The Worst Congress in History–Should We Look in the Mirror?

I think we just lived through the worst United States Congress in history. Since the American Republic has been around for 234 years now, that is saying something.

Of course, I wasn’t there to observe 177 of those years, but I’ve kept a pretty close view on the past thirty or forty–and nothing compares to the deception, ineptness, radical nature, and horrific policies of the 111th United States Congress.

The 80th Congress (1948) was called the “Do-Nothing Congress.” The 109th Congress (2006) has been labeled the “Vacation Congress” because they only met for 100 days. Various congresses in the 18th and 19th centuries were either extremely raucous or bitterly divided (such as over slavery).

But nothing trumps the just completed 111th Congress.

They should be named the “Destroy Everything” Congress.

I believe we need to open our eyes–and also look in the mirror.

We elected these people.

What does that say about us?

It wasn’t that long ago that you didn’t hear much about the US Senate and House of Representatives in the daily news. They weren’t much of a factor or presence. Yes, every twenty to thirty years they made a controversial decision or passed a bad bill.  But that was the exception, not a daily occurrence.

Of course, 24/7 cable news and the Internet have greatly increased the spotlight on national governance. But technology does not determine the character of those who lead.

During my lifetime, most senators and congressmen were decent people regardless of party. I generally vote Republican because of the GOP’s general commitment to Judeo-Christian principles which bring liberty. But I’ve liked and supported many Democrats as well including Senators Scoop Jackson and Henry Magnuson, and President John F. Kennedy.  Sam Rayburn was a heck of a House Speaker and Tip O’Neill was a decent guy who shared a congenial, after-hours relationship with President Reagan.

So the issue is not partisan. It relates to the people in office.

The elected representatives of the 111th Congress were the worst national legislators we’ve ever had. Don’t believe the spin of the past couple of week. It’s just a desperate attempt to resurrect the discredited progressive agenda. The majority of Americans aren’t buying it.

Take a look at the most recent Gallup Poll on the 111th Congress. The graph is quite enlightening:

“PRINCETON, NJ — Americans’ assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.”

s7pyxwkvskssjtqfjk4kxw.gif

“The prior low approval rating for Congress was 14% in July 2008 when the United States was dealing with record-high gas prices and the economy was in recession.”

“For the year, Congress averaged 19% approval among all Americans, tied with the averages for 1979 and 2008, and one percentage point above the 18% average for 1992. Those years were all marked by difficult economic times for the United States.”

Gallup asked another question in a July 22, 2010 poll. It had to do with which institutions give people the greatest confidence. The poll found Congress ranking dead last out of the 16 institutions rated this year. Eleven percent of Americans said they have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in Congress, down from 17% in 2009 and a percentage point lower than the previous low for Congress, recorded in 2008.

So according to Gallup, the 111th Congress approval rating is 13% and confidence rating is 11%.

That’s pretty bad.

Why?

Let’s first look at the people and then at the policies they’ve enacted.

THE PEOPLE OF THE 111TH CONGRESS (just to name a few)

Nancy Pelosi – She will probably go down in history as the worst Speaker of all-time. From ultra-liberal San Francisco, she ruled as if everybody in America wanted to move to her progressive haven. A blank slate on America’s heritage and principles, she drove her own Congress into the electoral ditch with the greatest turnover of seats in sixty years. Her most famous quote (among many)  referring to Obamacare: “We need to pass the bill so that we can find out what is in it.”

Harry Reid – The Senate majority leader from Nevada. He strong-armed Obamacare through the Senate by altering the rules and making back-room deals against the express will of the American people (Louisianna Purchase, Cornhusker kick-back etc.). Reid’s Senate didn’t pass one budget item during the past year while giving full vent to vast liberal wish lists of spending. His most famous gaffe among many: “The War is lost!” (When our fighting men and women were in harm’s way and the surge in Iraq was working.)

Barney Frank – His lack of regulation over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which continues to this day) was one of the major factors in the collapse of the real estate market and the financial difficulties we’ve experienced since 2008. Frank is a foul-mouthed, militant homosexual whose “partner” once ran a gay prostitution ring out of his D.C. apartment. 

Responding recently to President Jimmy Carter’s assertion that America is ready for a homosexual president, Franks bellowed: “It’s one thing to have a gay person in the abstract. It’s another to see that person as part of a living, breathing couple. How would a gay presidential candidate have a celebratory kiss with his partner after winning the New Hampshire primary? The sight of two women kissing has not been as distressful to people as the sight of two men kissing. And because of the Defense of Marriage Act, it’s not clear that a gay president could use federal funds to buy his husband dinner. Would his partner have to pay rent in the White House? There would be no Secret Service protection for the paramour.” 

