Why do we continue to help elect Senators and Congressmen so tied to special interests??

We get out and walk the streets and knock on doors and contribute financially to their campaigns, but they continue to vote for the big special interests that give them money or hire their spouses. The sad reality is that we, the common people, have not had any representation from this government since the Great Society. LBJ did manage to pass some laws that helped average folks. But since then, over 40 years, what have we gotten from our government, except for a crumb every once in a while, like a raise in the minimum raise? Under Clinton, we got the Family Medical Leave Act, but that is about all.

Under Obama, we have gotten off to a better start. He has shown that he is willing to promote issues and ideas that help the common citizen. But he is getting so much resistance - not only from the Republicans but from his own Party. Much of that resistance, maybe not all, but much of it comes from Senators and Congressmen connected to big special interests. What can we do about it and what should we do about it? Do you think it is even a problem?

So, after 40 years, we ask for a little assistance in getting healthcare for ourselves and our families and they slap us in the face. How dare you! We are here to support the insurance companies and Big Pharma. What were you thinking?

that we send representatives from our districts that represent US instead of them?

reelect incumbents at greater than a 90% rate, sometimes closer to 96 or 97 percent.

They know it, and they don't care, because they know that we will continue to do so.

Look at the election we had just last year. One of the lowest congressional approval ratings ever, yet we kept nearly every one of the incumbents seeking retention.

We say we want change, so we got us a new president, one that most of us really like. But we certainly put a big burden on him by keeping that same old millstone of congress weasels hanging on his neck. Now when he fails to walk on water, we don't look in the mirror to see who the real culprits are.

edited to add 'rec'

that half the population has an IQ of less than 100, it becomes self-explanatory. AS G.W.Bush said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time. Those are the ones we want."

and let their Consituents know when there are contradictions.

This past week I watched Ross from Arkansas(Blue Dog) conduct a
Town Hall in Ark. He got applause when he said he cut 100 million
dollars from the Budget and held up the vote until Sept(?).

He told them he was putting the 100,million into Small Business.

Mind you this was a crowd of predominantly Senior Citizens as
well as I could tell from Camera Angle--C-Span.
How do you think this crowd would have responded if he told
them --I took the 100 million out of Medicare. I believe he would
have some very unhappy campers. This is the sort of thing these
Guys do. Tell half-truths.

You can see where his values are. Small Business. How can you
expect him to support Health Care????

he would support healthcare reform.

Many small businesspeople go uncovered themselves. Most if not all wish they could provide coverage or at least access to coverage for themselves and their employees.

So, basically, I think what he is saying is a complete crock. How EXACTLY is he himself putting 100M into Small Business?

He said it was for small business.

I'm sure it's more complicated than that.

Someone else said half the people are below average intelligence; the other half are too lazy to do a little research before voting.

in a nutshell

seriously, if you're a senator who just got elected for the first time, what you do legislatively in the first two years, within reason, has virtually ZERO impact on your re-election chances because few people look that far back.

however, making sure that special interest money winds up in your re-election coffers rather than someone else's has a HUGE impact on your re-election chances.

it's a very simple matter to show our hapless senator that more money means fewer opponents will take you on and if they do, you'll have more ad time which in turn translates to more votes. so they start down the road to corruption early.

in truth, they most likely started well before that stage, they probably would never have won the primary without some significant corporate backing. really, it's only the occassional celebrity who can manage to score a federal seat without it, and even then it's hardly a cinch.