I don't get it.

[tj]

With this friendly bunch of opinionators, there is nary a mention of what is happening in DC just now?

Oddly, I don't see much on other forums either.

Perplexing somnolence.

[new cook]

Do we want to open that door?

I've seen a lot of arguing on FaceBook and Twitter (generically speaking, not GEFP people). All I'll say for now is that after reading the level of misinformation and lack of rationality that's out there, including someone who posted a YouTube link to a video that says "Obamacare" will require us to have chips with the mark of Satan inserted under our skins (I kid you not), I think we need to make sure more sane people register and vote to counterbalance the crazy. For the ones who aren't crazy but are merely misguided by certain echo chambers, I think we need to open up lines of communication and sources of actual verifiable information while ridding ourselves of the garbage spewers.

[okbye]

I just don't care TJ. It's all a bunch of stupid buffalopoop and I am so tired of republicans that I could spit on them. All of them. Then the democrats. But mostly the republicans. They all need to be fired. Acting like a bunch of spoiled preschoolers "If you don't stop Obamacare I'm going to throw a temper tantrum and stop the government". Bunch of bunny selfcentered egomaniacal insufferable cunts. And people still support the party. That's why I don't care anymore, it's the people that are hopeless, not the worthless politicians the stupid people keep electing. I'm just gonna sit back here and watch them implode and yell at everyone "I TOLD YOU SO!!!!" when it happens.

[ABwannabe]

Well, here at the GEFP, we're mostly good folks not looking for a fight. The fight about the shutdown can be found everywhere, why tarnish this small corner of the internet?

My biggest problems with the shutdown are:

1. It's mostly posturing, making sure "the little people" feel pain to drum up support
2. It keeps being presented as a one-sided problem. *No* problem is one sided!
3. Despite what most people are saying, it's not all one-sided. One side (Republicans) are asking a very high price, and the other side (Democrats) are not balking. There's no real collaboration.

[tj]

Well, since i opened this can of worms, I really should reply.

I can agree with most of the above. I simply do not see why Congress has been turned into a place where you have one agenda and refuse to deal with anything else. The budget is really a separate issue from the health care law and yet a certain group refuses to see that.

It has always been my understanding that solving problems was th job of government and not just staking out positions.

Adopting blocking tactics is not solving problems.

[new cook]

Adopting blocking tactics is not solving problems.

Indeed. Holding the jobs of roughly 800,000 people hostage is not the way to amend the law.

"We've elected people to govern us who don't believe in government." That's a serious problem.

[tj]

why is this about the Affordable Care Act anyway?

We really have not had enough experience of the law to know what may or may not need changing yet.

Anyone who has not been able to go to the doctor because of having no insurance, or seen a family completely bankrupt because they spent everything they had after the insurance limit was reached should know we have to do something. Still, the issue is the budget, not health care.

To cling to one issue and refuse to govern is childish. And, as you say, depriving 800,000 people of income in this economy is cruel.

[ABwannabe]

An argument could be made -- and I don't know enough to say how well this would hold up, or if it's their position -- that "a certain group" sees the healthcare law as being a major contributor to the current financial crisis, and a major inhibitor to financial recovery.

Also, it's amazing that "a certain group" is generally described as being demanding, yet the other group isn't "being stubborn". It takes two to have a standoff.

For instance, this New York Times chart (refreshingly free of hyperbole) shows that the latest House proposal asked for a delay in (not revoking) the Individual Mandate and to cancel subsidies for lawmakers, and discussion. I understand that the latter was not in the original law, but a Presidential Memo (or whatever it's called when a President writes in additional stuff).

[new cook]

ABWannabe, the reason that that certain group is being blamed for the shutdown is because they have been obstructionist since Day 1 and are on record as saying their number one priority was to make the president a one-term president. They didn't succeed and now they're sulking. They have repeatedly and consistently placed party before country. Most — not all — refused to work with those across the aisle and then they have the audacity to complain that they can't get their way.

I'm furious that the government has been shutdown and I place full blame on that group. I don't see how anyone can in good conscience hold those who we're being blackmailed responsible for not giving in. Blackmail is not the way to legislate, it is not the way to govern. That would have been a disastrous precedent to allow to be set. The shutdown is not an abstraction, and the livelihoods of 800,000 Americans should never be used as political pawns by those who want to force their way rather than use normal political protocols.

