Seventy percent of the nation does not approve of George W. Bush and despite a slight majority of the new Democratic Congress in the 2007 election, significant changes are not in sight. The grievous flaw in our Constitution is not being able to discharge an acting president who is destroying the country.
After September 11, 2001, nations were sincerely sympathetic about the disaster of the terrorist attack on the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York. In 2006, the United States is despised throughout the world.
Judging from the hesitancy of the U.S. media to ask pertinent questions, there is little doubt that some rights have already been lost. Using the fear tactic, the Bush administration has made nefarious changes in the Homeland Security Act that rob Americans of privacy rights and the accepted rule of law.
July 30, 2006, Americans learned from the CBS program 60 Minutes, that the Bush administration has prohibited scientists from speaking freely about the threat to the planet through global warming. They have been ordered to submit press releases for approval from the White House. Whole sentences, paragraphs and pages have been deleted to minimize the warnings of the approaching disaster. Jim Hanson, a scientist working for the government, told us only ten years remain to restrict the use of fossil fuels or there will be no chance to save the planet from coastal flooding, loss of water supply as snow no longer falls in the northwest, unbearable climate and environmental changes.
The following morning no one in the U.S. seemed to be alarmed. There were no news reports about this loss of right to free speech, people did not gather to seek action, no phone calls, no e-mail, so it is obvious that people do not believe the scientists, and are putting their trust in the "steadfast" president (description by Senator McCain (R) of Arizona).
How does one apologize to our progeny for the destruction we have allowed to be brought to the planet we inherited, but failed to safeguard and improve? They are destined to an abysmal quality of life if they survive.
AUTHOR'S BLOGS ON THE INTERNET
(Edited to conserve space)
(Edited to conserve space)
Blog site: www.livejournal.com/users/bert_fields
The purpose of the following blog entered August 21, 2004 was to alert everyone to the dangers of four more years of George W. Bush.
1. DUMBING DOWN OF AMERICA
Since casting my first vote in 1948, no election has been as crucial to the immediate and future needs of our country. In 2000, the United State Supreme Court's ruling allowed Mr. Bush to become what should be considered, "acting" president. Republicans apparently agree with this assumption, as only once in this campaign has the word "re-elect" been used in connection with this president.
Only days away from the Republican convention, it is amazing that supporters of Mr. Bush, media pundits, well-educated, former leaders and experienced members who have been in Congress too long, have not understood how badly our country has been damaged these past four years.
None have had the courage to question Mr. Bush's mental ability or analytical skills needed to make the monumental decisions that will be needed to bring about changes so carefully detailed in the 9/11 Commission Report. Anyone who has read or even scanned the contents should know that this "acting" president will not be able to safeguard this or any other country, or repair the harm he has done to domestic conditions.
Mr. Bush has dumbed-down America to his intellectual level measured by his inarticulate speeches, accepted as "gaffes," and in his apparent inability to 'think on his feet.' He has been unable to communicate or explain his own positions when responding to his opponent's ideas, not even in defense of his dogmatic and failed war in Iraq. He only repeats that he will stay the course, and that opponent Senator Kerry will not.
His gaffes are fodder for late-night show comedians. In his use of the word "feces" when he surely meant fetuses" in an anti-abortion speech, and his response to Senator Kerry's reference to a possible draft, pounding the lectern, "there will be a draft" which was opposite to what he meant to say. There was an embarrassed silence while someone told him he misspoke.
In a television debate he said he wasn't concerned and didn't think about Osama bin Laden then later denied he made that statement. What other gaffes has he made during meetings, perhaps with his own staff and military officers which might have led to misunderstandings of what he was ordering them to do?
We are accustomed to reports of a candidate's physical health. Are we not entitled to hear the opinion of psychologists as to what Mr. Bush's body language and facial expressions signify, and how they evaluate his mental health?
This "acting" president inherited excellent financial conditions which he squandered during this four year term. Former President Clinton's writes in his book, "My Life [page 891]; "My last State of the Union address was a joy to deliver. We had more than twenty million new jobs, the lowest unemployment rate and smallest welfare rolls in thirty years, the lowest crime rate in two years, the lowest poverty rate in twenty years, the smallest federal work-force in forty years, the first increase in adoptions and 150,000 young people who had served in AmeriCorps. Within a month we would have the longest economic expansion in American history and by the end of the year we would have the three consecutive surpluses for the first time in fifty years."
The billion dollar surplus left to Mr. Bush was depleted, and defense spending increased by 50 percent, from $354 billion to about $547 billion according to the 9/11 Commission Report, [p.361], creating a record deficit. What did Bush say when he took office? "I inherited a recession." Democrats did not challenge Bush's statement.
Former President Clinton wrote [p.935], "after Mr. Bush's election, he came to the White House for the same meeting I had with his father eight years earlier. He was putting together an experienced team from past Republican administrations who believed that the biggest security issues were the need for national missile defense and Iraq. I told him that based on the last 8 years, I thought his biggest security problems in order, would be Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda; the absence of peace in the Middle East; the standoff between nuclear powers India and Pakistan, and the ties of the Pakistanis to the Taliban and al Qaeda, North Korea; and then Iraq. He listened to what I had to say without much comment, then changed the subject to how I did the job."
Can it be more clear that Mr. Bush decided to invade Iraq before he was even inaugurated and before the 9/11 attack? There are many questions that voters need answered before they step into the booth to make their choice for president on November 2, 2004.
Who is really running this administration? Mr. Bush appointed his father's staff, including Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Dick Cheney to name a few. Do these Republicans have more loyalty to their party than to their country?
Why when we were so close to finding Osama bin Laden and ending his reign of terror did Mr. Bush leave this task to other forces, reduced our participation, and instead used our military resources to invade Iraq? Would a few more weeks of U.N. inspection reveal what we now know to be a lie regarding weapons of mass destruction controlled by Saddam Hussein? Are Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen and Egypt among the coalition countries and how many of their troops are fighting this threat of mass destruction in their own neighborhood?
Why would Mr. Bush put our troops in harm's way, causing the death of more than a thousand, injury to thousands more and unreported number of casualties and suffering of the Iraqi people, as well as the destruction of public utilities and infrastructure?
This 'acting' president created a war and then with enthusiasm proclaimed himself to be a "war president" as though it were a badge of honor. The 9/11 Commission reports that "polls in 2002 show the support in our fight against terrorism plummeted. Fifty percent of our friends in Egypt decreased to fifteen percent, and in Saudi-Arabia to twelve percent, and two-thirds of the countries from Indonesia to Turkey were fearful that the United States would attack them. Favorable ratings for the U.S. have fallen from sixty-one percent to fifteen percent in Indonesia, and from seventy-one percent to thirty-eight percent among Muslins in Nigeria. Does this indicate that Mr. Bush is correct in claiming, "we are safer now."
Has Mr. Bush read the U.S. Constitution, specifically in relation to the powers of the presidency? Does it say anywhere that his job is to bring democracy to the rest of the world, whether they ask for it or not?
Does our Constitution give Mr. Bush the power to decide the areas of research scientists are allowed to conduct based on his religious beliefs, especially limiting discovery of stem-cell applications that might cure many diseases and afflictions?
Does our Constitution give Mr. Bush the power to decide personal relationships such as same-sex marriage?
Does our Constitution give Mr. Bush or Congress the power to impose their views as to what a woman is allowed to do with her own body. Does Bush's pro-life view coincide with the number of lives lost due to his mistakes in not learning more about terrorist activity, and by launching a war against one man. It took two weeks to capture Saddam Hussein who was executed after a lengthy trial. During the preparation time he received better medical care than many children and elderly people in the United States.
Can anyone really believe that the tax cuts for the rich who make global investments, were better than middle and lower-income families who would increase daily expenditures to improve their local economies? Does this decision reflect his MBA degree?
Does Mr. Bush understand that the Constitution specifically separates Church and State and that whether or not he is a God-fearing man has nothing to do with the power of his presidency? Is his morality on a higher level in waging a catastrophic war than that of President Clinton's personal behavior? Was the break-in at Democratic headquarters for which President Nixon took responsibility and resigned, as horrible as the huge numbers killed and maimed due to Mr. Bush’s war?
Is Mr. Bush accountable for motivating the increase of gasoline consumption by granting tax incentives to buy SUVs, notwithstanding record-setting prices, and increased environmental problems.
Suburbia's "Security Moms," formerly called "Soccer Moms," said on television that they intend to switch their vote to Mr. Bush because he will better protect them from terrorists than his opponent Senator Kerry... Duh moms....who will protect your children from the enormously influential National Rifle Association lobby which refuses to ban automatic weapons. Deranged adults can bring weapons to your schools and kill your children; or help people to buy handguns that their children bring to school and randomly kill and injure other children or accidentally kill themselves or friends while playing at home? Is this not the realty of what is currently occurring on streets, at workplaces and in schools?
To repossess our democracy, we must elect a president who will understand and follow the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, that it be the responsibility of the presidency to completely reorganize all of our security agencies, at the same time preserving our civil liberties.
When you vote ask yourself whether or not you and our country are better off today than four years ago? It was a question I asked in the Grass Roots Public Opinion Poll which I conducted for a national newspaper chain all during the Reagan administration. (Signed) Bfields747@aol.com
BLOG, APRIL, 2006 (Edited)
SEND TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IF YOU AGREE
This is the most troubled time in U.S. history. It seems to be the government vs. the people. More than ever, Republicans are exhibiting a much greater loyalty to their party than to the country. Democrats are leaderless, exhibit no backbone, no plan or direction, no voice but to "support" the president, notwithstanding that seventy percent of U.S. citizens do not approve of his actions. Democrats "go along" and seem to be more fearful of being accused of not supporting the president than to come up with solutions germane to issues of concern to the people.
Why would Mr. Bush put our troops in harm's way, causing the death of more than a thousand, injury to thousands more and unreported number of casualties and suffering of the Iraqi people, as well as the destruction of public utilities and infrastructure?
This 'acting' president created a war and then with enthusiasm proclaimed himself to be a "war president" as though it were a badge of honor. The 9/11 Commission reports that "polls in 2002 show the support in our fight against terrorism plummeted. Fifty percent of our friends in Egypt decreased to fifteen percent, and in Saudi-Arabia to twelve percent, and two-thirds of the countries from Indonesia to Turkey were fearful that the United States would attack them. Favorable ratings for the U.S. have fallen from sixty-one percent to fifteen percent in Indonesia, and from seventy-one percent to thirty-eight percent among Muslins in Nigeria. Does this indicate that Mr. Bush is correct in claiming, "we are safer now."
Has Mr. Bush read the U.S. Constitution, specifically in relation to the powers of the presidency? Does it say anywhere that his job is to bring democracy to the rest of the world, whether they ask for it or not?
Does our Constitution give Mr. Bush the power to decide the areas of research scientists are allowed to conduct based on his religious beliefs, especially limiting discovery of stem-cell applications that might cure many diseases and afflictions?
Does our Constitution give Mr. Bush the power to decide personal relationships such as same-sex marriage?
Does our Constitution give Mr. Bush or Congress the power to impose their views as to what a woman is allowed to do with her own body. Does Bush's pro-life view coincide with the number of lives lost due to his mistakes in not learning more about terrorist activity, and by launching a war against one man. It took two weeks to capture Saddam Hussein who was executed after a lengthy trial. During the preparation time he received better medical care than many children and elderly people in the United States.
Can anyone really believe that the tax cuts for the rich who make global investments, were better than middle and lower-income families who would increase daily expenditures to improve their local economies? Does this decision reflect his MBA degree?
Does Mr. Bush understand that the Constitution specifically separates Church and State and that whether or not he is a God-fearing man has nothing to do with the power of his presidency? Is his morality on a higher level in waging a catastrophic war than that of President Clinton's personal behavior? Was the break-in at Democratic headquarters for which President Nixon took responsibility and resigned, as horrible as the huge numbers killed and maimed due to Mr. Bush’s war?
Is Mr. Bush accountable for motivating the increase of gasoline consumption by granting tax incentives to buy SUVs, notwithstanding record-setting prices, and increased environmental problems.
Suburbia's "Security Moms," formerly called "Soccer Moms," said on television that they intend to switch their vote to Mr. Bush because he will better protect them from terrorists than his opponent Senator Kerry... Duh moms....who will protect your children from the enormously influential National Rifle Association lobby which refuses to ban automatic weapons. Deranged adults can bring weapons to your schools and kill your children; or help people to buy handguns that their children bring to school and randomly kill and injure other children or accidentally kill themselves or friends while playing at home? Is this not the realty of what is currently occurring on streets, at workplaces and in schools?
