February 3, 2009
Feb 03 09:22 Never Send a Political Hack to Defend The Indefensible Feb 03 11:25 Are Tax Cheats Prefered By Obama Administration? Feb 03 12:18 BREAKING NEWS: Daschle Withdraws Feb 03 16:31 The Party Unites, The Movement Starts Rebuilding Feb 03 23:06 Pence: Signing Off on Liberal Wish List Won't Create Jobs
Prior Months: Jan
Never Send a Political Hack to Defend The Indefensible
Based on Bob Shrum's this article , it's obvious that he's clueless on what's happening outside the Beltway's echochamber. Here's the opening to his article:
So after all the bipartisan ambience generated by the White House, the stimulus package passed the House of Representatives without a single Republican vote. The President says he'll win over some Republicans in the Senate, but Arizona Republican John Kyl claims GOP support there is already "eroding."Mr. Shrum is intellectually insulting. Let's go through his misstatements one at a time, starting with this:
They won't admit it, but like the de facto leader of their party, Rush Limbaugh, Republicans want the President to "fail." Their arguments, if one can dignify them as such, are by turns petty, dishonest or ignorant, ahistorical and ugly.
The pettiest point was their complaint about the modest funding for birth control in the original version of the House stimulus bill. Heaven forbid, or at least Pat Robertson does, that the poor would have access to family planning. So at the President's request, the provision was removed; the funding will come later in a different piece of legislation.
...like the de facto leader of their party, Rush Limbaugh, Republicans want the President to "fail."Republicans voted against the President's bill because it did precious little to create jobs. Most of the money in the House bill is pork, payoffs for political allies or money that's spent 3 years from now.
What Shrum and his mindless allies at the DCCC are advocating is spending $819 billion. A mere 25-30 percent of that $819 billion are tax cuts. Even the tax cuts aren't all tax cuts. They're checks to people who don't pay taxes. Let's remember that $4.2 billion is allocated to neighborhood stabilization projects that will be administered by ACORN and like-minded organizations.
Here's a list of things originally included in Ms. Pelosi's bill :
- $650 million for digital TV coupons .
- $6 billion for colleges/universities, many which have billion dollar endowments.
- $166 billion in direct aid to states, many of which have failed to budget wisely.
- $50 million in funding for the National Endowment of the Arts .
- $44 million for repairs to U.S. Department of Agriculture headquarters .
- $200 million for the National Mall, including grass planting .
- $400 million for "National Treasures."
HANNITY: Look. This is $1.2 trillion worth of debt.That's only part of what John Kasich said. Here's more:
KASICH: That's really unbelievable. Just think about that. Over a trillion dollars. We're gonna have a deficit of $1 trillion and we don't even know where the TARP bill is going. We don't know where this bill is going. Sean, this kind of debt means it's a claim on future income, which means higher taxes at some point. In the short term, it could mean higher interest rates & it can mean high inflation . Which means if you have any money that you've saved and didn't invest it, those dollars are going to be worth less. Sean, this is a disaster for families & for children .
KASICH: Sean, I would argue with the Democrats before this election that, if Obama doesn't seize the process, that Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and all these big spenders, these committee chairmen are just going to jam through everything that they've been salivating thinking about and it's precisely what's happened. Obama lost control of the process. This is a bill supposedly to get the economy going. You can't stick all of your stuff in this bill. And Sean, here's the worst thing: Using an economic crisis when people are afraid (CROSSTALK) And then they go "We'll jam all this in." It's an excuse to jam all their stuff in and Obama better take control of this process or we'll"There's literally pork in this bill for every major special interest group the Democrats have. There's money in this bill for ACORN, their voter fraud specialists. There's money in this bill for unions. There's money in this bill for the environmentalists. There's money in this bill for House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey's son :
A top House Republican is demanding an investigation into whether the more than $2 billion for national parks in the House stimulus package is proper in light of the fact that the chief lobbyist for the National Parks Conservation Association is the son of House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey.Does this sound like a bill that puts families first ? Or does it sound like a bill that puts the Democrats' special interest allies first?
