January 13-14, 2009
Jan 13 11:37 This Is What Liberalism Run Amok Looks Like Jan 13 02:38 When Everything Isn't Enough Jan 13 17:53 Budget Trends Study Commission Report: We Need To Change Jan 13 19:02 Franken's Lawsuit: Seat Me Or Else Jan 14 04:45 The Fight Is On: Cutting Spending vs. Raising Taxes Jan 14 05:30 Professional Smoke-Blowing Jan 14 11:56 Gov. Pawlenty, GOP Legislators Aggressively Seeking Cost Savings Jan 14 12:55 Portman Announces Senate Candidacy Jan 14 16:15 Blogger Conference Call Notes
This Is What Liberalism Run Amok Looks Like
This AP article lists several indicators that have been emerging that California's irresponsible behavior is driving people away:
Mike Reilly spent his lifetime chasing the California dream. This year he's going to look for it in Colorado. With a house purchase near Denver in the works, the 38-year-old engineering contractor plans to move his family 1,200 miles away from his home state's lemon groves, sunshine and beaches. For him, years of rising taxes, dead-end schools, unchecked illegal immigration and clogged traffic have robbed the Golden State of its allure.Why should people stay when California's government has been so utterly irresponsible? Taxes keep rising. California's deficits aren't eliminated. They aren't even reduced. Gov. Ahnold and the legislature can't find a way to stop spending money they don't have. The last governor that acted in anything resembling a fiscally responsible way was Pete Wilson.
Is there something left of the California dream?
"If you are a Hollywood actor," Reilly says, "but not for us."
Since the days of the Gold Rush, California has represented the Promised Land, an image celebrated in the songs of the Beach Boys and embodied by Silicon Valley's instant millionaires and the young men and women who achieve stardom in Hollywood.
But for many California families last year, tomorrow started somewhere else.
The number of people leaving California for another state outstripped the number moving in from another state during the year ending on July 1, 2008. California lost a net total of 144,000 people during that period, more than any other state, according to census estimates. That is about equal to the population of Syracuse, N.Y.
In short, the supposedly enlightened people of California can't figure out a way to balance a budget because their enlightened priorities are making matters worse with no end in sight. Fiscal restraint is now extinct in most parts of California. At minimum, it's on the endangered species list.
If they don't start acting with fiscal restraint, California will become the Michigan of the Left Coast.
Why are so many looking for an exit?California doesn't really have much of a choice in raising taxes at this point. Raising taxes alone won't solve California's problems, either. California's appetite for irresponsible spending must end. That won't happen with spend-happy Ahnold. That won't happen with this spend-happy legislature, either.
Among other things: California's unemployment rate hit 8.4 percent in November, the third-highest in the nation, and it is expected to get worse. A record 236,000 foreclosures are projected for 2008, more than the prior nine years combined, according to research firm MDA DataQuick. Personal income was about flat last year.
With state government facing a $41.6 billion budget hole over 18 months, residents are bracing for higher taxes, cuts in education and postponed tax rebates. A multibillion-dollar plan to remake downtown Los Angeles has stalled, and office vacancy rates there and in San Diego and San Jose surpass the 10.2 percent national average.
The only thing that will pull California out of their financial trainwreck is fiscal restraint, limited government, intelligent priorities and leadership that says, metaphorically speaking, the children can't have dessert until they've finished their homework and eaten their vegetables.
I haven't seen proof that any of California's politicians are capable of or interested in providing that type of leadership. Without leadership and without restraint, California will be stuck in this hole for the forseeable future.
If ever there was a time when California needed adult management, it's now. Let's hope that leadership arrives soon. It can't afford this pattern much longer.
Posted Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:10 PM
No comments.
When Everything Isn't Enough
Harry Reid is proving that the Democrats aren't satisfied with owning huge majorities in the House and Senate and both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue for the next two years. President-Elect Obama hasn't become President Obama yet. That hasn't stopped Reid from clearing the way for making us more dependent on foreign sources of oil.
Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are talking about implementing the Fairness Doctrine. Another priority is passing EFCA, which allows union organizers to harass and intimidate workers in their drive to increase union membership while eliminating a worker's right to a secret ballot.
