I pretty much agree with your post.
I just find it disturbing that, in a time where we really do need to begin making an attempt to constrain spending (we don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem) the put an ideological, financially dim-witted person like her in a position like that.
” ...they put an ideological, financially dim-witted person like her in a position like that.”
The RATs unlike the R’s, have a much more rigid seniority system. It’s based on age and power base. Waters is dim-witted, but it’s “her turn” to run Financial Services and she has a well of hatred rather than some good ideas that would help our country. So it will be interesting to see her pi$$ing up a rope for two years, because this inane idea that the RATs are going to actually accomplish something is laughable.