Archive for January, 2010

We all remember Opposite Day from our childhoods. Once declared, all statements mean the exact opposite of what they normally mean. Though usually reserved for elementary school playgrounds, Opposite Day has been invoked on Capitol Hill. Under the rules, which Democrats are in control of, a Scott Brown win in Massachusetts means that efforts to pass the liberal agenda must be redoubled. The public’s continual repudiation of the Democratic health care experiment now signifies that Congress should speed up their effort to push through misguided reforms. Basically, whatever lessons voters have tried to send over the past three months, Democrats should feel free to ignore. After all, surely the voters don’t mean what they say, it’s Opposite Day!

The problem begins with the leadership. Yesterday Nancy Pelosi responded to the harsh legislative landscape by saying that, “We have to get a bill passed. We know that.” And Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, who has taken a lead role in health care negotiations, has said “No way is it dead, because it’s so important for the country. And we’ll find a way to pass [it].”

The problem has trickled down to pundits. Influential liberal thinker Paul Krugman has taken the lead with a piece entitled Do the Right Thing in which he writes,

A message to House Democrats: This is your moment of truth. You can do the right thing and pass the Senate health care bill. Or you can look for an easy way out, make excuses and fail the test of history.

After sorting through all of this I am struck by how out of touch every single one of these statements is. Do these people actually believe that the message to take from Massachusetts is anything but “slow down and let’s think this thing through.” There really is no leg for Democrats to stand on. Brown ran a campaign predicated on his intention to go to Washington to vote against the health care plan. His rallying cry became, “I could be the 41^st senator that could stop the Obama proposal that’s being pushed right now through Congress.”

And he won. He won in the most liberal state in the union because he stood against Washington at a time when people are fed up with what is going on there. Democrats can dither all they want about what his win truly means, but the fact remains that 56% of polled voters in Massachusetts say that the “health care was the most important factor in their voting decision.”

Despite, and probably in spite, of the results in Massachusetts, many Congressional Democrats have vowed to press on to ensure that some form of health care gets passed. How they will subvert the will of the people is yet to be decided. In the words of Nancy Pelosi, “everything is on the table.” Some are saying that reconciliation, which only requires a bare 51 vote majority, could be used to pass a truncated version of the bill. Other Democrats are calling for a scaled back version which they could pass quickly. But neither option falls in line with what people want.

A poll released today by Gallup shows that the majority of Americans (55%) now favor the idea of Congress’ putting on the brakes in the effort to pass health care reform.

As Gallup’s analysis describes the landscape,

“[T]he public is also not convinced that healthcare should be the top priority for the government at this time and endorses finding alternatives that can gain Republican support, which the bill under consideration has not received. Americans may therefore prefer a longer pause on the issue — one that stretches well beyond the time Brown is seated.”

Lest we forget it’s Opposite Day here in Washington. Under the game’s topsy-turvy rules, Paul Krugman writes of America’s desire for a “longer pause” that “the nation is waiting. Stop whining, and do what needs to be done.” What we’re really waiting for is for Democrats to come in off the playground and listen to what we’ve been saying for a long time – start over and do it better.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

By Scott McAfee

More agonizing than the last few moments of your Friday afternoon class, the health-care debate continues in Washington D.C. While the sausage-making process is enjoyable by itself, even more entertaining is listening to the advocates of the current proposal go on TV and desperately try to defend a bloated, defective bill. Instead of trying to explain how their bill would actually drive down costs and improve the system, it seems that every elected Democrat has gotten together and promised to wag their fingers at least three times and snarl, “The Republicans are the Party of No!” whenever they go on television. But is it really true?

Currently in the House there are more than 60 different health-care bills that have been proposed and submitted by Republicans. Most contain simple ideas that could effectively guarantee the lowering of health-care costs based on a simple question: When was the last time you called up a doctor’s office to inquire about the price? The health-care system needs to be reinvigorated by applying the true forces of the free market.

To this end, the GOP amendment to HR 3962 would allow everyone to purchase their health-care plans across state lines, a long overdue option that would open up the industry to the free market more than any public option ever would. This same amendment allows the health-care tax credit to apply to individual plans, and Americans would no longer have to risk losing both their job and access to health care at the same time as a result. HR 1086 would affect medical lawsuits through tort reform, which eats up an estimated $75 billion to $100 billion of medical spending a year. Effective health reform could be as simple as strengthening Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and making them a more feasible option for more Americans; HR 3971 would strengthen the development of HSAs, which encourage individuals to compare prices and consider the value of their dollar.

