You’re hoping for another 1994, eh? Well, you’re not going to get it if D.C.’s biggest union bosses have their say — and they don’t just have a say, they have a checkbook to put where their mouths are. And both words and munitions are taking on an overtly combative tone.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting:

The AFL-CIO plans to roll out its biggest political campaign ever, surpassing the $53 million spent in 2008 to help elect President Barack Obama, to try to avert a repeat of the 1994 midterm election when Democrats lost a majority in Congress.

If that sounds a bit aggressive, that’s nothing compared to the powerful head of the AFSCME public employee union, who is saying “The time has come to draw a line in the sand…Regardless of your party affiliation, if you’re not with us, you are against us.”

(We’re pretty sure we’ve seen other people get hammered for using the same language, but we digress…)

(more…)

While the media and most of the public are consumed by the health care death march, the Senate is deep in negotiations to pass a sweeping re-regulation of the financial sector. As the public knows, ObamaCare is an attempt to regulate 1/6th of the US economy. The financial ‘reform’ proposal, though, will impact the other 5/6ths of the economy. In many respects, the financial services ‘reform’ is much more damaging to the economy and our future competitiveness. Worse, its passage is being aided by Bob Corker.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory with his complete capitulation and total surrender on the Financial Services bill.  The bill, passed by the House with a $4 trillion bailout provision, making bailouts the permanent policy of the United States government, was on it’s last legs until Corker came to the rescue.  Now the Washington Post and other are reporting that Corker and ethically-challenged, retiring Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) are on the verge of a deal to breathe life back into the regulatory and bailout scheme.

Let’s be clear – the President and the hard left want this bill. David Reilly of Bloomberg described the measure as Barney Frank’s $4 trillion gift to the banks. Reilly wrote:

Here are some of the nuggets I gleaned from days spent reading Frank’s handiwork:

– For all its heft, the bill doesn’t once mention the words “too-big-to-fail,” the main issue confronting the financial system. Admitting you have a problem, as any 12- stepper knows, is the crucial first step toward recovery.

– Instead, it supports the biggest banks. It authorizes Federal Reserve banks to provide as much as $4 trillion in emergency funding the next time Wall Street crashes. So much for “no-more-bailouts” talk. That is more than twice what the Fed pumped into markets this time around. The size of the fund makes the bribes in the Senate’s health-care bill look minuscule.

(more…)

The recall of New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez took a step forward yesterday with a promising oral argument in New Jersey state court.  The New Jersey Constitution expressly provides for the recall of members of Congress representing the state in a provision adopted by a 75% favorable vote of the people in 1995.  The New Jersey state legislature then expressly provided by statute for the procedures for such a recall.

The Committee to Recall Robert Menendez filed papers for the circulation of their petitions to begin last September.  But the Secretary of State, who has no authority to issue rulings on constitutional questions, nevertheless refused to approve them on the grounds that her own New Jersey state constitution must be unconstitutional under the federal constitution, which she said did not allow such recalls.

The three judge appellate panel considering yesterday whether the recall should proceed expressed reluctance to declare a provision of their own state’s constitution duly adopted by the people null and void.  They also seemed receptive to the argument by the recall committee that they were only asking the court for an order for the circulation of petitions to proceed, and there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that prohibits that.  To the contrary, the U.S. Constitution protects the political expression involved in signing a petition calling for the recall of an elected official, and the petitioning of government for the redress of grievances.

If the recall committee gets the required signatures from over a million citizens calling for the recall of Senator Menendez, and the majority of citizens vote to recall him in a recall election, and the Senator decides to thumb his nose at the will of the people anyway, then the issue of whether state recalls of members of Congress are constitutional under the U.S. Constitution would be presented to the courts.  But until then all that the New Jersey recall committee is asking for is the freedom of political expression involved in gathering recall petition signatures, and the U.S. Constitution protects rather than prohibits that.

