49 of 50 States Have Lost Jobs Since Democrats' Stimulus
Every time Barack Obama, Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi say that the "stimulus" is working, they insult your intelligence.
From a post by Rep. Dave Camp, ranking Republican on the House Ways & Means Committee:
While the President recently claimed his February 2009 stimulus bill will "save or create 1.5 million jobs in 2010 after saving or creating as many as 2 million jobs thus far,” the table below compares the White House's original projections of state-by-state job creation with the actual change in state payroll employment through February 2010, using the latest data from the U.S. Department of Labor. The data show that only Alaska and the District of Columbia have seen net job creation since the enactment of stimulus, and even those levels fall far short of what the White House originally forecast.
To see a state-by-state breakdown of job loses, click here.
How's that Obamacare working out for you? As well as the Obama "stimulus" package?
Employers are already warning workers about higher health-care costs and reduced benefits, according to The Wall Street Journal.
From a new WSJ editorial:
Even before President Obama signed the bill on Tuesday, Caterpillar said it would cost the company at least $100 million more in the first year alone. Medical device maker Medtronic warned that new taxes on its products could force it to lay off a thousand workers. Now Verizon joins the roll of businesses staring at adverse consequences.
In an email titled "President Obama Signs Health Care Legislation" sent to all employees Tuesday night, the telecom giant warned that "we expect that Verizon's costs will increase in the short term." While executive vice president for human resources Marc Reed wrote that "it is difficult at this point to gauge the precise impact of this legislation," and that ObamaCare does reflect some of the company's policy priorities, the message to workers was clear: Expect changes for the worse to your health benefits as the direct result of this bill, and maybe as soon as this year.
And this is just the beginning of the havoc Obamacare will create.
Rep. Reichley: Rendell budget passed by House Dems is a 'sham'
Rep. Doug Reichley (R-Berks/Lehigh), vice chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, released the following statement after Tuesday's passage of House Bill 2279, Gov. Rendell's latest $29 billion red-ink budget proposal:
"It is no coincidence that the budget bill that passed today was voted on exactly 100 days before the June 30 deadline. Unfortunately, the governor and his allies would prefer to pass a bill that does not bear any reality to the financial difficulties faced by many families, businesses and organizations rather than to pass a fiscally responsible spending plan for Pennsylvania. The governor's proposal, passed with unanimous support from House Democrats, spends far more than the state is taking in, exceeding tax revenue by billions of dollars, and relying on deferred payments into state employee and teacher pension funds. Such reckless spending only compounds the problem we are currently facing.
"The governor's budget also unwisely uses a whistling through the graveyard approach by basing his spending plan on receiving $850 million in federal aid for Medical Assistance, the state-administered health care plan for the poor, elderly, and disabled in Pennsylvania. The problem is there is no telling if and when the state will receive those federal funds. The governor and his supporters in the House Democratic Caucus should have learned after seven years of missing budget deadlines that you do not achieve a balanced budget by crossing your collective fingers and wishing for federal aid.
"We need to act now to protect against tax increases in the future. We need to act now with further decreases in state spending. We need to fix foreseeable problems with the state employees and public school employees retirement systems before we reach the tipping point.
"Clearly, the bill that passed today is not the bill that will become law. It's a sham, designed to provide taxpayers with the illusion that the budget process has started in earnest. This is not a real, negotiated, fiscally sustainable budget. We will all end up paying for it, well beyond when the governor leaves office."
Few people have gone from hero to heavy so quickly in American politics as Rep. Bart Stupak, who billed himself as the champion of the unborn ... until he sold his vote to the abortion industry to support Obamacare.
Columnist Kathleen Parker offers a look at Stupak's pathetic betrayal of the pro-life movement.
From her column:
Ultimately, he was weak and overwhelmed by raw political power. History is no stranger to such moments, but this one needs to be understood for what it was. A deception.
The executive order promising that no federal funds will be used for abortion is utterly useless, and everybody knows it. First, the president can revoke it as quickly as he signs it.
Second, an order cannot confer jurisdiction in the courts or establish any grounds for suing anybody in court, according to a former White House counsel. The order is therefore judicially unenforceable.
Finally, an executive order cannot trump or change a federal statute.
One can reasonably surmise that Obama, a former constitutional law professor, is well aware of the uselessness of his promise. Perhaps this is why he didn't mention it during the bill-signing ceremony Tuesday.
Stupak, too, knew that the executive order was merely political cover for him and his pro-life colleagues. He knew it because several members of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops explained it to him, according to sources. The only way to prevent public funding for abortion was for his amendment to be added to the Senate bill.
Clearly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the president didn't want that. What they did want was the abortion funding that the Senate bill allowed.
Read the full column, "Stupak's fall from pro-life grace", here.
Rep. Quigley: Democrats' Budget Built on a House of Cards
State Rep. Tom Quigley (R-Montgomery) issued the following statement on the passage of House Bill 2279, which is Gov. Ed Rendell's proposed budget, minus the taxes Rendell wants to pay for the $29 billion spending plan:
"By relying on yet-to-be-approved federal funds, this legislation builds our budget on a house of cards. We should not allocate $850 million in federal money we only hope to get, but we should focus on the resources we know we have. This budget is the epitome of writing a check the taxpayers might not be able to cash, and it is irresponsible.
"For the past two budget cycles, Pennsylvania outspent its means. We are expected to end the year with a more than half-billion dollar deficit, which is a clear sign that this is not the time to increase spending. This budget calls for a $1.2 billion, or 4 percent, spending increase. Pennsylvania’s families continue to scale back their personal budgets, and this proposed state spending growth is not reflective of our current economy.
"I will continue putting my efforts into examining ways to make state government more efficient, and I am hopeful the Senate will amend this bill with a more realistic spending goal that will shield Pennsylvania families from future tax increases. We need to adopt a budget that is practical and sustainable."
The budget bill passed the House by a vote of 107-89, mostly along party lines, and now goes to the Senate for consideration. Since Republicans hold a 30-20 majority in the Senate, they will likely discard the Rendell/Democratic budget and craft their own spending plan.
Tuesday's House vote was essentially a publicity stunt by House Democrats. March 23 marks 100 days before the constitutional deadline to approve the budget for the 2010-11 fiscal year. You'll recall that the Legislature was 100 days late with in approving the 2009-10 budget.
On March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry delivered an address to the Virginia Provincial Convention in which he is said to have declared, "Give me liberty, or give me death!"
If Patrick Henry were alive today, he probably would have said "Give me liberty, or give me debt!" in response to the trillions of dollars of debt that Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats have piled on the American taxpayer.
