Comments on: The fiscal cliff deal proves Congress is working Sat, 03 Jan 2015 16:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: garilou Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:43:37 +0000 I could agree to say that “the congress works”.

Approximately half of it works against the other half.
This is really hard work.

Considering the salary of the congressmen (and women), in a well managed company, this would be considered SO counterproductive that almost all would be fired, with the exception of those who agree with the CEO.

Then if things still go very wrong, the CEO might loose his (her) job.
For a country that believes so hard in capitalism, this is how things should be.

By: ptiffany Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:25:34 +0000 No matter how dark, someone will always see a silver lining. For pundits to call this success is ludicrous when millions of people have been hit with higher taxes. They’re all lying and telling us the sky is blue.

By: QuietThinker Thu, 03 Jan 2013 17:13:39 +0000 After two full years having the title “Speaker of the House” but not performing the job, John Boehner has stepped up and become Speaker of the House. His next step should be to discipline those members of the House who are still attempting to sabotage the national economy in pursuit of ideological extremism.

By: Leftcoastrocky Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:44:52 +0000 And if the Tea Party decides to damage the full faith and credit of the US in order to get their way, it will prove that Congress does not work

By: COindependent Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:13:21 +0000 @ Peertoper your emotions indicate that you believe that Congress should have quickly reached some compromise and moved on. But note, the fiscal cliff has been a known and quantifiable issue for over a year. The fact that Congress and the President waited until now was a problem they created (most likely due to the election). When the parties involved are more concerned about their own personal well-being (e.g. re-election) then tasks do not get done in a reasonable amount of time.

Most importantly, every time Congress reaches a compromise (a) the difficult issues do not get addressed, and (b) the American taxpayer takes the hit. If you think this is a problem exclusive to one party or the other, go back and read history for the past 40 years. The problem is jointly owned by each party–as they continued to borrow and spend regardless of who was in the White House or who controlled Congress. So, go ahead an convince me they always have the citizens interests in mind….

Just watch the “negotiations” for the funding for Hurricane Sandy. $60 billion falls out the sky and it’s a feeding-frenzy for every special interest. At least $10 billion of the proposed relief has nothing to do with the impact of Hurricane Sandy. Logically, they should fund relief incrementally to fix local problems–but that takes too much work. Should we use taxpayer funding to rebuild private property–I am not sure, but I thought that was what insurance was for? If the private insurers think it’s too large a risk to ensure, then why should the fed step in and rebuild it? I am not saying we should not help, but much like the levees in New Orleans, why do we rebuild in the same place that is exposed to the very same risks?

However, politicians are always prepared to indiscriminately spend “other people’s money”–and that is why you have trillion dollar+ annual deficits.

By: Peertoperr Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:43:08 +0000 The author must be checked!!! – It is this king of stupid jurnalism that is killing the country. NO THE CONGRESS DOES NOT WORK. It was OBVIOUS that here was a majority for the deal acroiss republicans and democrats – But what is broken is the power of the speaker of the house to prevent votes from reaching the house of representatives. IN OTHER WORDS: a single guy can prevent the will of the American people – THIS my friendly author is what is BROKEN!!!!

By: COindependent Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:41:47 +0000 The problem is less with Congress than with the President–who opens every comment with a non-negotiable position. Thus, as soon as the fiscal cliff issue is (temporarily) resolved, he issues a statement saying that he will not allow spending issues to be part of the negotiation process for raising the ceiling on the debt. Thus, there is a limited opportunity for negotiating a resolution if one party tells you that a critical item (spending) linked to the debt is not part of the discussion.

The President fails to acknowledge that each of the 435 members of the House were also (re)elected in November, and many ran on a platform to get spending and debt under control. They have as much an obligation to hold their position as does the President, and are significantly closer to the wishes of the people than that same President.

The President has already asked for the authority to raise the national debt, but that would be in violation of the Constitution. I should like to think that if a Republican President asked for this same privilege the Dems would voice strong opposition (and rightfully so!)

That’s the structure of our government–and gridlock was designed into the Constitution– to prevent one party or branch from exclusively controlling the dialogue, and ultimately, the legislation.

By: ofilha Wed, 02 Jan 2013 23:34:12 +0000 hmm, interesting how the author spins this thing. It’s like cramming for the final exam when you did not study all year. This is the most dysfunctional statement i have ever seen.

By: Janeallen Wed, 02 Jan 2013 23:18:32 +0000 I wish I could agree with you a hundred percent;
but the last minute hashed up job is far from ideal, and is indicative of a huge degree of dysfunction in Congress.

Imagine if the time and effort wasted in months of senseless wrangling can be invested into something constructive, some positive, something conducive to world peace and better human rights in our country as well as all over the world — many more of world’s problems will get tackled head on, instead of delayed, ignored, misunderstood, or, in the worst cases, handled atrociously.