Thread: PLEASE Stop Rewarding and Re-electing Politicians that . . .

Please stop repeatedly rewarding and re-electing politicians that ignore existing laws and despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for profits and votes.

Arrogant, corrupt, irresponsible incumbent politicians are only HALF of the problem.
The other HALF is the voters that repeatedly reward and re-elect them.

Is that working?
Is that helping to reduce these abuses?
So why continue to reward bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 93% to 99% re-election rates (since year 1980)!

Some people have the mistaken idea that many politicians were ousted in the last election (7-Nov-2006).
Not true. Not with 93% to 99% re-election rates since year 1980.

Government will NOT become more responsible and accountable UNTIL the voters do too.
The voters are culpable too.
Does it make sense to give incumbent politicians dismally low 11%-to-18% approval ratings, and then repeatedly reward those incumbent polticians with 93% to 99% re-election rates?
What do they say about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

• Stop Repeat Offenders!

• Don't Reward them with Re-election!

And if the next Congress is irresponsible too, don't reward them with re-elect either.
Keep that up, and then, maybe, they will get the message.
But repeatedly rewarding and re-electing incumbent politicians will almost certainly make incumbent politicians more irresponsible, corrupt, and unaccountable.

After all, who can name 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable?
Perhaps the voters should start holding Congress responsible as a whole, instead of trying to figure out who (if anyone) is responsible and accountable?

Have you actually ever looked at your senators and representatives voting record?

So, why do voters repeatedly reward irresponsible incumbent politicians with re-election?

Sadly, 40% to 50% of 200 million eligible voters don't even bother to vote.
Most voters don't even know who their senators and representatives are.
Most voters blindly pull the party-lever (i.e. vote straight ticket) without even knowing exactly who they are voting for.
Most voters have fallen for the party line.

Perhaps enough voters will be less complacent, apathetic, blindly partisan, blindly loyal, irrationally fearful, and lazy when enough of the voters are jobless, homeless, and hungry?

After all, these abuses and the nation's pressing problems are growing dangerously in number and severity, and threatening the future and security of the nation.

We need to start learning a little faster (especially with the 6.7 billion world population growing exponentially). Learning (repeatedly) from pain and misery is not too smart. Pain and misery will motivate the voters, but perhaps the voters should try to starting learning to vote smarter, and learn from others' past mistakes and abuses, instead of re-living those mistakes and repeatedly learning the hard way (i.e. 2.00 steps forward, 1.99 steps backward) ?

I can name a few:

Congressman Ed Royce

Congressman Rohrbacher

Congressman Tom Tancredo

Senator Sessions

Senator Inhofe

Senator Vitter (despite his personal failure he votes for Americans)

......and sadly 90-95% of them are all part of this New World Order conspiracy. Congressman, judges, mayors, governors, city councilman are largely in on it too.

Sorry for my tin foil hat conspiracy nut roll. But , people are out there scratching there heads. Their asking questions. They are wondering. They shall see one day.

34 WERE IN OFFICE DURING THE 1985 IMMIGRATION DEBACLE AND THE 9 AMNESTIES SINCE THEN. NOTE: I haven't done the House of Reps yet, and there will be more there to add to these numbers.

THAT 34, PLUS MANY MORE, VOTED ON THE 9 AMNESTIES SINCE 1985.

IF THE 1985 LAWS WERE "BROKEN," WHY DID THEY VOTE TO PASS THEM? BECAUSE TED KENNEDY PUSHED THEM THROUGH LIKE HE TRIED TO DO IN 2007?

AND WHY DID THE PRESIDENT(S) SIGN THEM????? TOO STUPID TO READ THEM FIRST?

ALL BUT 3 HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE IN THE LAST 8 - 10 YEARS DURING THE ILLEGAL ALIEN INVASION.

WHY HAVE THEY SET IDLY BY AND WATCH THIS INVASION?

IF THEY REALLY THOUGHT THE "IMMIGRATION LAWS WERE BROKEN," WHY DID THEY NOT "REPAIR" THEM?