For the latest numbers on the National Debt Clock, click here.
Rohrer blasts House Dems for 'fiscally irresponsible' budget
Pennsylvania has spent $4 billion more than it has taken in over the past two years. Unemployment is at the highest level in two decades. The state's business climate continues to sink. Former and current state legislators are being hauled into court on corruption charges.
The "funny money" Barack Obama has sent to states as part of his "stimulus" package will dry up in two years. So what do the Democrats who control the Pennsylvania House do to show they're serious about the state's fiscal mess? They approved a $29 billion budget that is $1.2 billion higher than the current red-ink spending plan. And they have no way of paying for it. The budget the House passed along party-line votes Tuesday does not include any of the tax increases Gov. Ed Rendell proposed as part of the $29 billion budget.
So what is the most expensive state legislature in the country up to? State Rep. Sam Rohrer, an 18-year veteran of the House who is leaving to run for governor, has some thoughts about the state's fiscal woes:
"The current administration has led Pennsylvania down the path to fiscal insolvency," Rohrer said. "The budget approved today by the House is simply a continuation of the fiscally irresponsible practices of the last eight years. It spends too much, disregards financial reality and ignores the wishes of Pennsylvanians."
The budget bill approved today by the House was based on Gov. Ed Rendell's proposal outlined in his February budget address before the General Assembly. The bill calls for a $1.2 billion increase in state spending, which would drive up total state expenditures to in excess of $29 billion.
While the proposal calls for more than $29 billion in state spending, it anticipates only $26.2 billion in state revenues. Rohrer, who serves as the Republican chairman of the House Finance Committee, says the administration's revenue projections are far too optimistic.
"The budget approved today by the House is based on overstated revenues and underestimated costs," Rohrer said. "The state is already facing a half-billion dollar budget deficit for the current year. The administration and House Democrat leaders want to toss another $1.2 billion in spending on top of that through this budget proposal. Realistically, we are facing a $4 billion to $5 billion structural deficit, because that's how much state spending is outpacing our revenues."
Rohrer says revenues are likely to come in close to where they were in 2004 and state spending should be brought in line with where it was back then.
"The current administration cuts a dollar of spending with its left hand and then spends it somewhere else with its right hand," Rohrer said. "That is why state spending has increased by more than $8.6 billion since the administration took office. We need to make real cuts that root out waste, fraud and abuse from state spending initiatives."
Rohrer also argued that by passing the governor's budget proposal, House Democrats were ignoring the will of Pennsylvanians. In a recent Quinnipiac University poll, nearly half (49 percent) of respondents said the governor's budget proposal increases spending "too much." By comparison, only 6 percent of respondents said the governor's spending increase proposal was "not enough."
"Pennsylvanians are tired of lawmakers in Washington, D.C., and Harrisburg who refuse to listen to the people," Rohrer said. "This budget is a slap in the face to the taxpayers who foot the bills around here. They continue to speak out, but their voice was disregarded by the majority in the House of Representatives today."
The budget bill now heads to the Senate, where Republicans hold a 30-20 majority, for consideration.
From a new editorial in Investor's Business Daily:
Sunday's vote exposed the ugly truth that ObamaCare is not really about health care at all. It's all about who pays for it and who controls it — in effect a massive wealth-redistribution scheme.
Those who believe this will lead to some medical nirvana will likely be disappointed. Fact is, this poorly designed monstrosity will lead to lower-quality care, higher costs, fewer practicing physicians, higher taxes and fewer jobs.
We've done more than 150 editorials in the past year or so documenting these problems. Democrats surely understand them. Yet, despite a recent CNN poll showing that 59% of Americans oppose ObamaCare, Congress approved it anyway.
Why? Because it's not really about health care. It's the largest wealth grab in American history, masquerading as health care "reform," another step in the socialization of Americans' income in the name of "fairness" and "spread(ing) the wealth around," as Obama himself has put it.
The Republican National Committee raised more than $1 million in new pledges since Sunday's House vote to enact Obamacare. The campaign, which uses the clever tag line of "Fire Pelosi," is designed to raise money to help Republicans capture majority control of the House.
The former No. 2 Democrat in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives was found guilty Monday night of 14 corruption-related charges following a six-week trial.
Former state Rep. Mike Veon had been facing 59 counts related to public corruption while he held the post of Democratic Whip in the state House.
Prosecutors alleged that Veon orchestrated a scheme to pay state workers for doing campaign work on taxpayer time. Democrats took back control of the state House in 2006 thanks to Veon's efforts.
Two of Veon's former aides were also found guilty. A fourth defendant was acquitted of all charges.
While not the slam dunk case Attorney General Tom Corbett, who brought the charges, had hoped for, convictions of three of the four defendants will cement Corbett's reputation as a corruption-busing crusader.
While everyone's attention is focused on Obamacare, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Monday voted 104-85, mostly along party lines, to increase Pennsylvania's debt ceiling by another $800 million.
The vote puts the debt potential for Redevelopment Assistance Capitol Projects (RCAP) at a record $4.25 billion.
Rep. Curt Schroder (R-Chester County) voted against raising the debt and issued the following statement:
"It is the fourth time since Governor Ed Rendell took office that the debt ceiling has been raised," said Schroder. "The amount that Pennsylvania can borrow has shot up by 180 percent. The Commonwealth simply cannot continue to thrust mountains of debt on future generations of Pennsylvanians, particularly when they will also be saddled with massive debt created at the federal level."
As with any loan, the amount needed to pay off the debt is far higher than the amount borrowed. The debt service on RCAP projects in 2002-03 was $65.5 million. With the new debt ceiling now at $4.25 billion, the amount needed annually to cover the new level of borrowing will be $326.7 million - a 400 percent increase.
"In these economic times, we should be looking for ways to cut spending and to do more with less, just as the citizens of this Commonwealth are doing every day," said Schroder. "It is grossly unfair for future generations of taxpayers to be forced to pay for today's wasteful projects favoring the politically well-connected."
The House measure goes to the Republican-controlled Senate.
For the record, the following members of Congress from Pennsylvania voted on Sunday to raise your taxes, plunge the nation deeper into debt and impose a government-run health care system on Americans.
They voted "yes" to Obamacare. You should vote "no" when you see their names on the ballot in May and November:
John Boehner, the next Speaker of the House after Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are bounced out in November, promises to repeal Obamacare when Republicans take back control of the House.
If Republicans take control of the House this fall, Minority Leader John Boehner said Sunday he'd work to repeal the health care bill that's heading to final congressional votes.
