Leaders Out Of Touch With Economic Reality

Politico reports that almost half the members of Congress are millionaires compared to just 1% of the subject population that they rule.   Could this be one of the reasons why the Washington elite is so out of touch with the concerns of the average American?

The economy and pocket book issues are the main concerns of the electorate, regardless of whether they are currently employed or not.   The unemployed see their ship sinking rapidly and those still employed are seeing their standard of living decaying at an alarming rate.   While the average down on his luck American is worried about basic daily issues, the elite rulers of Washington are busily engaged on planetary quests to reduce carbon emissions and tell other nations how to conduct their affairs.    The recent election results prove that voters believe that their basic concerns are not even on the “to do” list of the Washington elite.

Among the highlights: Two-hundred-and-thirty-seven members of Congress are millionaires. That’s 44 percent of the body – compared to about 1 percent of Americans overall.

CRP says California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa is the richest lawmaker on Capitol Hill, with a net worth estimated at about $251 million. Next in line: Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), worth about $244.7 million; Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), worth about $214.5 million; Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), worth about $209.7 million; and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), worth about $208.8 million.

All told, at least seven lawmakers have net worths greater than $100 million, according to the Center’s 2008 figures.

“Many Americans probably have a sense that members of Congress aren’t hurting, even if their government salary alone is in the six figures, much more than most Americans make,” said CRP spokesman Dave Levinthal.

Change We Didn’t Need

Here’s an interesting article from The Washington Post explaining why the 2008 election meant a lot less than it seemed to at the time.   As the country discovers how deceptive, empty and expensive the promises of  “change” are turning out to be, disenchantment is growing by the minute.  Worth a full read…

The Myth Of 08, Demolished

In the aftermath of last year’s Obama sweep, we heard endlessly about its fundamental, revolutionary, transformational nature. How it was ushering in an FDR-like realignment for the 21st century in which new demographics — most prominently, rising minorities and the young — would bury the GOP far into the future. One book proclaimed “The Death of Conservatism,” while the more modest merely predicted the terminal decline of the Republican Party into a regional party of the Deep South or a rump party of marginalized angry white men.

This was all ridiculous from the beginning. The ‘08 election was a historical anomaly. A uniquely charismatic candidate was running at a time of deep war weariness, with an intensely unpopular Republican president, against a politically incompetent opponent, amid the greatest financial collapse since the Great Depression. And still he won by only seven points.

Public Angst Grows

Recent polls indicate increasing disaffection with the economic and social policies being forced upon the American public by the controllers in Washington.   The American public thought that they voted for “change” but what we seem to be getting is micro management and obtrusive government interference into our  lives.

The imperial Washington power structure seems oblivious to the fact that most Americans do not trust their government and believe that their financial situation is being made worse, not better, by government policies.

Here are the results from the latest polls that are beginning to show a major disconnect between the average American and an out of control power elite in Washington who believe they know “what is best for us”.

Why Obama’s Ratings Are Sinking

Instead, Gallup reports that disapproval of the president’s economic policies has grown to 49% in July from 30% in February. Even among the president’s core supporters, young people in the 18-29 age group, his overall approval has dropped 11 points since January.

Dissatisfaction is spreading into open protest as members of Congress try to explain the president’s policies to the public. Angry voters have engaged in high-profile confrontations in town-hall meetings around the country over a proposed health-care overhaul that protesters complain is unaffordable, socialistic, incomprehensible, and which their representatives have not even read.

The president’s sinking approval ratings are due precisely to his administration’s free-spending ways. In a July 2009 Gallup poll, the No. 1 reason for disapproval of the president’s economic policies was, literally, “spending too much.” In second place was the worry that the president is “leading the nation toward socialism” through government takeovers and bailouts.

In January 2009, the Pew Research Center asked about 2,000 Americans, “Do you think the government does more to help or more to hurt people trying to move up the economic ladder?” Amid the most frightening economic crisis in decades, more Americans still said the government would hurt than the number who thought it would help (50% versus 39%). Independent surveys from roughly the same period found that only one in five Americans believed he or she could trust the government.

Citizens will put up with a lot—but not with anyone who imperils our future.

There is no evidence that more than a minority of Americans accept the idea that a $17 trillion national debt, greater reliance on government for jobs and health, and hyper-progressive taxation offer the hope they deserve for themselves and their children. The administration and Congress can deny these truths with charges of un-Americanism and implausible conspiracy theories about the current citizen demonstrations. But opinion polls deliver an honest expression of unhappiness over the direction our nation is taking.

The ruling elite in Washington seem to be oblivious to or ignoring the reality of America’s growing disaffection with the course the nation is taking.  The approval rating of Congress is at 30%.  Only one if five Americans trust their government.   Many Americans believe that government policies are financially bankrupting the country and the future of our children.   It’s almost as if our country was being run by overlords, appointed by a foreign power.  It’s time for change indeed - the problem is that the “changes” being forced upon us are not quite what we had in mind.

Postal Service Poor Analogy

Now we know why the President usually does not say much without the Teleprompter in front of him; why in the world would you mention the Post Office when trying to convince America that the government should take over the health care system?

The Post Office is a prime example of how a lack of competition leads to high prices.  Without competition, there is no need to worry about raising prices, providing good service or running an efficient organization - higher prices are simply passed on to the consumer.   Productivity has been growing in the private sector for decades, especially with the efficiencies gained through the Internet.  Yet year after year, the Post Office relentlessly raises rates far in excess of the consumer price index.