Tom Daschle has been appointed the nation's first "health care czar", which is a neat trick since he'll soon be confirmed as the next secretary of HHS.
In fact, President-Elect Obama's list of advisers is filled with czars. Daschle's the health care czar. There's a car czar, too. Carol Browner is the incoming energy czar, which means the Obama administration will make us more reliant on foreign energy while driving up gas prices and home heating bills. According to this Boston Globe article , President-elect is panning on hiring a czar "to stop nuclear and biological attacks."
There's no hint that the Democrats will act with any type of restraint. Power corrupts. Total power corrupts totally. Based on what leading Democrats have said, they're planning a full assault on principles that we've held dear for our entire history. According to this article in the Hill , Chuck Schumer claimed "there is a strong need to allow workers to cast a public ballot on whether they support the formation of a union." Sen. Schumer even defended the Fairness Doctrine:
Asked if he is a supporter of telling radio stations what content they should have, Schumer used the fair and balanced line, claiming that critics of the Fairness Doctrine are being inconsistent.I agree with a portion of what Sen. Schumer said. I agree that it isn't consistent to limit pornography but then argue against the Fairness Doctrine. They're both First Amendment issues. If you think that the First Amendment is worth defending, which I do, then you have to be intellectually consistent. I oppose limiting free speech except when it's speech that incites violence.
"The very same people who don't want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to limit pornography on the air. I am for that, But you can't say government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are allowed to intervene in another. That's not consistent."
If the Democrats move ahead with EFCA, rest assured that alot of people will oppose them on it. People that don't like unions will pressure their legislators to vote against it. There will be a high profile campaign against the legislation. I suspect that George McGovern will be featured in that high-profile campaign.
I hope one advertisment asks Sen. Schumer what compelling reason exists for casting "a public ballot on whether they support the formation of a union." I hope he's made a focal point for that legislation.
It's obvious that the Democrats' appetite wasn't satisfied by their last 2 electoral victories. The list of things I've already mentioned is proof of that. Their appetite won't be satisfied until they've constructed every possible impediment to the GOP regaining control of Congress or their state legislatures.
While I think the Democrats will make some significant mistakes, I think it's foolish to rely on the Democrats' mistakes to retake the US House and Senate or any state legislative majorities. I'd rather we recruited candidates who are conservative, articulate, hardworking and with the ability to connect with independents and middle class voters.
The day we recruit those types of candidates is the day we finish playing defense and start going on the offensive.
That doesn't mean I think going squishy is the right approach. Quite the opposite. Gov. Palin is proof that candidates that articulate the conservative message in a way that makes conservative principles personal will attract independents.
Posted Tuesday, January 13, 2009 3:08 AM
No comments.
Budget Trends Study Commission Report: We Need To Change
I just got a copy of the Budget Trends Study Commission's report. Though I haven't read all of its 41 pages, their message is clear: We can't afford to keep doing what we're doing and spending the way we're spending. Here's the list of the Commission's 14 findings:
1. Minnesota is currently experiencing a major, long-range demographic shift.Several things jumped out at me. The first thing that caught my attention was this statement:
2. Minnesota has become more diverse in recent years and this will continue to increase as economic growth depends on drawing new workers to the state.
3. Public spending priorities will need to shift as Minnesota's economically dependent population grows larger and relies more heavily on fewer workers.
4. Despite continuing to rank high among many key social and economic indicators, Minnesota's economy has underperformed recently relative to the nation.
5. Demographic and economic factors will lead to lower growth of state tax revenues over the next 25 years.
6. Minnesota has a long-term structural budget problem, with long term expenditure growth likely to outpace revenue growth.
7. Health care growth will become the most important factor in controlling rising state expenditures.
8. State revenue volatility makes long term budget instability more difficult to manage.
9. Minnesota's general fund tax base has grown more volatile in the past decade.
10. Replacing highly volatile tax base components with less volatile sources could reduce the volatility of the overall general fund tax system. However, such changes would also affect revenue growth rates and the distribution of the tax burden among taxpayers.
11. Adjusting the mix of state taxes, while remaining tax base and revenue growth rate neutral, cannot significantly reduce revenue volatility without a radical change in tax rates and a dramatic reweighting of tax revenue sources to the system.