(more…)

In the category of least surprising, and therefore most anti-climatic, decisions of all time, Jerry Brown announced that he is running for Governor of California. He did so through an Internet video. Certainly I realize how fashionable the Internet is for candidates – but Brown’s choice of venue to announce his campaign was probably less hip than hiding – much like his virtual absence from the campaign trail the last few months.

Quite frankly, the former media-hound Brown has been hiding because he has nothing relevant to say. Indeed, the most important issues of the day all run counter to Jerry Brown’s current policies. Let me count the ways . . .

1. The Budget/Taxes.  In this perennial saga, California has yet another $20 billion+ budget deficit. The Democrats and their Union patrons want more spending and higher tax rates. The Republicans, including their statewide candidates and Brown’s Republican opponents, want less spending and lower tax rates. The California voters, according to the Field Poll (never known to lean to the Right), want lower spending not higher taxes. What’s the current version of Jerry Brown to say under those circumstances? Other than saying he will leave it up to the voters to raise taxes (the so-called leader is asking to be led), he has remarkably little to say – and that is one reason he avoids the press and limelight so assiduously – including campaign announcements devoid of those annoying press questions like – would you veto a Democrat sponsored tax increase bill?

2. Jobs. Nevada is the Nation’s #1 business development State. California is either last or second to last when it comes to being employer friendly because of high tax rates and the nation’s most onerous regulatory burden. See the correlation anyone? California, like the nation, faces a simple choice: government jobs or private sector jobs. Government jobs cost money California does not have. Private sector jobs require tax relief and lower regulations. Brown can’t advocate more spending very well and he can’t seriously claim he will go against the unions and the Democrats in the legislature when it comes to taxes and regulations. So what’s the current version of Jerry Brown to say under those circumstances? Remarkably little.

(more…)

Today is generally a day of liberation. Several nations declared independence today. The United States banned the importation of slaves in 1807. In 1861, Tsar Alexander II emancipated the serfs in Russia. Bear with us, but we think this is appropriate today:

“The Early Adopters” Report uncovers that most oppose a third party, many are new to politics

CHICAGO, —  A new study released today reveals that Tea Party activists are motivated by feelings of responsibility to future generations and belief in America’s founding principles, but still struggle with questions of leadership and identity. The study conducted by Sam Adams Alliance, The Early Adopters: Reading the Tea Leaves, also reveals that Tea Party activists are a diverse group trying – often for the first time – to change the political landscape by holding elected officials more accountable. The results of the full report can be found at www.activistinsightsreport.com.

The Sam Adams report offers the first-ever insights into the Tea Party movement that include a survey sample made up entirely of recognized Tea Party activists.

“A lot of surveys have focused on the Tea Party movement, but they’ve been about what others think of them, and don’t reveal the motives of actual Tea Partiers,” said Sam Adams Alliance chairman Eric O’Keefe. “We decided to learn what the Tea Party leaders are up to the old fashioned way: We asked them.”

(more…)

“Hot For The Up Do”

This week we wether the storm as conditions on the east coast play havoc with Mark Steyn’s power and Peter Robinson’s Skype. But we persevere as guest Andrew Breitbart creates his own storm with Media Matters and liberals in general. We talk about the health care summit, play “Who’s Your Favorite Lefty,” and Andrew and Rob reveal their secret admiration for the filmmaker John Waters. (more…)

It’s time to stop playing along with this ridiculous game called, “The government says the health care bill will cost…” It’s always wrong. And it’s always wrong by underestimating the cost. Why don’t the Republicans point this out? (Probably because they’ve been big government spenders, too.)

Look back at when Medicare was first created:

At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost only about $ 12 billion by 1990 (a figure that included an allowance for inflation). This was a supposedly “conservative” estimate. But in 1990 Medicare actually cost $107 billion.

In 2007, total Medicare spending was $431 billion! That isn’t even close to the costs predicted in 1965. Why do we act like the numbers coming out of Congress and the CBO have any basis in reality?

