Archive for December, 2009

The holidays are simultaneously the happiest and most depressing time of the year. The happiest because it is a time to surround yourself with family, eat some good food, and spread some joy. But it is also the most depressing because it amplifies the losses we’ve experienced over the past year. Whether it be the loss of a loved one or the loss of a job, being forced to watch others celebrate the season can often bring sadness. This year will be especially tough as the economy continues to fall and jobless claims continue to rise.

Young adults have been the hardest hit by this ongoing recession. As Phyllis Schlafly recently wrote,

Young people voted for Obama for President by 66 to 32 percent, but they made a bad bargain because three million of them now have no jobs. According to the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston, the percentage of young men actually working is the lowest in the 61 years of record-keeping.

Among men aged 20 through 24, only 65 of every 100 are employed on any given day, and among males aged 16 through 19, only 28 of 100 are working. John Podesta’s answer to this problem is to give a few thousand of them government jobs in AmeriCorps.

These figures were compiled by New York Times’ African-American columnist, Bob Herbert, who makes it clear that young black men are the ones that have been hurt most by this unemployment. In describing the situation for minorities, mere statistics will not tell the story. As Herbert says,

“The numbers are beyond scary; they’re catastrophic . . .When joblessness reaches these kinds of extremes, it doesn’t just damage individual families; it corrodes entire communities, fosters a sense of hopelessness and leads to disorder.”

Corrosion. Hopelessness. Disorder. Not exactly the kind of adjectives typically used to describe the holidays. Well,  maybe disorder, but only the Clark Griswold/Christmas Vacation variety.

Eschewing all the negative talk, let’s focus on another word this season…hope. Hope that the President and Congress will focus on a job creation strategy that rewards small businesses and entrepreneurs. Hope that young adults, especially young minorities, do not continue to be forgotten in this administration’s policies. Hope that President Obama gets out of the pockets of Wall Street and back to the priorities that got him elected. Unfortunately, something tells me these presents won’t be under the tree come Christmas morning.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

Around the nation College Republican chapters are speaking out and taking action against the Democratic health care experiment. Here is a message from the Ohio College Republican Federation that I think we can all get behind!

Today Washington is abuzz with news that Nancy Pelosi may actually throw the public option overboard once and for all, after it passed with the slimmest of margins, and bipartisan opposition.  For those that thought she was going to do this months ago (remember the attempt to change the name to “Consumer Option”?),  this time she is really serious.  Allegedly.  Speaker Pelosi wants Americans to finally see all of the good this albatross of a tax-hiking spending bill would do.  Of course–Democrats absolutely would not pull another “Kill the Public Option” bait-and-switch.

All of Pelosi’s rhetoric aside, her co-conspirators in this mess, President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid are clearly not thinking along the same lines.  President Obama is back at the bully pulpit with crony-in-arms hardball journalist Charlie Gibson, since his efforts to inspire votes in the Senate were for naught, cranking up the stakes on healthcare reform that 53% of Americans now oppose.  Apparently, if you are worried about Medicare, Medicaid, tax hikes, job losses, and a whole litany of other potential problems, you should be supporting his government grab of 1/6 of our economy, because more government is always the solution.  He even goes so far as to say the country will be bankrupt if we don’t pass his bill, the bill that even Democrats have to be paid to support, and unions won’t even back anymore.

Actually, the reverse is closer to the truth.  Spending $1.2 trillion (or up to $2.5 trillion if we’re going by Harry Reid’s wish list), creating layer after layer of new bureaucracy, taking over 1/6 of our economy, and raising or creating dozens of new taxes will push us closer to the brink of bankruptcy than standing pat ever could.  If we are to pull back from the brink, we need to cut spending and truly reform healthcare, not spend another $1.2 trillion on an economic bridge to nowhere.

In addition to President Obama talking down to Republicans for playing politics (or what most people would call standing on principle and up for what their voters want) while actually not needing a single GOP vote to pass the bill, we now have Harry Reid playing a game of holiday hide-and-seek with his Christmas list the Senate version, which is now up to $2.5 trillion.  Minority Leader Mitch McConnell calls a spade a spade this morning, making sure to point out that no one outside of Reid’s office has seen the 2,074-page bill.  Maine Senator Olympia Snowe, who has even supported some versions of this monstrosity, even correctly states that there is no need to rush on a bill that doesn’t hit full effect until 2014.