"If this bill passes, we will have an effort to repeal the bill, and we'll do it the same way that we approached health care on a step by step basis," the Ohio congressman said in an advanced transcript of NBC's "Meet the Press." I'd have a bill on the floor the first thing out, to eliminate the Medicare cuts, eliminate the tax increases, eliminate the mandate that every American has to buy health insurance and the employer mandate that's going to cover jobs."
Rep. Joe Pitts: 'This is a career-defining vote on the life issue'
Rep. Bart Stupak accepted his 30 pieces of silver from Barack Obama on Sunday to give the Democrats enough votes to pass a government takeover of health care.
Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16) issued the following statement following the announcement that President Barack Obama will issue an executive order addressing the concerns pro-life Democrats have with the Senate health bill:
"From a pro-life perspective, I find absolutely no comfort in this executive order. This puts the fate of the unborn in the hands of the most pro-abortion president in history.
"This is a career-defining vote on the life issue. Any member of either party who votes for this bill will never again be able to claim they have always stood for the most important and fundamental of all human rights.
"I congratulate the many pro-life Democrats who continue to hold firm on principle and who will join me in voting against this terrible bill later today."
Barack Obama had a lifetime pro-life rating of 0 (zero) percent during his Senate career from the National Right to Life Committee, according to Pitts, and a 100 percent pro-choice rating from the National Abortion Rights Action League.
Pia Varma is running for Congress. She has no political experience and she's fine with that.
In fact, that's the appeal of her campaign. We've seen what the "professional politicians" have done with this country. Why not give regular person a chance?
Pia Varma is a Republican running in Pennsylvania's 1st Congressional District. The seat has been held by Democrat Bob Brady since 1998.
Varma ran a full page ad in The Philadelphia Inquirer this week with a simple message: Hate Philly Politics?
If the answer is yes, you should vote for Varma. If you like the job Congress is doing, keep political insiders like Brady in office.
Shocking AP Fact Check: Premiums Will Rise Under Obamacare
From a new "Fact Check" by The Associated Press on Obamacare:
Buyers, beware: President Barack Obama says his health care overhaul will lower premiums by double digits, but check the fine print.
Premiums are likely to keep going up even if the health care bill passes, experts say. If cost controls work as advertised, annual increases would level off with time. But don't look for a rollback. Instead, the main reason premiums would be more affordable is that new government tax credits would help cover the cost for millions of people.
I cannot believe Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have been lying to us all this time!
So it's come down to this — desperate Democratic leaders strong-arming members on the worst bill ever before they go home to explain to constituents why they decided to commit political suicide.
We've said just about all we've had to say on this issue — actually dating back to 1993-94, when we wrote nearly 100 editorials in opposition to HillaryCare. Since January of last year, we've weighed in 150 more times against the latest version of socialized medicine.
The newspaper offers 15 reasons why a government takeover of the finest medical system in the world makes no sense. Read the full editorial at the newspaper's Web site.
It's a good thing President Obama isn't in the private sector. If he was, the budget he just put forward for the next 10 years just might get him indicted for fraud.
Of all the promises the president made during the 2008 presidential campaign and last year's budget debates, none rings so hollow now as the pledge of "fiscal responsibility."
As a recent nonpartisan analysis by the Congressional Budget Office shows, our current budget path is, to use the euphemism du jour, unsustainable. It will leave a nearly insurmountable mountain of debt and spending to future generations.
Just last year, U.S. public debt totaled $7.5 trillion — a sum equal to all the indebtedness accumulated from our 225 years in existence as a nation. But by 2020, total U.S. public debt will be $20.3 trillion — an increase of 171% in just 10 years.
Read the full story at the Investor's Business Daily Web site.
How can you not read a column that begins with this premise: "President Obama is presiding over one of the most corrupt administrations in American history."
Read Jeffrey T. Kuhner's latest at the link below:
There really are two Americas, but the divide is not between rich and poor, black and white, Democrat and Republican.
The gap is between the growing governing elite and the working class paying taxes to support the permanent political class.
From a thought-provoking column by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson, adjunct faculty member, economist, and contributing scholar with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College:
The truly revolutionary American idea of government as the servant of the people may be fading away. Many of today’s so-called “civil servants” are a protected, privileged class. While Middle America struggles through a difficult recession, a lot of government employees have lived on the gravy train.
Here are some facts to buttress that assertion:
Since the recession began in 2008, a period during which approximately eight million private-sector workers lost their jobs and millions more saw their income decline, the number of federal employees is increasing at a 7 percent per-year rate and their income is holding up quite nicely. According to the Cato Institute, the average federal worker’s pay and benefits now approximates $120,000 per year, or roughly double the compensation of the average private-sector employee. Factor out the lavish government fringe benefits and look at salary only, and the civil servant is still far ahead: $71,197 vs. $49,935.
During this recession, the percentage of federal employees earning annual base salaries above $100,000 increased from 14 to 19 percent. The number of Defense Department employees being paid more than $150,000 per year increased from 1,868 to 10,100. Before, the Department of Transportation had one employee with a salary above $170,000, but now has 1,690.
Read the full column by The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College Web site.
Top Senate Democrat Harry Reid says it was "really good" news that 36,000 Americans lost their jobs in February. The person who should lose his job is Harry Reid.
Finding an honest Democrat in Congress is proving to be a difficult task.
Less than 24 hours after replacing crooked Democrat Charlie Rangel as chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, crooked Democrat Pete Stark was also forced to resign.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi better get busy draining that swamp she keeps talking about. The place is beginning to smell. Then again, there's only eight months until the November elections. The American public will take care of cleaning out the cesspool that is Congress on Nov. 2.
From POLITICO:
Rep. Sander Levin will take over as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee after Rep. Pete Stark, who held the gavel for a day, stepped aside.
The dominoes fell after Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) resigned the chairmanship of the powerful tax-writing panel Wednesday as Republicans and many Democrats were moving to oust him following an ethics committee ruling that found he violated House gift rules.
Levin, who had been chairman of the trade subcommittee, will helm the panel through the end of this Congress — barring the unlikely return of Rangel.
Officially, Stark stepped aside to keep the gavel of the panel's health subcommittee. But lawmakers and aides said Stark faced a rebellion within the committee and the caucus over his sometimes bizarre behavior and penchant for making offensive comments.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen told Stark at a Ways and Means Committee meeting Wednesday that his stepping aside would be in the best interests of the party, according to a Democratic aide familiar with the meeting.
With the recent death of Rep. John Murtha, fellow Democrat Charles Rangel has a clear path to the title of the most corrupt member of Congress.
Just days after Nancy Pelosi defended Rangel despite serious ethical violations, Rangel has resigned as chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.