The predictions for Medicaid were just as wrong:

(more…)

Spending Under the Influence: National Brewery Museum receives a $449,574 grant from the Federal Highway Administration

The Secretary of Transportation says “it’s fun playing Santa Claus to states and cities around the nation”

…as the Department of Transportation furloughs federal bridge and road inspectors

Washington politicians and bureaucrats enjoy ‘lavish’ government pensions; Federal employees can draw on their pension beginning at age 50 and can get as much as 80 percent of their final salary

National Institutes of Health spends $3.9 million to develop ‘Avatar’ sex-ed video game for kids

National Science Foundation pays to produce a “free” CD for road trips on a highway in California

Director of Louisiana housing agency charged taxpayers for personal expenses; Unallowable charges included a $150 bill at hair salon, items from a sporting goods store and Wal-Mart, and telephone and electric bills

(more…)

On January 8^th, BigGovernment.com posted a blog that began, “Outrageously, U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Secretary Hilda Solis and other DOL Obama appointees appear to have blatantly disregarded the President’s Executive Order #13490 – the Ethics Pledge.”

Somebody at the U.S. Department of Labor must be reading BigGovernment.com because just 11 days after the posting, the DOL ethics officer wrote a letter to The National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix and provided copies of signed “EO 13490 ethics pledges.”  (See related Foundation ongoing lawsuit against DOL for DOL’s failure to comply with the Freedom of Information Act.) Each of these newly provided pledges matched the ethics order language (more on this in another post) unlike the self-administered waivers included in the publicly distributed pledges provided to ProPublica.org and referenced in the earlier blog.

In addition, the DOL ethics officer asserted that 51 people at the DOL have signed the ethics pledge and there has been only one (1) ethics waiver issued by DOL and that was for Naomi Walker.  Her Job:  Big Labor Liaison (an Associate Deputy Secretary position). Her past experience includes a stint as an AFL-CIO lobbyist among others.  Walker’s ethics waiver is the subject of this blog.

Walker’s ethics waiver and its accompanying explanatory memo was approved “after consultation with the Counsel to the President” expose The President’s Ethics Executive Order for the joke that it is.

The ethics officer provides a four-page memo (probably written in a large part by the Counsel to the President) to justify the reasons that Walker must be provided an ethics waiver of Obama’s ethics executive order.   My summary of the memo follows:

(more…)

Renown pollster Scott Rasmussen discussed the reason a backlash against Democratic health care reform is brewing. Rasmussen also discusses Obama, Evan Bayh, upcoming Republican victories and various other topics.

“I think the other thing that is hurting Democrats on the health care issue right now is sort of the sense of they were going to push it through regardless of the fact that it was unpopular, and I don’t think that’s the kind of responsiveness that people are looking for.”

“Right now you’d have to say the likelihood is the Democrats will lose 5 to 8 seats in the Senate, which means the Republicans would not gain control. That’s probably good news for the GOP because I don’t think they want to be in charge heading into 2012. Also expect that the Republicans will pick up maybe 25 or 30 seats in the House.”

(more…)

In a further attack on the housing market, the New York Times recently reported that President Obama may be amending his loan modification program to make it even more difficult for defaulting homeowners to be foreclosed upon.  The Times states:

The Obama administration, under intense pressure to help millions of people in danger of losing their homes, is considering a ban on foreclosures unless they have first been examined for potential modification, according to a set of draft proposals.

That would raise the stakes from the current practice, which strongly encourages lenders to evaluate defaulting borrowers for a modification but does not make it mandatory.

Meg Reilly, a Treasury Department spokeswoman, said Thursday that the proposed foreclosure ban was “one of the many ideas under consideration in the administration’s ongoing housing stabilization efforts.” The proposal was first reported by Bloomberg News.

To be fair, the effects of this program may be minimal, with some interpreting the ban to be more about PR than anything substantive:

Laurie Goodman, a senior managing director at the Amherst Securities Group who has been highly critical of the government’s modification program, said even if the proposal came to pass, it would not be “a major change. We think there is a large public relations element to this.”

…The Mortgage Bankers Association said its members were already doing what the administration was considering.