We agree.  Americans simply cannot afford this bill being shoved down their throat because today’s Democrat Party wants to pay back their election supporters thinks they know best.  Take action today with us, and tell your Congressman you don’t want another lump of coal from Washington under your tree this Christmas!

If you remember back to last week I questioned whether Congressmen were witnessing the dying breaths of the canary in the coal mine. At that point, two influential Democratic members of Congress had decided to retire rather than face stiff primary competition. Well, the canary appears to have croaked because Congressmen are fleeing the Capitol Hill coal mine.

Two more Democratic Congressmen unexpectedly announced their retirement this past week, signaling a sea-change in the political landscape for the 2010 midterm elections. Brian Baird (D-WA) and Bart Gordon (D-TN) are the latest (but certainly not the last) to announce that they will not be running next year.

Baird’s surprise decision could put another seat in play for Republicans in next year’s elections. The district twice voted for George Bush in 2000 and 2004 before voting for Obama by a 53%-to-45% margin. Nevertheless, he was considered a safe incumbent and hadn’t faced a remotely challenging race since his first contest in 1998, when he still captured 55% of the vote. Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee commented on the importance of the race saying,

“With this being the third retirement by a swing-district Democrat in as many weeks, it is clear that members of the Majority are feeling the ground shaking beneath them. . . Now, facing an angry and frustrated electorate, Democrats are quickly realizing that it’s time to throw in the towel.”

Bart Gordon also announced his retirement due to what was setting up to be his most strenuous reelection campaign since he first won the seat in 1984. In his last 5 reelection bids he held his seat by capturing more than 60% of the vote. Senator John McCain carried the seat in 2008 and George Bush won in 2004 with 60% of the vote. The NRCC jumped on the announcement,

“It’s official: Democrats now have a retirement problem. After being forced to toe the line for Nancy Pelosi’s reckless agenda too many times, Blue Dog Democrats would rather roll over and retire than face the political headwind that is barreling toward them. This is evidence of the fact that the Obama-Pelosi agenda of government takeovers, permanent bailouts, and fewer jobs is taking a political and mental toll even on incumbent Democrats who were once-perceived to be firmly entrenched.”

Of course, Democratic officials are crafting a different story, arguing that there are personal reasons behind their announcements. Regardless of the motive, these retirement decisions create a situation more akin to 1994 when Republicans won 21 open seats in which Democrats did not seek re-election. As polls continue to express the public’s dislike with Democratic policy choices, and reelection races appear more difficult, more Democrats are likely to announce their retirement for politics.

The political atmosphere is growing poisonous. The policies of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are repelling independent voters and mollifying the conservative base. Moderate Democrats are fleeing the mine.

Update: If I had to guess at the next retirement, I’d look no further than John Spratt (D-SC). As the chair of the House Budget Committee he could be a big fish for Republican challengers to go after in 2010.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

The latest from CRNC political cartoonist, Dave Hatch:

2009 has been an unprecedented year in politics. For instance, President Obama’s approval ratings fell faster and further than any president in history. Moreover, the fall was not tied to a particular event so much as a general dislike for the entire bevy of policy choices made this year. For instance, Gerald Ford plummeted, mainly because he pardoned Richard Nixon after the Watergate scandal. Bill Clinton saw a similar fall due to his mishandling of the “don’t ask don’t tell policy” and a bad haircut (I’m not kidding).

Obama has no similar singular event to lay the blame on. There is no one midcourse correction he can make to right the ship and improve his approval ratings. Simply put, the public doesn’t really like what he’s doing. Recent polls consistently paint a picture of an America who doesn’t like the Democratic health care plans, want the government to stay out of their lives, and wish Washington would quit spending so much money. Unfortunately their concerns have fallen upon the deaf eared majority in Congress. A recent Ipsos/McClatchy survey shows the incredible swing in public opinion on literally every major policy issue facing America:

2009 has been marked by Democrats spectacular fall from grace. In just one year they went from looking unbeatable for the foreseeable future to having a completely tarnished brand name. Whats more,  they did it faster than a Usain Bolt sprint (they must be using performance limiting drugs). This leaves 2010 open to by the year of a Republican resurgence.  Many of Obama’s supporters, the ones who bought into the failed message of change, are now up for grabs – we just have to reach for them.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

