Is it worth writing to our Congressional Representative Roscoe Bartlett about an issue that concerns you? I am furious that my credit card company has been attempting to add charges to my card for payment protection, which I don't need and never signed up for. Don't even have a balance on that card. I have to catch them making the charge and call them to make them stop it. Don't know if I can get back the money they illegally charged me. I've heard that there are congressional hearings on predatory credit card practices and I'd like to add my input. I think that's a legit subject to refer to my representative.

However, I've never heard that Bartlett ever gave a **** about his constituents and mostly concentrates on lining his pockets from the drug companies and trying to ensure that his son gets his job when he retires. Other locals have told me that he never even bothered to answer letters from them about issues that concerned them.

Otherwise, I guess I should write to a Senator Mikulski, because, honestly, I never signed up for these charges and the credit card companies are getting out of hand. I think that Senator Midulski does care.

I haven't heard anyone talk about Bartlett's committment to his constituents in Washington County. Maybe I've gotten wrong information.

It's worth shot, val. But before you mess around with Bartlett, close that card and make it clear to them why you did it. Send them a letter by certified mail, including the remains any cut up cards on the account, to close it. You can also call them if you want to go off on somebody, but send the letter to make it official.

There's just too much competition with credit card deals to screw around with companies pulling this crap.

Depending on what company it is, you should be able to call the Card company and just tell them to cancel the "service". To me it sounds like you have just been asking them to take the charge off. Tell them rather forcefully that you want this service cancelled immediately due to the fact that you never authorized the service. If they get pissy, and some do, ask them when it was authorized, and by who (or should that be by whom?). Most of the bigger companies will gladly take it off of your account and refund any "premiums" you were charged if you threaten to close your account. As SMan said, there is much competition out there.

I'm sure neither Bartlett nor Barbie will intervene on your behalf.

But if you insist, Barbie is your better choice.

If I were in the representative's shoes, I would not intervene on your behalf unless you could prove you dilligently tried to get them to stop the charges on your own and they refused. They do not have the time to be a secretary for every constituent.

I agree that a call to the card company, asking to speak to a supervisor, should get the charges stopped and any payments refunded unless they can prove you signed-up. Perhaps an overzealous employee, trying to get a bonus, signed you up w/o your permission. It happens. Give them a chance to fix it.

Now, if they do not fix it, or you want to comment on pending legislation, etc. then call or write both Bartlett and Mikulski and see for yourself who replies and who doesn't.

I certainly would not expect any legislator to intervene in my behalf for such a trivial issue. I can handle the credit card company, although I really hate to yell at the telemarketers; it makes me feel guilty. I just want to know that someone in Congress cares about their practices. To me. it is part of the "Enron syndrome." Do what you want as long as you can get away with it.

I do remember the ads that were on local TV during the Medicare drug bill debate. There was Roscoe with that creepy Art Linkletter and the voiceover said "Call Representative Bartlett and thank him for your support of this bill." Actually, Bartlett added the clause to the bill that forbade any negotiation on prices for the Medicare recipients. It took only a minute on the Internet to find out that the sponsor of that bill was a fictitious senior organization that was supported by Pharma. This was reported in the Frederick newspaper, but not the Herald Mail. That had to be worth a lot of big bucks to the pharmacy lobby.

I don't owe the credit card companies enough to make it worthwhile; it just annoys me that I constantly have to watch them and yell at their poor telemarketers.

No. I wrote to him expressing my oppostion to the policy of kicking people out of the army for being gay. I got a letter back from his office thanking me for *agreeing* with him on the issue (he approves of kicking them out). So he didn't read it, nor did his staff.

Actually many credit advisors nowadays do not advise closing accounts, especially if there is no yearly fee and the card's payment history is good. Just pay it off and then don't use it. The reason is that it could help pull your credit score up while a canceled card could pull it down depending on the credit rating company used.

You could still cut off the account number and the magnetic strip and mail them the rest. That would really drive them nuts.

Thanks for the input, Pops.

Actually, I wasn't very clear about giving my input to my representative in Congress. There have recently been hearings in Congress about predatory practices of the credit card companies, and I wanted to have my say. For example, I get blank checks every month for use as cash or balance transfer, which I have to shred. I have discussed this with friends. First of all, the balance transfers often involve a very high transfer fee and often have a time limit on the interest rate that is not obvious. In addition, another friend told me that if you have only one late payment on that account, the interest rate can immediately bounce up to at least 24%. It is hard to find that out until you have been suckered into the deal.

