Ok. we win the senate and win the house. what kind of changes will occur?

[BigBearJohn]

Just curious what others think. that's all.

[fooj]

1. First order of business...

Take our country BACK!

[wellst0nev0ter]

2. Clean Out The Aegean Stables

If the Republicans can't get on board, then we'll maintain the restrictive committee rules and conference sessions that excludes the minority party. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

The first order of business is repealing Don Young/Ted Stevens quarter billion dollars they were originally going to spend on the "Bridge to Nowhere". That should send a message.

[Philosoraptor]

3. end the slaughter

[Amonester]

4. Impeach ** & all PNAC war criminals

Plus a real investigation into their "New Pearl Harbor" sick "fantasy."

[Justice Is Comin]

5. We win the chance to remove the main epicenter of oval office stench,

give the VP a heart attack, fumigate the White House and install the Democrat speaker as president.

[MrSlayer]

6. Real oversight and investigations.

At least I hope that's what would happen. You never know, some of these scandals may include a few of our own.

[Lasher]

7. Stop harmful legislation and launch investigations.

We would be able to prevent any more harmful legislation from being passed, but without a veto-proof majority, we won't be able to get much if anything past Junior. He will oppose everything that is not exactly like he wants it - which is a pretty accurate description of what he's grown accustomed to getting from his bush league lapdogs who control Congress at this time. If you take The Decider's 'spoiled brat' nature into consideration, you won't be surprised if you see a government shutdown because he vetoed a budget bill that he didn't like.

We would be able to launch Congressional investigations, however, so that we could let Americans know what has actually been going on during the past 6 years. These things are what I think will occur.

But fast forward to 2008. What if we controlled Congress and the Presidency? I can't resist an exercise in 'If I were king': I would get out of Iraq, eliminate deficits, shore up Social Security, and provide single-provider universal health care. Here's how I would do all that:

Getting out of Iraq is simple. Just get the hell out. This would help quite a bit with the budget.

The only other thing I would have to do to balance the budget is to eliminate Junior's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. Don't believe me? Here, play the National Budget Simulation Game yourself and see. In my model I eliminated all costs of the Iraq war and Afghanistan operations, even though I wouldn't get out of Afghanistan. I figure I could keep Afghanistan going awhile by finding the $9 billion that Junior lost in Iraq. But seriously, this relatively minor expense could be easily accounted for. I just didn't want to get into that much detail right now. If you play the game, don't forget to also eliminate those 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. You'll end up with a $5.42 budget surplus.

OK next I would shore up Social Security by eliminating the ceiling on income that is subject to payroll taxes. That's all it would take to address 93% of the shortfall that is expected to occur way out in 2043, so nothing more would need to be done at this time. No reduction of benefits or any of Junior's other schemes that are intended to gut the program. OK, I know you want to try it yourself, so here's the Social Security Game.

And universal health care? That's the easiest of all because it wouldn't cost anything.

It would be easy to make things better because there are significant opportunities to improve. And it's really not that complicated. See, these fascists who are in power now are making things look more complicated than they actually are, because they would be in big trouble if most people realized just what they have been doing to us.

I think these 4 things are enough for my first week on the job.

[bowens43]

8. The republican anti-America agenda will be stopped.

[Selatius]

9. If they don't repeal REAL ID, the Patriot Act, and impeach Bush, I'm...

going to be terribly upset.

[kentuck]

10. Democrats need to restore people's trust in their government...

In order to do that, they need to investigate every questionable activity of this Administration. Until we get to the bottom of these lies and corruption, people will never trust this government, no matter if Democrats or Republicans are in charge...

[ThomWV]

11. John Conyers Will Take Over The House Judiciary Committee

And will initiate impeachment proceedings. Its really that simple.

The best order would be, first impeach Cheney, get him out of office. Then the Democrats have to pull out all the stops; we must not allow any replacement for Cheney who is not acceptable to us. Once Cheney is gone then we impeach Bush. Then this country sits back and cools its heels for the remaining year until the '08 elections. During that time we get out of Iraq and concurrently capture and try Ossama.

[kentuck]

12. But you can't impeach first and investigate later...

it doesn't work that way.

[ThomWV]

14. The House Impeachment Is An Investigation, The Senate Is A Trial

[MysteryToMyself]

13. Fight like Hell for the middle class and the poor

The best plan yet is getting rid of all the Republicans in office,that we can in November.

The Republicans have always taken care of businesses and the rich. The Democrats have always fought for the middle class, the poor and the underdog. We have always been dependent on business for jobs, but the Democrats never let them take advantage of us before.

When Robert Kennedy was killed by Sir han Sir han, we didn't attack country after country because of it.

The Bushites and their enablers like Lieberman have declared war against the poor and won, now they are doing their best to destroy the middle class and the media are their enablers. They are governing by deceit.

Take Social Security for an example. Bush won as long as he said he was going to "fix it". The media never once told what his plans were, but once he got on TV and told his plans, he went down from there in the polls. Most didn't like the idea of those who earn $35,000 while working getting their benefits cut and the privatization. The middle class know how important Social Security is.

They are using a lot of false information to justify their slow destruction of Social Security. For instance they say, “Life expectancy has increased from 61 to 76 years”. That is a totally fraudulent statement.

