaken Medicare, ration care, and let unelected government bureaucrats in Washington make medical decisions that may end up denying access to medical and life-saving treatments.

Despite what the President says, more than 180 million Americans are at risk of losing their current private health care under a government-run plan. In addition, proposed Medicare cuts could threaten the very existence of our fine local hospitals. Moreover, the House Majority’s current health care plan is financially unsound and will add to, and not lessen, our staggering national debt.

Instead, Congress should work to empower doctors and patients by making health care more affordable, more accessible, and more accountable. The American people deserve the freedom to choose the health care that is best for their families!

I support health care reform, but we must preserve what works: protecting the doctor-patient relationship in addition to allowing people to choose the personal care that suits their individual needs.

At this point, there is no firm date for the House health reform debate to begin but you should anticipate that it will be a rushed process. Speaker Pelosi says she will unveil a new health care bill, “when it’s ready.” Of course, this is another way of saying that H.R. 3200 will be rewritten behind closed doors and we will have little time, if any, to review its contents!

Fundamentally, I support reform efforts to make quality health care affordable and accessible for every American, but any proposed reform needs to proceed slowly and carefully and must be bipartisan.

Once again, thank you for contacting me.

Sincerely,
Rodney Frelinghuysen
Member of Congress

For those of you looking for more information about the Congressman, you can head over to his website and learn more about him.

Anyway, the Project on Student Loan Debt released a press release the other day regarding some alarming trends on private student loans. I’ve included it below for your information.

As Student Debt Rises, More Undergraduates Go Straight to Most Dangerous Loans

New Analyses Find Disturbing Trends and Inadequate Disclosure Rules

Berkeley, CA – In 2007-08, nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of undergraduate students who borrowed private student loans did not take out all they could in safer, more affordable federal loans, according to an analysis released today by the Project on Student Debt. In addition, the proportion of all undergraduates who took out private loans increased dramatically – from five percent in 2003-04 to 14 percent in 2007-08.

“Private student loans are one of the riskiest ways to pay for college,” said Lauren Asher, president of the Institute for College Access & Success, home of the Project on Student Debt. “Both the federal government and colleges should do more to prevent students from taking out unnecessary private loans.”

Like credit cards, private loans usually have variable interest rates that are higher for those least able afford them – as high as 18 percent in 2008. But unlike credit card debt, private loans are nearly impossible to discharge in bankruptcy. They also lack important consumer protections that come with federal student loans. Private loan borrowing has slowed since the credit crunch, but these risky loans remain available from major lenders.

Among the Project’s findings:

• While experts agree that private loans should be used only as a last resort, the share of private loan borrowers who could have borrowed more in federal Stafford loans increased dramatically, from 48 percent in 2003-04 to 64 percent in 2007-08.

• Private loan borrowing is not limited to students at high-priced schools. In fact, the majority of private loan borrowers (63 percent) attend colleges with tuition and fees of less than $10,000.

• Among all racial and ethnic groups, African Americans are now the most likely to borrow private student loans. The percentage of African-American undergraduates who took out private loans quadrupled between 2003-04 and 2007-08, from four percent to 17 percent.

New Disclosures Inadequate
“Without stronger consumer protections, students will continue to be vulnerable to aggressive private loan marketing tactics and inadequate information about their borrowing options,” said Asher. The Federal Reserve Board recently finalized regulations for new consumer disclosures for private student loans, as required by Congress last year. However, the Project’s analysis of the new rules reveals the Board did not go far enough to warn consumers about private loans and make them aware of other options.

“We are very disappointed by the Federal Reserve Board’s decisions. The disclosures will not have the effect that many in Congress had hoped,” said Asher. “These weak regulations underscore the need for mandatory school certification of private loans so schools can intervene when a student has better financing options, and for a consumer financial protection agency that would more effectively protect students and families from dangerous private student loans.”.”

If you’re in need of a student loan, I strongly urge you to go with government programs over private ones.

When I see both Republicans and Democrats casting off the concerns of their constituency, it makes me wonder how these people keep their offices. Why are there not more recall elections? Where is the political passion in America that we recently saw in the Iranian reformists, for example? Why are there not mass gatherings in Washington DC demanding that the Republicans in Congress and the Democrats both in the White House and the Congressional leadership begin listening to their constituents?

Look, I know that a minority in this country want both a public option for healthcare and a single payer system, but this country was not set up for the majority to be overwhelmed by the minority. In other words, while we listen to the minority voices and take their views into account, those views should not run this nation. Healthcare does need to be reformed so that more people can receive more coverage. But until our elected officials begin to listen to us, nothing will be accomplished.

Unless a third party rises up with a platform based off of the majority of the population’s concerns…

In addition to lowering monthly student loan payments, IBR forgives any remaining debt — including interest — after 25 years of payments. Most borrowers will pay off their debt before then, but under current law, if there’s anything left after 25 years, the amount forgiven would be taxed as income to the borrower.