12. Shifting consumption patterns have reduced Minnesota's sales tax base.
13. Minnesota's statutory budget reserve ceiling has not grown to an appropriate level to adequately manage the underlying risks in Minnesota's tax system over time.
14. Minnesota needs a cash flow reserve account of sufficient size so that the state can avoid short-term external borrowing during a biennium.
Public spending priorities will need to shift as Minnesota's economically dependent population grows larger and relies more heavily on fewer workers.Simply put, we can't keep expanding government at the rate it's expanding at right now. Speaking from a purely mathematical standpoint, we can't sustain this rate of growth. If we do nothing else, We the People have to admit that we have to spend less. The 'flipside' to that admission is that the money we do spend must be spent efficiently.
The minute more people are relying on government than are paying into it is the instant that we won't be able to balance the budget, even with unprecedented tax increases.
Here's another thing that caught my attention:
Minnesota's general fund tax base has grown more volatile in the past decade.The first question I'd ask is whether that volatility is caused by people moving out of Minnesota because it's policies are hostile to a prosperous small business climate? Have entrepreneurs grown weary of hearing that they aren't "paying their fare share"? Have these entrepreneurs said enough? I wouldn't blame them if they did.
Let's put this in the context of the 2007 budget bills that the DFL tried ramming down our throats. That first set of bills would've increased spending by almost 20 percent. Included in the HHS omnibus bill was the removal of the welfare reform provisions from 1997. That caused the US HHS to fine Minnesota $25,000,000 for not complying with federal welfare reform provisions. That sounds like wasteful spending to me. I'll bet I'm not alone in thinking that.
Page 7 of the Commission's report outlines the the categories for their recommendations. I think they're telling:
In response to these findings, the Commission offers specific recommendations around three centralA good start to "managing budget volatility" is for the DFL's special interest allies to stop their endless campaign for full funding of their program . Minnesota's budget forecasts reads like a road map through Feast-or-Famine Land. The Commission's report is an admission that this feast or famine approach to budgeting can't continue.
themes:
- Providing decision-makers and citizens with the necessary information to make informed budget and policy decisions
- Achieving a long-term balance of state revenues and expenditures, and
- Managing state budget volatility.
One man whose approach is vindicated by this report is Rep. Steve Gottwalt. Rep. Gottwalt talks constantly about living within our means, prioritizing spending and investing in important needs. To pay for those needs, Rep. Gottwalt votes against spending on special interests' wishlists.
That's all for now but I'll be posting more on this study as I find time to read more of it. It's an important report because they admit that the DFL's feast-or-famine approach to budgeting must be discontinued ASAP.
Posted Tuesday, January 13, 2009 5:53 PM
No comments.
Franken's Lawsuit: Seat Me Or Else
Al Franken's attorneys have filed a federal lawsuit aimed at seating him as Minnesota's junior senator:
Attorneys for Minnesota Democrat Al Franken said they have filed a petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court to get their candidate seated in the Senate.The linchpin to this lawsuit is the Constitution saying that "the governor and secretary of state must sign off on the winner of an election." Thus far, nobody has won this election.
The move came a day after Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) and Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie (D) rebuffed the campaign's request to certify Franken's election.
Franken's lawyers are citing federal law and the Constitution, which state that the governor and secretary of state must sign off on the winner of an election, and that a state should have two senators, respectively.
- Until all valid ballots have been counted, there isn't a winner .
- Until it's been determined in in a court that ballots weren't counted twice, there isn't a winner .
- Until it's determined that the absentee ballots that were improperly rejected have all been counted, there isn't a winner .
"We thought we'd see the epitome of arrogance yesterday, but today Al Franken and his team have topped even themselves. In the wake of the immediate denial of yesterday's publicity stunt calling on the Governor and Secretary of State to issue Franken a certificate that he didn't win then and hasn't won now, today he's asking to go above the laws of our state with this latest move.It's totally within Mr. Franken's character to do anything, even ignore Minnesota's laws and Minnesotans' ballots, to get elected. Until the courts hear the evidence that the Coleman campaign has compiled, until all legally cast ballots have been recounted, until the ballots are handled uniformly, then we don't know who the victor is.