As for the ACA, I really find it interesting that a plan that is based on a conservative idea, promoted by the Heritage Foundation, and successfully implemented by a Republican governor is suddenly viewed as Satan's evil plan because a certain Democratic president was successful in getting it passed. Once again, party before country declares it a disaster before it's had a chance to be fully in effect.

Does the ACA need some adjusting? Probably. But we have ways to address those concerns that involve actual work, not grandstanding.

[new cook]

Thought I'd share something posted by the writer, Anne Lamott:

Wow, they did it. They shut down the U.S. government, like we are such cute fancy banana republic. Of course, the first response is stunned silence. Something is happening that can't actually be happening, yet here we are. It's okay that you can't figure out what to do yet--it just happened. Stunned, scared amazement is appropriate. Mouths hanging open? Right in target. I myself look like one of the Little Rascals

I can't help but remember family holidays, where the alcoholic uncle, who has been threatening to do something rash every time he gets in his cups--and NOT his tea cups--finally goes and does it. He finally does some bizarre, bullying, irrational act that he has been threatening to do for awhile--and everyone's mouth drops open. Ten percent of those at the table think it's kind of great, because of their own sense of powerlessness, self-loathing, rage and pain. But the rest of us? Where do we even start, when our family has just been trashed, the kids and wife are crying, and the elderly are in real fear for their lives, scared literally to death?

Make no mistake, we are one family, appearances to the contrary.

One thing I know is that when the uncle is in his disease, you don't talk TO the disease about the disease. That's crazy, a waste or your breath and life force. No one in the history of the world has ever gotten another person sober. The only thing that EVER works is that the drunk is faced with the catastrophe of his or her consequences--the deep betrayal of children, trashing of one's deepest values, the finally sober drooly humiliation.

But where does a family even begin to deal with what the alcoholic has bought down on the house? Get the alcoholic to bed. He's on his own now. We can love him, later. At some point, he passes out, and will wake up so sick that the only thing that makes sense is a cool refreshing beer, to get all the flies going in one direction.

Or maybe, who knows, this person picks up the 500 pound phone, and asks for help. It's not in our control.

In the meantime, the praying people pray. Someone sweeps. The children and the elderly are fed, and comforted. The kids go off to school. Everyone pitches in to help clean up. But this is going to be a lonnnnnnng scary day. Where do we begin?

First of all, the writers need to keep writing. We cannot let you off the hook just because of our collective Confusion. We need you now more than ever: Barry Lopez said that when all is sad and done, all we have to help us are stories, and compassion. So get back to work! Short assignments, bunnypoopish first drafts; just do it.

And since we are not going to figure this out today, and since "Figure it out" is not a good slogan, let's do what we've always done. We'll stick together, and get the thirsty people a glass of water. I'll remember the sticker I saw once, of Koko, the sign language gorilla, above the words, "The law of the American jungle: remain calm, and share your bananas." I am going to fill a box of warm clothes and take it to Goodwill: this is going to be a terribly cold winter for the poor, what with sequestration and God-only-knows what the shutdown adds to that. I am going to pick up litter. I'll send some money to one of America's hunger projects. I'll pray and pray and pray, all day, that we'll all pitch in to help our most vulnerable, and that we'll help each other keep the faith, and our senses of humor. Remember: laughter is carbonated holiness. I swear to you, it is.

We religious nuts say, "I no longer know what the future holds, but I know who holds the future." I'm going to try to love the poor, degraded sick uncle, but I will forgive myself if this doesn't go as well as hoped. And right now, I'm going to practice radical self-care, with a handful of nuts, dried food, lots of water, and a hike. As my pastor Veronica would say, God bless you all REAL good.

[new cook]

I think Jon Favreau put it well here:

From budgets and taxes to Syria and Iran, this president has shown that he will negotiate on almost any issue, with anyone, at any time. But he will not—he cannot—negotiate with a roving band of anarchists who say, “Build our oil pipeline or the troops don’t get paid. Give us tax cuts for the rich or seniors don’t get their Social Security checks. Let insurance companies do as they please or the economy gets it.”