It's a step in the right direction, but it also shows how corrupt Congress has become under the Pelosi regime.
From POLITICO:
Neither power nor popularity could save Charles Rangel from himself.
The affable, quotable and often jovial New York Democrat stepped down from his chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee Wednesday because his fellow Democrats feared that ethics investigations into Rangel's personal finances, travel, living arrangements and use of his office posed a grave threat to their chances in November's elections.
Rangel says he's stepping aside only temporarily, but he officially resigned the post in a letter submitted to the House Wednesday morning. Technically, he could be restored by a future House vote, but that's a political long shot given that he was forced aside by ethics troubles.
It was not immediately clear who would take the committee's reins in Rangel's absence, with some insiders predicting it would be the next man in line, California's Pete Stark, and others predicting it would be Sander Levin of Michigan. Under House rules, Stark is chairman unless Democrats act affirmatively to put someone else in his place, according to a House GOP aide familiar with House operations.
Has anyone else noticed that Nancy Pelosi's four years as Speaker of the House coincide with the United States' rapid decline as an economic power? Record unemployment, skyrocketing energy prices, record budget deficits, massive corruption. That's Nancy Pelosi's legacy.
If the Obama Administration is starting to feel like the movie, "Groundhog Day," you're not far off. After wasting an entire year pushing a government takeover of health care that the majority of Americans oppose, Barack Obama is still peddling the same snake oil.
From Investor's Business Daily:
Health Reform: The linchpin of ObamaCare 2.0 is that 31 million uninsured will be covered at little added cost. But in fact, White House estimates for low costs are based on little more than accounting tricks.
The president's plan "puts our budget and economy on a more stable path by reducing the deficit by $100 billion over the next 10 years — and about $1 trillion over the second decade — by cutting government overspending and reining in waste, fraud and abuse," the White House says on its Web site.
Sound too good to be true? It is.
None of the numbers can be believed. The plan is a result of blatantly dishonest accounting for the real costs of the program, while grossly overstating its benefits. Americans should know the actual 10-year cost is closer to $2 trillion over 10 years, not the $950 billion claimed, when all the actual costs are toted up.
How can there be such a wide gap? Mainly because the president's plan doesn't provide benefits until the second half of the first decade. So it pretends that it will "only" cost $950 billion. But once the program kicks in, the full 10-year cost of benefits will be included — at a real current cost of $2 trillion or more.
Or, as columnist Charles Krauthammer, himself a trained physician, told Fox News' Bill O'Reilly: "It's a trick. The way the Democrats got under (the spending limit imposed by Obama) was by making 98% of the expenditures, the benefits that you and I would get under the bill, occur in the second half of the decade."
Taxpayer group issues report card on Congressional spending
Although more lawmakers joined the ranks of "Taxpayers' Friends" for their voting records in 2009, the vast legion of "Big Spenders" who opted to grow government remained overwhelmingly large, according to the National Taxpayers Union's 31st annual Rating of Congress.
The unique scorecard utilizes every roll call vote affecting fiscal policy – 333 House and 227 Senate votes taken last year.
Here's how Pennsylvania members of Congress did on the newest ranking issued by the National Taxpayers Union. (Can't help noticing all the "F" grades next to Democrats.)
U.S. Senate Bob Casey Jr. - F Arlen Specter - D
U.S. House Jason Altmire - D Bob Brady - F Chris Carney - D Kathy Dahlkemper - F Charlie Dent - C+ Mike Doyle - F Chakah Fattah - F Jim Gerlach - C+ Tim Holden - F Paul Kanjorski - F Pat Murphy - F Tim Murphy - C John Murtha - DECEASED Joe Pitts - B+ Todd Platts - C+ Alyson Schwartz - F Joe Sestak - F Bud Shuster - B Glenn Thompson - B
Democrats shun Sen. Evan Bayh for speaking the truth
Have you noticed how there's no room for dissension within the Democratic Party?
Look how quickly the Dems have turned on their once golden boy, Sen. Evan Bayh, because he has pointed a finger at his fellow Democrats for the gridlock in Washington, D.C.
The party has been hijacked by far-left extremists -- Obama, Pelosi, Reid, who are bent on destroying the party if they don't get their way. Moderates like Bayh have no place in today's Democratic Party.
And isn't it interesting that the liberal media is still trying to portray the Republican Party as divided when it's the Democrats who are dysfunctional?
From POLITICO:
Sen. Evan Bayh handed Republicans plenty of ammunition to use against Democrats when he announced his retirement last week — and some of his colleagues are none too happy about it.
In explaining his decision not to seek reelection, the Indiana Democrat has complained publicly about legislative gridlock, saying that Congress hasn't done enough to prop up the economy and hasn't created a single private-sector job in the past six months.
While many Senate Democrats share Bayh's frustration with Washington partisanship and stalling on major bills, some are angry that he's stepping all over their 2010 message: that the 111th Congress has been one of the most productive in a generation, that the stimulus stemmed the tide of job losses and that Republicans, not Democrats, deserve most of the blame for the paralysis afflicting Capitol Hill.
"I just have no idea what he's doing," said one Democratic senator, whose face turned red as he threw up his hands after being asked about Bayh.
"We get some of the blame; we moved a little too slowly on health care," said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). "My only disappointment, and the only thing I'll say about Sen. Bayh, is that I think a more accurate portrayal by him was how Republicans have tried to block everything that we've done."
"It almost seems like he's siding with" Republicans, said one top Democratic aide.
Is Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele a closet Democrat? He sure is spending a lot of money.
From POLITICO:
Republican National Chairman Michael Steele is spending twice as much as his recent predecessors on private planes and paying more for limousines, catering and flowers – expenses that are infuriating the party's major donors who say Republicans need every penny they can get for the fight to win back Congress.
Most recently, donors grumbled when Steele hired renowned chef Wolfgang Puck's local crew to cater the RNC's Christmas party inside the trendy Newseum on Pennsylvania Avenue, and then moved its annual winter meeting from Washington to Hawaii.
For some major GOP donors, both decisions were symbolic of the kind of wasteful spending habits they claim has become endemic to his tenure at the RNC. When Ken Mehlman served as the committee chairman during the critical 2006 midterm elections, the holiday party was held in a headquarters conference room and Chic-fil-A was the caterer.
A POLITICO analysis of expenses found that compared with 2005, the last comparable year preceding a midterm election, the committee’s payments for charter flights doubled; the number of sedan contractors tripled, and meal expenses jumped from $306,000 to $599,000.