The list goes on but the point is clear: Most of these ideas could have been worked into the Democratic bill if anyone in majority wanted them to be. Proponents of the current plan are currently engaging in a form of mass deception that would make the Wizard of Oz proud. Pay no attention to that bill behind the curtain! We’ll somehow find a way to expand an already massive entitlement like Medicare without raising the deficit. In fact, we’ll lower it! While continuing to debate health care may seem about as appealing as a second helping of the Dobbs University Center’s mystery sauce, we cannot afford to lose our concentration on this issue. Alternatives are out there and we should not have to choose between a bad bill and nothing.

So when you hear about the many proposals being discussed, you have a responsibility to ask yourself more than just, “Do I feel lucky?” First, consider if a certain plan can be expected to lower costs. Does the government have the best track record of cutting costs and streamlining efficiency? When it was first created, Medicare was projected to cost about $6 billion by the year 1990. It ended up costing $67 billion with no end in sight.

Second, if you believe in the power of the free market and its magical ability to provide you with $1 chicken nuggets at a dozen fast food restaurants within walking distance, look for solutions that truly utilize its potential. Many of the regulations that have strangled the industry and prevented it from being accountable to the consumer could be removed overnight if the people demanded it. If you really want to cover the 46 million uninsured, make the system more affordable by finding a solution that opens the industry to the free market. Anything else is a misdiagnosis.

While Republicans may not be the alleged “Party of No,” they don’t have a right to have their bills heard either. They lost and lost badly in the last two election cycles and are now a complete minority, with the complete lack of influence that goes with it. But perhaps Democrats should stop saying “no” to any alternative suggestions and then refusing to acknowledge that these alternatives exist, or they might be surprised when the voters say “no thanks” in November.

Scott McAfee is a College junior from Kennesaw, Ga. He is president of Emory’s College Republicans.

If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen! No, really, please leave. A recent poll by NBC and the Wall Street Journal shows that only 22% approve of the job that Congress is doing, the lowest approval rating since Obama took office. People are right upset with how things are going in Washington. They’ve showed up at town halls, called their congressment, held rally’s and are showing their willingness to throw the bums out of office. But up until very recently, incumbent Congressmen have stuck a finger in their ears and a hand over their eyes, hoping that the problem will just go away.

With the recent victory of Scott Brown in Massachusetts, it should be becoming increasingly clear that the public is tired of a Congress content to keep their head in the sand. Four recent polls in districts ranging from Democratic strongholds, such as New York, to places more recently turned blue, such as Arkansas, show that Republicans have a chance to make serious gains in 2010.

Ohio: Republican candidate, and former Congressman, Steve Chabot has opened up a wide lead in the race for Ohio’s 1^st congressional district. The race, which represents a rematch from 2008, provides a great control group on just how far the nation has shifted in the past year. Last election cycle, the Democratic Driehaus unseated Chabot with 52.5% of the vote. However, a recent SurveyUSA poll now shows that the tide has once again turned, this time sharply against Driehaus who trails the Republican challenger 39%-to-56%. More ominous for the incumbent, given the dim prospects for passage, is that this is a district that actually favors passing the health care bill.

New York: Democratic Congressman Timothy Bishop is currently finding himself in a place he’s not used to: mired in a close race. The four-term House candidate who won the last three elections with 56%, 62%, and 58% of the vote respectively, is only ahead by 2% in the lastest SurveyUSA poll. But even this razor thin margin is misleading. Currently, the poll shows Republican challenger Randy Altschuler only receing the support of 66% of Republicans, likely due to the fact he’s facing a primary. If Altschuler is able to unite the support of conservatives after the primary it may be difficult for Bishop to maintain the lead.

Arkansas: After seeing a precipitous fall in his polling numbers, Democratic incumbent Vic Snyder was the latest Congressmen to announce his decision to retire rather than face a competitive race. In his own words,

“2010 will be a robust election year during which great forces collide to set the direction for our country for another two years,” Snyder said in a statement.

“I have concluded that these election-year forces are no match for the persuasive and powerful attraction of our three 1-year-old boys under the leadership of their 3-year-old brother, and I have decided not to run for reelection.”

The decision may have been shrewd, a recent SurveyUSA poll had Snyder behind Republican Tim Griffin 39%-to-56%. Quite the change since 2008 when he ran unopposed after several cycles of easy victories. Democrats must now scramble to find someone who can be competitive in a purple district where independents are overwhelmingly breaking for Griffin.

