How can you tell when Politicians are not interested in Fixing America's Problems?

I used to think that it was common knowledge and quite easy to tell if the person in front of you blowing smoke was really blowing smoke or really did mean what they said.  I am becoming even more skeptical now but not toward those politicians who know exactly what to say to get you to vote for them but toward the public whose intelligence about these matters seemed to be more and more diluted.

This is why now, I would like to take this time to try and help some of you re-adjust your vision and see past that façade that is placed in front of us to blind us from the real intentions of those who will promise you much and deliver very little.  It is mostly seen in politics but in today’s world, it’s becoming more and clearer in everyday living.  I present to you two major examples of which I speak.

First let’s consider the article written by Josh Israel for Think Progress titled “Georgia Congressman Proposes That Poor Kids Sweep Schools for Their Lunch”.  In it he reports that “Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA), who from 2011 to 2012 chaired the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees funding for school nutrition programs, told party activists that kids receiving free breakfast and lunch should either be asked to pay for part of their meals or earn them by sweeping the floor.  According to the Huffington Post, Kingston told the Jackson County Republican Party that the program that provides children from struggling families with free lunch and breakfast is error-riddled. He then opined that schools should not teach any of the kids, eligible or not, that there is such thing as a “free lunch” in America”.

Apparently Mr. Kingston believes that those who are born poor makes a choice to stay there and never dream of a day where they are rich and can afford to pay for everything and anything they want or need.  Mr. Kingston probably did not mention this when running for his current office but feels confident to be able to share this now because the importance of fixing America’s problems comes second to shaping this world to fit his and those who think, feel, act and subscribe to the same things he does in the same manner he does.  What this means is if you are of a different mind than Mr. Kingston any issue you have that you thought he would fix will certainly be ignored.  If you still believe that he is only blowing smoke and would never turn his back on his fellow Americans, whether they look like him or not, whether they are as wealthy as him or not, then good luck with that.

Secondly we have to look at the recent movement of Virginia Governor-elect Terry McAuliffe.  We get a glimpse of what may be happening to a man who ran to support women’s rights only to appear to have changed horses in mid-stream now that he has won.  According Lauren Rankin’s article titled “Women’s rights sold out again: McAuliffe’s betrayal”, “After Terry McAuliffe won Virginia's governor race by touting his women's agenda, a key early move is drawing fire”.  The article continues by saying that “

When Terry McAuliffe was declared the governor-elect of Virginia on Nov. 5, abortion rights advocates breathed a deep sigh of relief. Now it seems that celebration may have been shortsighted. McAuliffe will reportedly reappoint current Gov. Robert McDonnell’s health secretary Dr. William Hazel Jr. as his own. 

Hazel, an orthopedic surgeon, is no friend to women’s rights. He was criticized for his handling of the adoption of a law that mandates an ultrasound be performed on a pregnant person seeking an abortion, regardless of medical necessity, and forces the patient to pay for it”.

Now in the effort to be fair about this some are saying that the reason Mr. McAuliffe is doing this is to “Some reports suggest that the governor-elect may have reappointed Hazel in an effort to win Republican support for expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act”.  Now only God truly knows if this is the truth but from where I stand, this move stinks of gamesmanship and not governing. 

We all know that in order to proper govern, one will have to compromise and in this particular situation compromise is not a dirty word but to make the first few moves you make as Virginia governor by taking on the very person who demonstrated no backbone in the fight for women’s rights with the last governor does not strike me as a move toward those who elected you to fix their problems.  It strikes me as a dealmaker instead of a leader for all of Virginia.

You want to know how you can tell if someone does not truly have your welfare at heart.  Look deeply into their eyes and ask them a question that you have already heard them defend or attack.  If they can quickly respond with the very same answer then maybe they have promise but if they hesitate or change their stances right there in front of you, throw them a towel because they are all washed up.

Here is an example of how politics is supposed to work and not just for the “haves” but the “have nots” too.  It happened in my State of Illinois and you can find this and other examples under the title “Illinois revamped by new laws, hot-button issues” posted: Monday, August 26, 2013 12:00 am but updated: 8:52 am, Mon Aug 26, 2013.  It states “Gov. Pat Quinn has been pushing for law reform and implementation throughout the state. Illinois has enacted new laws, such as legalizing medical marijuana and allowing a new system for online voter registration. Illinois has also reformed previous laws, such as increasing the maximum speed limit on rural highways and completely banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. Other issues such as the state’s pension crisis remain unsolved. Nonetheless, Illinois is continuing on its path toward progressiveness and bipartisanship”.

What all that means is each side comes to the table with all their demands and one by one they are read aloud and either completely rejected or tabled until the entire list is read.  After both sides have presented their lists, those items that were completely dismissed stay dismissed and those tabled are then taken one by one and discussed.  Once a compromise has been reached on that item, then and only then do they go to the next one.  A three-hour meeting may seem like a three week day but in the end, the State wins because more can find something good in the legislation than bad.  Knowing ahead of time that we are not going to get everything we want means that we will go after the most important ones and use the lesser ones for later.

Now the only thing wrong with this idea is the adults that go into the room may soon regress to children while they are there but this too can be fixed by voters taking responsibility for the representative’s actions that they sent and taking it personally when those sent to serve only seek to serve themselves.  

Need an example, consider your military.  Many different people come together who have never seen each other before and on behalf of our country, we band together like brothers and sisters and complete the job we were sent to do in brilliant fashion.  Get the point?