I have read all these pieces, some opinion and some dutifully completed, with interest. So, several items of note come to mind. One, the process of budgeting in Washington (which has gone on this way for almost 80 years), two: the other highlighting a couple of states run by Republicans which seem to have been unsuccessful, and three: the “obstructionist” labels placed on the Republicans alone (in these articles).

First, the process of budgeting in Washington is broken because of so many “omnibus” bills instead of separate spending bills. Even the more moderate think tanks such as the Brookings Institute note this.

Reimagining the Federal Budget Process

There is broad agreement federal budgeting is not an orderly process that reflects the nation’s needs and priorities.

Improving the Federal Budgeting Process

Part of the issue is these massive (not completely read) omnibus bills that don’t allow much time for amendments and other normal legislative debate. And I still say we need to go to zero based budgeting for all agencies and programs and get away from “baseline budgeting” that spends two to three times the amount of dollars as the cost of living or inflation (as a general rule). This is how we end of with wasteful expenditures placed on the backs of all people (well-to-do, middle class and others). Don’t forget that the upper 20% pay most of the taxes anyway. (http://www.wsj.com/articles/top-20-of-earners-pay-84-of-income-tax-1428674384)

Secondly, the two examples, Kansas and Louisiana, are surely noteworthy and I, personally, would have to delve deeper into both examples to see the details. However, what is the “elephant in the room” in these discussions are the disaster examples of California, Illinois (and Chicago comes to mind), and New York are not mentioned at all (and they are all Democrat controlled states and legislatures and have been for some time) and some more successful Republican examples like Florida and Ohio. We won’t even begin to mention Detroit which was driven into the ground by Mayor Coleman Young (decades long Democrat) and his “public sector” expansions, tax hikes, and corruption. So, if we are going to have a circumspect (and not slanted) discussion, let’s include them all shall we.

Thirdly, let’s discuss “obstructionism”. I can remember a health care bill passed in the “stealth of night” so to speak, which allowed no Republican discussions, amendments, or debate, and it was passed without most members even reading it. As it turns out, the major premises of the bill: reduced health care costs for the average family, keeping the same doctor, and keeping the plan you currently liked, have all been proven false and baseless claims. That folks is “obstructionism” at its pinnacle and it was all Democrats! So, the old axiom applies here, “People who live in glass houses should not throw stones”! I need not mention the “obstructionism” of the Democrats that fought the Civil Rights Act of 1965, and it was Republicans that made that happen under President LBJ. As to the “difficulty” of the legislative process, it was designed that way to provide “checks and balances”. So, if I, as a legislator in any governmental body, have legitimate concerns, I have to be a “rubber stamper” or not object otherwise, I am an “obstructionist”? If you talk about the current holder of the White House, there can be plenty of concerns about his public policies that one could question (the ACA being one area that was “bullied” through both the House and Senate) a lot of pauses given his upbringing (both parents ardent communists, statements, his adherence to Saul Alinsky’s tenants (and yes I have read Rules for Radicals), and other inclinations. So, I have to be either a Republican (and I throw stones at their shortcomings too) or Democrat automaton and go along with everything somebody wants. That is a BROKEN process for sure, and gives us great danger. We should have debates, we should object to what our respective constituents want of us. We should find compromises that are realistic (shall I mention Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, John Kasich, Dick Armey, and Pete Domenici for example) who came up with a real compromise on the federal budget (and cut taxes) that came up with surpluses. We should object and discuss if we feel we should. Otherwise, we live in a Fahrenheit 451 or Anthem world of totalitarian control and mindless masses.