NPCA is a major player in advocating for national parks funding, and its senior vice president for government affairs is Craig Obey, son of the Wisconsin Democrat who has long been his party's top Appropriations Committee member.
The money included in the stimulus bill that passed Mr. Obey's committee, $2.25 billion, was about equal to the National Park Service's total yearly budget, and would be a staggering increase and almost three times the $802 million that the Senate Appropriations Committee approved for park spending in its stimulus bill.
Here's something else that John Kasich told Hannity during their interview:
KASICH : When we were balancing the budget , and we did, and we paid down the largest amount of national debt in modern history , we had surpluses, trillions of dollars when our team left Washington. And you know what Sean, we made hard choices. They're making no hard choices . And rhetoric isn't going to get it done.John Kasich and Pete Domenici forced Bill Clinton into making some difficult decisions. I'm certain that they said no to lots of frivolous things. They couldn't have balanced the budget without first setting their priroities and without putting their foot down.
There's no reason people should have confidence in President Obama's economic team. Timothy Geithner doesn't walk on water. He wasn't even interested in watching the TARP money sent to NYC banks. Not surprisingly, much of the TARP money vanished.
Once and future presidential candidate Mitt Romney told the GOP House retreat that the size of the recovery package threatened to set off hyperinflation. Either he was intentionally deceptive or, like George W. Bush, he slept through economics classes at Harvard Business School. The danger now is not inflation, but a descent into deflation. An economy with a paralyzed private sector needs public spending to create demand, production, and jobs.If hundreds of billions dollars worth of extra pork are run through the system over the next 2-3 years, inflation will be high. It will have a dramatic negative effect on the economy. It won't happen immediately but it will happen:
KASICH: They're gonna end up with either higher inflation or higher interest rates, a slower economy and ultimately a tax increase because of this tremendous debt.Anytime I'm confronted with either believing John Kasich or Bob Shrum on economic policy matters, it's an easy choice. Bob Shrum has been a political hack for the Democratic Party since the Sixties. John Kasich actually balanced the budget 4 straight years.
Forgive me if I'd prefer skipping that multiple disaster question. According to one of the sharpest budgetary minds in our nation's history, passing this bill will either cause high inflation, high interest rates or be a drag on the economy. I'd rather see Republicans demand that the bill be rewritten to include things that will jumpstart our economy. John Kasich has the right prescription for that:
KASICH: Sean, look, the stimulus package, what they should do is, you've gotta cut taxes, give people an idea that they're gonna be permanent. It will change their behavior. It will give them an incentive to invest in the economy again . Some stimulus? Sure. Roads that are going to improve productivity in the country, not stuff like $60 million for new cars for the federal government.Taking money away from the job creators is foolishness. This bill doesn't increase taxes but it doesn't extend Bush's tax cuts for small businesses either. With a shaky banking system and the likelihood that the tax cuts that affect them most will soon incresae, why shouldn't small businesses be cautious?
Bob Shrum has been a loyal liberal attack dog for decades. He isn't unintelligent. He's just used to making foolish arguments and talking down to people. This article highlights both those habits. Whle Democrats defend the indefensible, support for the bill drops.
That's what happens when you trot out a political has-been to make unconvincing arguments for the stimulus bill.
The good news is that we have a number of great spokespeople arguing against it, starting with John Kasich. Anytime the face of the Democratic Party is Bob Shrum or Nancy Pelosi and the face of the Republican Party is John Kasich or Michael Steele is a good day for the GOP.
Thanks to the Mother of all Porkfests, the GOP looks poised for a run of good days.
Originally posted Tuesday, February 3, 2009, revised 14-May 1:44 PM
No comments.
Are Tax Cheats Prefered By Obama Administration?