Rep. Fattah Proposes New Tax To Pay Down National Debt
What's the Democrats solution to paying down the national debt that they've helped create by spending more money than the government takes in? Raise taxes, of course.
Congressman Chaka Fattah (D-PA) today introduced legislation that calls for a penny on every dollar on transactions in the United States economy to be directed to eliminating America's national debt.
I guess it never occurred to Fattah or any other Democrat to just stop spending or cut taxes to jump-start the economy.
From a column by Terence P. Jeffrey posted at CNSNews.com on Obama's reckless spending:
After he signed a law last week authorizing the U.S. Treasury to borrow an additional $1.9 trillion, President Barack Obama delivered a characteristically sanctimonious speech. It was about his deep commitment to frugality.
"After a decade of profligacy, the American people are tired of politicians who talk the talk but don't walk the walk when it comes to fiscal responsibility," he said. "It's easy to get up in front of the cameras and rant against exploding deficits. What's hard is actually getting deficits under control. But that's what we must do. Like families across the country, we have to take responsibility for every dollar we spend."
To put Obama's Olympian hypocrisy in perspective, one need only examine the federal budget tables posted on the White House website by Obama's own Office of Management and Budget.
They reveal these startling facts: When calculated by the average annual percentage of the Gross Domestic Product that he will spend during his presidency, Obama is on track to become the biggest-spending president since 1930, the earliest year reported on the OMB's historical chart of spending as a percentage of GDP. When calculated by the average annual percentage of GDP he will borrow during his presidency, Obama is on track to become the greatest debter president since Franklin Roosevelt.
From a new editorial at Investor's Business Daily:
Is the president right when he says the stimulus kept the U.S. from falling into a depression? No. In fact, too much government tinkering and spending, not too little, has given us the jobless recovery we have now.
Democrats in charge of both the White House and Congress are firing all their guns at once to tout the benefits of the $862 billion stimulus package passed a year ago this week. They've even planned a 35-city tour to support it. Their message?
"One year later, it is largely thanks to the recovery act that a second depression is no longer a possibility," President Obama said Wednesday. The stimulus act has created 2 million jobs, he claimed, predicting 1.5 million more this year from the program.
Is it just a coincidence that the 3.5 million jobs he is claiming is exactly what the White House predicted early last year? We doubt it. But whatever the case, Obama's claims are false.
Start with this: Stimulus didn't save us from an economic cataclysm. Obama himself said so back in March, noting that the economy was "not as bad as we think," and that he was "highly optimistic." It's clear he didn't think we were on the brink of a Depression.
If Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats don't make a mid-term course correction soon, they'll end up at the bottom of a steep canyon.
The latest "Right Direction or Wrong Track" survey by Rasmussen Reports finds just 28% of Americans say the U.S. is heading in the right direction.
From Rasmussen Reports:
Just 28% of U.S. voters say the country is heading in the right direction, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. This marks the lowest level of voter confidence in the nation’s current course since one year ago and appears to signal the end of a slight burst of confidence at the first of this year.
The majority of voters (65%) believe the nation is heading down the wrong track, a figure that's held roughly steady since mid-November.
At the start of 2010, voters were slightly more optimistic, with 32% saying the country was heading in the right direction. Past polling shows that voters are typically more optimistic at the start of a new year.
Leading up to Barack Obama's inauguration a year ago, the number of voters who felt the country was heading in the right direction remained below 20%. The week of his inauguration, voter confidence rose to 27% and then steadily increased, peaking at 40% in early May 2009. Since then, confidence in the direction of the country has steadily declined.
The Wall Street Journal offers some insight into the real reason Sen. Evan Bayh has turned his back on Barack Obama and the far-left Congressional leadership that hijacked the Democratic Party.
From the WSJ:
The political retirement of Evan Bayh, at age 54, is being portrayed by various sages as a result of too much partisanship, or the Senate's dysfunction, or even the systemic breakdown of American governance. Most of this is rationalization. The real story, of which Mr. Bayh's frustration is merely the latest sign, is the failure once again of liberal governance.
For the fourth time since the 1960s, American voters in 2008 gave Democrats overwhelming control of both Congress and the White House. Republicans haven't had such large majorities since the 1920s. Yet once again, Democratic leaders have tried to govern the country from the left, only to find that their policies have hit a wall of practical and popular resistance.
Democrats failed in the latter half of the 1960s, as the twin burdens of the Great Society and Vietnam ended the Kennedy boom and split their party. They failed again after Watergate, as Congress dragged Jimmy Carter to the left and liberals had no answer for stagflation. They failed a third time in the first two Bill Clinton years, as tax increases and HillaryCare led to the Gingrich Congress before Mr. Clinton salvaged his Presidency by tacking to the center.
A fourth crackup is already well underway and is even more remarkable considering how Democrats were set up for success. Inheriting a recession amid GOP failures, Democrats had the chance to restore economic confidence and fix the financial system with modest reforms that would let them take credit for the inevitable recovery. Yet only 13 months later, Democrats are down in the polls, their agenda is stymied by Democratic opposition, and their House and Senate majorities are in peril as moderates like Mr. Bayh flee the scene of this political accident.
The mere mention of Barack Obama helps Republicans get elected these days. Will the Dems hide Obama in a secret underground location until after the November 2010 election?
And the hits just keep coming for Pennsylvania Democrats.
Following in the footsteps of the recent announcement by Speaker of the House Keith McCall that he is retiring, the Senate's top Democrat, Sen. Bob Mellow, is also calling it quits.
Sen. Robert Mellow has represented the 22nd Senate District for the past 40 years. The dual retirement of McCall and Mellow is a severe blow to the influence Northeastern Pennsylvania residents have enjoyed in the Legislature.
From Mellow's office:
Senator Robert J. Mellow, the Pennsylvania State Senate's longest-serving member and its highest-ranking Democrat, announced today that he will not seek re-election. With a lengthy record of public service, Senator Mellow's distinguished career includes two terms as Senate President Pro Tempore, the third-highest constitutional office in the Commonwealth.
"It has been my profound personal honor to serve the citizens of Pennsylvania. It has literally been my life's work. I am deeply grateful for the trust that my friends and neighbors from northeastern Pennsylvania have shown me by electing and re-electing me to work for them. We have accomplished many great things together,” Mellow said.
"I have fought hard for the good people of Pennsylvania, and I have loved every minute of being in the arena. My constituents have shown me that if we stand together with honor and integrity, there is nothing that we cannot accomplish as citizens of this great state. I always knew there would come a time to make this difficult decision. I am confident I have accomplished all I set out to do for the people of Pennsylvania. I leave public life knowing that I have always strived to meet a high standard of excellence. I know in my heart that we have climbed that mountain. Now while at the top, it is time to move on to different priorities."