Yuck.

And this man was one of the powerful men in Washington, D.C. during the 111th Congress?

The list could go on and on–but I think you get the point.

POLICIES OF THE 111TH CONGRESS

First, they wastefully threw an 800 billion dollar stimulus program at the nation that did nothing to create jobs. The unemployment rate continued to climb because government spending does not stimulate capital creation and entrepreneurship. This was the biggest pork barrel bill in the history of the nation. Much of it went to prop up liberal causes, state governments, and unions. It was an utter waste of nearly one trillion dollars.

Then they spent an entire year going against the will of the American people and finally jamming through Obamacare last Christmas–the first step toward socialized medicine in the United States. This nearly three thousand page monstrosity is probably the worst single piece of legislation ever enacted on American soil. As a result, doctors are vowing to retire; Companies are raising rates; Over 250 groups have been exempted from the program because they’re favorites of the Administration; And this is a giant take-over of one-sixth of the  American economy.

Because of the radicalness of this and other income re-distribution programs, the Tea Party Movement was born and swept many state houses, legislatures, and Congressional members out of DC in the November 2 elections.

After the election, the chastened 111th Congress should have humbly returned to their D.C. offices, voted to keep the tax rates in place, funded the government, and gone home. They had been soundly defeated and told they were taking the nation in a wrong direction.

But in a brazen, in-your-face manner, they did just the opposite. First they pushed to raise taxes on the wealth creators in America, lost, and finally capitulated. Then they pandered to their homosexual base and sent shock waves through the US armed forces by callously rescinding the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy–again against the wishes of the people and especially those on the front lines.

They also tried to slip in a controversial immigration bill, and pushed for a major nuclear arms treaty with Russia that is hurtful to the United States. They have no business even treading in these waters.

But this Congress doesn’t care. They have an agenda–and they stuck it to the American people.

Rush Limbaugh described the 111th Congress this way in his radio commentary on December 16, 2010:”The damage being done by this Congress is disastrous. They are hi-jacking our country right before our eyes. We are in the middle of being raped and they know it. We said “No” in November but they are still destroying and hijacking our country right in front of our eyes. They don’t care about the country.”

That’s why I call them the “Destroy Everything” Congress.

Fortunately, in a few days, they will be gone and the 112th will take their place.

But their destructive rampage should lead us to some necessary introspection.

Many of these people, including Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barney Frank were re-elected in 2010. They will be diminished, but are still in office.

What does that say about us–that we could elect people such as this to guide the affairs of our nation?

In olden times, God used prophets to explain to people why they were given good kings–when they followed God and lived right–and why they were sent bad kings as judgment for their sins.

We don’t have unelected kings in our day. We don’t need an explanation. We live in democratic times where our leaders are a reflection of us.

We the people–elected the 111th Congress. They were the worst in history.

But that consequently means that we, too, just might be the worst generation in American history who elected the worst leaders.

We need to change, live good lives, and elect good leaders.

Start with yourself. Look in the mirror.

Humble yourself. Ask God to forgive you, and live a changed life.

If enough Americans do it, we just might turn our worst time into one of our best .

 “If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray, seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will from heaven , forgive their sins and heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:14).

   

Refusing to Listen is Failing to Serve

When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he campaigned as a center-left politician who eventually got in trouble for pushing nationalized health care (Hillarycare) and taking the nation in a liberal direction. He was rebuked by the avalanche of the 1994 elections (remember the “Contract With America“) when the Republicans swept both the House and Senate.

A course correction was needed to serve the people and the American vision.

President Clinton needed to listen.

That’s the essence of both servant and democratic leadership–the will of the people should prevail. The American vision is people rule (self-government) under God.

I wrote a book on servant leadership in 1989 called Leadership for the 21st Century: Changing Nations Through the Power of Serving. The book centers on ten attitudes and ten actions of a servant leader that are exemplified in the life of Jesus. Servant leaders always put the needs and desires of others above their own.

If you’ve never read Leadership for the 21st Century, I’d be glad to send you a personalized copy. Besides the ten character qualities, the book is worth the “prophecy” contained in the first chapter that amazingly became true over the past twenty years. The other is the Appendix where I shared William McDonald’s twenty-five qualities of leadership that made Jesus the greatest servant leader of men.