"Al Franken knows he can't win in court, abiding by the rules of Minnesota election law. So he's coming up with every desperate move he can, and his Washington legal team as well, to take this out of the hands of the law here and not to have to go to trial against our election contest. Franken knows the case made in our election contest is strong. Double counted votes, newly discovered ballots and missing ballots, and inconsistent standards regarding rejected absentee ballots are serious issues that will get their day in court.
"Al Franken wants his Democratic supporters in the US Senate to seat him in a blatant political power play. The people of Minnesota, and the votes cast by three million Minnesotans in this election, deserve better than this. Minnesotans cast their votes, and when this election contest phase is completed, we have every hope and expectation that they can be confident in the results as they send Senator Norm Coleman back to work for them."
Part of the Canvassing Board's record includes G. Barry Anderson's statement that some votes were likely counted twice. Until that's resolved, we can't determine the winner. One of the SecState's rulings said that counting the physical ballots was the recount standard. Another of the SecState's rulings was that the tape record, not the ballots, was the standard. Until that conflict is resolved, we can't determine the winner.
Another thing that Team Franken hasn't dealt with is the equal protection clause of the Constitution. When the Florida Supreme Court tried imposing inconsistent, even contradictory, standards for determining legitimate votes, the US Supreme Court stepped in and demanded that a uniform standard be imposed.
Anyone thinking that the Roberts Court will ignore the equal protection clause isn't thinking clearly.
I'd further argue that Minnesota's elections laws are clear and logical. They explain what counts as a legal vote and what doesn't. They clearly explain the criteria for which ballots can be accepted and which ballots must be rejected. Finally, the laws governing recounts are well-reasoned and clearly explained.
We're in the midst of following Minnesota's elections laws to determine who got the most votes. Until that's been determined, Mr. Franken can try all the bullying tactics he wants but it's best characterized as much sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The ballots, not Al Franken or Harry Reid, will determine the winner of this election.
Techorati: Al Franken , Lawsuit , Absentee Ballots , Election Law , Constitution , Equal Protection , SCOTUS , Florida , Minnesota , Recounts , Harry Reid , Norm Coleman , Election 2008
Posted Tuesday, January 13, 2009 7:02 PM
No comments.
The Fight Is On: Cutting Spending vs. Raising Taxes
Tuesday, Tommie 'The Commie' Ruckavina said that "You won't find hardly anybody at the Capitol that is saying that we're gonna solve this just with spending cuts or by re-inventing government or whatever. Everyone knows that we're gonna have to raise revenue." Fortunately, Senate Minority Leader Dave Senjem sees it differently: "You don't grow jobs by increasing tax burden...This is the worst time in history to raise taxes."
This video outlines the DFL's proposal to "raise revenue":
Everyone paying an income tax surcharge regardless of income isn't just regressive. It will pour cold water on a struggling economy, too. It will take money out of small businesses' pockets at a time when we need them to create jobs and generate prosperity.
This proposal is particularly awful because (a) it would take money away from families when they need it the most and (b) take money away from businesses who need the money to invest in their businesses and create jobs.
Rep. Ruckavina's statements are disheartening. We're barely a week into the session and he's saying that they need to raise taxes. Rep. Ruckavina said this before committees have held hearings identifying wasteful spending. Rep. Ruckavina said this before a hearing was held trying to identify ways to re-invent how government delivers services.
To their credit, the Senate GOP is off to a fast start, proposing several things to save money. Unfortunately, the Senate DFL is off to a plodding start. They've voted down every GOP cost-saving proposal.
I hope that GOP activists recognize that the House and Senate GOP are proposing reforms and looking for ways to save the taxpayers' money. GOP state legislators bear no resemblance to Senate Republicans in Washington. It's a night and day difference.
Now that state GOP legislators are acting like fiscal conservatives, it's time to start supporting them. It's time to work hard in getting their message out. Most importantly, they've given us reason to get excited about the GOP.
Originally posted Wednesday, January 14, 2009, revised 19-Jan 6:29 PM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 14-Jan-09 02:55 PM
What's Pawlenty's salary?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 14-Jan-09 03:24 PM
I don't know, Eric.