Just a week ago, California College Republicans spearheaded a campaign to help Oceanside Councilman Jerry Kern keep his seat in a failed recall election. Kern was the target of a campaign by a coalition of firefighter and police unions who opposed the Councilman’s proposed belt-tightening moves. Considering the city’s $10 million operating budget deficit cuts had to be made somewhere. Not wanting to admit this fact, the unions won a recall for the ballot – a measure that will cost the city $500,000 at a time when it can least afford it.

After a successful grassroots effort by the College Republicans Assemblywoman Diane Harkey had some kind words for the effort:

From The Desk Of
ASSEMBLYWOMAN DIANE L. HARKEY
73RD DISTRICT

College Republicans Win One for Oceanside

Last night voters of the 73rd Assembly District in the city of Oceanside resoundingly rejected the union-financed attempt to recall City Councilman Jerry Kern by nearly a 2 to 1 margin. Jerry Kern’s victory, supported by the strong grassroots program implemented by the California College Republicans and led by Chairman Michael Antonopoulos, sends a strong message that the taxpayers of California are not a blank check for public employee unions.

The College Republicans organized a five week field program that consisted of phone banking, targeted absentee ballot chasing, large weekend precinct walks, and a well-oiled GOTV program that led to a 63% victory for Councilman Kern on election night.

Special recognition should go to Michael Antonopoulos and the team of California College Republican leaders including Megan Rodriguez, Clinton Soffer, Chasen Bullock, Matthew Donnellan, and Matthew Dobler who worked tirelessly to make this victory possible.

Most importantly, congratulations Jerry Kern and the taxpayers of Oceanside!

-Diane

These and many other stories exemplify why College Republicans are an incredible resource going into the 2010 elections. We have the knowledge, ability, and motivation to run effective grassroots efforts. As Republicans gear up to retake the House next November we must continue to step up to the challenge – knocking on doors, making the phone calls and doing the dirty work that carries candidates into office. We have long been labeled as the future of the party, but the CRs in Oceanside proved we are the party now.

What goes around comes around. In recent weeks Democrats have been quick to criticize Republicans for their demands of ideological purity. They called it infighting, labeled it as factionalism, and predicted it would lead to our doom in 2010. Now Democrats in the Senate are facing a similar critique. As Alan Fram of the Associated Press writes,

Get on the health care bandwagon, or don’t count on our help in your re-election. That’s the hardball message liberal groups are hurling at moderate Democrats in a battle that is dividing the party.

The growing rancor comes from the desperate need for 60 votes in the Senate to pass the health care experiment. There are exactly 60 Democrats in the Senate (if you include Joe Lieberman who caucuses with them) – meaning there is absolutely no wiggle room. Everyone must be on the same page.

Fortunately for Republicans, some moderate Democrats have made a stand against various portions of the health care bill. For instance, Senators Jim Webb of Virginia, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Evan Bayh of Indiana, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, and Blanche Lincoln, also of Arkansas, are Democrats who have expressed apprehension with some portion of the bill in its current form. These are the Senators to watch and call – they hold the fate of the bill in their hands.

Jim Webb: He is an extremely moderate war hero from Virginia.  Nevertheless, his votes on the health care bill have still been considered a surprise. Thus far, he has voted for Republican efforts to send the bill back to the Finance Committee and also voted to restore the hundreds of billions in cuts to Medicare. Funding for Medicare is his main sticking point and it may make him a tough vote for the Democrats to lock up. Without drastic cuts to the program the Democratic illusion of deficit neutrality goes out the window. Realizing the importance of the bill appearing cheap, Democrats defeated the proposed Medicare cuts, making the effort to secure Webb’s support that much more difficult.

Ben Nelson:  Another conservative Democrat, Nelson recently broke with his party when they would not include strong anti-abortion language in the Senate bill. He recently offered an amendment to the Democratic bill which mirrored the Stupak amendment that passed in the House. The amendment was tabled by a 54-45 vote, making Nelson an unlikely supporter of the bill. Nelson, who is enormously popular in his home state, partially due to his socially conservative principles has said, “[A]t the end of the day, if it doesn’t have Stupak language on abortion in it, I won’t vote to move it off the floor.”

