« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

A telling stat of why we are where we are today.

By: Common_Cents (Diary)  |  September 23rd, 2010 at 07:16 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I heard Joe DioGuardi, running against Kirsten Gillibrand, on an interview today and he pointed something out that is shockingly telling on why we are where we are today.  It really got my attention and alerted me to something very wrong with our system.

Joe said, If Kirsten gets elected, she will be the 57th (The Won’s fave #) Senator out of 100 that is an attorney.    If Joe gets elected he’ll be the only certified public accountant.   Think about that for a moment or two and its implications.

If I remember right from the interview he also said there were approximately 250 attorneys out of 435 in the house of representatives.   I’m not sure how many CPA’s are in the house but I sure as hell know, not enough of them.

These people are responsible for America’s check book.   No wonder all we get is 2,000-3,000 page bills full of complex gobbledy gook, most of them are attorneys!  You’d think they are being paid by the word!

Obviously something went wrong.  Wasn’t congress intended to represent the cross section of America?   Over half of Americans are certainly not attorneys.  Yes, they are a necessary evil these days but not over 50% in CONgress.

We need more real citizens in congress, business leaders, accountants, concerned parents, people that respect the Constitution.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • conservativecurmudgeon

    If you take away the attorneys, those in line from crude primogeniture (think Al Gore, Jr., John Dingell, Jr., etc.), those elected from “lower” office, Political Science majors, and staffers of former legislators, there are very, very few normal people wandering about the halls of Congress. And, you DioGuardi, are exactly correct that this is the taproot of our ills.

    Where are the pastors, the farmers, the shoe-salesmen? Or, the artists, the fishermen, the policemen? Well, I guess you can count Bart Stupak as a policeman (-he was a state cop), but he was also, guess what, a lawyer…

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      that have built things and know what it takes to encourage more of the same.

      • Common_Cents

        We should require every congress critter to pass a quiz on the constitution, econ 101 if not require the budget committees to have accounting/CPA experience. Maybe we use affirmative action

        All those academic do nothing wordsmith elites are worthless and dangerous to America.

  • chbroussard

    Seems to me to be a conflict of interest.

  • http://Blackberrybear.etsy.com knitwit

    It’s the Dem’s favorite bedtime story and best fallback position when they squeak about *fairness*, isn’t it? So, why don’t we apportion the members of Congress according to the percentages of workers in each state who hold acutal jobs? Now, someplace like NY might actually end up with a lot of lawyers in their Congressional seats just because of all the law firms, and another big chunk might be brokers from Wall Street firms, but that would balance out the farmers from Upstate, wouldn’t it?

    And, someplace like Wisconsin would send dairy farmers and artisan cheese makers. California could be sending the vintners and silicon valley workers, farmers and loggers, actors and undocumented domestics. Texas would send oilmen and cattle ranchers……you get the picture, here, right? Real redistribution of Congressional seats and power, to reflect the makeup of the people of each state, as well as representing the population.

    That would really straighten out all the lawyers and poly-si folks, wouldn’t it?
    *snark*