The Index-Journal from Greenwood, South Carolina • Page 7

I U.S. Reps. Gwen Moore (D, Anthony Weiner (D, NY), and Aaron Schock (R, Ill.) had found themselves co-chairing a committee, it would have been labeled: Moore-Weiner-Schock. But this got me thinking. There are currently 541 elected officials in the 112th U.S.

Congress (435 members in the House of Representatives plus six non-voting delegates, and 100 from the Senate). Do other members in this distinguished group have interesting names, too? Turns out that quite a few do. So here is a guide to current congressional names that are all real and, unlike some of the individuals they belong to, unadulterated: The most common last name amongst current members of Congress is Johnson (7 of them), followed by Miller (5), Scott and Smith (4 each), and Young, Davis, Bishop and Rogers (3 each). Some of the more unusual names include: Ruppersberger, Frelinghuysen, Luetkemeyer and Sensenbrenner. It would seem there are a few colorful individuals in Congress, including some Blacks and Browns, a couple of Greens, a Whitehouse and a Schwartz.

Others are just plain animals such as Reps. Foxx, Labrador, Quayle, Fincher, Wolf, Bass, Doggett and Sen. Coons. The list also includes members who are Kind, Blunt, Grimm, Hurt, Long and one who is Camp. a Flake, a Harper, another is the Pitts, and one is a real Payne; but thankfully, just a single Biggert in the group.

And even on a good day, one senator from Idaho is always Crapo. We also have Waters, Wasserman, Snowe and Brooks, as well as a Boxer, a Gardner and a Hunter. There is a West, a Moore, a Landry and a Westmoreland. Rep. Slaughter is known for her killer speeches, while Rep.

wit can quickly cut an opponent down to size. Senator Lugar has a reputation for being a straight shooter. And despite touting a Pastor and several Bishops, no Christian is currently listed on the congressional rolls. The international crowd is well represented, too, with Sens. Austria and Deutch, as well as Reps.

Israel and Jordan (not surprisingly, on opposite sides of the aisle). Some members might even claim presidential heritage since the group boasts a Carter, Adams, Buchanan, Wilson, Jackson and Johnson also include Geoff Davis, of Kentucky, for all you Confederates out there). There are plenty of Lewis and Clarkes, several Mr. Rogers, a Daniel Webster, and some veterans from the world of entertainment including: Joe Walsh, Al Green and Jerry Lewis. And not forget a bunch of Bradys, too.

Then Sens. Bill and Ben Nelson, who are both Democrats; but if one should be absent from the floor when called to vote, officially recorded as a half Nelson. well-known, of course, that partisan debates can occasionally flare up on the House floor. This is especially true when Alcee Hastings (D, Fla.) and Doc Hastings (R, Wash.) go head-to-head on issues because it invariably leads to a Battle of Hastings. However, Rep.

Dun can prefers to keep out of the fray and nibble on donuts during fiery debates, while Rep. Campbell stays relaxed with a thermos of hot soup. As for Sen. Boozman, they ask in his thermos. After reading through the lists of House and Senate members, I was still left with quite a few unanswered questions.

For instance, could we really trust Rep. Fudge to chair the House Finance Committee? Reps. Schilling and Pence be far more suitable to deal with money matters? Just how supportive of the US auto industry would Rep. Honda be? And, face it, Sen. Graham crackers? Amazingly, despite the occasional representative falling from grace on ethical issues while in office, none of the House members seem to have any Pryors.

Can you believe it? But the senate does: Mark Pryor (D, Ark.) Speaking of grace fallers, one fact remains inescapable along these lines: many heaved a collective sigh of relief with the recent resignation of a certain representative from New York. After all, who want one less Weiner in Congress. Thomas is a freelance writer. He can be reached at www.along-these-lines.com. Editorial opinions in this column represent the views of this newspaper.

All other columns, cartoons and Letters to the Editor reflect the views of the individual author. They are not the opinions of this newspaper. Light bulb situation is one for the books The light bulb that has no mercury content faces extinction in this country. The federal government, at least, has put tough restrictions on incandescent bulbs. Bulbs, the fluorescent bulbs, are supposed to be more energy efficient.

Incandescent bulbs will be allowed, but they have to be more energy efficient. You have to wonder, though, if not trading away something more valuable. In effect, will the cure be more trouble than the disease? so unusual about that? Light bulbs are light bulbs, right? Wrong! Many, if not most, of the new bulbs are made in China. They are far more expensive than what South Carolinians have been using as long as anyone can remember. In addition to that, they contain mercury, and that means some toxicity.

Some states, including South Carolina, have some lawmakers that want to make it legal for their states to manufacture incandescent bulbs. In spite of any desire to an incandescent light bulb in this state, not likely to ever become a reality. There are so many hurdles, likely to be daunting. Texas has passed a bill to keep Texas-made incandescent bulbs in Texas. Still, it would be tough going.