After another Obama administration nominee has withdrawn her name from consideration because she failed to pay her taxes , my question is whether the vetters thought that cheating on your taxes was preferable. Another question I have is whether there's a different standard applied to high profile cabinet choices (like Timothy Geithner and Tom Daschle) than to lower profile cabinet nominees (like Nancy Killefer).
Nancy Killefer, who failed for a year and a half to pay employment taxes on household help, has withdrawn her candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for the federal government, the White House said Tuesday.Then President-Elect Obama talked about an administration that was long on personal responsibility, ethics and integrity. Instead of getting that, the Obama administration is becoming a haven of tax cheats. A sarcastic argument could be made that cheating on your taxes is a resume-enhancer with Obama's vetters.
Killefer was the second major Obama administration nominee to withdraw and the third to have tax problems complicate their nomination after President Barack Obama announced their selection.
The White House said Obama had accepted Killefer's decision and that the 55-year-old executive with consulting giant McKinsey & Co., would explain her reasons for pulling out later Tuesday.
When her selection was announced by Obama on Jan. 7, The Associated Press disclosed that in 2005 the District of Columbia government had filed a $946.69 tax lien on her home for failure to pay unemployment compensation tax on household help. Since then, administration officials have refused to answer questions about the tax error which she resolved five months after the lien was filed.
Remember Speaker-Elect Pelosi's claim that the 110th Congress would be the most open and most ethical Congress in history? That quickly vanished. President Obama's promise to run an ethical administration are quickly becoming as extinct as the passenger pigeon and Ms. Pelosi's promise to run an open, ethical congress.
Last night, Hannity interviewed Dick Morris. They talked about Mark McKinnon's column in which he said that every day that the current stimulus bill is out there for the public's examination, the more that legislation starts stinking "like a rotting corpse." That's certainly an accurate appraisal of the less-than-stimulating stimulus bill but it's an accurate appraisal of what happens each time President Obama nominates a tax cheat.
A couple of weeks ago, I said that President Obama would, for the first time in his life, be appraised on what he did, not on his blank slate of accomplishments and his image. Fairly or unfairly, he now owns the stimulus bill. It's fair that he owns the cabinet picks who didn't pay taxes until they were picked for a cabinet secretary's position or who short-circuited the pardons process to free terrorists.
If this continues much longer, people will question whether President Obama's image of being the first postpartisan president isn't just smoke and mirrors.
Posted Tuesday, February 3, 2009 11:28 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 03-Feb-09 11:50 AM
One has to wonder, based on the sample taken thus far, whether tax cheating is the norm for liberals? How can that be? Could it be that, offered the choice (or even if NOT offered the choice) liberals prefer lower taxes for themselves, and higher taxes for everybody else? There's a word for that...
BREAKING NEWS: Daschle Withdraws
According to this article , Tom Daschle has removed himself from consideration to be the next Secretary of HHS:
Tom Daschle is withdrawing his name from consideration to head HHS, saying he does not want to be a distraction.This storyline had started to dominate the news. After Nancy Killefer withdrew her name from consideration for tax issues, it became apparent that President Obama wanted to rid himself of this storyline. Unfortunately for him, with Tim Geithner still being the Treasury Secretary, there will always be a constant reminder that President Obama nominated people with tax problems.
"If 30 years of exposure to the challenges inherent in our system has taught me anything, it has taught me that this work will require a leader who can operate with the full faith of Congress and the American people, and without distraction. Right now, I am not that leader," Daschle says in a statement just issued by the White House.
President Obama says in the statement that Daschle "made a mistake, which he has openly acknowledged. He has not excused it, nor do I. But that mistake, and this decision, cannot diminish the many contributions Tom has made to this country."
Yesterday, I said that Sen. Daschle wasn't the only man on the planet who could fix our health care system . It's my opinion that the private sector has already done more to reduce health care costs than Sen. Daschle was likely to accomplish as Secretary of HHS.