D Akaka HI Senator since 1990 - 17 yrs
R Allard CO Senator since 1997 + 3 terms as a Rep = 16 yrs
D Baucus MT Senator since 1979 + 2 terms as a Rep = 32 years
D Bayh IN Senator since 1999 = 8 yrs
R Bennett UT Senator since 1992 = 15 yrs
D Biden DE Senator since 1973 = 34 yrs
D Bingaman NM Senator since 1983 = 24 yrs
R Bond MO Senator since 1987 = 20 yrs
D Boxer CA Senator since 1993 + 5 terms as Rep = 24 yrs
D Brown OH Senator since 2007 BUT 7 terms as Rep = 14 yrs
R Brownback KS 1999 = 8 yrs
R Bunning KY Senator since 1999 + 6 terms as Rep = 20 years
D Byrd WV Senator wince 1959 = 48 yrs
D Cantwell WA Senator since 2001 + 1 term as Rep = 8 yrs
D Cardin ND Senator since 2007 BUT 10 terms as Rep = 20 yrs
D Carper DE Senator since 2001 + 6 terms as Rep = 18 yrs
R Chambliss GA Senator since 2003 + 4 terms as Rep = 12 years
D Clinton NY Senator since 2001 = 6 yrs
R Coburn OK Senator since 2005 + 5 terms as Rep = 12 yrs
R Collins ME Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
D Conrad ND Senator since 1992 = 15 yrs
R Crapo ID Senator since 1999 + 3 terms as Rep = 14 yrs
R DeMint SC Senator since 2005 + 3 terms as Rep = 8 yrs
R Dodd CT Senator since 1981 + 3 terms as Rep = 22 yrs
R Domenici NM 1973 = 34 yrs
D Dorgan ND Senator since 1992 + 5 terms as Rep = 25 years
D Durbin IL Senator since 1997 + 7 terms as Rep = 24 years
R Ensign NV Senator since 2001 + 2 terms as Rep = 10 yrs
R Enzi WY Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
D Feingold WI Senator since 1993 = 14 yrs
D Feinstein CA Senator since 1992 = 15 yrs
R Graham SC Senator since 2003 + 4 terms as Rep = 12 yrs
R Grassley IA Senator since 1981 + 3 terms as Rep = 32 yrs
R Gregg NH Senator since 1993 + 4 terms as Rep = 22 yrs
R Hagel NE Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
D Harkin IA Senator since 1985 + 6 terms as Rep = 34 yrs
R Hatch UT Senator since 1977 = 30 yrs
R Hutchinson TX Senator since 1993 = 14 yrs
R Inhofe OK Senator since 1994 + 4 terms as Rep = 21 yrs
D Inouye HI Senator since 1963 + 2 trms as Rep = 48 yrs
D Johnson SD Senator since 1997 + 5 terms as Rep = 20 yrs
D Kennedy MA Senator since 1962 = 45 yrs
D Kerry MA Senator since 1985 = 22 yrs
D Kohl WI Senator since 1989 = 18 yrs
R Kyl AZ Senator since 1995 + 4 trms as Rep = 20 yrs
D Landrieu LA Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
D Lautenberg NJ Senator 82-01 + 03 to present = 23 yrs
D Leahy VT Senator since 1975 = 32 yrs
D Levin MI Senator since 1979 = 28 yrs
I Lieberman CT Senator since 1989 = 18 yrs
D Lincoln AR Senator since 1999 + 1 term as Rep = 10 yrs
R Lott MS Senator since 1989 + 8 terms as Rep = 35 yrs
R Lugar IN Senator since 1977 = 30 yrs
R McCain AZ Senator sisnce 1987 + 1 term as Rep = 22 yrs
R McConnell KY Senator since 1985 = 22 yrs
D Menendez NJ Senator since 2006 + 7 terms as Rep = 15 yrs
D Mikulski MD Senator since 1987 + 6 terms as Rep = 32 yrs
D Murray WA Senator since 1993 = 14 yrs
D Nelson FL Senator since 2001 + 6 terms as Rep = 18 yrs
D Nelson NE Senator since 2001 = 6 yrs
D Reed RI Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
D Reid NV Senator since 1987 + 1 term as Rep = 22 yrs
R Roberts KS Senator since 1997 + 8 terms as Rep = 26 yrs
D Rockefeller WV Senator since 1985 = 22 yrs
D Schumer NY Senator since 1999 + 9 terms as Rep = 26 yrs
R Sessions AL Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
R Shelby AL Senator since 1987 +4 terms as Rep = 28 yrs
R Smith OR Senator since 1997 = 10 yrs
R Snowe ME Senator since 1995 + 8 terms as Rep = 28 yrs
R Specter PA Senator since 1981 = 26 yrs
D Stabenow MI Senator since 2001 = 6 yrs
R Stevens AK Senator since 1968 = 39 yrs
R Sununu NH Senator since 2003 + 3 terms as Rep = 10 yrs
R Thune SD Senator since 2005 + 4 terms as Rep = 10 yrs
R Vitter LA Senator since 2005 + 3 terms as Rep = 8 yrs
R Voinovich OH Senator since 1999 = 8 yrs
R Warner VA Senator since 1979 = 28 yrs
D Wyden OR Senator since 1996 + 8 terms as Rep = 27 yrs

From the thread "IMMIGRATION LAWS BROKEN?"