"The long hours in Harrisburg over the years have cost me precious time with my daughters and now my grandchildren. My choice to put them first is the right thing to do and, as jarring as this decision has been to make, I am confident that now is the right time to do it. All of those days devoted to my constituents have resulted in many good things for the 22nd District – some I never imagined possible. With those successes in mind, I am shifting my focus. My daughters and grandchildren mean the world to me, and in this next chapter of my life, I need to devote more of my time and energy to them."
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review is reporting that Pennsylvania's longest serving member of the U.S. House of Representatives, the controversial John Murtha, died Monday of complications from recent gall bladder surgery.
From the Tribune-Review:
U.S. Rep. John Murtha, the longest-serving congressman in Pennsylvania history, died today at 1:18 p.m. at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, Va., his office announced today.
He was 77.
Murtha had been hospitalized since Tuesday with an infection that arose from gallbladder surgery in late January.
Murtha was first elected to the U.S. House in February, 1974, and became the longest-serving congressman on Saturday. He served since 1989 as chairman or ranking member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.
His family was at his bedside when he died, said spokesman Matthew Mazonkey.
The Associated Press released a quick video about his death.
How screwed up is the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania?
The Pennsylvania's Democratic State Committee met in Lancaster Saturday to endorse an 80-year-old man who served as a Republican in the U.S. Senate for the past 30 years as its 2010 Senate nominee.
Arlen Specter, a Republican since 1965, persuaded enough Democratic Party officials that he is their best option for 2010. All that stands in the way is Congressman Joe Sestak and angry voters who are tired of incumbents.
The party also could not reach a consensus on an endorsement for governor. The only thing the delegates were sure of was they did not want perennial loser Joe Hoeffel, who is running on a pro-abortion, pro same-sex marriage platform. Hoeffel was eliminated on the first ballot.
But the delegates could not decide between liberal Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato and moderate Auditor General Jack Wagner. Neither man received the necessary two-thirds vote for the endorsement.
Wagner finished first in the balloting, but could not garner enough support for the endorsement. Onorato, who has raised the most money and wants to continue the failed Ed Rendell policies, finished second and attracted only half as many endorsement votes as Wagner.
A Republican retread and a candidate who couldn't earn his own party's endorsement will lead the Democratic slate in 2010. Can you say "Republican sweep"?
Look for Pat Toomey to be the next U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania and Tom Corbett to be the next governor.
If 'Unsustainable' Is New Normal, Collapse Is Closer Than We Think
Columnist and best-selling author Mark Steyn says Barack Obama doesn't know much about economics, which is not good news considering the shape the U.S. economy is in right now.
From his latest column in Investor's Business Daily:
Obama's spending proposes to take the average Bush deficit for the years 2001-08 and double it, all the way to 2020. To get out of the Bush hole, we need to dig a hole twice as deep for one-and-a-half times as long. And that's according to the official projections of his economics czar, Ms. Rose-Colored Glasses.
By 2015, the actual hole may be so deep that even if you toss every Obama speech down it on double-spaced paper you still won't be able to fill it up. In the spendthrift Bush days, federal spending as a proportion of GDP averaged 19.6%. Obama proposes to crank it up to 25% as a permanent feature of life.
But if they're "unsustainable," what happens when they can no longer be sustained? A failure of bond auctions? A downgraded government debt rating? Reduced GDP growth? Total societal collapse? Mad Max on the New Jersey Turnpike?
Tom Caltagirone has spent the past 34 years in the Pennsylvania Legislature.
The Reading Democratic is planning to run for an 18th term in the state House in 2010.
If you like the way Harrisburg is run, then by all means, keep sending Caltagirone back to the Legislature. If you're tired of high taxes, uncontrolled spending and all the corruption, then stop returning the same people to Harrisburg.
Let's get real. If somebody hasn't done the job in 34 years, why should voters give them another two years?
Politicians are like diapers. They're full of doo doo and need to be changed frequently.
Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats are leading us over a cliff.
From Investor's Business Daily:
The proposed budget over the next decade would rack up $45.8 trillion in new spending, $9.1 trillion in deficits and more than $2 trillion in higher taxes on Americans. It will double the national debt held by the public to over $18 trillion, while raising taxes on 3.2 million small businesses and upper-income taxpayers — the very people the administration is counting on to pull us out of recession.
Based on recent estimates, the expected deficits are growing, not shrinking. Last year's proposed budget contained just $7.1 trillion in red ink over 10 years. This year, that's ballooned to $9.1 trillion. Higher spending is responsible for 90% of the increase. Total spending over the decade is expected to swell 54%.
During the decade, spending will average about 24% of GDP — compared with the 20% of GDP that has prevailed since shortly after World War II. This represents a permanent 20% increase in the real size of government — which explains why the number of federal employees has reached 2.15 million, the most ever.
If spending isn't brought under control soon, the U.S. will suffer the fate of all fiscally irresponsible nations — slower economic growth, lower standards of living, shorter lives.
The same Democratic Party strategists who downplay the GOP's chances of picking up 10 more seats in the Senate are the same ones who said the Dems would always keep Ted Kennedy's seat in Massachusetts.
From POLITICO:
Republicans suddenly have a conceivable path to winning back the Senate in November, after locking in top-flight candidates overnight in Illinois and Indiana.
A 10-seat pickup for the GOP — once regarded as an impossibility even by the party’s own strategists — remains very much a long shot. It would still require a win in every competitive race, something that happens only in wave elections like 1994 and 2008.
But only 14 months after the GOP was routed up and down the ballot on the night of Barack Obama’s election, the new political environment makes significant Senate gains likely. And within the past 24 hours, a Republican recapture of the Senate is at least within the realm of speculation.
With all the usual disclaimers attached — do not engage in political odds-making while taking medication or operating heavy machinery — here's why a Republican takeover is at least possible.
A new Rasmussen Reports survey of Americans voters finds that 61% believe Congress is doing a poor job.
In case you get all your information from the Mainstream Media, Congress has been controlled by the Democrats since the 2006 elections.
There is a bright side to the dismal poll numbers. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will be out as leaders of their respective chambers after the November election when Republicans will win majorities in the House and Senate.
From Rasmussen Reports:
The number of voters who give Congress a poor job performance rating is now at its highest level in more than three years. More voters also think most members of Congress are corrupt.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 61% of likely voters say Congress is doing a poor job. Just 12% give Congress good or excellent ratings, marking no change from last month. Positive ratings for Congress have changed little from a year ago, when 14% gave the legislature good or excellent marks.