With Sen. Daschle's withdrawal now in the rearview, the biggest remaining question about his fledgling administration is whether President Obama will call for a total rewrite of the stimulus bill.
Posted Tuesday, February 3, 2009 12:20 PM
No comments.
The Party Unites, The Movement Starts Rebuilding
It will take more than nicely-worded speeches and posts to rebuild the GOP and, more importantly, the conservative movement. Nonetheless, those things are important. This morning, I've read several posts, two on Redstate, another on The Next Right , that tell me that the grassroots are getting energized like they havent' been in years. Let's first examine Patrick Ruffini's post on The Next Right. This is the part that jumped out most at me:
It's true that a handful of bloggers, most of whom have worked in and around the conservative establishment, voiced concerns about Steele, while touting Blackwell. Blackwell had the support of most conservative "leaders" who endorsed, but finished last in the balloting, never cracking more than 20 votes.Hallelujah, the gatekeepers have been put in their place. It isn't that I'm interested in booting them from the party. It's that I think they must realize that politics are governed by a new paradigm. The message changes to fit the situation more than ever. That doesn't mean, however, that our principles change. Let me explain.
I think this highlights a very real disconnect between the leaders of the conservative establishment in D.C. and the conservative movement in the heartland. Rank-and-file Republican activists had no real problems with Steele, with his membership in the RLC belied by his strong pro-life stance running in midnight blue Maryland.
You can also say this divide was on display in last year's Presidential primary, when the conservative establishment failed to derail John McCain. In that case, I thought "the groups" were right but proved themselves ineffective by failing to attack McCain or coalescing around a single candidate when it could have made the difference.
One way of looking at Steele's victory is that it was a victory of the grassroots over the gatekeepers. Both the gatekeepers in the old guard of the RNC who supported Duncan and eventually Dawson. And also the gatekeepers in the conservative movement who supported Blackwell. Part of our role here at The Next Right, I think, is to look with skepticism at all who would fashion themselves as gatekeepers for the grassroots, in any wing of the party.
The message involves the issues that happen to be the most important to mainstream America. Our principles, however, remain steadfast. Effective, limited government isn't obsolete. In fact, I'd argue that that's needed now more than ever. I'd also argue that people are looking at the stimulus bill and realizing that pork-barrel spending can't be justified.
Likewise, people haven't grown tired of prosperity or personal liberty. One of the things that President Bush got right in foreign policy was that he knew that people everywhere loved freedom. Unfortunately, he didn't grasp that when putting domestic policies together. Had he done so, history would treat him better.
By definition, gatekeepers are status quo because they don't move. Grassroots activists, by definition, are energetic, movement-oriented people. We need to focus on the grassroots because Democrats are outworking us for votes. We need energetic, clear-thinking people to start rebuilding the party. Without the energy, all the great policies in the world won't help us. Everytime we've combined great policies with a re-invigorated base, we've won convincing victories.
Next, let's look at Ken Blackwell's post. I found this part of his post positively inspiring:
This election was a battle to see who can best unite these members, or at least 85 of them, to capture a majority of the votes in the short term. But in the long term, we need a plan that will rebuild the party by articulating conservative principles, inspiring our base, decentralizing authority, and building the technical infrastructure that will unite the millions of Republican voters behind a common goal of a conservative resurgence across the country.Ken Blackwell is exctly right in saying that "articulating conservative principles, inspiring our base, decentralizing authority, and building the technical infrastructure that will unite the millions of Republican voters behind a common goal..." is the key to rebuilding the party. He's especially right about the part about decentralizing authority and articulating conservative principles. Without those steps, there won't be an energized grassroots infrastructure.
Republican voters have spoken, at the ballot box, with their donations, through grassroots activities, and in online communication. We've all heard and echoed their message: let's get back to basics. Now we have someone on the national stage who can do something about it, including returning party operations to the state and local leadership, dominating technology in order to position us to win, and preparing for our toughest redistricting battle yet. Michael Steele has assured members of the conservative community that we will not only have a voice, but a place at the table as decisions directing the RNC are made. And I don't know about all of you, but I'm ready to be put back to work.
We've been run by top-down control freaks for far too long. It's what's killed the conservative movement's esprit de corps. When we've shared a common vision, there's been no consideration of taking our ball and going home. That's because we didn't want to let our cohorts down.
It's also invigorating to hear Mr. Blackwell say that he's "ready to be put back to work." Last Friday, I sent Chairman Steele a private message via Facebook, in which I said that I'm perfectly happy to be sent out onto the battlefield of ideas. I said that the only requirement I'd make was that he gave me enough intellectual ammunition to exploit the battlefield and win wars.
Finally, let's pay attention to Rep. Tom Price's post:
The Republican Party is at its best when its leadership has a bold vision and is rooted to conservative principles: personal responsibility, liberty, limited government, traditional values, providing for the common defense, and optimism about the future. But Republicans seem to have lost the ability to intelligently or ideologically define these principles and convey them to the American people.The things that Rep. Price outlined in his post should become the framework that conservatives build around. It's imperative that conservative elected officials stand fast for conservative principles. By doing that, these officials will send the signal that they're willing to fight for conservative principles.
Moreover, elected conservative leaders need to act immediately in order to facilitate the rebuilding of the Republican Party and reconnect it to the conservative movement.
Back to basics: The first step starts with a little bit of self-reflection and "re-learning" the core principles of conservatism. Only through understanding the past can our core principles be applied and developed into meaningful solutions to tackle the challenges facing America.
Party of Solutions: A new Republican platform of ideas and language must be created and championed, built on a foundation of conservative solutions. It will also need to be built from the ground up from fresh and innovative ideas.
Rebuild the party's infrastructure and coalitions: There must be a specific focus on nurturing the grassroots, shoring up ties with existing coalitions and leading thinkers, and creating new infrastructure to meet the challenges of politicking in a new century.
Hold Democrats accountable: This begins with a proactive and coordinated strategy between elected conservative leaders and outside allies. Americans need to be reminded on a daily basis that Democrats want to play politics and centralize power, raise taxes, cut defense spending, and undermine traditional values.
Go on offense, engage and educate: Yes, Virginia, someone in Washington is fighting for you. And when Republicans stay on offense and engage, then it garners attention and provides opportunities to educate every American on conservative solutions that work.
Look no further than the Energy Revolt on the floor of the House of Representatives this past August which gave Republicans a needed voice and identity.
Remain unified and disciplined: Hostile Democrat majorities and liberal special interests are more energized than they have been in decades. Without unity and discipline, the differences between the two parties become blurred, and conservatives have every right to question allegiance to Republicans.
Reclaim the American lexicon: Democrats have been successful in altering the mindset of what made this nation great through language and institutions. Once, Americans valued "responsibility," "self-determination," and "hard work." Now, these ideals have been replaced by fuzzy appeals to "diversity," "fairness," and "social justice." No longer can Republicans cede the language or institutions.
Broaden the appeal: Republicans win elections when they run on an across-the-board conservative solutions-based agenda.
However, the appeal must be broadened to acknowledge and embrace the
demographics in our country. Failure to do so will relegate the party to permanent minority status.
Earlier today, I read that quite a few Republican senators were afraid to challenge President Obama on a number of issues because he's very popular right now. That's wrong-headed thinking. House Republicans worried about doing the right thing about the stimulus bill. Because they stood fast, they put the Obama-Pelosi axis of instability on the defensive.
Popularity or unpopularity don't matter nearly as much as being right. When Democrats regained the majority, the anti-war activists demanded that Congress shut off funding the Iraq war. Democrats tried a slow bleed strategy. They tried redeploying to Okinawa. In the end, though, President Bush told Democrats that he'd trust Gen. Petraeus.