Cost Of A Stamp

Consider some of the other obnoxious results of a government run monopoly as detailed in a recent Wall Street Journal Opinion column:

Whatever possessed President Obama to mention the travails of the post office while discussing health care the other day, his timing was certainly apt. The Postal Service is headed toward a loss of $7 billion this year and another $7 billion in 2010.

Most mail today is delivered electronically via email. Traditional postal mail volume has fallen by nearly 20% since 2000, and the average household gets one-third fewer letters than a decade ago.

No private business in America could continually raise prices, lose billions of dollars and then hope to win back customers by promising poorer service.

Here’s a secret Washington doesn’t want to admit: That 14 cent per letter cost hike after inflation over the past 60 years imposes a $20 billion a year toll on the U.S. economy.

Most employees have no-layoff clauses, the starting salaries are about 25% to 30% higher than for comparably skilled private workers, and the fringe benefits are so expensive that the Government Accountability Office says $500 million a year could be saved merely by bringing health benefits into line with those of other federal workers.

The most overdue reform is to strip away the Post Service’s monopoly on first-class mail and bulk mail. Competition is the key ingredient to innovation, low prices and good service. This was Mr. Obama’s insight at his recent health-care town hall when he noted that “UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.”

The argument has been made for 200 years that the postal monopoly is necessary to “bind the nation together.” Once that was at least plausible. But today the Internet delivers to the most remote corners of Alaska and the Badlands at one-one-hundredth the cost of snail mail. The sooner Congress requires the Postal Service to shrink and adapt to this reality, the smaller will be the losses imposed on taxpayers.

To expect a government health care monopoly to be run efficiently defies common sense and the American public knows it.  The attempt to quickly ramrod massive health care legislation into law before allowing public discussion is an outrage against democracy.

The haste to force health care legislation upon the American public implies that those pushing for  “quick” legislation knew that in the light of day, the American public would reject it or demand further information on the cost/benefits of proposed changes.  Elected representatives are supposed to represent the public view rather than arrogantly assume that they know what is best.  The uncontrollable, unaccountable  and free spending mob now running the country needs a course in basic democracy.

Lost American Initiative

Whatever happened to the “can do” attitude that allowed this country to put a man on the moon when such a feat was perceived possible only in science fiction movies?   Essential and long overdue improvements to US infrastructure now take decades as work is delayed by bickering special interest groups, mindless bureaucrats and endless state and federal regulations.

The recent opening of 3 new runways at 3 major airports is cause for celebration, but the amount of time required to complete these long overdue expansions is appalling.  Hundreds of billions of dollars a year in energy and human resources are dissipated each year as we still rely on unexpanded and unimproved infrastructure built decades ago.

Consider the time required to reap the benefits of 3 new airport runways.

In the eight months since a new runway opened at the U.S.’s second-busiest airport, plagued for decades with lengthy flight delays, O’Hare has operated with above-average on-time arrivals—better than Dallas, Atlanta and Denver in 2009, according to FlightStats.com. O’Hare’s on-time arrival rate improved by 27% so far this year compared with the same period of 2008. That was twice the improvement of any other big U.S. airport.

The new runway, opened last Nov. 21, gets much of the credit. While airline reductions in flight schedules have eased congestion and reduced flight delays, the ability to now land three planes simultaneously in most weather conditions instead of two jets at a time has turned O’Hare from a choke point into a reliable airport.

Because of the enormous cost and heated legal battles with neighbors and environmentalists, building runways at big airports is a rarity—and a major reason air travel has been bogged down in the past 10 years. Last fall, three major runways opened with much fanfare on the same day in Chicago, Seattle and Washington, D.C. Seattle’s new runway took two decades of planning, approval, court fights and construction. O’Hare’s new runway was the first at that airport in 37 years.

Economic growth relies on an efficient transportation system.  The fact that the second busiest airport in the US could not be expanded for 37 years speaks volumes for the inability of government to “get things done that need to be done”.  Think about this the next time you are wasting 8 hours of your life due to a flight delay.

According to the FAA, 30,000 flights at O’Hare were delayed because of weather in the first five months of 2008. This year through May, only 8,800 weather-delayed flights were recorded “and we had a crazy winter this year with all kinds of snow,” says Ms. Drouet.

Consider the similar multi decades delay for Seattle to add an additional runway:

At Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, delays typically stacked up in the frequent fog and rain because the two existing runways were too close together to have planes landing side-by-side in poor visibility. So the airport wanted a third runway far enough from the existing runways so planes could land two at a time in any weather.

The project took more than 20 years and cost more than $1 billion. Heavy construction started in 2004.

Stimulus Spending Largely Wasted

A significant amount of the country’s infrastructure was built during the depression.  The interstate highway system was built during the Eisenhower administration before many of us were born.   How much better off would all of us and our children be if necessary improvements  to the country’s infrastructure was addressed in a comprehensive, time sensitive manner?

“Stimulus spending” of almost a trillion dollars was deployed to reduce taxes, enhance special interest spending and pass out funds to those who would most quickly spend it at Walmarts on Chinese imported goods.  This type of foolish spending leaves us another trillion in debt while keeping Chinese factories busy - it does not leave the country with anything of lasting value.

Vacuous Leadership

Of course, even if every dollar of stimulus spending had been directed exclusively to infrastructure enhancements, it would not be spend for 15 years if the airport runway example applies.    Therein lies the pitfalls of democracy - those making the spending decisions are more focused on the next election rather than the strategic long term needs of the Country.