U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, is trying to repeal the 2007 energy independence act passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush. Barton says, want the government dictating the lighting they can use. Traditional incandescent bulbs have been brightening the night since Thomas Edison created the first one in 1879.

They are safe, cheap and Safe, cheap and reliable? That indicates a gracious amount of common sense. Too bad. Common sense seems to always be in the cross hairs when the federal government gets involved. However, maybe Barton and others have been heard. Rep.

Fred Upton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a co-sponsor of the bill that would impose a ban on common light bulbs, is now saying he will support a bill to kill the bulb ban introduced by Barton and others. Like President Ronald Reagan said, nine most terrifying words in the English language are, from the government, and here to Common sense? It used to be worth noting. Nowadays you have to wonder where it went. There has been so much controversy surrounding original bill that he and those who support him have felt so much pressure in recent weeks that it would have been foolhardy to let the ban go into effect next Jan. 1.

more to this debate than meets the eye. It shows quite definitively the average American can indeed fight city hall. There were so many entities that could get a lot of benefit from keeping a ban on regular light bulbs that it made it harder to stop it. In the final analysis, though, none of them was as significant as the will of the people. a lesson there, too.

Maybe its message will spread. A guide to congressional names OUR VIEW Locally owned since 1919 here was no banner, no naval cheering section, no aircraft- carrier landing and thank heavens no flight suit. But make no mistake: President Obama gave his own version of a speech Wednesday. The policy itself was no triumph, just a split-the-difference compromise between the slower troop withdrawal from Afghanistan sought by the generals and the faster one many congressional Democrats and a majority of the public desired. But Obama packaged it nicely, wrapped it with a bow and declared, perhaps prematurely, that his in Afghanistan had been a success.

starting this drawdown from a position of the president proclaimed in his prime- time address. is under more pressure than at any time since Together with the Pakistanis, we have taken out more than half of leadership. And thanks to our intelligence professionals and Special Forces, we killed Osama bin Laden, the only leader that al-Qaeda had ever known. This was a victory for all who have served since from a position of sounds eerily like the on phrase that George W. Bush used about Iraq and the similarities did not end there.

take comfort in knowing that the tide of war is Obama said. ended our combat mission in Iraq, with 100,000 American troops already out of that country. And even as there will be dark days ahead in Afghanistan, the light of a secure peace can be seen in the To be sure, the president was characteristically muted in his celebration, warning of ahead. His staff was rather less restrained; speaking under the cloak of anonymity, his aides held a teleconference Wednesday afternoon with audible chest thumping. seen a terrorist threat emanating from Afghanistan for the past seven or eight one boasted, finding indication that there is any effort within Afghanistan to use Afghanistan as a launching pad to carry out attacks.

The threat has come from Pakistan over the past half-dozen years or so, and So if there been a terrorist threat coming from Afghanistan for seven or eight years, why did Obama send tens of thousands of additional troops into a conflict that has claimed more than 1,500 American lives? And why is he leaving most of them there? Obama surely hopes that his declare-victory-and-retreat-slowly plan will get us somewhere between a catastrophic collapse of order in Afghanistan and an unending American commitment. But the happy talk comes with a risk: By saying things are going so well, Obama could wind up looking premature, as Bush did, if things later go poorly. more than a theoretical possibility. As an investigation by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee found, Afghanistan has squandered the breathing space given it by the surge, making only modest progress toward competent governance. All but 3 percent of GDP is foreign military spending.

But Obama is sorely in need of a victory, and proclaiming one in Afghanistan is as good a choice as any. Sixteen months before the election, it seems his leadership is in trouble everywhere he looks. Liberal Democrats and many Republicans are uniting in opposition to his military action in Libya. The Federal Reserve on Wednesday steeply reduced its growth forecasts for both 2011 and 2012. Even Al Gore is complaining, about work on global warming.

A Bloomberg poll this week found that only 30 percent of Americans said they would certainly vote for Obama, compared with 36 percent who definitely Against that miserable backdrop, handling of terrorism is his strongest area of performance 69 percent in the Bloomberg poll. The president reminded Americans why they hold this view, recalling his vanquishing of bin Laden. information that we recovered from bin compound shows al- Qaeda under enormous he said. Laden expressed concern that al-Qaeda had been unable to effectively replace senior terrorists that have been killed. We have put al-Qaeda on a path to defeat, and we will not relent until the job is That, again, echoed Bush.

But by the end of the speech, Obama was aiming rather higher. confidence in our cause, with faith in our fellow citizens and with hope in our hearts, let us go about the work of extending the promise of America for this generation, and the When you echo the closing lines of Abraham second inaugural address, you need a banner. Milbank can be reached at dan Judith Mundy Burns President and Publisher Richard S. Whiting Executive Editor R. Frank Mundy 1915-1982 Eleanor M.

Mundy 1917-1998 William A. Collins Editorial Editor Viewpoints 7A June 27, 2011 MONDAY The First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. SyndicATEd coLumniST DANA MILBANK GuEST ViEW NICK THOMAS.