Yes!!! These critters have had ample time to do something about this and they haven't.

Some have told me about others and I won't disagree as I haven't read up on them, but as far as I am concerned, TAncredo is the only one who has stepped out in the limelight and taken the heat from the pro-illegal bunch and the WH.

As far as I am concerned, TAncredo and his willingness to take the heat and be non-pc and take it to the public as best he could, is one of the main reasons we are having this debate.

It is one thing to stand around and 'vote right', it is another to put oneself out and speak out, risk all the mud-slinging and the ire of the WH. If Mr. TAncredo had been one of the 'old hats' who really knew his way around - who knows what he could have accomplished.

danielsummars said:

Sadly, 40% to 50% of 200 million eligible voters don't even bother to vote.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'll use Daniel's segue to once again sound the trumpet for getting as many people as possible registered to vote. Do it early and do it often. A message from the ballot box is the strongest one a politician can receive.

We should already be in countdown mode as South Carolina's primary is scheduled for January. Let's make a statement there . Become intimately familiar with your state's voting procedure. Just google for "__________ voter registration." Enter the name of your state in the blank.

Originally Posted by nntrixie

Yes!!! These critters have had ample time to do something about this and they haven't.

Some have told me about others and I won't disagree as I haven't read up on them, but as far as I am concerned, TAncredo is the only one who has stepped out in the limelight and taken the heat from the pro-illegal bunch and the WH.

As far as I am concerned, TAncredo and his willingness to take the heat and be non-pc and take it to the public as best he could, is one of the main reasons we are having this debate.

It is one thing to stand around and 'vote right', it is another to put oneself out and speak out, risk all the mud-slinging and the ire of the WH. If Mr. TAncredo had been one of the 'old hats' who really knew his way around - who knows what he could have accomplished.

Actually, Royce and Rohrbacker also do what Tancredo does, they just don't get the same press coverage or TV coverage. I've seen Ed Royce more this year than any.

Gogo wrote: I can name a few:
Congressman Ed Royce
Congressman Rohrbacher
Congressman Tom Tancredo
Senator Sessions
Senator Inhofe
Senator Vitter (despite his personal failure he votes for Americans)

OK, first of all, that's only 6 and they are ALL Republicans. No partisan bias there, eh?

There are 535 in Congress. Unless there are at least 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are not irresponsible and unaccountable, then Congress as a whole is irresponsible and unaccountable, which is probably why they get dismally low 11%-to-18% approval ratings.

It's time to start holding Congress (as a whole) responsible and accountable.

Also, illegal immigration is just one important issue of several other pressing problems that have the potential for an economic meltdown (or worse). It's a death of a thousand cuts. Can a nation actually commit suicide? Just look at history to get your answer.

What good is a stand on illegal immigration alone if the politician is fiscally irresponsible, corrupt, FOR-SALE, and arrogant?
Congress (as a whole) is selling us all out.
They are despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other, sending jobs overseas (even giving corporations tax breaks for doing it), and heaping the burdens onto the tax payers.