To repossess our democracy, we must elect a president who will understand and follow the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, that it be the responsibility of the presidency to completely reorganize all of our security agencies, at the same time preserving our civil liberties.
When you vote ask yourself whether or not you and our country are better off today than four years ago? It was a question I asked in the Grass Roots Public Opinion Poll which I conducted for a national newspaper chain all during the Reagan administration. (Signed) Bfields747@aol.com
BLOG, APRIL, 2006 (Edited)
SEND TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IF YOU AGREE
This is the most troubled time in U.S. history. It seems to be the government vs. the people. More than ever, Republicans are exhibiting a much greater loyalty to their party than to the country. Democrats are leaderless, exhibit no backbone, no plan or direction, no voice but to "support" the president, notwithstanding that seventy percent of U.S. citizens do not approve of his actions. Democrats "go along" and seem to be more fearful of being accused of not supporting the president than to come up with solutions germane to issues of concern to the people.
One can only conclude that you have failed in your duty to your constituents and thereby have lost your legitimacy. Did you know or forget that your job is to balance the power of the executive branch? You, not the president are the lawmakers. It is not your job to blindly support the president, especially when he has led us on the path to destruction.
Did you know as reported in April 3, 2006 edition of U.S. News & World Report, "that after he decided to invade he told Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon to carry out the mission as they saw fit?" The report said he then timidly followed Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney's recommendations. Where was the Congress to monitor their senseless and ill-planned war?
If you know anything about our Constitution, there is no provision for the president to "bring democracy to the world." The president is charged with the duty to defend our country. If you agree that this was a preventive war and continue to believe that he really thought that Iraq had the capability to attack us and had the intelligence data to prove it, you are on the same intelligence level as the president. When George W. Bush declared war on Osama Bin Laden and his terrorists, he gave him legitimacy as the head of a government. bin Laden and his organization should have been dealt with as international criminals.
Even with a supposedly huge turn-out for elections, and training to develop their own security force in Iraq, there is no functioning government. Are you prepared to approve funds requested by Iraq's new leaders at the January, 2006 World Economic Forum in Davo, Switzerland, for a program similar to the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe after World War II?
Senators McCain and Biden's solutions to end the war in Iraq as reported in the Readers' Digest were thoughtless and an embarrassment. Did it occur to any one of you, that the only way to end this war and the historic conflict among and between the Sunnis, Shi’as and Kurds is to separate them into three countries and divide the profits from oil production according to the population in each country?
We have seen in our lifetimes the division of Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, and others, into individual nations.
It is obvious that none of you bothered to learn the history of Islam. Do you know that Muhammad did not leave instructions as to his successor which is why the Sunnis and Shi'a have been enemies since his death. Did you know that the seat of Islam was once in Damascus and moved to Baghdad because of this conflict? These groups have lived apart in different parts of Iraq for centuries, with limited integration in some city neighborhoods. Many have already fled to Syria since the U.S. invasion, leaving behind their homes and possessions.
George W. Bush says Iraq is not engaged in a civil war while their newly elected prime minister said a civil war is in progress. Which one is to be believed?
More people seem to be resigned to the dumbing-down of America to the president's level, providing fodder for comedians, while none of you legislators seem to have the fortitude to turn things around. Your committee hearings as seen on C-Span are lackluster with partisan questioning and acceptance of refusals to answer, that it seems you are all merely going through the motions.
If you do not carefully regulate the influence and practices of lobbyists, especially to enrich their weapons-manufacturer clients, you are war criminals and we will never achieve global peace. Along with global warming which you and the president have ignored, this planet will not survive a nuclear, or even another conventional weapon world war.
Shame on all of you for allowing September 11 to make you so fearful that you are willing to trade our freedom for "security" while innocent civilians and young soldiers are dying every day in Iraq. Our airport security system is absurd and inefficient and an example of what a police state looks like, while public utilities are not secure.
Have any of you investigated who at our embassies are screening people's applications for visas to enter the United States? Who carefully checks their visas before they board a plane or ship? Who checks their visas when they arrive at our air or sea ports? Does anyone know where these people stay when they enter? Are they tracked down if they overstay their visa date? How many of these people are unaccounted for in the United States who might actually be a security risk?