That isn’t democracy. That isn’t America. Throughout history, politicians of both parties have been able to argue their agendas fiercely, even nastily, but then accept the Election Day judgment of voters without resorting to extortion that threatens the economic destruction of their own country. A small faction of Republicans who represent an even smaller fraction of Americans has now decided to reject this bipartisan legacy in favor of nihilistic madness. As citizens, we can call on our president to give in to their demands, thereby setting a precedent that will permanently and fundamentally alter the nature of our democracy for future leaders of both parties. Or we can finally call these people what McConnell once gleefully acknowledged they are: hostage takers, unrepresentative of the once-proud Republican Party and unfit to govern the greatest nation on Earth.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... overn.html

[carla]

Anne Lamott
thanks for sharing. very provocative and a great piece of writing, of course.

[carla]

some levity. or truth. or trash. Whatever you wish:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... -on-cover/

Daily News cover page

[new cook]

That thing I said earlier about garbage spewers? Yeah. Like this persistent myth that has been busted repeatedly, yet it still flies around like an elusive, pesky gnat that can't be killed. Time to get the Raid.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... tion-myth/

[ABwannabe]

new cook, there's a *lot* of garbage being spewed all right, all around. It has been *extremely* difficult (not impossible) to find fact based news about the shutdown, the ACA (ObamaCare), and the debt ceiling. Since much of the MSM tends to be less conservative and the House Republicans aren't looking very good anyway, it's hard to sort the garbage from the facts. Of course, this says a lot about the facts.

A telling example: on Tuesday, I wanted to find a simple, non biased, rundown of the weekend events leading up to the shutdown. The mainstream news organizations all pretty much lumped the events as "House Republicans are holding the country hostage. Senate Democrats are standing firm on hallowed ground.' (OK, I'm exaggerating, but not too much). It turns out they were not *too* far off, but their words sounded so biased that I couldn't tell. Note that my only attempt at getting information from a conservative source was local talk radio, and it was more obviously opinion rather than fact. For all I know, Fox News may have had something equivalent to ABC.

[Catherine]

ABW, I am so tired of the skew. BOTH sides have skew, in everything. Neither side is right, I'm feeling very discouraged. I wish we could get lobbyists out of the government. Because they do end up having an impact on our laws. One of my friends, who is a Republican, said that apparently the insurance companies were supporting the Affordable Care Act, and that was, in part, why it got passed. I know various government figures (on both sides) have financial ties to companies like Monsanto, which is how pro-Monsanto laws get passed.

I don't know what the answer is. Everyone vote for the third guy in the next election? In my book, both sides are equally culpable.

[tj]

Catherine, that insurance companies would be supporting the ACA is a bit of disconnect, isn't it? It could make sense in a very large picture way, but since when has American business thought that way?

I am not defending all lobbyists, but they can go both ways. what seems to be the 'bad guy' in the present situation is the threat of the Tea Party persuasion. I have heard a couple of times that if Boehner were to bow to pressure and take a vote on the CR,the Tea Party influence groups would charge ahead and take over the Republican Party, essentially putting things into the hands of extremists. A very interesting pickle.

Glad to see you posting on the forums, by the way.

[ABwannabe]

I'm eternally an optimist, to a fault sometimes.

I really believe that the majority of the people involved in today's politics - the politicians, lobbyists, media, everyone - are truly doing what they believe is the best that they can do for the country and/or their constituents. I also think that most of them are wrong

[new cook]

I'm eternally an optimist, to a fault sometimes.

Thats one of the things I love about you, as I'm an optimist, too. And yet I am more cynical about the motives of some politicians.

Catherine, while no side is populated by angels I don't believe both sides are to blame in this situation. There is enough evidence to the contrary. For one thing, enough non-Tea Party Republican house members have publicly said they would vote for a clean CR, so that together with the Democrats they would have enough votes to pass a CR, end the shutdown, and avoid the crisis that would be caused by not raising the debt ceiling and therefore not paying our bills and trashing the nation's credit in the process.

So why doesn't Boehner take advantage of this? Why is he capitulating to a small but very vocal minority? I believe it's because he has gerrymandered his way into a Tea Party corner and knows that if he doesn't go their way they will see to it that he won't be re-elected.

The New York Times published an article the other day that shows the strategy the Republican party has used to try and leverage the possibility of a government shutdown in order to force their way, since they weren't able to accomplish their goal by normal procedural means. They want to defund the law that is the ACA, they want to repeal it, but as I've been saying elsewhere there is a process by which they can properly attempt to do this. Extortion, however, is not it. And if they can't rustle up enough votes to push through their desires then they need to accept the fact that they've lost and that's the way democracy in a Republic works. We need to move forward.

A FEDERAL BUDGET CRISIS MONTHS IN THE PLANNING
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and MIKE McINTIRE
Published: October 5, 2013

WASHINGTON — Shortly after President Obama started his second term, a loose-knit coalition of conservative activists led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III gathered in the capital to plot strategy. Their push to repeal Mr. Obama’s health care law was going nowhere, and they desperately needed a new plan.

Out of that session, held one morning in a location the members insist on keeping secret, came a little-noticed “blueprint to defunding Obamacare,” signed by Mr. Meese and leaders of more than three dozen conservative groups.

It articulated a take-no-prisoners legislative strategy that had long percolated in conservative circles: that Republicans could derail the health care overhaul if conservative lawmakers were willing to push fellow Republicans — including their cautious leaders — into cutting off financing for the entire federal government.

(Emphasis mine.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a- ... nning.html

Let me know if you want to read the full article and are having trouble with the link.

[okbye]

I don't know what the answer is. Everyone vote for the third guy in the next election? In my book, both sides are equally culpable.

I always encourage voting third party. I did in the election before last, because I couldn't vote for Obama and I didn't think McCain had a chance in hell of winning so it was safe. I voted for the Libertarian out of protest. He was the next closest candidate and got like less than 1% of the vote. It's a pipe dream that we will ever end the grasp of the 2 parties but it's the only one I have. Last time I had to vote for Obama because there was no way Romney could be allowed to win but I wasn't happy about it. With the exception of Hilary in the primary I have been voting against candidates for years, there hasn't been a single one I wanted to vote FOR. I sure hope Hilary gets her rear in gear for the next election. The republicans need more time to grow up before they can be allowed in office. Not that I love democrats but I am so fed up with republicans I could spit. And I hate spitting.

Britain has managed to get a viable third party going, we need to work on that.

[carla]

I adore new cook and her optimism. I respect and appreciate all optimism (waves at Catherine -- and AB W.)

But this is reality:
(I don't know if it's a liberal site that posted this, and I don't care. Voters, oops, I mean CITIZENS, ARE incredibly uneducated. At least there's been no mention here of microchips. Sorry, I'm in a bad & honest mood.)

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-p ... obamacare/

Oh this is SO MUCH WORSE:
Kimmel: "Obamacare or ACA?"
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jimmy-kimmel ... obamacare/

From a confirmed skeptic and devout pessimist, who's gonna go drink.

[haleoalau]

I was angry at the furloughed jobs; taking money from people who have no control over any of this mess is ridiculous.

What makes me furious are the completely innocent, un-thought about people who are paying the consequences for these oafs inactions:

+ The 3 year old boy who needs a specific type of medical treatment but has to wait for Congress to pass a resolution on his behalf to reopen NIH.

+ The families of military KIA who were denied the death & burial benefits due them ( I believe Congress was suppose to address this today...)

+ If the food supply happens to become contaminated, or a viral outbreak occur, how will the public be notified and how will precautions be taken due to furlough of USDA and CDC. (both of whom are constantly undermanned prior to the furlough).

Those things are what ticks me off.

[tj]

If they end up defaulting and missing social security payments, it is going to hit the fan big time.

I understand that some tea partiers are saying that a default is no big deal.

[new cook]

Haleoalau, I agree. It was people in those kinds of situations and more that first came to my mind when the shutdown began. And it made me furious.

It's not just the 800,000 furloughed jobs, either. The longer this goes on the more people in the private sector will lose their jobs. Tea Partiers are fond of saying that the government creates nothing, only takes, but they forget (or ignore) the fact that the government has many contracts with private sector businesses. Then there are the businesses who depend on the tourists who visit nearby national parks and monuments. They are hurting, and there's been a big increase in the number of people who are going to food pantries to feed their families.

And yes, all the people who depend on the services provided by agencies like the NIH and CDC. For those of you who remember Lee, she's got homeless veterans who can't move into their government subsidized apartments because the paperwork can't be processed.


TJ, that is true. Ted Cruz said it in a Newsmax interview before the shutdown began. He even tried to joke about it. Michele Bachmann has even said that she's never seen some of her Republican colleagues so happy that the government has shut down.

Elsewhere in cyberspace it's been a very frustrating experience for me to try to have a conversation with some Tea Partiers who support what's happening. I've found that they don't like to stay on topic, they ignore questions, don't address points made, and when facts are presented they reject them. It's like trying to have a conversation with a broken record: the same words get regurgitated and there's no exchange of thoughtful consideration to what is being said. I've rarely been able to say "I understand but I disagree;" instead I've found myself having to say "That's not true," followed up with links to supporting facts.

There was one exception I came across. The woman started out like the rest but I kept asking her to engage instead of deflect. She tried, but it was very difficult for her. I've had lots of disagreements in my life but have never experienced anything quite like this. It's Bizarro World.

We've got an even bigger problem though, looking ahead beyond this crisis. And that is that these Tea Party Republican congresspeople do not feel they need to be concerned with what the majority of Americans experience, need, or want. It is not the country at large whom they serve:

"Government shutdown: Why many Republicans have no reason to deal"
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/g ... 97768.html

[haleoalau]

Tea Party -

They're very proud of that nomenclature - but I don't think they'd find it funny (or a bit ironic) if the majority rebel against them next election.

IF (and but fat friggin' IF, I fear), enough people will get off their complacent asses and vote them out.

One of my areas Repub reps voted against the shut down knowing it would be horrible for the people in her district, and while I applaud her move, it's too little, too late. All incumbents in my area have lost my vote. If I could vote a straight 3rd party ticket, I would.

[Steve G]

Just to update.

The families of military KIA who were denied the death & burial benefits due them ( I believe Congress was suppose to address this today...)

LA Times: Private charity to restore death benefits for U.S. military families

In a surprise move, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced that the Pentagon had reached an agreement with Fisher House Foundation, a nonprofit charity that assists military families, to begin paying the survivor benefits until the government can resume them. The foundation will be repaid after the stalemate ends.

Hagel's announcement came slightly more than an hour after the House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill, 425 to 0, to restore the benefits and sent it to the Senate. It appeared, however, that the Democratic-controlled Senate might not act on the bill after the Pentagon moved to pay the benefits through the private foundation.

If the Senate fails to act, Republicans would have a harder time claiming credit for restoring the aid to military families.

The Senate did not take up the bill.

“Lord, when our federal shutdown delays payments of death benefits to the families of children dying in far-away battlefields, it’s time for our lawmakers to say enough is enough. Cover our shame with the robe of your righteousness. Forgive us, reform us, and make us whole.”

A further update:

ABC: Bill to Pay Military Death Benefits Heads to Obama

The Pentagon infuriated congressional Republicans and Democrats and touched off a national firestorm when it said that a law allowing the military to be paid during the partial government shutdown did not cover the death benefit payments. Congress passed and Obama signed that measure into law before the government shutdown last Tuesday, and lawmakers insist that the benefits shouldn't have been affected.

In stepped a charity, the Fisher House Foundation, which Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Wednesday would cover the costs during the shutdown. Hagel said the Pentagon would reimburse the foundation after the shutdown ended.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said Thursday that the organization is "extraordinarily generous and they do very good work," but he pressed for Senate passage of the benefits bill to ensure the Defense Department and Fisher House wouldn't have to figure out a special work-around.

The government could not actively solicit funds from private organizations but could accept an offer.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the Pentagon had essentially resolved the problem and the issue was moot, but he didn't object to passage of the bill.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said the arrangement with Fisher House means "the legislation is not necessary" because the issue has been resolved. He would not say whether Obama would sign the bill.

Latest update:

ABC: Obama Signs Bill to Pay Military Death Benefits

Families of fallen troops will be assured of receiving death benefits under legislation President Barack Obama signed Thursday amid a national firestorm after the Pentagon suspended the roughly $100,000 payments during the partial government shutdown.

Obama signed the bill into law after it won final passage in the Senate earlier in the day.