It's like the gift cards that companies were marketing. Until they were exposed. People did not realize that the value of the card decreased every month. For example, for a $50 card in December, in January decreased by $10, and by $10 every month until it was worth nothing.

You Washington County conservatives, if you read your history, Adam Smith's theory of the free market was predicated on the definiton of "men of good will." Until there are no Enrons, Bernie Ebbers, Tyco Labs, ect,.I am not unhappy to have someone slap them on the wrist from time to time.

valentine, you can call your credit card issuers and request they not send you those "courtesy" checks; as well as opting out of any other "offers" that they may send you.

and while I knew the gift cards devalued over a period of time, that time doesn't start for most cards until about after 18 months after the gift card was issued. and the devaluation was generally about 1.5% per month. Which for a $50 card would be $0.75 per month.

I can't say whether he'd give the likes of you the time of day, but an old friend at the church I used to go to used to meet with Congressman Bartlett from time to time to discusss various issues, and it's not like he was really anybody of any special significance. So I can tell you that he does listen to at least some of his constituents.

Yes!

*News : New Candidate Announces a Run against Roscoe Bartlett
Posted by sabraham on 2005/11/17 12:47:43 (45 reads)
FREDERICK, MD- The congressional race is heating up in Maryland, as a new candidate announces his bid for a seat in Maryland’s 6th district.

With his supporters gathered around, democratic candidate Barry Kissin announced he's running against Roscoe Bartlett.

He spoke about his plans to get the public more involved in government affairs and he even shared his views on Bartlett.

“The administration is so unpopular that people are afraid to open their minds on alternative. As I said Roscoe is an extreme example of a politician in favor of his administration. This is the time for the American people and people of the sixth congressional district to embrace a real alternative,” said Barry Kissin.

If elected, this would be Kissin's first major political victory.

Reported by Amie McLain
amclain@nbc25.com

By the way, here's Kissinger's Website.

Until and unless Roscoe Bartlett decides to retire, nobody else has a snowball's chance in hell of unseating him. In my humble opinion.

This Barry Kissin guy sounds like a real tool. See above.. hasn't got the slightest chance... he's just wasting his time and ours.

Have you heard him speak? He's full of passion and emotion. This Barry Kissin guy is the type we need in office more than ever right now. He's not hypocritical and full of lies and deceit like most politicians and he'd work for us citizens instead of big business and special interests. Come to the Java Bean Coffee Bar at 57 Eastern Blvd (the Center at Antietam just off Dual Hwy) in Hagerstown Sunday between 1 and 3pm.
Please stop putting this Barry Kissin guy down. He's the type we desperately need.

I read his announcement speech. It was awesome. Is the primary over? did he beat Duck? That's the only reason I was holding off on a contribution.

No way. It's Roscoe Bartlett or nobody for me. IMO we should get rid of most of the so-called "Republicans" out there, but Roscoe B is THE MAN.

Oh yeah, Sunday 08/20/06 Kissin will be at the Java bean Coffee Bar between 1pm and 3pm.
Thats in the Center at Antietam Creek plaza, 57 Eastern Blvd just off Dual Hwy in Hagerstown.
301-665-3874.

Your contribution might just help him beat the Quacker. Anyway, don't hold off voting in the primary election September 12th.

Not to worry: I won't.

I will not vote for Roscoe simply because he thinks internet gambling is funding terrorists! i wrote and asked him what was wrong with someone betting on poker from their home and I got a rambling reply back that internet gambling is used as a front for money laundering and terrorism. Unless he can show me (which he cant) where that money is being used to fund terror or gangsters I will take it that Roscoe is infringing on my rights as a citizen

Internet gambling is doing a lot more things than funding terrorism and in more cases IMO, organized crime as history has shown us regular gamlbing does, and unless I am mistaken, most if not all internet gambling is also already illegal. IMO just as with illegal drugs, they should prosecute the users as well as the "dealers", to the fullest extent of the law. Please let's not turn this into a debate about gambling. We've already debated it and everyone knows my strong stance and it's not the subject of this thread.

Sure, you're going to oppose Roscoe B if you favor any particular illegal or immoral, self-destructive or socially-destructive activity. But that's why I will vote for him before any other politician out there. He's the only one I have ever heard of who is so consistent in his support of all moral and right causes. Even he's probably not perfect, but he's the closest thing to it that I have ever seen.

