- – to exercise authoritative or dominating influence over
- – to have power over
- – to direct the behavior of
- a process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task”
In psychology, Control Freak is a slang term that refers to a person who attempts to dictate how everything around them is done – usually those with Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder. Judith Orloff, MD,in her new book “Emotional Freedom: Liberate Yourself from Negative Emotions and Transform Your Life” describes it as a person “who feels out of control and tends to become controllers. Deep down, they’re afraid of falling apart, so they micromanage to bind anxiety”. You can read her blog post at Psychology Today.
Compare that to the definition of leadership and the key word becomes accomplishment. Unless control is your ultimate goal and not problem resolution, I guess you could say thats leadership. I don’t believe most Americans believe that. I believe they want leadership from their members of Congress and the US Senate, but most of all from President Obama. Years of standing at a podium lecturing on legal issues and topics of the day have left him believing his title as Commander In Chief does not require compromise, discussion, or accomplishments. All he seems to understand at this point is “a red line in the sand”. Add 535 Members of Congress and the Senate and you get a recipe for the very disfuction we’re living through now. Control – not leadership.
After 11 years of working in a Congressional office I know first hand the difference between control and leadership. For instance, a CBS reporter asked Senate Pres. Reid if he has walked across the building or made any attempt to communicate with House Speaker Boehner. His answer after he hemmed and hawwed for over a minute, with a smile was “I have done what I was asked to do”. That is control not leadership.
So what was he asked to do and by whom? One can only surmise it must be the head of the Democrats, President Obama. Control is more important than accomplishments for the good of the people. Directing the outcome has priority over resolution
.In United States history, the degree to which the President’s political party has control over the House of Representatives and Senate often determines his political strength – such as the ability to pass sponsored legislation, ratify treaties, and have Cabinet members and judges approved. Moreover, it appears to have a strong effect on presidential popularity and historical ranking, especially in conjunction with years served and number of elections won.
With control over the Senate and 2 years with the House you would expect to see more accomplishments by this administration than there are. And if POTUS spent 1/3 of the time he spends running around the country campaigning for one issue or another working with ALL members of congress he might learn how to lead so that others would follow! I’m afraid he always gets out so far out in front he leaves himself open to get his tail end kicked – and the country with it. How was President Clinton able to accomplish a great deal for our country without total control – he knew what leadership required.
At this rate, nothing is going to get resolved anytime soon unless Senator Reid and President Obama figure out what Leadership is. They might look to Speaker Boehner for help. You may not like what he’s doing, but he is leading. So, maybe Michael Reagan is right – just wait. By the first of the year the American people will recognize that Speaker Boehner is the only leader and they’ll be willing to follow. You can read his article here.
PS. Congressman DeFazio just sent via Facebook a list of agencies currently open. Here it is:
Citizenship and Immigration Services
Veterans’ benefits and services
Active duty military members and families benefits and services
Customs and Border Protection
Patents and Trademarks
Social Security applications and appeals
IRS extensions, payments
Transportation Security Administration
Affordable Care Act implementation
Federal retirement services, disability claims
Workers compensation (federal)
Small business disaster assistance
Personal responsibility is imperative if you’re going to benefit from Obamacare. Regardless of your age, gender, race (except American Indians who are exempt), diseases, disabilities or drug use – prepare to pay more for your care. You’ll need to learn what your care requires and how much Medicare/Medicaid will pay for your treatments because you’re going to pay for the balance. Obamacare reduces Medicare funding between now and 2020. It reduces certain Medicare Hospital payments and it eliminates the Part D drug plan by January 2020.
162 years ago today, Carolyn Ingraham of Madison, New Jersey became the first woman in America to be issued a life insurance policy. Back then most folks believed in self-insured programs. They worked with their neighbors or churches to assure their families were taken care of in the event of loss. Graineries were a primitive form of insurance. They house food to indemnify them against famines. Oversight did not begin until 1851 when New Hampshire had the first Insurance Commissioner.
Congress took no significant action about Insurance until the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 when they proclaimed Insurance Company oversight was the responsibility of the states. In 1999, the Financial Modernization Act reaffirmed states rights on Insurance Company oversight while it acknowledged a framework to authorize affiliations between banks, securiteies firms, and insurer. Dod-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act took things a little further. It established the Federal Insurance Office within the Dept of Treasury. It adds another layer of beauracracy without enforcement capabilities and the industry continues to escape Anti-trust laws. It was inconceivable in 1850 so many people would live so long and the financial burden to society would be so great.
Obamacare shifts a large portion of the financial burden to employers and private pay individuals. When hospitals that accept large numbers of indigents receive less, beginning in October of 2014, cost of services will have to rise in order to cover those reduced revenues. Eventually indigent and fixed income folks will get less care for more money – when that happens Congress will get to revisit this issue – if not sooner.