How does it help the U.S. economy to pay $6.5 billion to Dubai and a British corporation to manage our ports? How could contracts have been awarded without bids from American companies? Or, in learning of the Dubai contract, did anyone have an intuitive, if not educated awareness of "hali burton tosis"? How did the president and his vice president Dick Cheney keep this secret? Why was the sub-government bureaucracy, permitted to make this momentous decision? George W. Bush defended the transaction, and Senator First, without knowing the facts, said he thought the president is "probably right." What was right about it? Did it have anything to do with the president's family dealings with Middle East oil interests?
As for erosion of our rights, where is "equal under the law" in giving tax cuts to the wealthiest? Would not middle-class taxpayers immediately put the money back into our economy right here in the U.S. paying huge gas-heating bills and automobile fuel, credit card debt, mortgages, property taxes, medicines, utilities, clothing, food, school supplies, children's needs, perhaps a movie?.
How are the rich spending their windfall? Perhaps large amounts are in safety deposit boxes, if not in Swiss bank accounts. Has it occurred to any one of you to initiate national sales tax for luxury items so that wealthy loop-hole users would pay an equitable share?
When will you become aware of markets that are growing in China, India and Korea, throughout Asia and Russia? Many nations are ahead of us in education, specifically math and science. We will wonder how and why we became the fourth wealthiest country in the world. if not fifth or sixth. What happened to the funds Representative Henry Hyde was supposed to use to reform the judicial system? Has our current system anything to do with truth and justice? Other than lawyers, who are the beneficiaries of final judgments? All lawyers are familiar with the courthouse statement, "the worst settlement is better than a trial." It is beyond understanding that representatives of a civilized people accept the building of more and more prisons without any significant rehabilitation and treatment programs.
Only Senator Feingold (D) Wisconsin had the courage to seek censure of a president who has broken the law with secret wire-tapping, violating our right to privacy. Who knows what else is being kept secret? Changes to the Homeland Security Act are equally insidious.
If you don't have the courage to seek censure, than at least demand this president's resignation with the clear understanding that he must take with him all of his father's cronies who designed and carried out his orders. According to the article in U.S. News and World Report, April 3, 2006 it appears that they have actually been running the government, with the president as a figurehead. It describes his hands-off style, quoting him, "I put a lot of faith and trust in my staff...I look for people who are smart and loyal and who share my conservative philosophy. My job is to set the agenda...and then delegate much of the process to them. The final decision often rests with me, but their judgment has a big influence..... I am loyal to my friends, so it is sometimes hard to say no." How does that statement stand up to his loyalty and duty to his country and its citizens?
The president's plan to relieve the burden of the cost of medicine for the elderly is becoming a tremendous windfall for pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Americans have been very generous in contributing to medical research for many years, and if universities are working on cures, how does the industry attribute its outrageous prices for drugs to the "cost of research" while Europe and Canada can provide them at one-third or one half the price in the U.S.? The president can't explain the plan, and I doubt any one of you can.
It is impossible to respect your positions as representatives of the people when not one of you speaks out to contradict the president's statement that he "inherited a recession" from the Clinton administration. Not one Senator came forward to support the House bill challenging the Supreme Court's decision that put George W. Bush in office.
And, on this third anniversary of our invasion of Iraq, the president speaks out on the White House lawn upon returning from a weekend at Camp David, bragging how we freed the Iraqis and helped them achieve a democracy with the election of a new government. At the same time, the elected prime minister in Iraq clearly states that a civil war is being waged there now. Despite the elections, a government has yet to be formed and American troops are still casualties. .
Last and perhaps most important, is the silence these many years regarding the enactment of a limited term for the presidency, but not the legislature. Obviously you have been able to stay in office for many years past your effectiveness, if you ever were even mildly effective.. Most of your terms are spent fund-raising to remain in office. The necessity to raise millions of dollars to campaign to serve one's country is in itself a travesty in a democracy. You have allowed this democracy to erode incrementally, with your own purposes in mind.
If you truly loved our country you should seek resignations from those who blindly followed the party line, rather than represent their constituencies.
How does it help the U.S. economy to pay $6.5 billion to Dubai and a British corporation to manage our ports? How could contracts have been awarded without bids from American companies? Or, in learning of the Dubai contract, did anyone have an intuitive, if not educated awareness of "hali burton tosis"? How did the president and his vice president Dick Cheney keep this secret? Why was the sub-government bureaucracy, permitted to make this momentous decision? George W. Bush defended the transaction, and Senator First, without knowing the facts, said he thought the president is "probably right." What was right about it? Did it have anything to do with the president's family dealings with Middle East oil interests?
