From the Economist: The Democratic Party tries to regain control of state legislatures - excerpt: Given where they are, the only direction is up. What is worrisome is the means to their ends. Gerrymandering, which is fool's game ...
Republicans can lose 6 of the 7 toss ups in the Senate and still win. The House is looking closer, but I only really care about confirming judicial nominees, it actually might be a good thing for there to be legislative gridlock. Means government can't expand.
Correct. Gridlock is our salvation from runaway partisan legislation and regulation. Even now when the republicans have a majority in both houses and the white house, we still have gridlock. Partisan laws are bad. People should be able to determine what is best for the country rather than for themselves. Since they don't then the less government we have the better. Gridlock is essential.
I don't care the least about government expansion. Nearly half the US Discretionary Budget is being wasted on the DoD. See here. I care about what government does. And does not do. And in that matter, Americans are without a necessary National Healthcare System or a Free Tertiary Education - both of which are keys to a decent life-style. America is binging upon Muney, Muney, Muney. It is the most important qualifier of an individual, or a family. A kind of "Badge of Honor". Having enough money is, yes, important. Having much, much more than anyone else is anecdotal at best and trite at its worst. It is also a waste. The money of the extremely rich stays for the most part outside the economy in Investment Accounts. Were it adequately taxed and spent on Health Care and Education, it would be a real benefit to everyone. The real purpose of a market-economy is not to create as many billionaires/millionaires as possible. It is to assure that the most people can lead decent lives. Everyone deserves a adequate lifestyle, but earning megabucks is no real necessity at all. And no, I'm no socialist. I am a tried and true social-democrat. Which is defined as: And compared to Europe, the US is light-years away from that model ...
That's a government term to try to imply that the congress has no control on most of the budget. IOW - That they have no responsibility for that spending.
It appears you actually do care. We could probably cut a full 1/2 of the federal budget and improve government immeasurably. I care about what government does also. I care that it does less than it does now.
I like how democrats pretend in their little fantasy land that only republicans gerrymander districts.
It's a "game" they both play, and have played since 1812 when a Massachusetts governor named Gerry first tried it:
Exactly. It's just human nature to want to do that kind of thing. The dems currently hate it because Republicans took over enough State Houses/Senates and they can no longer gerrymander. Republicans will hate it in a few years, when we lose those State Houses/Senates, and we can't gerrymander.