Missouri: The public’s negative views of the economy and health care will likely put Democratic  Robin Carnahan at risk of being Coakley’d. Republican Roy Blunt now holds a six-point lead over Carnahan 49% to 43% according to the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey. This is a big jump from only a month ago when Carnahan actually held the advantage 46%-to-44%. Moreover, the Democrat has done little to impress voters or pundits. As Politico wrote, in a piece eerily foreshadowing the same critiques Martha Coakley faced,

“Missouri’s 2010 Senate contest is an open-seat race, but you’d hardly know it from the campaign that Democrat Robin Carnahan is running.”

The quiet may have been on purpose. As liberal blog, the St. Louis Oracle wrote,

I have been waiting for quite some time for Missouri’s presumptive Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Robin Carnahan to take a stand on an important federal issue in a timely manner. This week she finally did so. I think I liked the silence better.

People are tired of the status quo. They voted for change and didn’t get much. The change they got they didn’t like. Now Republicans carry the mantle of change. We have the chance to succeed where Democrats have so spectacularly failed. These four races are merely the latest examples of a movement that is reverberating throughout the political world: Republicans can win anywhere. Fortunately, College Republicans are also everywhere and we will work hard to capture and amplify the anger that is boiling over across America. If Democrats can’t stand the heat we’ll be bringing, take the lead of Vic Snyder and get out of our kitchen.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

One year into the Obama Presidency it’s hard to believe how far he’s fallen.  This President, we were told, would be a game-changer.  He would take on the entrenched powers-that-be and change the way things are done in Washington.  He was supposed to change the very way that politics is perceived.  He was supposed to enact sweeping legislation that would forever alter public policy.

One year later, the only thing the President has to show for his work is a mountain of debt to be paid by future generations.  The economy is still in the doldrums, economists are fretting about permanent structural unemployment and a lost generation, and America’s standing and influence internationally have declined further.

One year ago, the President said he would repair America’s reputation internationally, and strengthen its influence.  The President’s policy of snubbing America’s friends and groveling to our enemies has done neither.  Poland was left high and dry by Obama’s reversal of missile defense, England was miffed by his return of a Churchill bust that had been in the oval office for decades, Columbia has been denied a free trade pact, and the President offered Israel no support in its battle with Gaza terrorists.  Meanwhile, the President has practically begged to talk with North Korea, Iran and Russia and has been unceremoniously snubbed by each.

Even on the President’s signature issue—healthcare—he has shown an almost total lack of leadership.  Hoping to avoid conflict, the President handed the Congress a set of vague guidelines with which to design a healthcare bill.  When both Houses of Congress came up with separate bills which skirted these guidelines, the President did nothing to advocate his original objectives.  Now, with the House and Senate deadlocked, and just two days after a Republican Senate takeover, the President is calling for the healthcare bill to be scaled back dramatically to facilitate passage.  Apparently having one of the largest legislative majorities in history isn’t enough to win on an issue that the President has staked such a great deal of political capital.

Even the left is giving up on the President.  Paul Krugman said as much yesterday, and despair has been the prevailing mood among the liberal netroots for months.  One year in, its hard to imagine a Presidency that has fallen so short of expectations.

In the words of Tony Blair: “Weak, weak, weak!”

—Zach Howell

As the voice of young conservatives, the College Republican National Committee will be out in force at CPAC with thousands of College Republicans from around the country.

At CPAC, we will be announcing the College Republican campaign to show the country the strength of young conservatives: Operation Advancing Freedom.

To show a united front and to let you know about the College Republican only events, please fill out this form with your information if you plan on attending the conference.

To keep up to date on our CPAC action on Twitter use #CRCPAC.

The College Republican National Committee is the voice of young conservatives. This encompasses a number of roles, from educating young adults about conservative principles, to getting Republicans elected, to training tomorrow’s Republican leaders. Each of these roles was on display in Massachusetts, where College Republicans played a large part in getting Scott Brown elected. To show our impact I could present you with the data – the amount of volunteers that went, the number of phone calls made, or the total number of doors we knocked on. But this is a case where the personal story of one College Republican volunteer best sums up the difference we made in the race.

His name is Karl Beckstein and he’s a sophomore at Suffolk University. He came to my attention from an email I received from the College Republican Chair of the Massachusetts which described a guy who “went from a curious kid just wanting to help out with the campaign to being put in charge of a major call center in Littleton.” I was intrigued. I did a little research and it turns out that the Littleton center was one of the highlights of the campaign and on more than one occasion beat the campaign headquarters in output. The email went on, “this guy has been enormously helpful to both the campaign and our state federation, he’s really the model of what a CR should be.”