As for erosion of our rights, where is "equal under the law" in giving tax cuts to the wealthiest? Would not middle-class taxpayers immediately put the money back into our economy right here in the U.S. paying huge gas-heating bills and automobile fuel, credit card debt, mortgages, property taxes, medicines, utilities, clothing, food, school supplies, children's needs, perhaps a movie?.
How are the rich spending their windfall? Perhaps large amounts are in safety deposit boxes, if not in Swiss bank accounts. Has it occurred to any one of you to initiate national sales tax for luxury items so that wealthy loop-hole users would pay an equitable share?
When will you become aware of markets that are growing in China, India and Korea, throughout Asia and Russia? Many nations are ahead of us in education, specifically math and science. We will wonder how and why we became the fourth wealthiest country in the world. if not fifth or sixth. What happened to the funds Representative Henry Hyde was supposed to use to reform the judicial system? Has our current system anything to do with truth and justice? Other than lawyers, who are the beneficiaries of final judgments? All lawyers are familiar with the courthouse statement, "the worst settlement is better than a trial." It is beyond understanding that representatives of a civilized people accept the building of more and more prisons without any significant rehabilitation and treatment programs.
Only Senator Feingold (D) Wisconsin had the courage to seek censure of a president who has broken the law with secret wire-tapping, violating our right to privacy. Who knows what else is being kept secret? Changes to the Homeland Security Act are equally insidious.
If you don't have the courage to seek censure, than at least demand this president's resignation with the clear understanding that he must take with him all of his father's cronies who designed and carried out his orders. According to the article in U.S. News and World Report, April 3, 2006 it appears that they have actually been running the government, with the president as a figurehead. It describes his hands-off style, quoting him, "I put a lot of faith and trust in my staff...I look for people who are smart and loyal and who share my conservative philosophy. My job is to set the agenda...and then delegate much of the process to them. The final decision often rests with me, but their judgment has a big influence..... I am loyal to my friends, so it is sometimes hard to say no." How does that statement stand up to his loyalty and duty to his country and its citizens?
The president's plan to relieve the burden of the cost of medicine for the elderly is becoming a tremendous windfall for pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Americans have been very generous in contributing to medical research for many years, and if universities are working on cures, how does the industry attribute its outrageous prices for drugs to the "cost of research" while Europe and Canada can provide them at one-third or one half the price in the U.S.? The president can't explain the plan, and I doubt any one of you can.
It is impossible to respect your positions as representatives of the people when not one of you speaks out to contradict the president's statement that he "inherited a recession" from the Clinton administration. Not one Senator came forward to support the House bill challenging the Supreme Court's decision that put George W. Bush in office.
And, on this third anniversary of our invasion of Iraq, the president speaks out on the White House lawn upon returning from a weekend at Camp David, bragging how we freed the Iraqis and helped them achieve a democracy with the election of a new government. At the same time, the elected prime minister in Iraq clearly states that a civil war is being waged there now. Despite the elections, a government has yet to be formed and American troops are still casualties. .
Last and perhaps most important, is the silence these many years regarding the enactment of a limited term for the presidency, but not the legislature. Obviously you have been able to stay in office for many years past your effectiveness, if you ever were even mildly effective.. Most of your terms are spent fund-raising to remain in office. The necessity to raise millions of dollars to campaign to serve one's country is in itself a travesty in a democracy. You have allowed this democracy to erode incrementally, with your own purposes in mind.
If you truly loved our country you should seek resignations from those who blindly followed the party line, rather than represent their constituencies.
I would very much appreciate if you respond with answers to the following questions.
1. What was your schedule this past week that was of benefit to your constituency?_____________________________________________
2. Since you have been a U.S. Senator which bill(s) did you author and which was your most significant contribution and when did that occur?
3. How much money do you have in your next election campaign funds?_____________________
4. How much time do you expect you will spend from now to November for fund-raising and campaigning? _________________________________
Any comments would be appreciated. BFields747@aol.com
(No response was received from any member of congress.)
No comments:
Post a Comment