Anti-war activists that this would be a slam dunk. They had majorities in the House and Senate. They had lots of political capital. The media wrote that Pelosi's Democrats walked on water and that President Bush's low approval rights made this fight a done deal.
Because President Bush fought Congress to win the war, he was able to leave office with the war having been won. The moral of the story: It's more important to be right than it is to be popular.
The articulation of conservative principles matter. Steadfastness to conservative principles matters more. Picking the smartest fights on the most important issues is the most important thing.
Going on offense against Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi isn't difficult. I've said repeatedly that that duo is the most incompetent pair of leaders the House and Senate have had.
For that matter, it isn't that difficult to do battle with Obama propagandist Robert Gibbs. Here's Gibbs' gem from today's briefing:
Despite the tax problems faced by high-level nominees, and the exceptions made to the no-lobbyists pledge, President Barack Obama's spokesman is defending the administration's ethical standards. Robert Gibbs told reporters Tuesday, "The bar that we set is the highest that any administration in the country has ever set."The bar might've been set high but the bar has been ignored time after time after time. Who cares where the bar is set if the administration that made the rules ignores their own rules?
During a briefing filled with questions about Tom Daschle's decision to withdraw from consideration to be Health and Human Services secretary, Gibbs pointed to experts who describe the administration's ethics rules as the strongest in history.
That's why we keep fighting. That's why doing the right thing is important. If we follow our principles, we'll win these fights and, eventually, we'll win these wars.
Posted Tuesday, February 3, 2009 4:40 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 03-Feb-09 06:58 PM
Yes, standing on principle is important, even essential. But it does no good to be so stiff-necked on principle unless a) the legislation's bad vastly outweighs the good in it AND b) you are somehow able to communicate that to the voting public. This is politics, not the debate club, and certainly not scientific research where the truth will out. The truth must be PUT out, and ground out, and shouted out, in terms so simple that the average Obama voter can understand it. That might be even more difficult than sticking to principle.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Feb-09 10:42 PM
The current stimulus bill is god-awful. That's why President Obama's worst nightmare is seeing this bill pass with minimal GOP support.
I'm spending alot of time identifying the GOP's best spokespeople. Right now, the group includes Mike Pence, Michael Steele, Eric Cantor, Jeb Hensarling, Jim DeMint, Michele Bachmann, John Cornyn, Paul Ryan, Tom Price, Ken Blackwell & Kevin McCarthy amongst elected officials.
That's before we start talking about Newt, Fred Thompson & Mitt Romney. (Yes, I know Romney isn't a staunch conservative but he's a great spokesman on economic issues.) That's before we start talking about Gov. Palin, Gov. Jindal, John Kasich & Rob Portman.
We'll articulate our message quite effectively.
Pence: Signing Off on Liberal Wish List Won't Create Jobs
Mike Pence, chairman of the House Republican Conference, made this speech today on the House floor:
"Our nation is in a recession and millions of Americans are hurting. Many have lost their jobs and many more millions worry that they'll be next. It is absolutely right that our new President and this Congress take decisive action to stimulate this economy. But the legislation brought to the floor last week and legislation being considered on the Senate floor this week in the form of the Democrat stimulus bill is not the answer.President Obama's worst nightmare is getting this bill passed with a couple Republican votes in the Senate and no Republican votes in the House. I'm certain that President Obama understood that this bill was his last best attempt to stuff the bill with tons of payoffs to the Democrats' political allies. I think he now understands that that isn't happening anymore.
"Last week, House Republicans unanimously rejected the so-called stimulus bill that was brought to the floor by Democrat leadership and we urge our Senate colleagues to do likewise. House Republicans unanimously opposed the Democrat spending bill for a variety of reasons, but among them, first, the bill that Democrats brought to the House was not about stimulating this economy but more about stimulating government and debt. It included wasteful government spending that has nothing to do with creating jobs.