Professional Smoke-Blowing
The tactics and arguments that lawyers use never surprises me. That's why this argument isn't surprising:
Although Senate Democrats have indicated that they wouldn't seat Franken provisionally because of the threat of a Republican filibuster, the Franken campaign is banking on that changing if a certificate were issued by the GOP governor and DFL secretary of state. "I believe if he had a certificate, the chances of a Republican filibuster would all but disappear," Elias said.John Cornyn spelled out what would happen if Harry Reid tried to seat Franken. Cornyn knows he has the votes to sustain a filibuster. Cornyn is a lawyer, too. I don't believe he knew much about Minnesota election laws 2 months ago. I suspect he knows them as well as Franken's and Coleman's attorneys now, if for no other reason than out of necessity. That means he knows the recount isn't really over until the election contest is over.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Until all of Ritchie's inconsistent and often contradictory rulings have been reconciled, we don't know who won.Until we determine whether some ballots were counted twice, we don't know who won. Until every properly cast ballot has been counted, we don't know who won.
I'd be surprised if the Minnesota Surpreme Court will rule in Franken's favor on this one. They'd have to ignore a significant portion of Minnesota's election laws to grant his request.
Posted Wednesday, January 14, 2009 5:30 AM
No comments.
Gov. Pawlenty, GOP Legislators Aggressively Seeking Cost Savings
It isn't a secret that Gov. Tim Pawlenty enjoys being called a 'Walmart Republican'. Now he's using some principles that Walmart has used for years to balance Minnesota's budget. Here's his latest attempt to find cost savings for Minnesota's budget:
Make way for Bucky Gopher and Goldy Badger.This follows his proposal to help create savings within Minnesota's education budget:
With a few inevitable Vikings/Packers jokes thrown in, the governors of Wisconsin and Minnesota said Tuesday they are looking at ways to combine operations such as purchasing and technology to save money in the face of budget deficits projected at around $5 billion in each state.
The Upper Midwest neighbors will look at such steps as volume purchasing of the 600,000 tons of road salt they use each season; Wisconsin's borrowing Minnesota's helicopters for deer counts; and combining operations in areas such as licensing and call centers.
"Even though both states individually have great strengths, we think that if we can combine together, we can increase the likelihood of overcoming and getting through these enormous challenges ahead of us, " said Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who quoted legendary Green Bay Packers coach Vince Lombardi in a spirit of cooperation.
Under the Minnesota K-12 Shared Service proposal, school districts and charter schools will be able to pool their purchasing power for information technology, food services, supplies and equipment, operations, transportation, and other goods and services.Thus far, Pawlenty has proposed several ways to reform government. He isn't the only Republican who's looking for, and finding, cost savings. Sens. Ray Vandeveer, Amy Koch and Dave Senjem have proposed cost savings within the Senate's operating budget. Tom Emmer has been the most prominent Republican in finding cost savings, though he isn't the only one proposing ways to save money without cutting services.
In other words, state GOP legislators have combined with Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty in hunting down savings in an effort to minimize the hurt of a $5,000,000,000 deficit.
Gov. Pawlenty's cost-saving proposals are making a mockery of Tarryl Clark's statement on At Issue With Tom Hauser :
Hauser: You can talk about reform all you want but reform inevitably ends up meaning that some people that are getting state services now won't be getting them after this reform, whether it be in HHS, whether it be in education, early childhood, any of those things.Just because Tarryl thinks that we'll be fortunate to find $500,000,000 of savings doesn't mean that Republicans have to agree with her. Thus far, the most noteworthy thing I've noticed is that Republicans are aggressively proposing intelligent reforms that will save a significant amount of money.
Tarryl: Sure, and an estimate, a good estimate would be that maybe we could figure out how to save about $500 million .
This isn't an attempt to sugarcoat the pain that will be part of balancing the budget. It's an attempt to highlight the fact that Republicans are doing their utmost to find savings throughout the budget to lessen the need for dramatic cuts that impact delivery of important government services.
There's undeniable proof that Republicans are taking this opportunity to re-invent government. Their proposals are showing what their priorities are, too.