Drop me a note with any donation (YWAM, P.O. Box 1634, Port Orchard, WA USA 98367) and I’ll send you a copy.

It would make a great Christmas read.

Then there’s the aspect of democratic leadership. In republican democracies, representatives of the people are elected for two primary reasons: 1) To protect the God-given rights of the people, and 2) To legislate their concerns into law.

Servants care about people’s desires and real democrats do too. Democratic governments are uniquely designed to benefit the people.

Now back to President Clinton.

After a shellacking in the 1992 elections, to his credit, President Clinton recognized democratic realities (and also good politics), admitted that the nation had spoken, and that he needed to change.  Over a number of months he pivoted to the political center for the good of the nation.

Before his pivot he had become “The Incredible Shrinking President” (remember that cover story of TIME magazine in 1992?). After he humbled himself and changed course, he became a relatively successful president. What followed was a season of bi-partisanship in politics, social stability, and economic growth led by a Republican-controlled Congress and a begrudging but cooperative presidency.

Bill Clinton was willing to change course when shown he was wrong. As a result, he ended up getting major credit for the first balanced budget in years, and despite the Monica Lewinsky sexual scandal, ended his term in high popularity with the American people.

He listened. Both he and the nation were blessed.

Now fast-forward to 2008. 

A nation tired of war and worried about economic uncertainties again voted for a supposed center-left politician–Barack Obama. He was well-spoken and charismatic–although grossly under qualified for the highest office in the nation. He had never run a business or met a payroll. Most of the life had been spent on the public dole or in community organizing activities. He was a state senator for seven short years and US Senator for only two. He’d never led anything, and had been involved in politics for less than a decade.

His major track record related to radical causes

Yet, because of a supportive press, and the failure of the Republicans to live up to their ideals, the American people elected Barack Obama to lead the most important nation on earth.

Upon assuming office in January, 2008, he immediately tacked to the left just as Bill Clinton had done sixteen years before–and Jimmy Carter sixteen years before that.

We seem to get a liberal assault every sixteen years or so.

And now–after two years of radically liberal policies:

  • Three trillion dollars in excessive government spending
  • Chicago-style arm-twisting, back room deals, and appointing numerous “czars” 
  • Pushing destructive environmental causes (Copenhagen Summit and Cap and Trade legislation)
  • Weakness in the war on terror (refusing even to use the word),
  • Expanding the federal government by 10% and scores of thousands of jobs
  • Pushing through national health care–worse than Hillarycare–that bears his name.
  • And vowing to vastly alter the American nation through massive income re-distribution,

Barack Obama has arrived at the “shrinking president moment” faced by Bill Clinton in 1992. Repudiated by a landslide election on November 2–far worse than the 1992 debacle on a national scale–President Obama had the opportunity to humble himself, accept a political defeat, and be servant-like, and democratic by turning back to the traditional American center.

He could have pivoted America back toward fiscal sanity and moral rightness.

Instead, he pushed for a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (the homosexualization of the American Armed Forces), and continued to hold out on raising taxes on successful small businesses and wealthy individuals–the ones who create jobs in the economy.

He’s not listening.

So he’s neither being democratic nor acting as a servant leader.

Barack Obama has proven to be a radical ideologue who doesn’t understand democracy and appears to have no desire to serve the will of the people. He ultimately lost the battle to raise taxes, but not because he’s repentant and willing to change.

He just doesn’t have the votes.

As long as he proudly stays the secular-progressive course, he will continue to shrink as a leader  (now down to 39% in public popularity) and hurt the American nation.

We are witnessing a colossal failure in democratic, servant leadership.

It pains me to write these words. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, to stay clear of questioning others’ motivations, and give them a chance to perform. For the past two years I have been waiting for a “wiser” Barack Obama to emerge or evolve. I wishfully thought that the awe and realities of the office of the POTUS would soften his perspective on the great issues of our day.

I have been deeply disappointed–as has much of the nation. After the November mid-terms, which were an historical tidal wave for conservative candidates on both a state and national level, I again hoped Barack Obama would step to the teleprompter and say something like this to the American people:

“My fellow Americans, you have spoken clearly through the election results. I have been humbled by your voice and want to respond to the will of the people. “Let me be clear: the people are the true leaders of the United States of America, and as our leaders you have told us to change course.”

“You do not want us to increase the size and growth of the Federal government. You want power returned to the people and also to the states. You don’t want us to follow the pathway of Europe, but return to the American dream of individual freedom, a Constitutional republic and limited powers of government control.”