Recent statistics show that people are dying younger than they were. The Bushites say that is a fluke, but if you look around, notice the ages of people who are dying. A great many die before age 62 and it gets worse after that.

The statistics have been wrong anyway. They figure in the life expectancy from birth. The older statistics were lower because more babies died before age two. Now, more babies live, making the life expectancy higher, but people are not living longer.

The COLA for Social Security is not too high, not the way the government figures inflation. Not many expenses go down after retirement or are eliminated.

In 1983 Greenspan raised the retirement age to 67. He cut college for the dependent children of the deceased. We have paid in a surplus, since then, to take care of the extra costs of so many boomers retiring at once so we would not be a burden to the younger generations. Greenspan cut some benefits then. That is enough.

Social Security should never be needs based. It is the one government program that has a surplus. The Bushites and their enablers figure the costs of Social Security to infinity. If the stock market does as well as the Bushites think it will, there will be plenty of money to help pay Social Security back from capital gains taxes.

Those of us who have saved in a 401k or in other ways should not be punished by getting less Social Security.

To increase the tax ceiling would solve the problem, but only if the Bushites and their enablers make up their mind to pay back the surplus. Greenspan has stated overseas, that due to the deficit they will have to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits. The more we pay into Social Security now, the more they will owe us and they plan to beat us out of it. Al Gore’s lock box is looking pretty practical.

The wealthy get a lot more special tax breaks on income like capital gains. Social Security is already taxed enough. If we have income over $32,000 and draw Social Security we pay taxes on half of the Social Security that we draw after we retire. That is fair for those who have lower income because they will pay no taxes. But it isn’t too harsh for those who have saved. Maybe tax all of the Social Security income for those who are in the top 30%, but they would probably fight it.

The reason FDR set it up to where Social Security could only be loaned to the government is because US Government Treasury Bonds are the safest investment in the world. People who do not want Social Security to succeed could rip it off with certain stock market moves and bad investments. That would be Wall Street investment houses and insurance companies who want to sell annuities.

The supporters of private accounts say you will inherit the money you invest, but the bill the government wrote up says you have to buy an annuity for enough to support yourself after retirement a few years before you retire with your investment money. Your family will not get the annuity money, the insurance company will get that. It would not help the poor inherit at all, because they would have to put all their investment money into an annuity. If we want to help the poor, we could put aside an extra fund for them. We could raise the minimum wage and take a percentage out of regular income tax to invest for them.

Even a lot of savvy investors don't want the privatization plan because the money will be invested in bonds and ultra safe stocks funds. No getting rich that way.

One thing for sure, the market can NOT go up forever. If the stock market had to support everyone’s retirement, the cost of living would be unbelievable. The profits of the stock market goes up as prices go up. Think how high everything would be, if it went up year after year. We can sell more to other countries which would help, but the zinger of that is they can sell more over here. As an example, look at the mess our big 3 automobile makers are in, but the foreign cars, with low gas mileage are thriving in our country. People from other countries also invest in our markets, which make even more it would have to support. They know this and are already predicting $300,000 out of pocket expenses for each person after retirement, with Medicare. Even divided by 20 years health care would be un affordable.

One thing that would help a lot would be to stop well-to-do people from working and drawing Social Security after legal retirement age. Clay Shaw, R, Senator, draws Social Security, plus all the perks, like paid insurance and a nice salary we pay him as a Senator. He worked tirelessly to get the bill passed so he could do that. Social Security is for retirement, not for people like Clay Shaw to draw while working. The only time people should be allowed to work and draw Social Security is if they make below a living income. At this time, if you aren’t retirement age you are taxed $1 for every $2 you earn, if your spouse is on Social Security, with no regard to the total income. (unless they have changed it recently).

When Social Security was started by FDR, the rich and businesses fought it tooth and nail. Their grandchildren are the government now. They are determined to roll back and destroy every program of FDRs’ plus Medicare.

The thing is, unless the government plans on people starving and losing everything they have worked for, then the welfare check would replace the Social Security check, so the savings wouldn’t be as great as they think. Most people have contributed for 50 years before they draw Social Security. Their employer has matched every dollar they put into Social Security as part of their wages. To cut their benefits is to beat them out of a self funded program benefit paid for with hard earned dollars. Totally unfair.

Social Security keeps the middle class from becoming poor.

They are telling the younger generation that it won’t be there for them and that the boomers didn’t save. That is so wrong. We have contributed to FICA, which stands for Federal Insurance Contribution Act from the first paycheck to the last paycheck we draw. It is an insurance and works like insurance. We pool our money and those who are entitled to it draw it out as their time comes. No one supports each other, because we are building up credits. The longer we work and the more we make the more we get when our turn comes to draw out. The Social Security Administration keep track of our earnings and the years we work.

Bill Clinton planned to pay down the deficit so that it would not be a burden to pay back Social Security. That is what the Bushites should worry about NOW.

Those entering the state work force should probably be put into Social Security, because it would increase the income to the pool of money.

There are ways to get money for Social Security as it is needed. As the baby boomers retire, they won’t need it all at once. They will sell part of their 401ks yearly and the taxes from them are going to be regular income taxes, since they don’t get the capital gains rate because 401ks tax defer the money you put it. So the taxes on the 401k money could be used to help pay back Social Security.

[BigBearJohn]

15. Thank you for writing such a well-thought-out reply. I loved it.