“Lenders generally go to foreclosure as a measure of last resort, after all other options, including loan modification, are exhausted,” said John Mechem, the trade group’s vice president for public affairs.

Any enhancements the government made to the modification program would be unlikely to stem many foreclosures, said Howard Glaser, a prominent housing consultant.

Regardless of the impact however, this potential loan modification addendum adds insult to the injury of an already wrongheaded and destructive policy, and will only prolong the pain in the housing market.

The reasons for the woes in housing are quite simple.  Banks extended mortgages to borrowers that were poor credit risks, and many borrowers took out mortgages that they shouldn’t have either out of speculation or profligacy.  That the depression is throwing people out of work and keeping many jobless exacerbates the problem, in that unfortunately many who could have reasonably expected to afford their homes now cannot given their lack of sufficient cash flow.  Of course, truly prudent buyers might have saved to purchase their homes outright with cash.

(more…)

Recently the Obama Administration cut funding to Upward Bound, a successful educational program with a proven track record. Upward Bound provides support to participating students in their preparation for college entrance. Upward Bound serves high school students from low-income families and high school students from families in which neither parent holds a bachelor’s degree. 95% of Upward Bound graduates have entered post-secondary education and are four times more likely to earn a college degree than students from similar back-grounds who do not participate in the program. The Obama Administration will cut funding for this successful educational program.

Radical Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings will get a fat raise in funding this year.

At the same time, despite the runaway federal spending and record budget deficits, Barack Obama is including $410 million in the 2011 budget for his “safe schools” czar Kevin Jennings. This is an increase of $45 million over last year’s budget. Obviously, some things are more important than others. These funds ought to buy a whole mess of fisting kits, leather bar guides and child porn books. And, the money will come in handy for the sexual indoctrination of teens and pre-teens.
Citizen Link Blog reported:

So want does Jennings intend to do with this money?

For starters, he says he’s going to make “school climate” measurement a top priority—and, in fact, he’d love for “school climate” to eventually be made part of the “Common Core” national standards movement! He plans to begin with “a new grant program coming out of this department where we’ll be providing possibly as much as $70 million for investments in school climate projects.” (He revealed all this and much more in this month’s Phi Delta Kappan magazine. Scroll down to the “Safe at School” title.)

(more…)

Carpe Diem, Larry Kudlow. This is your moment to take on Charles Schumer in the November 2010 race for the New York Senate seat. It’s also our moment to take back America. We understand that the thought of joining one of America’s most hated institutions—Rasmussen now reports a 10% approval rating for Congress—can be deeply disturbing. Still, we urge you to do it. Today there are two diametrically opposed views of government.  You have long articulated a belief in individual liberty, limited government, and free markets. You understand that the purpose of government is to secure and protect our individual rights. For Charles Schumer, government exists to right all perceived societal wrongs, individuals be damned.  In the eyes of Charles Schumer, the world is comprised of victims, capitalists who prey on them, and benevolent elites in Washington who come to the rescue.

This is your moment, Larry Kudlow, and you have a grass roots movement behind you, the likes of which the state of New York has never seen. You see, even though the Harvard trained, professional politician won his last election with 71% of the vote, and believes it to be his birthright to get reelected, there is good reason to believe that Chuck may be just a tad worried. There’s something rotten in the state of Eliteville these days.

Chuck is not a big tea party fan and was a bit shaken up by the Massachusetts results.  In fact, in his fundraising efforts to keep the “Kennedy seat” in the right hands, Chuck derided Scott Brown as a “far right tea bagger”. I guess Chuck doesn’t think many New Yorkers are sympathetic to the tea party movement. Let’s show him how wrong he is, Larry.

(more…)

Last week, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a crime syndicate dedicated to tightening the Democratic Party’s grip on America, dissolved its national structure.  Too much of ACORN’s corruption had been exposed to public scrutiny for it to run its vote fraud and extortion rackets effectively.  So, ACORN activists will have to soldier on in state-level organizations, such as New York Communities for Change and New England United for Justice in Massachusetts.