Mary Landrieu:  Historically a low tax supporter, she voted for doing away with the Death Tax forever in 200, and voted for the Bush tax cuts in 2001.  The 13 year veteran Louisiana Senator is part of the Common Ground Coalition, with Republican Olympia Snowe, committed to finding bipartisan solutions.  Nevertheless she has taken a harsh stance against the public option, saying “No, I’m not open to it. I’m not open to a public option. . . I don’t think it’s the right way to go.”

Evan Bayh:  As part of a political dynasty in Indiana and enormously popular in his own right, Evan Bayh is not at risk in his home state. Nevertheless, he has stated that he has expressed multiple issues with the bill including its cost and its effect on the national debt. Bayh has said that “[I]f this is going to increase the amount that people who currently have insurance pay, I would have a very hard time supporting something like that.”

Arlen Specter:  The defector from the Republican Party, who switched parties in April 2009 after it became apparent he would face an extremely challenging primary, remains a moderate who would have a tough time voting for the public option, and joined 3 other Democratic Senators in voting with Republicans against the Medicare cuts in the Democratic healthcare bill.  He faces an extremely tough election season in his home state, so look for him to always do the most politically popular thing.

Mark Pryor:  Another offshoot of a popular political family, Pryor is an Arkansas Senator who is a devout Evangelical Christian.  He can be counted on for a vote on socially conservative issues, such as abortion, and also on issues of national security.  He is the leader of a group of Democratic senators in the so called “Gang of 10” who forced Reid to turn the public option into a trigger, and will continue to push the legislation further to the right.

Blanche Lincoln:  Senator Lincoln of Arkansas is facing a re-election campaign in 2010, and will be, like Sens. Bayh and Specter, looking to vote the most politically expedient way.  With public opinion falling, especially in culturally conservative Arkansas, over a robust public option and government takeover of healthcare, she may be less likely to follow Reid down the road towards electoral defeat. Moreover, her recent flip-flops have made her position ever more perilous.

July: “Individuals should be able to choose from a range of quality health insurance plans. Options should include private plans as well as a quality, affordable public plan”

Sept: “I would not support a solely government funded public option . . . We can’t afford that.”

Joe Lieberman:  The former Democrat who campaigned for John McCain in 2008 was Al Gore’s running mate in 2000.  He was elected in Connecticut with the support of 70% of Republicans in Connecticut, but still caucuses with the Democrats and is the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs.  He is on record as opposing a public option in any form, and will not support it even with a trigger.  He is also on record as being willing to join any filibuster. In his own words,

“I think a lot of people may think that the public option is free. It’s not. It’s going to cost the taxpayers and people who have health insurance now, and if it doesn’t it’s going to add terribly to the national debt…there’s so much in this health reform legislation that is so good, that I think they’re just putting an unnecessary burden on top of it by creating another Washington-based entitlement program.”

These are the big players that Democrats must woo. What makes it difficult is that they are fighting over different and often conflicting components of the bill. Some demand Medicare cuts, others demand deficit neutrality. Some are righting for a robust public option while others believe it will be too expensive. Democrats must find a way to tread the tightrope and balance the needs of 60 individuals. Conservatives must continue to urge these members of the Senate to fight for what they believe. We must eventually travel down the road to health care reform, but as Senators are increasingly recognizing – this is not the right vehicle to make the trek.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

33.  An overall important number. It is the number of Larry Bird, Shaquille O’Neal, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. On the Newton Scale it the temperature at which water boils. And for all the Dan Brown fans out there – it is the highest degree in Freemasonry. But 33 is also significant in politics. It is the number of state legislature seats won by Republicans in special elections since Barack Obama took the presidency.

Perhaps that doesn’t sound particularly important. State legislature races receive arouse less enthusiasm and draw less attention than national or state-wide races, but this does not detract from their significance. These are the people who have their hands in domestic policy, affecting the day-to-day decisions of nearly everyone, they act as a proving ground for the party’s future stars, and most importantly this year – they will be the ones drawing the congressional districts.