Since then, of course, Congress has passed a controversial economic stimulus plan and unpopular bailout plans for the financial industry, General Motors and Chrysler. The health care plan now stalled in Congress has long been opposed by most voters. In fact, 61% now want Congress to drop health care and focus on jobs.
Forty-five percent (45%) of voters now view most members of Congress as being corrupt, the highest level found since June 2008. Just 28% disagree and say most members are not corrupt. Another 26% are undecided.
The latest Franklin & Marshall College Poll has the answers ... and the news is bleak for Barack Obama and the Democrats.
Among the poll highlights:
1) Pennsylvanians continue to express pessimism about the economy. Four in ten (40% compared to 36% in October) say they are financially worse off this year than last, and only a quarter (27%) expects their personal finances to be better off a year from now.
2) Among registered Democrats, Senator Specter leads Joe Sestak (30% to 13%) in the primary race for U.S. Senate, although 50 percent remain undecided. In possible general election match-ups, Pat Toomey leads both Specter (45% to 31%) and Sestak (41% to 19%) among likely voters. Registered Pennsylvanians cite health care (29%) and the economy (24%) as the most important issues in their vote for U.S. Senate.
3) Nearly three in four (72%) Pennsylvania Democrats remain undecided about the primary race for governor. Tom Corbett leads Sam Rohrer (23% to 5%) among Republicans for the gubernatorial nomination, but seven in ten (69%) remain undecided about their preference. Registered Pennsylvanians cite the economy (26%) and taxes (13%) as the most important issues in their vote for governor.
4) Favorability ratings for President Obama have changed slightly since October. His unfavorable rating increased by 5 percentage points, and he is now viewed favorably and unfavorably by equal proportions (44%) of registered Pennsylvanians. Senator Specter's favorability rating has risen slightly to 35 percent (compared to 28% in October), and his unfavorable rating stands at 43 percent (compared to 46% in October).
5) President Obama's job approval in Pennsylvania is the lowest of his presidency, with only 38 percent (compared to 40% in October) saying he is doing an excellent or good job. Senator Specter's job approval has risen slightly to 34 percent (compared to 29% in October), and about three in ten (29%) respondents say he deserves re-election (up from 23% in October). Those who say Specter does not deserve re-election cite his length of service (25%) and party switch (21%) as the main reasons.
6) Pennsylvanians continue to express dissatisfaction with the direction of the state, albeit less so than in October. 53 percent now say the state is off on the wrong track (compared to 60% in October), while 39 percent say the state is headed in the right direction (compared to 32% in October). Nearly eight in ten (78%) registered Pennsylvanians feel state government needs reform, and a similar number (72%) would favor a constitutional convention to review the state's constitution.
7) The job approval rating of the state legislature remains very low with only 16 percent of registered Pennsylvanians indicating it’s doing an excellent or good job, while 74 percent indicate it's doing only a fair or poor job. These figures have changed little since October.
Charles Krauthammer is amused by the reaction of top Democratic Party officials and their media allies to the crushing defeat (and repudiation of Barack Obama) in Massachusetts.
From Krauthammer's latest column:
After Coakley's defeat, Obama pretended that the real cause was a generalized anger and frustration "not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years."
Let's get this straight: The antipathy to George W. Bush is so enduring and powerful that ... it just elected a Republican senator in Massachusetts? Why, the man is omnipotent.
And the Democrats are delusional: Scott Brown won by running against Obama, not Bush. He won by brilliantly nationalizing the race, running hard against the Obama agenda, most notably Obamacare. Killing it was his No. 1 campaign promise.
Bull's eye. An astonishing 56 percent of Massachusetts voters, according to Rasmussen Reports, called health care their top issue. In a Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates poll, 78 percent of Brown voters said their vote was intended to stop Obamacare. Only a quarter of all voters in the Rasmussen poll cited the economy as their top issue, nicely refuting the Democratic view that Massachusetts was just the usual anti-incumbent resentment you expect in bad economic times.
Brown ran on a very specific, very clear agenda: Stop health care. Don't Mirandize terrorists. Don't raise taxes; cut them. And no more secret backroom deals with special interests.
Stinging from loses in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, Democrats now fear they can't hold Joe Biden's old Senate seat in Delaware. 2010 is shaping up to be a blowout for the Republicans.
What is "Plan B" for a political party with no new ideas?
Now that Bush-bashing has backfired for the Dems in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, what will the party run on in November?
It's now the Obama recession. It's now Obama's wars. It's now Obama's deficits.
From POLITICO:
After three consecutive losses in statewide races, some top Democrats are questioning a tactic aimed at boosting the party's candidates in each of those contests: Bush-bashing.
"Voters are pretty tired of the blame game," said longtime Democratic strategist Steve Hildebrand, a top aide on Obama's presidential campaign. "What a stupid strategy that was."
U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts, R-PA 16, released the following statement on the election of Republican Scott Brown to fill the remaining three years left in the term of Sen. Ted Kennedy:
"This is a strong signal that Congress has its priorities wrong. The American people want us to focus on job creation but instead the Administration and Congress has been spending all its energy trying to push through an expensive and extremely unpopular healthcare bill and massive spending bills that are bankrupting our country. The only new jobs created by the health care bill would be for government bureaucrats. I think Scott Brown will be a great Senator and I know his first priority will be getting the people of our nation and his state working again."
Now that Obamacare is on life support, it's time for voters to demand Congress pull the plug on the cap-and-trade energy tax.
The National Federation of Independent Business today released 16 state-based surveys that show opposition to the Democrats' proposed energy tax. The majority of voters polled say tax-and-trade will cost more U.S. jobs.
The Wall Street Journal believes Barack Obama can salvage what's left of his failed presidency by listening to the American people instead of the "Democratic delusionists" who have been advising him over the past year.
Tuesday's stunning victory by Republican Scott Brown, which the newspaper calls a "historic election rebuke," was a clear signal that the majority of Americans want Obama to rethink most of his policies, especially government-run health care.
From the editorial:
Yesterday's vote wasn't a repudiation of Mr. Obama's Presidency, or at least it needn't be. The President remains more popular than his policies, and voters want him to succeed. But they are also telling him he needs to steer a more moderate, less partisan course, returning to the pragmatism and comity that shaped his political rise but have vanished in his first, squandered year.
Tradition has it when Lord Cornwallis surrendered to Gen. George Washington at Yorktown in 1781, ending the Revolutionary War, a British band played "The World Turned Upside Down."
That may be just a legend, but it's appropriate to play the tune today as a Republican has defeated the heavily-favored Democrat for Ted Kennedy's former U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts.
