Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, definitions:

• "Inane: Absurd, banal, foolish, frivolous, insipid, pointless, silly, trite, vapid."
• "Asylum: A sanctuary, as a temple, where criminals, debtors, etc., are safe from arrest; an institution for the care of the mentally ill, or the aged, the poor, etc.…"

(Although this column was written pre-election, we believe it requires publication)

On this election eve, let's approach Congress, whom we "affectionately" label "The Inane Asylum^TM," on a "What if?" basis.

We have been taught by the experts (moms, dads, teachers) that we should never revert to the "would have, should have, could have" syndrome. In other words, whatever we did, whatever has happened, is real and factual. We can't go backwards. Although President Bush has consistently said, when the many occasions have arisen - "I don't want to play the blame game" - it's not a question of blame, but a question of fixing responsibility for actions. And so, let's indulge ourselves in the "What if?" game with Congress with the view that perhaps something can be accomplished in the future.

• What if: Both prior to and immediately after President Bush received his mandate from Congress to wage war in Iraq, Congress had not marched lockstep with President Bush, but had honestly and energetically reviewed the forthcoming war decision? When it was revealed that there were no WMD's (weapons of mass destruction), a Congressional inquiry should have, at least, reviewed the steps that President Bush took to ascertain that Iraq truly was a current threat to our security. Subsequently, Congress should have taken into account the changing reasons for President Bush's intrusion into Iraq - he wanted to bring democracy to Iraq; Iraq was a threat to peace and a perpetrator of terrorism; and Iraq had mobile units capable of chemical warfare. The Inane Asylum's inhabitants would have discovered that President Bush's continuing reasons for invading Iraq were similar to the actions of the pigs in George Orwell's "Animal Farm," when they imposed their new "edicts" on the wall of the barn.

• What if: Congress had honestly and effectively "oversighted" the cost of war and reconstruction in Iraq? Had they investigated the overcharges by Halliburton and other major contractors, they could have not only saved the American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars but could have taken effective measures to ensure that the contracts provided goods and services that were without deficiencies and faults. The buck has to stop someplace, and it should have been the oversight committees of Congress.

• What if: Congress had realized that a comprehensive energy program and policy were necessary and legislated such a program, even if it was vetoed by Mr. Bush? President Bush has decided that a comprehensive energy policy is not necessary in spite of the fact that a major cost of any developed nation doing business is energy - oil to us - and that the United States was and continues to be at the mercy of the oil-producing nations, primarily the countries of OPEC.

• What if: Congress had recognized that the President was giving lip service to allegedly protecting the environment when he was actually reducing the commitment to cleaner air and water? Even China has done more than the United States to both recognize this phenomena and take effective measures to correct its pollution activity. Congress, in its dysfunctional state, failed the American public by not taking the measures necessary to safeguard our country, now and for future generations. An effective Inane Asylum would have taken strong measures to goad the Bush administration into action, or, at least, bring to the public's attention that the environment was not being adequately protected.

• What if: Congress acted upon the need to provide adequate healthcare to all of its citizens? Not doing so exacerbates taxpayer healthcare costs in many ways, including paying for the costs of those not covered. Congress should have imposed upon the Bush administration the necessity to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to provide drugs at a reasonable rate to those many Medicare recipients who cannot afford to pay for drugs, even a measured amount.

• What if: Congress honestly and effectively considered the immigration issue? This issue will not vanish, even with a wall. Recognizing reality and the facts, Congress should have dealt with the issue in an honest, mature and accountable manner. Again, partisan ideologies have held sway. Most illegal immigrants are honest, hardworking people who sought our country's opportunities to earn an honest day's wage and attend to their families' needs.

• What if: Congresspersons attended to the needs of their constituents rather than their own needs? Not at any time in our history has this been more evident than in today's environment of corruption and selfdealing in Congress. The Abramoff scandal and revelations are just the tips of the icebergs that permeate the workings of Congress. Merely a visit to 101 Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., will reveal the workings of special groups and their lobbyists. This simply stinks!

• What if: Congress "honestly" was concerned with purging itself of unethical conduct? Its fox-in-the-hen-house approach and conclusion that it can police "its own house" and set up appropriate policies for ethical conduct is, as we say in the law, Caca-Poopoos. It just doesn't work; it won't work; it will never work. Their denial of a serious ethical problem and defeating a measure to have an independent organization monitor their ethical behavior are without merit.

• What if: All the above happened? Would we be in a better position to deal with Iran and Korea knowing that our military was intact and not depleted? Would we be able to have provided billions of dollars to further our education values and systems? Would we have been able to provide adequate medical assistance to those in need who are not being given adequate services today? Would we have been able to have reduce our tremendous deficit and provide for the future? Would we have been able to provide additional jobs and economic benefits to those who need them? Would we have been able to begin rebuilding our nation's crumbling, outdated infrastructure - highways, bridges and other structures? Would we be a less polarized nation, as well as a healthier one?

Maybe not, but even some of the above actions that could have been taken would have been much better than the actions that were not taken.

Truly Congress has lived up to its name and reputation of being the Inane Asylum^TM.