At this point I don’t think I have to tell anyone how the race turned out. Suffice it to say that a Republican was elected to a seat which Ted Kennedy held for 46 years in arguably the bluest state in the nation. After the election I finally had my chance to talk with Karl and see just how he went from volunteer to a major player in the campaign. He described to me how he had put in the work, going from internship to internship, putting in his best effort along the way. As he said,

“Everyone works hard, but the key is how you do it. You have to wake up and say, I don’t want to put in 15 hours today, but I’m going to do it.”

His diligence didn’t go unnoticed. In the fall he says he received a call asking if he was interested in working for the Scott Brown campaign.“I was completely taken by surprise. They called and said ‘We need someone to run a field office in your area, would you be willing to do it?’ It really came out of nowhere.”

Scott Brown should consider himself lucky. By the end of the campaign Beckstein’s call center was “easily doing ten-to-fifteen thousand calls a day” and in the final push making as many as “seventeen thousand voter contacts.” He said the success of his call center came easy, it was just a matter of building a sense of family amongst the volunteers.

A number of those volunteers were fellow College Republicans who were quick to join in the excitement that the Scott Brown campaign created. Beckstein pointed to a surprising call he received from the University of Texas CRs who wanted to know what they could do to help. As he said,

One of the people from the CRs, even before it looked like we were going to be able to pull it off, called to see what they could do. They said, ‘just let us know what we can do and we’ll make sure it gets done.

The help poured in from all over the nation. Brown’s call-from-home program enabled College Republicans everywhere to donate their spare time to helping the Republican candidate pull off a surprising victory. The reason, says Beckstein, was that,

“the message definitely appealed to us. Young people are sick of the Kennedy’s. Part of the win is just the youth being fed up. Part of it is just that [Scott Brown] is a rockstar. There was a ton of youth at the rallys. I mean, we had high school kids, college kids, down to middle school kids who wanted to help the guy. He himself was younger and he could relate to who we are and what we wanted.

Young adults’ excitement translated into votes come election day – a fact that Republican candidates would be wise to remember in November. “Scott Brown won the 18-29 age group. He killed the Democrats with the youth. Now we just have to take that fact and ride that wave throughout the nation,” Beckstein says. That is where College Republicans come in. We will do our best to educate the young adults on candidates and issues which concern them. We will be the boots on the ground and the voice on the phones to get Republicans elected. And we will continue to cultivate tomorrow’s leaders, like Karl Beckstein, who will carry the banner of the Republican party for years to come.

Recently Pennsylvania’s attorney general, Tom Corbett sent out a campaign email urging voters to sign up for his “2010 club.” Members of the Tom Corbett club would serve as a key role to elect the next GOP Governor of Pennsylvania. “Corbett is a fiscal conservative, and believes that taxing Pennsylvania families more is not a real strategy to get our state back on track.”[1]

So by helping with his campaign you will not only help the great state of Pennsylvania turn red again, but you will also help create a safer place for families to live, work and raise a family. The Corbett team is also in need of volunteers, and any help would be greatly appreciated.There is a link on his website and it’s very quick and easy to sign up.

By signing up for the Tom Corbett campaign, you’re not just electing a smart and ambitious Republican Governor, but you are also creating a better future for the great state of Pennsylvania. With Pennsylvania being considered a very important swing state in any national election, a win for Corbett would send a very powerful message to Washington, and the rest of the country. And with Scott Brown’s recent Senate upset in Massachusetts, a Republican Governor’s victory is very feasible with a candidate like Tom Corbett.

What does yesterday’s victory really mean? We know by now that he represents the 41^st Republican vote in the Senate. We know he breaks the Democrat supermajority that has prevented Republicans from being able to filibuster bills. We know he’s a conservative who won Liberal Lion Ted Kennedy’s seat in the bluest of the blue Massachusetts. We know all that by now. But that doesn’t tell the full story of the truly momentous change that happened yesterday.

The sobering reality is that this vote was not so much for Republicans as it was against Democrats. Frankly, we stand to gain a lot of seats in 2010 simply because we are not them. Rather than view this harsh reality negatively, Republicans must take it as an opportunity. This is a mandate to get back to work.

Republicans have been in the minority for the past year, unable to do much of anything beyond telling their ideas to the few people who wanted to listen and doing their best to save the public from the Left. Yesterday marked the loudest repudiation of the Democratic agenda yet, but more than that, it signaled that the public wants some new ideas. That is not to say that the Republicans did not have ideas – it’s just that the media had no incentive to cover them. But with Massachusetts acting as a mandate to pay attention and Republicans now wielding enough votes to matter in the Senate, the party can show it is not the “Party of No.”