Knowing their importance, Republicans got an early and unlikely Christmas present with the election of Jimmy Higdon in the 14^th state Senate district in Kentucky. Higdon faced some overwhelming odds on his way to winning the race, including:

• Being outspent 5-to-1 by his opponent Jodie Haydon
• Republicans being out-registered 3-to-1 in the district

Nevertheless, Higdon scored an impressive victory, taking 65% of the vote in what has recently been considered an area of Republican erosion.

What makes the race especially important is the message that helped Higdon win his seat. While his opponent, Jody Haydon, fell in line with the national Democratic platform including tax increases and big government, Higdon nationalized the race and channeled the public’s discontent with what the Democrats are doing in Washington.

In Higdon’s words, “[t]he race at times almost took on a national character” because of the central role that health care played in the debates. “Even though it’s a national issues, it’s on the minds of my constituents.”

The race could serve as a key indication of things to come and should provide some hope to Republicans in what had been considered safe Democratic districts. Simply put, there is no such thing anymore. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said in a statement that the election is,

“[A] positive sign of additional Republican victories to come, not only in Kentucky but nationwide, as we move forward to elections in 2010 and beyond.”

As Steele’s comments suggest, this race is an indication that grassroots support for key conservative principles such as low taxes and small spending is what will win races.  Equally important, it shows that Obama’s ever-shortening coat tails will not be enough to carry Democrats to office based on the brand name alone. The American public has realized that big-government solutions embodied by Democratic leaders such as President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are the wrong solutions. The tide has turned. The momentum is building. I’m excited for the first Tuesday in November, are you?

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

Things are getting interesting in the Ohio Senate primaries. Democratic candidate, and current Lieutenant Governor, Lee Fisher just received an endorsement from Democratic strategist David Plouffe. Plouffe is best known for his role as the chief campaign manager for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential bid and his close friendship with of Obama’s special adviser David Axelrod.

But there is an issue over whether Plouffe’s endorsement was real or simply a sly campaign maneuver. It seems Plouffe’s firm, AKPD Message and Media, is currently on Fisher’s campaign payroll. CQ Politics did some digging and found that, “according to campaign finance reports, the Fisher campaign had paid more than $3,100 for media production to AKPD so far this cycle through Sept. 30”

My question…how is Lee Fisher even staying competitive? Before becoming Lieutenant Governor he held the dubious title of Ohio Director of Development at a time when Ohio’s economy was in a free fall. Some of Fisher’s accomplishments since taking over as the point-man on the state’s economy:

• Ohio has lost 258,100 jobs in the past year alone
• The state ranks 6^th in the nation for the largest decline in jobs
• Unemployment levels have reached 11.2% – more than a point higher than the national average
• Ranks 47^th out of 50 states in job creation
• Lost two of the state’s largest employers, DHL and NCR, to competitive bids in other states

Ohio College Republican chairman Jonathon Snyder reacted to the endorsement saying,

This is an obvious heavy-handed play by the White House to squash a very competitive opponent in strong female candidate Jennifer Brunner, because they know that Lee Fisher would simply be another yes-man for their failed policies.  While neither Lee Fisher nor Brunner’s beliefs are in line with mainstream Ohio voters, the White House is clearly saying that they want Ohioans to promote Fisher’s record of failure to the US Senate via Oval Office insider David Plouffe’s endorsement.”

“We have lost enough jobs with Lee Fisher asleep at the wheel, and Ohioans cannot take any more of his inability to deliver.  You can only get away with saying you are the jobs candidate so many times if you do not deliver jobs, and Lee Fisher has not delivered.  It is incredible that Democrats continue to believe the fantasy that being a champion for Ohio’s workers means sitting idly by while their jobs pack up and leave the state en masse.”

Snyder continued, expressing the notion that Democrats are showing their deep-seated fear of strong Republican candidate Rob Portman of Cincinnati.  “National Democrats are clearly not excited about their prospects of facing a candidate like Rob Portman, who has a record of leadership and service on behalf of Ohioans that no Democrat in this race can dream of matching.  It is crystal clear that Portman is the better choice to be our next Senator, and the Democrats are desperate to employ any strategy available to make sure Democrat primary voters do not get to choose their nominee.”

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

The newest cartoon from our very own Dave Hatch: