MARLBORO — The opening of a recent New York Times editorial was striking: “The federal debt limit is far too dangerous and unstable for lawmakers to use as a political weapon.” One might ask, “If not that, what?”
In the final debt limit vote, our own Senator Leahy sided with senior Democratic leadership in Congress while Senator Sanders and Rep. Welch opposed both the somewhat symbolic cost-cutting and the completely nonexistent revenue enhancement. After the fact, Leahy was among the first to admit that the debt squabble was “manufactured.”
In a representative democracy, these three folks speak for Vermont, a state whose companies in the last decade have received more than $7 billion in defense spending (Peace & Justice News, November/December 2010) and perhaps 20 percent of its annual state budget from the federal government. Senator Leahy has helped immeasurably in the task of bringing in the sheaves (even though Champlain is not a “Great Lake”).
Welch and Sanders seem upset about the ever-widening gap between rich and poor and, at times, seem to reflect what might be called the people's “best interests.” They seem to think big and to think “democratic.”
Now the Times does not regard the Congress as competent to handle important matters, but we're the ones who put them there. What are we going to do now?