But his chief spokesman, Jay Carney, had said the measure was unnecessary because a military charity had stepped in to continue the payments. Carney also had declined to say whether Obama would sign the bill, which reinstates benefits for surviving family members, including funeral and burial expenses, and death gratuity payments.

Edit to consolidate posts

[new cook]

That's very nice of the charity to do that, but who is helping the homeless veterans that people like Lee are being prevented from housing? And who is helping veterans with other needs?

Even big business is now distancing themselves from the Republican strategy, which was actually fed to Republicans by private rightwing and Tea Party organizations (see NY Times article I'd posted). It's time to stop the extortion and let a clean CR be voted on.

Of course, then we'll have the debt ceiling issue but this is really where business and Wall Streer split with the hard line ideologues of the Tea Party. The former knows that, unlike a shutdown which hurt the middle class and poor - mostly the poor - failure to raise the debt limit would soon enough cause their investments to meltdown. The Tea Party doesn't care, they're happy to bring down the whole system so they can reform it according to their view of the world.

Michael Needham, CEO of Heritage Action*, was quoted yesterday as saying, "We'd give the Speaker some flex on a short-term debt limit increase."

Who elected Heritage Action to "give some flex" to the Speaker of the House of Representatives? We really must overturn Citizens United. Until then, we need to educate and mobilize real actual individual citizens, get them registered, and make sure they have access to the polls and vote.


*see NY Times article for their involvement in this debacle.

[Steve G]

see previous post

[new cook]

October 9, 2013
Business Groups See Loss of Sway Over House G.O.P.
By ERIC LIPTON, NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and NELSON D. SCHWARTZ

WASHINGTON — As the government shutdown grinds toward a potential debt default, some of the country’s most influential business executives have come to a conclusion all but unthinkable a few years ago: Their voices are carrying little weight with the House majority that their millions of dollars in campaign contributions helped build and sustain.

Their frustration has grown so intense in recent days that several trade association officials warned in interviews on Wednesday that they were considering helping wage primary campaigns against Republican lawmakers who had worked to engineer the political standoff in Washington.

Such an effort would thrust Washington’s traditionally cautious and pragmatic business lobby into open warfare with the Tea Party faction, which has grown in influence since the 2010 election and won a series of skirmishes with the Republican establishment in the last two years.

“We are looking at ways to counter the rise of an ideological brand of conservatism that, for lack of a better word, is more anti-establishment than it has been in the past,” said David French, the top lobbyist at the National Retail Federation. “We have come to the conclusion that sitting on the sidelines is not good enough.”

Some warned that a default could spur a shift in the relationship between the corporate world and the Republican Party. Long intertwined by mutual self-interest on deregulation and lower taxes, the business lobby and Republicans are diverging not only over the fiscal crisis, but on other major issues like immigration reform, which was favored by business groups and party leaders but stymied in the House by many of the same lawmakers now leading the debt fight.

Joe Echevarria, the chief executive of Deloitte, the accounting and consulting firm, said, “I’m a Republican by definition and by registration, but the party seems to have split into two factions.”

While both parties have extreme elements, he suggested, only in the G.O.P. did the extreme element exercise real power. “The extreme right has 90 seats in the House,” Mr. Echevarria said. “Occupy Wall Street has no seats.”

Moreover, business leaders and trade groups said, the tools that have served them in the past — campaign contributions, large memberships across the country, a multibillion-dollar lobbying apparatus — do not seem to be working.

“There clearly are people in the Republican Party at the moment for whom the business community and the interests of the business community — the jobs and members they represent — don’t seem to be their top priority,” said Dan Danner, the head of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, which spearheaded opposition to President Obama’s health care law among small businesses. “They don’t really care what the N.F.I.B. thinks, and don’t care what the Chamber thinks, and probably don’t care what the Business Roundtable thinks.”

For the complete article:

Business Groups See Loss of Sway Over House GOP

[tj]

A very interesting article. The present standoff has several facets that I think will see some examination beyond the time when it is over. What the article referred to is one. Another is the antiquated debt limit system. Another is the possibilty of factionalism being at least partially debunked. We are smarter than this, folks. I think the one best thing we can encourage our neighbors to do and teach our kids to do is to be as well informed as possible and to vote at every election. It is a crying shame that so many do not realize how valuable these things are.