39.

Despite popular belief, there are many more ways to reduce the deficit other than cutting taxes for the wealthy, eliminating any form of welfare, cutting education spending, treating large corporations more like people than the people who elected you, and using $2000 of your party's money at some shady bondage club! Yeah, I said it! As evil as it may be, technology, or rather the use of technology, may actually - in addition to being better for the world in general - save us money. Now, I realize that for some readers I have already crossed the line and entered into the realm of "beyond offensive" but just hear me out.

The Congressional Budget Office just recently announced that the proposed "climate bill" would reduce the national deficit by $19 billion dollars (that's $19,000,000,000)! It may be that what the CBO says is only true and nonpartisan when certain members of our legislative body deem it so, but let's use that long lost skill of imagination and common sense and examine the oh-so-unlikely possibility that they may know what they're talking about.

Those who oppose the bill do so because "we aren't ready" and because they don't want to increase the deficit. Now that it has surfaced that this bill not only won't increase the deficit, but will actually decrease it, that eliminates the main problem. Despite this, I know that before voting time, during the drawn out filibustering process that will likely reduce the bill to something that gives people in Suffolk County Massachusetts an extra cent for recycled aluminum cans, every single person opposed to the bill will without flinching say that they are opposed to the bill because it will increase our "crippling deficit." Yep, they will straight up lie about it. And to make matters worse, half of their constituents will believe them because their beloved senator or representative would never ever tell a lie!

As far as the "we aren't ready" part of the argument, we'll never ever be "ready" for anything different by their arguments. Using a super secret decoder ring I found in a box of Cracker Jacks, I have discovered that "we aren't ready" actually means "I fear I may not get re-elected. A tragedy that would spoil my long-lived period of personal political gain without interest in the well being of the people I represent. I also fear that the oil companies that, more or less, bought my seven homes and pay for my campaigns may be upset by such an action." It is also likely that the religion of those opposed would disapprove of such a narrow-minded vote because, obviously, the fact that there is oil (placed there by divine powers) means that we are morally obligated to drill it.

If we leave out all of the political and monetary issues related to the debate, we are left with the benefits any such bill would bring to the environment. If anyone tries to argue that reducing emissions of poisonous gasses into our atmosphere is a bad thing, then they should try running their car in a closed garage; I'm sure that would change their mind. Now, I'm in no way wishing harm upon anyone, but those same noxious fumes that a car emits in a closed garage are emitted in the open air. Coal, oil and - to some extent - natural gas power plants all produce these gasses that result from combustion. In places like Los Angeles, the dense smog is evidence of such gases and chemicals in the air, but even when they can't be seen they are still there. The amount of these gases in our environment will continue to increase as long as we are allowing them to spew into the air and even if we stop, what we have already put there will not just go away. Is it not possible that it may be less costly to prevent further damage than to repair it later? And that is assuming we will even be able to repair it. Wake up people! Your re-election is not the most important thing to the world. One day you'll be dead and gone and everyone else will be left to clean up your mess.