Wednesday, March 02, 2011

House Floor

I went to the State Capitol yesterday to witness a proclamation my daughter-in-law has been working hard on --  Hemophilia Awareness Month.  (My grandson has it.)  Actually got to go into Gov. Nixon's office.   Neat office.   Cool painting of Mark Twain.  Nice wood paneling and furniture.  Wood carvings, etc.

The governor himself was out at the opening of trout season down at Bennett Springs.  So one of his assistants gave us the proclamation and a tour of the office.

While we were there, we went into the observation balcony over the House Floor, and the House was in session.   And I found it a bit bizarre.

Also, I had my camera out.  A balif type came over to "remind" me that there were no pictures allowed in there.  I suppose it's so there won't be any evidence of anyone having porn up on his screen, or worse -- The Huffington Post.

There were representatives on the floor.  Each of their desks had a laptop on it ... or at least a computer monitor and keyboard.  There was a woman from St. Louis testifying for an amendment to a bill they were discussing.  She wanted the Missouri minimum wage raised to $10 an hour.   She assured us that this would not chase any jobs out of the state or cost us any jobs in any way.

But that wasn't the bizarre part.  Typical progressive schlock.  Ho-hum.   No, it was the fact that most of the representatives were paying little or no attention ... which I find disrespectful - even derelict.   It was explained to me by some lobbyists we were with that only people who didn't already know how they were going to vote on the subject being discussed would be paying attention, or even there.  I don't think that's right. 

On top of that, on the area surrounding the floor there were lots of people just ... talking.  It was impossible not to notice the chaotic din.  I don't know who those people were, or why they were there.   If the lady testifying hadn't had a microphone and the sound system turned up, she would have just blended in with it.

If I were king for a day, I'd change the House Rules to say everybody had to be there unless they were seriously ill or there were some family emergency.  Everybody would shut up and listen to everyone's arguments, and there wouldn't be crowds of yappy people around the periphery.

Happily, the amendment was struck down.  I was glad the bit of business that happened to happen while I was there went the way I would have it to go. 

Afterwards some members exchanged words, and the lady (I THINK she was a representative) blathered on something about "how can we pay a CEO $24 million to ship jobs overseas while someone is making less than $15,000"?

And I thought to myself, "self?".  Ok my first reaction was "why do you think he's shipping jobs overseas, little Miss $10/hour?"  And my second was, "since when do 'WE' pay CEO's?"   Companies pay CEO's, and they pay them what they think they're worth.

This translated over to some of the discussions on Facebook that have been going on between some of our friends out there.  One of them is over Morgan's many defenses of Sarah Palin ... to which one of his supposedly centrist friends piped up with this snark:

‎"well i cant wait for sarah to singlehandedly provide jobs for everyone! "
And there's the difference betewen our worldview and the progressive worldview. One of the reasons we like Sarah is that she realizes that the president doesn't provide jobs for people. It's not the president's role, or the government's role. It would never occurr to her to TRY to make government provide jobs for people. The government's role is to make sure people play by the rules and let the market do its thing, and let people react to it as best they can.

I want someone in there who understands this. She also understands that when you take money away from the people who actually do provide jobs, they provide fewer jobs. If you make it more expensive for them to provide jobs, they provide fewer jobs. It's really not complicated.
But propeller beanie eggheads from the London School of Economics like to think it is, and only they have the magical voodoo know-how to make it all work, like they did in the 1930's.

Roosevelt's own Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morganthau figured out it doesn't work ... by 1937, he said:
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot."
But either the eggheads are too hard boiled to get it, too proud to admit they're wrong, or too addicted to the power that being in charge of it all brings -- to admit it.

Morgan votes for the power explanation.  He's probably right.

3 comments:

Bill589 said...

I’d vote for you to be king for a day. . . but I don’t think it works that way.

philmon said...

I think I could only do it if I were guaranteed it would only be for a day :-)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're right about the way it doesn't work.

jayb said...

Phil,

Thanks again for your support and for taking pictures to help create awareness for Bleeding Disorder Day.

Sincerely,

Jay