Either I am all wet, or it is raining.

Like it or not, I am going to start with a wider topic today that covers about 435 different areas.

The reason behind the saying that a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing was once explained to me as the little bit is seldom enough to truly understand enough of what is involved in something, and even less seldom enough to know how to deal with a problem.

It doesn't mean people with a little knowledge should not be involved in a matter.  They should however attempt to gain sufficient knowledge to deal with a matter. 

I hear the constant complaints about how the tea party doesn't represent the country.  I agree.  I find most tea party elected representatives to be to radical to the right of the spectrum. The fact is though these members weren't elected to represent me, or as far as I can ascertain, any one in Massachusetts.  They were elected to represent the individuals who live in the their respective congressional district (or state).`

If memory serves me, we have 435 congressional districts from which a voting member of the House of Representatives are elected. Like it or not, each district is free to choose who they wish to send to congress. Like it or not, often other districts elect individuals that do not necessarily align with our philosophies.

A Congressman (person in the PC vernacular) is elected to represent the people of his or her district.  It really is that simple. the bulk of that radical right the vast bulk come from solid republican districts.  

In the last election, between retirements and election losses (both primary and general), the tea party caucus lost 11 members. Just under 19%.

Take out the retirements, the percentage drops to a loss of about 11%.  Factor in redistricting,  you can probably cut that down to about 7%.  Of the 48 that managed to get re-election, assuming my research is correct, the bulk of them won by fairly solid margins.  Less than a handful won with less than 55% of the vote (three if I counted correctly), but with the exception of the Congresswoman from Minnesota who suffered from foot in mouth disease and who squeaked out a victory, many pundits attribute the bulk of the loss in tea party votes to redistricting and a presidential election coat tail affect.

Bottom line, the collective we get an opportunity to change one Representative to to the House every two years.  with our one vote every two years, collectively we are most likely to vote the party line that influences our specific difference.  The fact that in our pocket of the collective political arena the walls are painted a solid blue makes many people very happy.  A less pleasant fact for people behind solid blue walls is there are a great many people who live inside of walls painted a very solid red.  A deeper shade of red than the blue that walls in Massachusetts.

Members of Congress are elected to represent their districts.  The reason you don't even much movement from either side back toward sanity is a result of that fact.  Most of those elected people have a solid backing for their positions.  Until some opinion poll from a district comes out and tells one of them that opinion is shifting in their own district, they ain't worried about what you think in an outside district.

The second biggest problem in Congress today is elected officials who are more interested in those color schemes and thus ensuring they maintain their seats.  The number one problem, the fact that way too many of the votes cast are based on the little bit of knowledge about  which party the candidate is affiliated with.

Enough traveling around the country.  The landscape we look at on this journey is the same no matter where you go.

Back to our starting point, i.e. Fairhaven.  A few of you offered some tidbits on the revenue & expenditure scenario on discussed yesterday.  Well mainly the expenditure side of it.

One commentator even had a bullet list.  I kind of liked the list.  Probably 90% in agreement with the points.

Believe it or though I am not entirely opposed to a partial subsidy for the Rec Center.  Don't get me wrong, for a town this size running a municipal rec center in my mind is a luxury.  Part of the problems the center has faced over the years stems from the Fairhaven only mentality that prevailed originally.

From the get go though, such a facility by pure statistics could not be both self sustaining and affordable to Fairhaven residents limited to only Fairhaven residents.  There is a whole lot of potential to the facility.  

Anyway, its continued operation is a matter of decisions to be made. The commentator is correct in that if cuts have to be made, it is one that has to be on the table.

What if anything should be done about other non-necessities.  I am sure you can think of plenty of them. Should every senior be eligible for a free shellfish permit just because they are a senior?  Why is it that charitable endeavors are given a discount? If you can't raise enough without the discount, is it the right thing to do for the town to utilize tax payer money?

I hear all the time is is a drop in the bucket compared to what is spent or wasted on other things.  The same may very well be true.  Quite frankly though it is just another example of the whole concept of trickle down, except the tax dollars are what is being spent.

Again, believe it or not, I am not entirely opposed to the concept, might not even be opposed at all, it just seems to me the concept is never universally applied. 

Enough meandering thoughts.  Open line continues for the day.  

Be Safe.