although we seem much more polite it it's not one of us telling each other where to go?

NaCl and best of luck, Prof.

Best of luck, Jasper! I look forward to reading your DAILY commentary. MK

I guess you should be the guy to ask about the current or soon to be reccession, unless we're all so stimulated by a few hundred $ it never comes about.

Tell US professor, will the stimulus work?

I don't know if you get around on this blog or not but I've made a suggestion. Our illustrious representaives pass a law or something on those lines to take two percent of creidt card interest rates & give it to the state where the $ was spent. The reasoning behind my idea is that

1. Consumer spending drives 70% of the economy & many people use credit cards to do that spending. Raising taxes leaves people with less $ to spend on the economy. If people are taxed from 40 to 50% of gross & taxes increase aren't we on a dead end as the economy can't survive when we getto a certain point? For example 60% of gross incoem paid to taxes.

2. I hear all about every household having thousands of $ in credit card debt while many people are going bankrupt due to those cards & irresponsible use of them.

3. Where would the economy be without the use of credit cards, including the ones causing so much grief?

4. If using two percent of credit card interest would prevent raiing taxes wouldn't people have more of their own $ to spend while also providing $ for roads, schools, & whatever the $ was designated to proved for?

5. Wouldn't credit card companies benefit as well as people might be using cards more & at least some of the people going broke due to high credit card interest would only increase due to raising taxes on top of high interest where as holding taxes down by using credit card interest would have the opposite effect? Credit card companies have to be losing a certain percentage to bankruptcy, would this create a balance or at least a possiblity of less bankruptcy?

I'll leave it at that & let a professor kick my idea to the dirt. If you have any ideas that would help or get US, the working class thinking I'm all for them. Anything but the same political yada, yada, yada that has US $9 trillion in debt, dollar in the crapper while printing more $, subprime lenders selling to foreign interest, & the FBI investigating several companies involved, free trade, war, & I would have to imagine more to come.

You not being a politician I'm treating you better then I treat them, but that could change.
Just kidding.

Just a little suggestion for a topic that catches both current events and can dovetail with one of your sabbatical projects:

the role of interest groups in the housing boom in the Treasure Valley, focusing particular on realtors and developers lobbying inside municipalities and the county (as well as the state). I'd particularly be interested in hearing more of your perspective on what's next for these interest groups as the housing/economy slow down.

Dr. Jasper M. LiCalzi, You say: I want to answer the questions: “How are the state house and senate different from each other?” and “Why are they different?”

Look at http://fp1.centurytel.net/democracy/ where you can see what the Senate is doing about Fair Elections. Earlier, the House would not listen to Fair Elections at all.

The Senate State Affairs Committee had a partisan vote on S1037 Idaho Fair Elections Act last February. Kate Kelly revised S1037 to S1292, the Fair Elections Act, referred to the State Affairs Committee on January 17. While you are at http://fp1.centurytel.net/democracy/ , send those 7 Senators a message about Fair Elections, if you want to help democracy in Idaho. Elsewhere http://fp1.centurytel.net/democracy/table_money_source.htm
you can see that the Senators who voted No on S1037 and the Sponsors of S1037 have similar campaign money contributions.

Do you suppose the vote was partisan and had nothing to do with Fair Elections? Do you suppose the House's refusal to even vote on it is a difference you are looking for?

Calvin Leman, PhD
305 Washington Street
Salmon, ID 83467
208-756-4104 phone or fax
http://fp1.centurytel.net/democracy/

If they threw an election and nobody gave a dman, would you hear a reporter call in the results?

So, if there are no differences between the houses (and I see no reason why there should be, except that people in eastern Idaho tend to be bigger jerks), then why on earth have two houses? Does the state legislature really need to be more deliberative and confrontational?