Yeah, the Communist allusion occurred to me as well. Then again, we're nationalizing everything and redistributing on the basis of "to each according to his needs..." so why not.

well I for one need a a crap load of money, I've never even made enough money to screw up a big car loan let alone a house mortgage, hell when will it be my turn, were is the fairness, I do have a little practice with a couple hundred dollar credit cards I managed to turn into 4,000$ Worth of dept with the aid of late charges, shit I new paying them back and going through credit counseling was a mistake, so wtf hook a brother up? I need!!!!!

It looks centrist, and practical, to me.

(I'd say "pragmatic" but I remember that is a bad word at OTB)

From the idiocy of the Gramm-Rudman attempts to rein in the deficit by abandoning Congress's role in actually making decisions on what to spend on and which proved easy to get around (as anyone else would have predicted), to his frequent declarations that Clinton's 1993 budget was going to kill the economy, to his repeal of Glass-Steagel, he has been consistently wrong, and his failures have been consistently ignored by the so-called liberal media. If McCain had won last fall, this is the record of accomplishment we would have had with our new Treasury Secretary, with a free hand under a President who admitted to knowing nothing about economics. Bleah!

If I was handed the pen to draft an amendment, I would look more towards capping the percentage of Americans who could receive government assistance to 25% and that 75% have to pay taxes. This would help keep the 'bread and circuses' to a minimum.

Or as an alternative, change how we elect senators again, but this time make it based on federal tax dollars paid (with a minimum of 1 for everyone). The would have brought a screeching halt to the stimulus bill.