ACORN does indeed operate like the Mafia, but it more closely resembles another organization that began as an affiliate of the Democratic Party, the Ku Klux Klan.  Aside from intimidating some bank executives, ACORN does not engage in violence, but like the KKK it has vote fraud as a top priority.

There have been two distinct organizations known as the Ku Klux Klan.  The modern-day KKK, with whom most people are familiar, was spawned in 1915 by the Hollywood epic Birth of a Nation, premiered at the White House by a Democrat president, Woodrow Wilson.  Cross-burning and other rituals were actually inspired by the movie.  The Klan came to dominate the Democratic Party so thoroughly that the 1924 Democratic National Convention was known as the “Klanbake.”

It is not so much this Klan 2.0 that ACORN parallels as the original version.  Established in 1866, Klan 1.0 was an affiliate of the Democratic Party during the Reconstruction era.  Named for “kuklos,” the Greek word for “circle,” the Ku Klux Klan waged war against the Republican Party in the former Confederate states.  Goofy titles for its commanders such as Wizard and Cyclops were intended to disguise the fact that the KKK was a paramilitary organization.  In some areas, leadership of the Ku Klux Klan and the Democratic Party were indistinguishable.

(more…)

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear McDonald v. Chicago, in which the Court will decide whether the City of Chicago can disarm its citizens by forbidding them from owning handguns, or whether gun ownership is a “privilege” of citizenship protected by the U.S. Constitution.  In doing so, it will reconsider whether courts should play a more robust role in the protection of the basic liberties of the people.

Such a statement may seem counterintuitive.  Of course courts protect rights; it’s their job to interpret the Constitution to do just that.

But the practice of constitutional law has unfortunately long since been about more than the simple application of the plain text.  That’s because the Constitution—the point of which is to limit government power—is a rather inconvenient roadblock when government wants to do something without restraints.  Courts, in many cases, have abandoned their responsibility to apply the clear commands of the Constitution and have become extremely deferential to legislatures, especially with regard to progressive policy goals the judges themselves often share.  It seems crazy that we would let legislatures determine when laws they themselves create violate the Constitution.  But that is exactly what has happened.  We’ve let the fox guard the henhouse.

Some call this judicial “restraint,” but increasingly, a more accurate term would be judicial abdication.  And judicial abdication is every bit as dangerous as judicial activism, and arguably even more so because it allows politicians to disregard whatever constitutional limits they find inconvenient, which leads to unchecked expansion of government power.

(more…)

Today, in 1931. American author Tom Wolfe was born. A pioneer of “New Journalism,” he remains one of the keenest observers of the American Experience. He is also immune to the pablum of the lefty, deconstructionist rhetoric that has ruined most contemporary commentary. (If you haven’t read “Radical Chic”, do it soon.) Happy Birthday!

Last week, with eyes glazed to the tube and hands filled with overflowing tubs of popcorn, the nation watched as the most powerful man in the world temporarily stepped down from his post to serve as a mere committee chairman of the bipartisan health care summit.

The Chairman-in-Chief spoke condescendingly, counted everyone’s minutes except his own, and ultimately watched his team get thoroughly embarrassed on national television in a political Stupor Bowl.

For nearly the past year, Congressional Democrats have run around like chickens with their heads cut off, ignoring the opposition to the president’s legacy-making initiative, and feverishly making deals which each other so enough support could be garnered to get a bill passed—any bill.

In their haste to make history, it’s unfortunate that the manufactured-crisis of health-care reform has unnecessarily dominated the national debate while a real, alive-and-well, housing crisis has continued to manifest itself.

Last year, the president’s signature housing program, Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), was supposed to stem the tide of foreclosures. In the words of his Treasury Secretary, the initiative would “show results quickly”, but homeowners, mortgage companies, and legislators all questioned its effectiveness. For a few months, foreclosures were down, until December, when filings had its first month to month increase since July.

Was the increase a sign of things to come?

(more…)