One thing that we should be mindful of is that some proposals won't be helpful. Anyone who's been part of brainstorming sessions knows that those sessions invariably produce some clunker ideas. The first step in innovation is brainstorming. The next step is refining and combining those ideas into something coherent and valuable.
It's important that we recognize the fact that we can't get to Step 2 if we don't look for innovations. It's also important that we refrain from saying that the DFL doesn't have any innovations. It's fair to say, though, that the GOP has led on reform issues thus far. That's thanks in large part to the things that Gov. Pawlenty has proposed.
Republicans are shrinking the budgetary pain by increasing the innovative gains. Thank God for their leadership on this issue.
Posted Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:02 PM
Comment 1 by Roger Dukowitz at 22-Jan-09 07:33 AM
Just what we need. State gov. creating tax breaks to encourage business, then pool with other states to purchase by trainloads, making it impossible, for local business to market their product.
How are we going to pay for the additional bureaucrats needed to administer this one?
Portman Announces Senate Candidacy
Last summer, Rob Portman was said to be a viable candidate to be John McCain's running mate. This morning, he became the man most likely to be the next US senator from the great state of Ohio:
Former Republican Congressman Rob Portman announced Wednesday that he will run to succeed Ohio Senator George Voinovich.Yesterday, I read an article by Amy Walter in which she wondered about the GOP's prospects for holding the seats of retiring GOP senators:
Portman made the announcement at the Golden Lamb in Lebanon.
How's this for a welcome present? National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn, R-Texas, has been in his new job for just a few weeks and already four GOP incumbents, Christopher "Kit" Bond (Mo.), Sam Brownback (Kan.), Mel Martinez (Fla.) and George Voinovich (Ohio) have decided to call it quits. This comes on the heels of two difficult election cycles where Republicans have lost 13 seats, 14 if you count Norm Coleman (Minn.). Are Republicans doomed to another losing cycle? Or does the earliness of these retirements mean Republicans will have the time they need to raise money and recruit the strong candidates?This is a good start in replacing Voinovich, Bond, Martinez and Brownback. Hugh Hewitt explains why this might actually excite the GOP base in this post :
It would have been hard to rally Buckeye State Republicans much less conservative activists nationally to Voinovich's side, and Mel Martinez had similar problems. Portman and Rubio, by contrast, will excite the national base which will help with fundraising and organization. Kit Bond is greatly loved in Missouri, but he's been there a very long time and a re-election bid wouldn't have energized a single out-of-state GOPer, whereas the possible return of Jim Talent, well known and widely respected across the grass roots on defense issues, would bring national grassroots attention to the race. Sam Brownback's different because he is still a leader in the GOP, but he's been committed to leaving for some time, and Kansas is a pretty good ground on which to wage an off-year election when the White House is held by a Democrat. In short, three of the retirements we have already seen represent net pluses when it comes to the energy that will flow into the 2010 contests.Portman's conservative credentials are solid. More importantly, he isn't a protectionist. Lord knows there's too many protectionist Democrats wandering the halls on Capitol Hill. The GOP doesn't need to add to that total.
Here's what Reid Wilson said about Portman's announcing for Sen. Voinovich's Senate seat:
National Republicans scored their first major recruiting victory of the 2010 cycle when ex-Rep. Rob Portman (R) jumped into the race to replace retiring Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) Wednesday. Portman made his entry official at an announcement in Cincinnati, an area he represented in Congress for a dozen years.The Republican Party of Ohio just took a major step in rebuilding itself. For years, Ohio Republicans were caught up in scandals, the most prominent of which were Bob Ney's involvement with Jack Abramoff and Gov. Bob Taft's criminal conviction.
"At a difficult time in our state and national economy, I believe I can make a positive difference in the lives of people throughout Ohio," Portman said. "Over the past year or so, as I have traveled across the Buckeye State and listened to Ohioans talk about what matters most to them, I learned that we all have a lot in common, strong family values, a solid work ethic and a common-sense approach to solving problems," Portman said. "I am committed to working with all Ohioans to get our state back on the path to greatness."