Now, taking that list of politicians one by one:
______________________
Representative Ed Royce (R-CA):
[] Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)
Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. (Apr 2006)
[] Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions. (Feb 2002)
[] Voted NO on banning soft money and issue ads. (Sep 1999)
[] Voted YES on allowing vouchers in DC schools. (Aug 199 {this undermines public education}
[] Voted NO on allowing stockholder voting on executive compensation. (Apr 2007)
[] Voted NO on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007) {but Congress gave itself its 9th raise in 10 years}
[] Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox. (May 1999) {allowing it to continue to be plunderd; it's now $12.8 Trillion in debt}
[] Voted YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends. (Dec 2005) {this is why someone making millions pays a lower income tax rate percentage than a secretary making $60K ; how about income tax cut or tax reform instead of capital gains for the wealthy?}
[] Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
[] Voted YES on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks. (Jul 2001) {that is possibly a 1st Amendment violation}
______________________
Representitive Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA)
[] Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions. (Feb 2002)
[] Voted NO on banning soft money and issue ads. (Sep 1999)
[] Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)
[] Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. (Apr 2006)
[] Voted NO on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007) {but Congress gave itself its 9th raise in 10 years}
[] Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox. (May 1999) {allowing it to continue to be plunderd; it's now $12.8 Trillion in debt}
______________________
Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO)
[] Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox. (May 1999)
[] Voted YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends. (Dec 2005) {again, this is why millionaires pay a lower percentage of income than a secretary making $60K}
[] Voted YES on eliminating the Estate Tax ("death tax"). (Apr 2001)
[] Abolish IRS--replace income tax with national sales tax. (Jul 2003) { VERY BAD idea (that is a 30% sales tax!; inclusive)- that will make lower income earners pay a larger percentage of their income to taxes; a flat income tax on income above the poverty level and eliminate all tax loop holes makes more sense}
______________________
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL):
[] Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 199
[] Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 199
[] Voted NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity. (Mar 2006)
[] Voted NO on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
[] Voted NO on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations. (Apr 2001)
[] Voted NO on preserving habeus corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)
[] Voted NO on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007)
[] Voted NO on banning chemical weapons. (Apr 1997)
[] Voted NO on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)
[] Voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)
______________________
Senator Inhofe (R-OK)
[] Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 199
[] Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 199
[] Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
[] Voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)
[] Voted NO on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)
[] Voted YES on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress. (Mar 2006)
[] Voted NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity. (Mar 2006)
[] Voted NO on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
[] Voted NO on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations. (Apr 2001)
[] Voted NO on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007)
[] Voted NO on preserving habeus corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)
______________________
FORMER Senator David Vitter (R-LA):
[] Voted YES on extending Immigrant Residency rules (allowing more time for illegal aliens to stay in the U.S.). (May 2001)
[] In early July 2007, Vitter's phone number was included in a published list of phone records of Pamela Martin and Associates, a company owned and run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, also known as the "D.C. Madam", which is accused by the U.S. government of being a prostitution service. I wonder how Vitter's wife Wendy, a former prosecutor, and three daughters, Sophie, Lise, and Airey, and a son, Jack. feel about that. If you can lie and cheat on your wife, what makes you think he'll be honest to the voters?
[] Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
[] Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions. (Feb 2002)
[] Voted NO on banning soft money and issue ads. (Sep 1999)
[] Voted YES on eliminating the Estate Tax. (Apr 2001) {don't eliminate it; make it taxable at the normal tax rate; in fact, implement a flat tax rate percentage (e.g. 17%) on all income above the poverty level and get rid of all tax loop-holes}

___________________________

Notice how few (if any) want to reform campaign finance?
That's because most (if not all) are bought-and-paid-for.
The reason they ignore the majority of voters is because they know that those voters will re-elect them ANYWAY!
Voters have the powerful leverage of their vote, but lack the ability to use it wisely.

Also, 83% of all federal campaign donations come from only a very TINY, tiny 0.15% of of all 200 million eligible voters.
How can the 99.85% of all 200 million eligible voters compete with those that abuse vast wealth and power to control and influence elected officials?

This exemplifies one-half of the problem.
Politicians are voters are both culpable.
Repeatedly rewarding and re-electing irresponsible incumbent politicians will only make them more irresponsible and unaccountable.

Remember: Congress' approval ratings are 30% but their re-election rate is 90% to 95%.
Why do voters do that?
It's because they really are not paying much attention.
Too many voters blindly pull the party-lever (i.e. straight-ticket) without even knowing who they are voting for.
40% to 50% of voters don't even bother to vote.
Most voters don't even know who their Congress persons are.
And the politicians love to fuel the partisan warfare that is so powerfully effective at distracting the voters from more substantive issues; pressing problems that are growing in number and severity.

Perhaps voters won't be as apathetic, complacent, and disinterested when they are jobless, homeless, and hungry.

