Question: Would GOP Have Worked To Pass A Budget?

MoveOn.Org challenges Chet Edwards to "Take The Pledge"

The nonpartisan PAC MoveOn.Org issued a call for 500 CD-17
constituents to petition Rep. Chet Edwards to fight
budgetary corruption.

Their goals:

* Overturn the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v.
FEC to remove unlimited corporate money in political
campaigns;

* Pass the Fair Elections Now Act to publicly finance
elections;

* Enact a Lobbyist Reform Act to reduce the influence of
corporate lobbyists.

So far, 170 people in Mr. Edwards' district have signed the
petition.

If they reach their goal of 500 signatures, they will
confront him with a plea that he take the same pledge early
next month.

"We'll ask him to choose between standing with big corpor-
ations and standing with us," said Ilyse Hogue of MoveOn.Org.

They plan to do this in each of the Congressional Districts
of the U.S.

If Rep. Edwards or his staff would respond to my question, I
would ask this.

As a member of the Budget Committee, would he have worked
with Republican members of the House to hammer out a
compromise budget if he thought the votes were there?

As a follow-up, I would ask this.

In fact, how many votes separated the two sides of the
conundrum and what kind of concessions by elephants and
donkeys would it have taken to reach an agreement?

Furthermore, would Republican Congressmen have been tract-
able, or would they have continued to sit on their hands
and say, no, no, no, a thousand times no?

It's a fair question. I am seeking a response only in the
most general of terms.

Are there any other terms when you begin to deal in figures
that reach into the trillions of dollars?

For instance, The Legendary knows and understands that a
billion is a thousand million.

A thousand million!

The people at MoveOn.Org are working for more than just an
answer to that question, but here goes nothing.

According to Ilyse Hogue, "Over the last two years, corpora-
tions and lobbyists have been working overtime to block pro-
gressive change in Washington. We've seen insurance compan-
ies work to water down health reform; bailed-out bankers lob-
by to keep bonuses; and now BP is spending more than $30,000
per day to avoid responsibiity for the disaster it caused.

"That's what democracy looks like when too many politicians
forget to do the peoples' business."

I think we all know what it looks like when a well in mile-
deep salt water blows out and continues to gush crude into
the Gulf of Mexico - day in and day out. CNN, as well as
other cable news services, keeps on showing a constant feed
of video in case anyone has forgotten and needs to refresh
their memory.

How did the petroleum giant get the assent of Congressmen to
go along with the fierce gamble of granting a permit for
such a deep well?

Corporate lobbyists played a big part.

For instance, a subsidiary of British Petroleum, BP America,
has spent $3,530,000 on lobbying so far year.

The Political Action Committee pointed out the following
figures from Open Secrets, dollar amounts gleaned as of
April 25.

"A special interest's lobbying activity may go up or down
over time, depending on how much attention the federal
government is giving their issues. Particularly active
clients often retain multiple lobbykng firms, each with a
team of lobbyists, to press their case for them," said the
OpenSecrets staff, who got their figures from the Senate
Office of Public Records through the cooperation of The
Center for Responsive Politics.

This compares with a total of $15 million for the year 2009.

BP America hired the following firms, among others, and paid
them these amounts:

* Alpine Group - $60K
* Arnold & Porter - $20K
* DC Legislative & Regulatory Services - $20K
* Duberstein Group - $100K
* Podesta Group - $60K
* Stuntz, Davis & Staffier - $20K