"As I asked on this floor last week, what does $50 million to the National Endowment for the Arts have to do with creating jobs in Indiana? What's $400 million for climate change research going to do to move people from the unemployment line to the factory line? In legislation before the Senate this week, $20 million for the removal of small to medium-sized fish passage barriers or $25 million to rehabilitate off-roading trails for ATVs is not going to put this economy back on track. And, it was exactly that kind of wasteful government spending that resulted in unanimous Republican opposition last week.
"Well, the average American is starting to catch on. We're starting to see support for this so-called stimulus bill eroding across the country and leading economists are catching on as well. And, as the Republican Leader said just moments ago, we oppose this bill unanimously not just for what was in it but for what wasn't in it. The Republicans have what we believe to be and what history proves is a better solution to get this economy moving again.
" Republicans proposed a broad range of fast-acting tax relief proposals that would bring immediate relief to working families and small businesses giving the American people and American families more of their hard-earned dollars to get this economy moving again. The bill that House Democrats brought to the floor last week was not then about stimulating the economy. Under the guise of stimulus, House Democrats brought a partisan bill to the floor. It was really more of a wish list of long-standing liberal priorities that have little to do with putting our economy back on its feet .
"Now, having originally promised that a stimulus bill would be temporary and targeted, House Democrats brought to the floor this week and the Senate is considering new legislation that is more about as the Speaker said, and I quote her with great respect, about 'taking America in a new direction.' Respectfully, Madam Speaker, I thought what we were doing is trying to pass a temporary stimulus bill that would create jobs, not reorder all of the priorities of the federal government along liberal democratic lines .
"The truth be told, not only are the American people catching on about this bill but many leading economists are. Some 300 economists recently published a full-page newspaper article, advertisement, rather, opposing this bill and conservative economist Martin Feldstein, who supported a fiscal stimulus bill, came out late last week describing the legislation that came before the House as, 'an $800 billion mistake.' Feldstein wrote, I believe in The Washington Post, quote, 'the problem with the current stimulus bill is not that it's too big but that it delivers too little extra employment and income for such a large fiscal deficit. It is worth taking the time to get it right.'
"House Republicans, leading economists and average Americans are opposing this so-called stimulus bill for one reason and one reason only: it won't work and it's a disservice to taxpayers.
"More big government spending on a liberal wish list of programs won't cure what ails the American economy. And House Republicans do have a better solution: fast-acting tax relief for working families and small businesses. And, according to analysis and economic models used by President Obama's own economic advisors, when those models are applied to our plan the results are clear: not the two million to three million jobs that the Democrat plan boasts it will create in the next several years but rather six million jobs would be created under the Republican proposal at half the cost. Twice the number of jobs at half the cost is a better solution. Let's put politics aside and do what's best for the American people."
If the bill passes with minimal Republican support, the American people will know that President Obama co-owns the bill with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. They'll also know that they'll be held responsible if the bill doesn't lift us out of this recession while creating jobs.
Rep. Pence has been one of the consistently conservative voices on Capitol Hill. He's taken on Speaker Pelosi on their stimulus bill because it's loaded with more pork than a bacon sandwich. The thing I like about Rep. Pence is that he understands that it isn't the popularity of the politician he's taking on. It's the popularity or unpopularity of the bill being debated.
President Bush was an unpopular president but he won alot of arguments because he frequently pushed popular policies. Conversely, President Obama is immensely popular on a personal level but he's defending policies that aren't popular.
Most importantly, Rep. Pence understands that the American people want a stimulus bill that creates jobs, stops the bleeding of the economy and doesn't put their children and grandchildren deeply into debt. Conversely, Speaker Pelosi appears perfectly willing to defend legislation that doesn't create jobs, hikes inflation, heaps loads of debt on future generations and pays off the Democrats' special interest allies.
All things considered, I'd rather be playing Rep. Pence's hand than Ms. Pelosi's hand.
Originally posted Tuesday, February 3, 2009, revised 04-Feb 7:46 AM
No comments.