“I have heard your concerns and will respond to your will. Together, let us do the right things to make our nation great again.”

I’d love to hear those words from our 44th president.

Humility and truth are beautiful things.

So is the ability to listen.

But it doesn’t look like they will be forthcoming. Barack Obama is more a radical version of Jimmy Carter than a pragmatic-oriented Bill Clinton.

In my heart,  I hope that President Obama will still see the light and pivot toward the truth. If he doesn’t, the American nation could be in store for some very dark days ahead.

We are sadly witnessing a colossal failure of democratic servant leadership.

Let us pray fervently for our president–and live as servant leaders in the spheres God has given to each one of us..

 

 

Principles You Can Take to the Ballot Box

I have been saying for many months that the most important election of our lives may take place on November 2. The present administration in the United States is dangerously veering this nation down a road of reckless spending, social experimentation and class warfare.

As both believers and citizens, we must cry out to God for his mercy and grace and exercise our incredible right to vote for a change of direction. That vote will take place on November 2nd. My cell phone and e-mail box are already filling up with messages asking my opinion on how to vote.

Here are the principles that guide my own votes, and also some recommendations for Washington voters on how to navigate the many Initiatives on the ballot this year.

If you are a Washington State resident, please forward this e-mail to those it might help.

First of all, the principles.

There are a number of things I take into consideration when deciding how to vote for a candidate.

1. World view – Which candidate has the clearest and most consistent Judeo-Christian worldview both on economic and social issues? I actually put this before a candidate’s professed faith. You can be a Christian in heart but have a secular world view in terms of policy positions. This was the problem with Jimmy Carter in 1976. He professed faith in Christ but did not have a biblical worldview. That’s one reason why he was a poor and ineffective president.

2. Personal faith – this does make a difference. One who believes in God and has made Jesus Christ the Lord of his or her life will generally make wiser and more noble decisions in the public arena. A person of genuine faith is likely to have greater integrity and honesty than the secular candidate who has lesser restraints on his actions and words (a lack of the fear of God).

3. Do they believe in individual freedom in economic issues and government restraints on morality? This is the biblical balance. A strict libertarian believes in individual freedom in all areas, including morality. A consistent progressive believes in government controls in all areas. The biblical Christian desires freedom for business and commerce which encourages personal responsibility and prosperity but also supports government restraints on sinful behavior (abortion, pornography, homosexual marriage etc.). God wants people to both have liberty to soar and to be protected from sin.

4. Who is supporting the candidate? Endorsements tell you a lot about the views of a candidate. If I am in doubt about a particular candidate, I will look at his or her backers for a signal as to their beliefs. This is especially helpful when looking at initiatives. Birds of a feather flock together.

5. Who do I trust to have a wise and fair view of the candidates in question? I have a friend named Mary McQueen who for many years managed the Washington State Supreme Court. Mary is an attorney who shares a common faith and desire for good and principled leaders. She personally knew every judge and prominent attorney in the state. In many judicial races, where there just didn’t seem to much be information on the candidates, I would give Mary a call because I trusted her personal knowledge of the people involved.

Trust is the basis of most of the great decisions of life–including voting.

These are the questions I ask myself about candidates. For initiatives and referendums, there’s another set of questions that I use to make wise voting decisions.

1. Will this issue grow the state or empower the individual? This is the crucial issue of 2010. We are involved in a great struggle between statists (the world view of secular progressives) and freedom- loving patriots (think the Tea Party movement and average faith-based American).

2. Is this activity something that God has assigned to the governmental domain (protecting citizens) or to the private or eccesiastical spheres (providing for human needs)?

3. Will this law raise taxes?  I always say no to new taxes. Why? Because biblical tyranny begins when government takes more than ten to twenty percent of personal income. We are now approaching fifty to sixty percent in America, and some European nations are over the seventy per cent mark. We don’t need more taxes. We need better use of resources.

4. Is this initiative pro-freedom and entrepreneurship? Motivated-and-lower-taxed individuals create the jobs, not government bureaucracies.

5. Will this issue protect the God-given family and our precious children? The family, and its crucial role in nurturing the next generation of children, is the bedrock of any enlightened society.

6. Does the Bible deal directly with this issue (such as marriage and various crimes)? God’s ways always produce freedom and blessing when followed by a wise people.

7. Does this issue encourage good stewardship of the environment and natural resources while looking market forces and individual decisions for direction (not rabid environmentalism)?

8. Does this issue encourage or squelch religious faith?

I hope this set of guidelines helps you make some wise and critical votes on November 2.