Your right. Dont let me derail your topic. I am for less government involvement in my life. Those people that need someone to intrude on what you do in the privacy of your home should all line up and vote for roscoe and his kind. Personally I have enough of a moral compass that I dont need roscoe to tell me whats right or wrong

Regardless of what his opponent may believe and vote for?

I have yet to find a politicain who agrees with all my stances, and sometimes it comes to the lesser of 2 evils, but lesser of the two evils is better than the greater, right?

you are correct. it all boils down to the lesser of 2 evils. and NO I wouldnt vote for Hitler just because Roscoe and I dont see eye to eye on 1 subject. I start to get leery of anyone who has been in office long enough to make them a career politician. Although change comes sloooowly here in Washco eventually a fresh face is needed

The people of Iraq sure know a lot about “socially destructive activity”. I don’t believe the war in Iraq is a “moral and right cause” especially when you consider how the American people, the Congress and the world were lied to and deceived to gain their support. Mr. Barlett has supported this administration and all it’s war making activities. By the way, the war is not only immoral it’s illegal international law. Mr. Bartlett voted to authorize military force in Iraq and has fully supported the administration’s expansion of the military-industrial-intelligence complex. He has supported the administration in all of its budget proposals and has never questioned appropriating more and more money for the military. Major campaign contributors to Mr. Bartlett include all of the nation’s largest defense contractors (those who profit most from the many wars the US is fighting and instigating). Including Bechtel, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC).
We shouldn’t vote for any politician advocating continuing the war in Iraq.

Advocationg a vote for or against any politician based on a single issue is just as stupid as trying to change the minds of the Islamic fundamentalists by any means except by killing them all.

Ok, then let me throw out a hypothetical situation for you Looky. Let's say you agree with every stance that a particular local Hagerstown politican has, except for one, where she/he supports raising city taxes. Would you vote for him/her? Afterall, it is just one single issue you'd have a problem with.

[quote name='latebloomer' post='64747' date='Aug 22 2006, 08:20 PM'][quote name='BMIC' post='64359' date='Aug 20 2006, 11:05 AM']
I don’t believe the war in Iraq is a “moral and right cause” especially when you consider how the American people, the Congress and the world were lied to and deceived to gain their support.

By the way, the war is not only immoral it’s illegal international law.

We shouldn’t vote for any politician advocating continuing the war in Iraq.[/quote]
Do tell -- who lied? What law was broken?

I'm surprised anyone is still asking those questions.

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/i...finalreport.pdf

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6917.htm

Forgive me, I haven't taken the time to read ALL the replies to your question and I don't know the answer to your credit card problem. I have dealt with Congressman Bartlett though. I've dealt with his staff and he personally. I have always found them responsive. Such issues will likely be addressed by a staffer rather than the congressman of course. Whether or not they can actually help... who knows?

As for those who've been dissatisfied with responses... Typically this is the result of the inquiry rather than the response. Citizens too frequently ask representatives to address something out of their realm. When the desired answer doesn't come it's the representative's fault!

Don't beat me up too bad, I'm only speaking in general terms not specifics. I'm not defending Bartlett or anyone else. Simply speaking from experience.

Aldo:

When I wrote that post, I had been looking in on CSpan at some Congressional hearings on the "predatory" practices of some credit card issuers. It was not my imagination.

However, on the subject of Roscoe Bartlett, I remember reading in the Frederick Post during the turbulent passage of the Medicare drug bill that he and a crony from West Texas sponsored an amendment that forbade the US government from negotiating drug prices. After that, we got a deluge of ads on the local TV station sponsored by an PHarma affiliated organization praising Bartlett and showing him walking around, hand in hand, with Art Linkletter, urging seniors to thank him for his care and support. Honestly, I read it in the Frederick paper.

I have no interest in this subject anymore: Washington County will get the representation they deserve.

On Barry Kissin's website kissinforcongress.com it says............

CONGRESSMAN BARTLETT has scored 22% on health issues as rated by the American Public Health Association (APHA). This indicates an anti-public health voting record. APHA is the oldest and largest organization of public health professionals in the world, representing more than 50,000 members from over 50 occupations of public health. APHA is concerned with a broad set of issues affecting personal and environmental health, including federal and state funding for health programs, pollution control, programs and policies related to chronic and infectious diseases, a smoke-free society, and professional education in public health.

Kissin is for.......

