Will Republicans Gain Veto-Proof Majorities

Over a year ago I commented on a discussion thread on Politico.com, engaging in some drive-by commentary, that the Republicans would gain 47 seats during the 2010 election cycle. The lefties, liberals, and eco-topians jumped on my punditry with comments like:

What planet are you on?
What have you been smoking?
Brought your lap-top to the bar, again, ehh?
Hey Rip, where have you been?

Hope and Change springs eternal. Who is hee-hawing now? The election landscape has changed so dramatically that some are asking whether a veto-proof majority looms. It may be possible in the House of Representatives, but unlikely in the Senate. For a veto-proof majority the Republicans would have to win 290 seats in the House and hold 67 seats in the Senate.

Nothing the current administration has done to fight the economic malaise (a Carter phrase, since this is the second term he never had) has worked. The unemployment still hovers around 9%. The housing mess gets worse, exacerbated by little income growth and no employment growth. Stimulus. What Stimulus? The only thing that has been stimulated is the wallets of the various cronies, interest groups and fellow travelers of the Obama administration and their congressional allies.

We have reached the tipping point. As the party of government (Democrats) battles to preserve the paychecks of their apparatchiks in government; meanwhile the government of the people (Republicans) push back, offering tax cuts and spending cuts in an effort to turn the economy around. A political war is breaking out between the entrepreneurial class and the ruling class.

The question remains whether the Republican’s have the stones to offer meaningful cuts as in slicing department budgets by 25% or eliminating whole departments. We shall see. The “mad as hell” voter is out there and ready to pull the lever for any politician that will get us back to fiscal sanity. Now that would have a greater simulative effect by throwing the tax and spend rascals out.

The Obama administration continues to throw fuel on the American public’s dissatisfaction with its policies by offering up another stimulus package. If the first one failed, why would voters support another? This administration is pulling out all the stops to really put its allies in Congress on the defensive. The administrations policies have energized the opposition. The only question is the depth of Republican takeover of Congress, come November. Veto proof majorities may not be possible during this election cycle, but if there is no improvement in the economy, the American public will not put up with it. These are very interesting political times.

Stimulus Plan: Good Idea Gone Bad

The American Recovery and Reimbursement Act of 2009 has ended up being a standard Tax and Spend liberal social welfare bill. With only approximately 12% ($111 billion) going towards actual infrastructure spending. the balance of the legislation ended up being more transfer payments. What could have been a solid piece of legislation with a mix of tax cuts and incentives as well as much needed infrastructure spending ended up being a good idea gone bad.

The first mistake the Obama administration made is painting a broad picture of what they liked and then abdicating Leadership to a Pelosi, Obey, Frank, and Reid cabal of socialist tendencies. This massive measure of $787 billion will weigh the US Taxpayer down for many years to come.

Infrastructure Bonds
An opportunity to significantly improve this nations roads, highways, bridges, ports and waterways was lost. Instead, the vast majority of the monies were allocated to social welfare spending. Consequently, fewer jobs will be created. What the administration and the legislature could have done is create an Infrastructure Bond (similar to the War Bonds sold during WWII) to fund significant re-building and urgently needed new infrastructure projects.

Now, there will be political battles being fought among the states to see which projects will be funded, tightening the federal grip over the states. How will these funds be divided and who will make that decision??? Will states get a pro-rata share of the funds appropriated or will it be solely based on who can exercise the raw political power? It remains to be seen.

I for one will be checking closely on the web-site www.recovery.gov to see where the money will be going.