For fellow Washingtonians: I have never seen such a complicated initiative ballot than the one we’ve received in 2010. After studying those issues myself, I came across some information from the Faith & Freedom Network, that is extremely helpful to me–especially on Initiatives 1100 and 1105.

Here’s where the issue of trust comes in. Matt Shea is a Spokane-area representative that I know and trust a great deal. He’s one of the shining lights in our current legislature. Matt has taken the time to give his perspective on the labyrinth of initiative issues. I agree with his assessment.

BALLOT MEASURE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Initiative Measure No. 1053 – Concerns tax and fee increases imposed by state government. This measure would restate existing statutory requirements that legislative actions raising taxes must be approved by two-thirds legislative majorities or receive voter approval, and that new or increased fees require majority legislative approval.

– Vote Yes. “All power is inherent in the people…” Washington Constitution Article 1, Section 1. The people decided to put another limitation and check on an out of control government. What’s more Republican than that?

Initiative Measure No. 1082 – Concerns industrial insurance. This measure would authorize employers to purchase private industrial insurance (a/k/a workers’ compensation) beginning July 1, 2012; direct the Legislature to enact conforming legislation by March 1, 2012; and eliminate the worker-paid share of medical-benefit premiums.

– Vote Yes. Washington is one of only four states that do not allow a private option. This measure would lower the L&I cost and provide much need relief to our struggling small business owners.

Initiative Measure No. 1098 – Concerns establishing a state income tax and reducing other taxes.
This measure would tax “adjusted gross income” above $200,000 (individuals) and 400,000 (joint-filers), reduce state property tax levies, reduce certain business and occupation taxes, and direct any increased revenues to education and health.

– Vote No. This violates the State Constitution Article 7, Section 1 which reads “All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word “property” as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership.” The State Supreme Court has correctly ruled on multiple occasions that income (defined here as the fruits of one’s labor) is property. That is consistent with the founding fathers view as well.

Initiative Measure No. 1100 – Concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits). This measure would close state liquor stores; authorize sale, distribution, and importation of spirits by private parties; and repeal certain requirements that govern the business operations of beer and wine distributors and producers.

– Vote Yes. The role of government is to protect our God given unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property not run liquor stores. Like taxpayer funding of abortion clinics, it is also morally reprehensible to use tax payer dollars to distribute liquor.

Initiative Measure No. 1105 – Concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits). This measure would close all state liquor stores and license private parties to sell or distribute spirits. It would revise laws concerning regulation, taxation and government revenues from distribution and sale of spirits.

– Vote No. This expands the size and scope of government through new mandates and licenses effectively trading one monopoly for another. It also proposes two tax increases.

Initiative Measure No. 1107 – Concerns reversing certain 2010 amendments to state tax laws.
This measure would end sales tax on candy; end temporary sales tax on some bottled water; end temporary excise taxes on carbonated beverages; and reduce tax rates for certain food processors.

– Vote Yes. Cuts taxes and eliminates a massive regulatory burden on businesses to figure out which items are “candy” and should be taxed.

Referendum Measure 52– Concerns authorizing and funding bonds for energy efficiency projects in school per EHB 2561 as passed by the Legislature. This bill would authorize bonds to finance construction and repair projects increasing energy efficiency in public schools and higher education buildings, and continue the sales tax on bottled water otherwise expiring in 2013.

– Vote No. This is deficit spending and dishonest. This would allow “projected energy savings” to be the asset against which to bond half a billion dollars at a total cost to tax payers of almost $1 billion.

Senate Joint Resolution 8225– The Legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment concerning the limitation on state debt. SJR 8225 would require the state to reduce the interest accounted for in calculating the constitutional debt limit, by the amount of federal payments scheduled to be received to offset that interest.

– Vote No. This is an accounting trick to allow the state to borrow more money above the current constitutional debt limit while our spending remains out-of-control.

Engrossed Substitute House Joint Resolution 4220– The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment on denying bail for persons charged with certain criminal offenses. ESHJR 4220 would authorize courts to deny bail for offenses punishable by the possibility of life in prison, on clear and convincing evidence of a propensity for violence that would likely endanger persons.

– Vote Yes. This would restore the original understanding of when bail could be denied for “capital offenses.” Had this been in place it likely would have prevented the infamous Lakewood shooting.

 

Don’t forget to pray and don’t forget to vote on or before November 2. Edmund Burke wisely said that “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

That’s another principle you can take to the ballot box.