The world has turned upside down for Barack Obama and the Democrats.
Pat Toomey, who is seeking the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, issued a statement Tuesday night saying the victory by the GOP's Scott Brown in Massachusetts is a repudiation of the Obamacare bill being negotiated in secret by Congressional Democrats.
From Toomey's statement:
Tonight, voters in Massachusetts made their voices heard. In one of the most Democratic states in the country, voters elected Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate in a demonstration of their opposition to one-Party Democratic rule in Washington and the nearly $1 trillion health care monstrosity the Democrats are trying to ram through Congress.
Voters want health care reform but they are fed up with the bill being pushed by President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Leader Harry Reid. That 2,000-page bill includes $500 billion in new taxes, a catalogue of Washington mandates and takeovers, a parade of sweetheart deals for individual politicians and special interests, and nothing to bring down premiums for average American families.
Now the one-Party-rule Democrats are talking about circumventing the normal congressional process, either by having the House accept the Senate version of the bill, or stalling Scott Brown’s swearing in. Yet even Democratic leaders like former Vermont Governor and Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean admit that Harry Reid's Senate bill does not move the country forward. Dean recently called the Senate bill, "a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than AIG." (ABC News, 12/16/09)
"Everyone can agree that we need real health care reform in this country," U.S. Senate candidate Pat Toomey said, "but it is clear that Americans all across the country are rejecting the Democrats' sweetheart deals, tax hikes, and massive spending. It is time to start over and begin the process of working on bipartisan, commonsense health care reform that brings real competition to the health insurance market and lowers the cost of care."
Toomey says it's time to start over and enact health care reforms that bring down medical costs without growing government.
Last November, Toomey wrote an op-ed urging bipartisan health care reform. He proposed commonsense solutions like eliminating the unfair discrimination against individually purchased health insurance in our tax code, allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, implementing reasonable tort reform, and allowing small businesses and organizations to band together and form health associations.
"I urge the Democrats to put aside their partisan determination to ram a $1 trillion bill through Congress that a majority of Americans oppose," Toomey added. "Now, is the time to implement reforms that will truly help people afford health care, without breaking the bank in Washington."
If Barack Obama didn't get the message from Virginia and New Jersey voters in November, he got it tonight in Massachusetts.
Who says there's no such thing as a recall election?
Voters in Massachusetts, the most Democratic state in the country, changed their mind about Barack Obama today by electing a Republican to the U.S. Senate seat held by the Kennedys for a half-century.
Stick a fork in Obamacare. It's done. Say goodbye to Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have retreated to a secret underground location.
Voters took the Democrats to the woodshed for a good old-fashioned whooping over uncontrolled spending and a health-care bill most Americans don't want or need.
We may be witnessing the biggest political upset since Truman defeated Dewey.
With 60 percent of the vote in, Republican Scott Brown is ahead of his heavily-favored Democratic opponent, Martha Coakley, in a special election to fill the remainder of Sen. Ted Kenney's unexpired term
The Massachusetts Senate seat has been held by the Kennedys since the early 1950s.
With 60 percent of precincts reporting, Brown has 53 percent of the vote to 46 percent for Coakley.
The Associated Press calls the race "a referendum on President Barack Obama's sweeping health care overhaul and his first year in office."
From the wire service:
A loss — or even a narrow victory — by the once-favored Coakley for the seat that the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy held for nearly half a century in this Democratic stronghold could signal big political problems for the president's party this November when House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates are on the ballot nationwide.
More immediately at stake was a critical 60th vote for the Democrats' supermajority, which is needed to save their health care legislation and the rest of Obama's agenda. The Democrats can't afford to lose a seat because a 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate could allow the Republicans to use procedural maneuvers to block votes on legislation.
The election transformed reliably Democratic Massachusetts into a battleground state. One day shy of the first anniversary of Obama's swearing-in, it played out amid a backdrop of animosity and resentment from voters over persistently high unemployment, industry bailouts, exploding federal budget deficits and partisan wrangling over health care.
A timely and thought-provoking column posted at HumanEvents.com by Frances Rice, chairwoman of the National Black Republican Association, on how the Democratic Party has taken advantage of blacks for decades.
From Rice's op-ed:
Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans.
In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.
Time magazine is focusing national attention on the ongoing political corruption scandals in Harrisburg.
From an article by Sean Scully posted at Time.com:
Pennsylvania has long been known for shady politics, but this year promises to be particularly ugly as series of corruption trials unfold, all stemming from a sweeping probe known as "Bonusgate." Prosecutors charge that leaders of both parties in the state House of Representatives flagrantly ignored the law, using taxpayer money to wage political warfare and to lavish perks on aides and party loyalists. The price tag is likely in the tens of millions, and prosecutors warn there could be more indictments, possibly targeting leaders of the State Senate. "There was an unbelievable sense of entitlement in Harrisburg that they could do this with a high degree of immunity," said Chris Borick, political science professor at Muhlenberg College.
The future of Obamacare and the entire Obama Administration could hinge on the results of Tuesday's special election to fill the U.S. Senate seat from Massachusetts, says House GOP Leader John Boehner.
From POLITICO:
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) predicted “the end of the Obama agenda” if health care reform does not pass — and he says Massachusetts can help usher in this demise by supporting Republican Scott Brown.
"If this health care reform bill doesn't pass, it is the end of the Obama agenda," Boehner told conservative radio host Laura Ingraham on Monday morning. "It's pretty clear that they're going to use every trick imaginable ... to shove this down the throats of the American people."
Boehner, who has contributed to Brown’s campaign, said he is hopeful for a victory Tuesday in the traditional Democratic stronghold but wary that congressional leadership will push the health care bill regardless of the electoral results.
On the eve of the special election, Boehner called Brown a "great candidate with a real chance to win," yet the minority leader was in lockstep with his party's message when he framed the election as more of a repudiation of the Democrats than a statement on the candidate himself.
"I have no doubt that the people of Massachusetts are looking at this race as a way to send Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama a message to stop this spending," Boehner said. "We can continue to put pressure on them, exploit those differences and bring this bill down.
"This is not about political points," Boehner continued. "Our members are adamantly opposed to the government taking over control of our health system."
Tony Phyrillas is the city editor and political columnist for The Mercury, a two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning daily newspaper in Pottstown, Pa. Phyrillas has won several national and state awards for his columns. Phyrillas has been featured on National Public Radio (NPR) and in The New York Times and is a frequent commentator on radio and television programs. He co-hosted "Talking Politics with Tony Phyrillas & Mike Pincus" on WPAZ 1370 AM.
RSS
Links to this post