A bipartisan bill in the U.S. House of Representatives, H.R.2492, would prevent debt forgiven through IBR from being taxed as income. Loan forgiveness is supposed to wipe the slate clean for responsible borrowers, not create a new financial obligation.

Many of you have already taken action, helping to persuade over 20 Members of Congress to sign on in support of the bill. We need your help to bring more on board! If you haven’t already, please take a moment to urge your representative to support H.R. 2492.

If you are interested in taking action (and I really hope that you DO choose to take action), you can click over to the IBR website and use their pre-formatted web page to send a message to your Representative. Please do so and help fix a bogus loophole in this Bill!

While I understand that the transition from high school to college is literally life-changing, many students are entering college without any ability to live on their own. I see kids who are constantly on the phone with their parents, make daily trips back to their hometowns, and cocoon themselves from any new experiences on campus. To some small degree you have to appreciate why employers don’t want to give these people jobs once they graduate. The ability to think on your own and solve problems as they arise is critical to being successful in today’s world.

Anyway, the point of this entry is how taking a year off between high school and college might have always been a good idea for some students, but it might be a good idea for all students given some pending legislation. As the New York Times reports:

Last month, President Obama proposed what some experts called the most sweeping changes in federal college aid programs in decades. But even if Congress approves the new and expanded programs, they will not take effect until July 2010.

So here is a heretical idea for this year’s high school seniors: Take a year off and go out and do something else. Then, when it is available, see if you can take advantage of that aid money — more fixed-rate student loans and bigger grants to the poorest students.

Brilliant! This is a great idea that has many unintended (or perhaps intended) consequences. First, those who take next year off to develop themselves as human beings will be better prepared for the rigors of college life. Second, colleges will be forced to re-evaluate their expenses and whether or not they offer a valuable service given the realities of today’s market. And last but not least, you have the actual intended effect of the recommendation above – take a year off and wait until more subsidy dollars flow to your educational pursuits.

If coordinated correctly, this idea could initiate a great shift in the higher education system.

I know that the price of tuition is higher than ever, which is why if you are willing to volunteer in your neighborhood or give back to your community or serve your country, we will make sure that you can afford a higher education. And to encourage a renewed spirit of national service for this and future generations, I ask this Congress to send me the bipartisan legislation that bears the name of Senator Orrin Hatch as well as an American who has never stopped asking what he can do for his country – Senator Edward Kennedy.

You know – that’s a very inspiring thought and a good idea. I wonder about how realistic it is in action, though. For example, what will the cost be to the government if High School Student A volunteers X amount of hours in his or her hometown and thus meets the requirements of this program? Will the government pay all of their tuition at a public school? Half? A quarter? What is the number that makes college affordable for a student?

Further, what happens if High School Student B – who is from a better off family than Student A – does the same amount (or more) of volunteering than Student A? Since Student B is from a well-to-do family, then does he or she get anything for their community service? The same end was achieved – citizens served their community. Right?

And what happens when High School Student C needs another 50 hours of community service by the deadline date to qualify for whatever this grant money will be? Are we to believe that if Student C’s family knows people who know people that they won’t write-up false letters showing all of the service hours that Student C volunteered?

I don’t want to sound like a negative guy on this proposal, but it seems like it’s a bit too nebulous right now. I’m all for college affordability so long as 1) it is a program with no discrimination (income included), and 2) it’s fiscally responsible. We didn’t get that information last night. Other than that, I thought the President’s speech sounded more like a campaign speech than anything else, but I had no major fundamental problems with it.

What I found to be most intriguing about the book was the way it used real accounts to describe both Washington’s army and the British army. Also, the sheer size and skill of the British army (plus their ability to hire Hessian soldiers to do their dirty work) should have made them the winners of this “war” by a long shot. Yet, the Continental Army – in the face of poor supplies, captured heroes, and hundreds of deserters – managed to win the war.

The book doesn’t go into how we won the war, since it continued on for a few years, but the tactic (if you can call it that) of running away is heavily covered. Also, I was glad to see that a true representation of George Washington was included. For those of you that don’t know, this guy was about as pompous and arrogant as they come (one of the reasons why I’m a fan).

I suggest this book for any history buff or anyone who wants a real account of the not-so-glamorous Revolutionary War. Also, if you’re interested in the military and its interaction with the federal government, one could successfully argue that this book chronicles the very beginning of that relationship as Washington was in constant contact with the Second Continental Congress. You may also enjoy reading how Washington pretty much self-regulated his actions (and the actions of his officers) and how he thought it of utmost importance to be sure that the Congress gave their approval to his actions.

Since the summer is upon us, this might be a good beach or backyard read. Feel free to leave comments if you decide to read the book!