Establish a single-payer American national health insurance program.
Expand and improve the current Medicare program to apply to all U.S. residents.
Provide all Americans with access to the highest quality and most cost-effective health care, regardless of one's employment, income, or health care status.
Save over $150 billion on paperwork, and $50 billion by using rational bulk purchasing of medications.
Cover all medically necessary services, including preventive care, inpatient care, outpatient care, emergency care, prescription drugs, durable medical equipment, long term care, mental health services, dentistry, eye care, chiropractic, and substance abuse treatment.
Provide patients with their choice of physicians, providers, hospitals, clinics, and practices.

It would have been helpful if he would have explained how he was going to pay for this.

Massive taxes or major cuts in other areas is the only way.

Maybe it is just me, but I don't want the giovernment in charge of healthcare. They screw up enough stuff as it is.

Here's the source. I don't understand most of it but..............

United States National Health Insurance Act (HR676), sponsored by Democratic Congressman John Conyers
http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676_2.htm

Cost Containment Provisions/ Reimbursement
The National USNHI program will set reimbursement rates annually for physicians, allow for "global budgets" (annual lump sums for operating expenses) for health care providers; and negotiate prescription drug prices. The national office will provide an annual lump sum allotment to each existing Medicare region; each region will administer the program.

The conversion to a not-for-profit health care system will take place over a 15 year period. U.S. treasury bonds will be sold to compensate investor-owned providers for the actual appraised value of converted facilities used in the delivery of care; payment will not be made for loss of business profits. Health insurance companies could be sub-contracted out to handle reimbursements.
Back


Proposed Funding For USNHI Program:
Maintaining current federal and state funding of existing health care programs. A modest payroll tax on all employers of 3.3%. A 5% health tax on the top 5% of income earners. A small tax on stock and bond transfers. Closing corporate tax loop-holes, repealing the Bush tax cut.

Thanks for the info lb. The more I've learned about Kissin, the more I like him and I'll tell you why.

#1. At least he says how he's going to pay for something. I haven't seen much of that on the fed level in the last 6 yrs. You can complain if you want about the tax increase but I'm curious if the top 5% or employers will complain. As a retired but former employer my guess is they'll gladly take a 3.3% tax to get out of the insurance business.

#2. Bartlett has a 14 year record. Go to congress.gov and you can read all the legislation he's proposed during that period. Show me something he's tried to do for regular people. He recycles the same old ideas every year.

#3. He lost all respect from me when in the run-up to the 04 election he co-sponsored an anti-same-sex-marraige bill. My disgust had nothing to do with gay marriage, but the fact that the bill itself tried to circumvent the constitution and prohibit the supreme court from ruling on it. It was simply an election year stunt to embarrass house democrats. The senate never even brought it up for a vote.

I'm no democrat but we need somebody to represent us who will be more than a yes man to their party. I think Kissin will. He's doing amazingly well when you consider that the democratic party isn't giving him much help.

All that adds up to a massive tax increase.



That is not Kissin's idea.




I'll agree with that.



I thought Congess made the laws, not the Supreme Court.

Valentine

Perhaps you misunderstood my response. I have no doubt your concern is genuine. I was merely answering your question if - is it worthwhile writing to Congressman Bartlett? That answer is simply YES. Whether your particular issue is within the arena of congressional help, I simply do not know.

I do fully agree with your assessment of Washington County getting the representation it deserves though. Been involved in enough politics to be soured on the whole process. Locally it's basically a popularity contest. I know folks who actually vote based on who has the most yard signs out! For others it's name recognition. Don't even have to be related to the name they recognize. Neither is this my imagination, been there and seen it first hand.

Good luck with your inquiry.

US Constitution, Article III section 2:



Congress can make all the laws they want. The SC decides if they remain law or not.

Yeah, that Bush tax cut has just ruined the economy -- and corporations don't pay any taxes...


US Treasury Sets New 1-Day Tax Receipt Record Of $85.8 Billion
Tuesday September 19th, 2006 / 0h04

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. government recorded record-high overall and corporate tax receipts on Sept. 15, which was a quarterly deadline for tax payments, the Treasury said Monday.
Total tax receipts were $85.8 billion on Friday, compared with the previous one-day record of $71 billion on Sept. 15 of last year, the Treasury said.
Within the overall figure, corporate tax receipts Friday were $71.8 billion, up from $63 billion in September of last year.
Treasury Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Randal Quarles said Friday's numbers provided a "continuing demonstration of the strength of the U.S. economy."
"In fact, Friday's gross receipts were the largest in a single day in the nation's history - 20% higher than receipts on the same quarterly tax payment date last year," Quarles said in a statement.

3 reasons Roscoe must go.


1) NO to stem cell research
2) NO to same sex marriage
3) NO to online internet gambling

These are my reasons for a change in leadership. I am a rep. who won't be voting for good old Roscoe!