I suspect that those ethical dilemmas will be a distant memory by the time voting starts in 2010, thanks in part to Rep. Portman's candidacy, in large part thanks to John Kasich's work with RechargeOhio.com. Things will really get cooking if Chairman Kasich jumps into the governor's race as expected. The instant he jumps into the race is the minute Ted Strickland starts making retirement plans. It's that simple.
There's an additional dynamic that would be at work in Ohio that would help down-ticket Republicans: Chairman Kasich and Representative Portman are running for statewide office, meaning that they'll have lots of opportunities to campaign with state legislators and state legislative candidates.
Anytime a GOP candidate or legislator has the opportunity to campaign with Rep. Portman and Chairman Kasich, rest assured that they'll jump at that opportunity. Both men are young, energetic and photogenic. Both men have a long list of legislative accomplishments.
Sen. Cornyn has alot of work ahead of him but it's work that might pay off bigtime. I've paid attention to Sen. Cornyn over the last six years. He isn't a man that's easily underestimated. In fact, he's one of the most formidable Republicans in the Senate. Thanks to Rep. Portman's announced candidacy for the US Senate, Sen. Cornyn's job just got a little easier.
Posted Wednesday, January 14, 2009 1:08 PM
No comments.
Blogger Conference Call Notes
I just finished participating in a blogger conference call put together by Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence. Other legislators participating in the call were Rep. Lynn Jenkins, Rep. Peter Roskam & Rep. Jeff Flake. The call mostly dealt with the stimulus package but also touched on SCHIP, tax reform, economic growth & inflation.
Rep. Pence updated us on the votes that've taken place thus far this week. Rep. Pence said that there was great unity in opposing the current SCHIP bill. He made clear, though, that House Republicans aren't opposed to SCHIP. They're just opposed to expanding it to children whose parents are well into the middle class. Rep. Pence said that expanding SCHIP this way would increase the cost of the program. He then said that this bill could potentially put low income children at risk of not getting the coverage they need.
Rep. Flake was the next person to talk. He spoke at length about the stimulus package, especially focusing on this bill driving up our deficit. He then said that the percentage of the deficit as compared to GDP was "well north of 5 percent". Rep. Flake then noted that economic growth is essentially impossible anytime that the deficit is more than 5 percent of GDP.
SIDENOTE: I've seen reports where it's possible the deficit will be 10+ percent of GDP.
I asked the first question. Here's what I asked: Do you know what the composition of the stimulus package is, what percentage of it involves needed infrastructure projects, what percentage of it is just wasteful spending?
Rep. Pence said that they don't know what will be in the bill. He said that he's heard the bill will be light on tax cuts and heavy on spending. He then said that the bill will be at least $850,000,000,000.
Redstate's Brian Faugnan asked about the bailout package too. Rep. Pence mentioned that Rep. Peter Roskam was working with other House Republicans on putting an alternative to stimulus package that's currently being put together. Roskam said that there's a sense that this package is anything but finalized. Speculation exists that that's because liberal Democrats think the package should grow.
(This could be known as the 'hanging the ornaments on the Christmas tree' phase.)
Another blogger identified himself (I apologize for not catching this gentleman's name) as an entrepreneur whose business takes him around the world. This blogger said that Estonia's entire tax code was 50 pages. He talked about "jurisdictional competitiveness", then asked if that might be an issue that the House GOP would address sometime soon. He said that this issue, if not addressed properly, would make American companies less competitive around the world.
The Congresscritters assembled there said that that's definitely something that needs to be dealt with intelligently because we can't afford to not be competitive on the world marketplace.
I was able to ask another question after the first round of questioning. It, too, dealt with the stimulus package, this time dealing with the issue of inflation. Both Rep. Flake and Rep. Pence said that this legislation could cause inflation to spike, thereby making job growth and economic recovery more difficult.
I was impressed with the fact that they're working on putting alternatives to the Democrats' proposals together. They clearly aren't planning on having a squishy agenda. They plan on putting forth a robust, muscular agenda based on free market principles and fiscal restraint.
If they follow through on that agenda, which I think is likely, they will have gone a long ways to restoring the GOP brand of fiscal responsibility and limited government. That will be most welcome to GOP activists everywhere.
Originally posted Wednesday, January 14, 2009, revised 15-Jan 3:18 AM
No comments.