I hope it doesn't come to that, but it is NOT far fetched when you consider:
[] history;
[] Social Security is $12.8 Trillion in debt;
[] the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC) is $450 Billion in the hole;
[] the massive debt ($42 Trillion nation-wide; that's $140,000 per person!),
[] a dishonest fiat-funny-money-system and excessive money printing (high inflation is highly likely),
increasing economic instability,
[] a government that is increasingly, corrupt, FOR-SALE, and generally, fiscally and morally bankrupt; politicians only care about their own self-gain and the security of their incumbencies;
[] increasing corpocrisy, corporatism, corporate welfare, and other manifestations of unchecked greed;
[] not to mention what will happen when 77 million baby boomers (demanding their Social Security and Medicare benefits from an already bankrupt system; becoming eligible at a rate of 13,175 persons per day);
older people will not be able to retire as benefits are reduced, taxes are increased, and inflation grows to double-digits; and this will pit older and younger Americans against each other as each struggle for jobs and the increasing taxes imposed on all of them; possibly creating a generational storm;
[] and Congress has irresponsibly abdicated its responsibility to declare war to a severely bloated Executive branch, which is growing far too powerful (a gang of 2 million, compared to the 535 in Congress and their 200,000 employees); we used to be a nation that finished wars; now we're a nation that starts wars; since Korea, Congress has never declared war in Korea, Vietnam, nor the 1st and 2nd wars in Iraq; the executive branch is free to wage war and occupy other nations without the consent of Congress;
[] And if that isn't enough, consider the impact of another energy shortage? The Department Of Energy, despite its cu$hy $24 billion annual budget, has no energy plan. The government, despite the trillion$ it bilks from the U.S. tax-payers, is not serious about developing alternative energy sources. Just think what could have been done with that annual $28 billion of pork-barrel and waste?
[] and, as if that wasn't enough, we have a serious healthcare problem in this nation; healthcare is not only increasingly unaffordable, but dangerous too! Greedy pharmaceutical corporations and the FDA are becoming pill pushers that are killing hundreds of thousands in the U.S. (annually). That does not even include the huge number of patients that are irreversibly damaged and maimed. JAMA reported that over 2.2 million hospitalized patients in 1994 had serious Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) and 106,000 were fatal, making these drug reactions the 5th or 6th leading cause of death in the U.S.! Yet another example of the growing corpocrisy, corporatism, and other manifestations of unchecked greed. Healthcare solutions are needed now. While government is not responsible for providing universal healthcare, it is responsible for protecting consumers from some greedy corporations and people that abuse vast wealth and power to influence government to allow endangerment and swindling of Americans. Also, illegal immigration is placing huge burdens on the healthcare system, over-run ERs and hospitals, Medicaid, and welfare.
[] and, as if that wasn't enough, there are the problems of the ever increasing population (increasing by 249,000 per day; worldwide) and environmental issues; over-population exacerbates all other problems;
[] and the wealthiest 1% of the 302 million U.S. population that used to have 20% of all wealth (in 1980) now has 40% of all wealth.

NOTE: being wealthy is not a crime. But abusing vast wealth and power to control and influence government should be. Unfortunately it is NOT, and that is why government is FOR-SALE. That is why Congress gives itself raises (9 times in the past 10 years) while our troops go without body armor, adequate medical care, and/or promised benefits. How much proof is needed to prove their arrogance, and general fiscal and moral bankruptcy?

I don't think things have ever been this serious since World War 2 or the Great Depression.

I may be wrong, but I think people should be asking themselves what their life will be like in the next Great Depression.

So, repeatedly reward and re-elect irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for, incumbent politicians; keep rewarding them with a 90% to 95% re-election rate, and see where it gets us. Pain and misery is also a good educator and motivator.

In a voting nation, education is paramount.
We're going to get our education one way or another.
Voters can choose whether it is going to be:
(a) the smart, peaceful, responsible way,
(b) or the hard, painful way (again).

Originally Posted by Gogo

Originally Posted by nntrixie

Yes!!! These critters have had ample time to do something about this and they haven't.

Some have told me about others and I won't disagree as I haven't read up on them, but as far as I am concerned, TAncredo is the only one who has stepped out in the limelight and taken the heat from the pro-illegal bunch and the WH.

As far as I am concerned, TAncredo and his willingness to take the heat and be non-pc and take it to the public as best he could, is one of the main reasons we are having this debate.

It is one thing to stand around and 'vote right', it is another to put oneself out and speak out, risk all the mud-slinging and the ire of the WH. If Mr. TAncredo had been one of the 'old hats' who really knew his way around - who knows what he could have accomplished.

Actually, Royce and Rohrbacker also do what Tancredo does, they just don't get the same press coverage or TV coverage. I've seen Ed Royce more this year than any.

Yes, I have heard Rohrbacker - but not for as long as I have Tancredo.
I will never forget the first time I was surfing and saw him on C-Span - speaking, as they do, in front of an empty house, but he was saying things I had given up hope of anyone ever saying on TV.

He began talking when he was fairly unknown. There are others who could have accomplished a lot more because they have more clout, more connections, but they were just not as constant.

I will confess to almost being a one-issue voter. If we do not fix this one issue - and very, very soon - the rest won't matter. We won't be voting on any of the rest of them as we won't be a country.

Of course, I am for cleaning house - with few exceptions - very few.

nntrixie wrote:
Of course, I am for cleaning house - with few exceptions - very few

.

Exactly.

D.C. needs a good flush.

Sounds simple, eh?

But it is very elusive.

Voters are culpable too.

The voters will have the government that the voters deserve.

Perhaps voters will stop repeatedly rewarding irresponsible incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 93%-to-99% re-election rates when enough of the voters are jobless, homeless, hungry, and overrun by hundreds of millions of illegal aliens?

By the way . . . how many are aware that Congress is ignoring Article V of the U.S. Constitution, regardless of 567 applications to make amendments by ALL 50 states ?