Hrm, those are three of the reasons I think he should stay.

Well there you go. you and Roscoe will get along fine.

stem cell= if it can come up with cures that will save millions of lives I'm for it!

same sex= what do I care if 2 people want to be married or partners? Its none of my business. the only people that this scares are people who have a problem with gays. I don't couldn't care less.

Internet gaming= Roscoes excuse to me was. "It might be funding terror" Ok, heres where I draw the line!
If me losing $11 is going to fund al-queda then show me how? Wheres the proof? Roscoe or anyone else cant come up with hard proof that this is happening. If they are scared thats the case then regulate it! I'll kcik in an extra quarter a haqnd if it means the govt. wont be kicking my door in at 3am siezing my computer and locking me up for playing dollar a hand poker! we can't find Osama but we can devote time and money into tracking down Joe the postman and prosecuting him for playing poker in his own house?
RIDICULOUS! We have to have bigger fish to fry

I couldn't agree more with all three and up until a year ago I was a rep myself.

1. Stem cell research--if it is going to have a benefit (read $$$) private companies will fork up the dough to find a way to use them. Ps. they already are!! So, why should the public funds go to something the public is not for?

2. Same sex this year, next year polygamy..how about bestiality? Some stupid woman in England "married" a dolphin...He Understood her I guess..where does it end?

3. Internet gambling--why do we need more gambling sites? The old ladies already sit at Weis Markets and block the exit playing the numbers...

I do not agree with every position Roscoe takes. Who knows a politician they agre with 100%???

Every vote is, to one degree or another, the lesser of 2 evils.

I've visited Roscoe's opponent's (Duck's) website and I saw enough to say Roscoe will get my vote. Duck provides little detail, but what he says is he wants to:

* Close the "gun show loophole" (that doesn't really exist) and "register weapons" -- so he proposes anti-gun laws while pretending to be pro-gun. Wonder if he'll be like Kerry and go hunting with a horde of cameras around soon...

* Proposes universal healthcare in a utopian-like plan. UGH!

He hints at other positions he has w/o actually stating them, but if you can read between the lines you'll get the gist of it.

Universal Healthcare? Oh boy, that will be as effective as the EPA's weaning us off of oil.

Gun control loophole? So then only those that do not obey anyway will have all the guns..can anyone say New Orleans after Katrina??

Andrew Duck's position from his website.

On Gun OwnershipAmericn citizens should have a right to own Firearms unless they are a criminal or mentally unstable.

Gun ownership is a tradition in the United States, a tradition supported by the Constitution. While we do have a problem with gun violence in this country, we should not restrict individual rights of people who have not done anything wrong. We should focus on finding solutions to violence, not by restricting individual rights.


We should take practical steps to reduce gun violence. We should:

Close the Gun Show loophole to make sure criminals do not gain access to weapons.
Provide Universal Access to Health Care, to include Mental Health Care.
Register weapons, as provided by Maryland law, to provide law enforcement with the information they need to track weapons used in crime.
Focus effective law enforcement on violent criminals.
Support aggressive anti-gang policies.

But we should not restrict the rights of people who have done nothing wrong. Some people want to focus on gun ownership for the purpose of hunting. Hunting is an important part of the cultural tradition in Western Maryland, and even an important food source for some families. But hunting is not the only reason for gun ownership. Some people own firearms for self-defense or even just as collectors.


I have spent 20 years in the military, and have experience with firearms. I can appreciate the quality of a good firearm. I understand what it means to have the right amount of trigger pull, not too soft and mushy, but not so stiff as to cause the weapon to jerk. I understand the appreciation for a weapon that fits the hand just right, and is perfectly balanced. Gun collectors appreciate firearms in the same way some people collect art, or baseball cards, or fine automobiles. It is more than just firearms for hunting purposes, some people collect firearms for their own sake.


I know many people who collect firearms of all sorts. I cannot support going to my friends and telling them we are going to restrict their hobby when they have done nothing wrong. We must deal with the real problem, and focus on violence and its causes.

Just in case some voters prefer the whole message and not the condensed version.

Maybe supporters of Roscoe Bartlett do support guns in the hands of criminals and those with a history of mental illness.

seems like a reasonable and intelligent proposal. I tend to agree with most of what he says. I'm sure old roscoe is a nice guy I just don't agree on several key issues and they are big ones in my book. i'll have to read up on Duck some more.

Mil, any idea on his stem cell research stance?