Step one on the path back towards the majority: defeat the unpopular health care bill that does nothing more than mandate that everyone should have health insurance with no method of controlling costs. Step two, begin the process of crafting a bill that solves the problems with health care costs that we all agree exist. What’s more, do it in a bipartisan fashion. Republicans already crafted a workable solution back in the days when they’re ideas fell upon the deaf ears of a Democratic Party who thought there was no incentive to listen (turns out they were very wrong). Get back to promoting the small government reforms such as allowing buyers to purchase health care insurance across state lines. I guarantee that a capitalist solution that uses the principle of competition to lower costs will go over a million times better than enlarging the bureaucracy and making the federal government the de facto provider of health insurance.

The bottom line: Republicans must present common sense solutions that address the nation’s problems in a way that does not overextend the boundaries of government or mortgage the future with extreme debt. Right now voters are scared by the Democratic plans for the future of this nation, but if we want lasting change among the electorate we must show them that Republicans have better answers.

Democrats spent the better part of the last year arrogant because of their own success. They snubbed their noses at polls and ignored the worries of the average citizen. But arrogance is inherently nonpartisan. Republicans must work to ensure that they do not share the same fate. Just because our candidate won in the unlikeliest of places does not mean that we can rest on our laurels. The public’s ire is focused on Washington because they perceive nothing is getting done. Republicans must get to work to ensure they are living up to the standards which are now getting them elected. The message of yesterday was not that a Republican won. As Minority House Leader Mitch McConnell said,

“We need to move in a new direction. That’s the message of Virginia and New Jersey. That’s the message of Massachusetts.”

Since 1995, The Index of Economic Freedom has been used to measure the economic freedom of all the countries around the world. The Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, the creators of the Index, have definitely shown the direct correlation with economic freedom and prosperity. Unfortunately, 2009 has not been the best year for economic freedom worldwide. As Paul Gigot of the Wall Street Journal writes,

“Many governments and their political agents have used the financial panic and recession as an opportunity to reassert control across the private economy. . . The U.S. is also tempting slower growth with its policies across the microeconomy: a de facto government takeover of health care, a gigantic new tax on carbon energy, the political allocation of capital in energy and autos and so much else, new rules to expand union membership, nationalization of the mortage market, hostility to freer trade, and much higher taxes to pay for it all.”

It is unsurprising then to see that the United States’ Economic Freedom score fell by the twelth most amount last year – falling in a similar class with dominating governments such as Uzbekistan and Libya. How we ended up with such unflattering company is the result of two related things. First, the economic crisis created a panic in which people demanded action. Second, Democrats seized the opportunity to promote the idea of government regulation as a solution. Unfortunately, as the data bears out, to achieve economic growth, the government mortgaged the future in return for short-term relief.

Sources: Miller and Holmes, 2010 Index of Economic Freedom, at www.heritage.org/index; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD.statextract, Quarterly National Accounts: Quarterly Growth Rates of GDP, volume, at http://stats.oecd.org/index.as

The reasons government intervention puts a damper on economic growth are numerous. As the authors of the Index point out,

“[The data] would seem to confirm the view of many economists that the deadweight loss from government inneficiency, the various burdens associated with financing government deficits, and the crowding out effects of government spending on private-sector demand and investment combine to make fiscal stimulus a poor policy choice in a recession.”

The flaws of government intervention lie in the simple fact that the government works at an inherent disadvantage to private businesses. As a single large entity they cannot capture the infinite and individual economic choices that people make. In addition, the bureaucratic nature of government combined with its monopolistic tendencies negate its need to work as an efficient and responsive actor in the economy. Financially disastrous government entitlement programs such as Medicaid, Social Securty, and Medicare are prime examples of the government’s inability to adapt to the realities of the marketplace. The ultimate result is that innovators, entrepreneurs and businesses (i.e. the true job creators) are given a disincentive to enter the marketplace.

The lack of job creation resulting from government intervention in the economy, either through direct competition, misguided financial stimulation, or over-regulation, has disastrous effects for standard of living. As data from the Index shows,

Sources: Compiled by the Heritage Foundation, at http:/heritage.org/index; Miller and Holmes, 2010 Index of Economic Freedom, World Bank, world Development Indicators Online, at http://publications.worldbank.org/WDI

Over the past year citizens have clearly repudiated the Democrats’ big government strategy to fix the economy. We, as a nation, must get back to crafting legislative strategies designed to promote economic freedom and economic prosperity. The United States became great because of the work and innovation of its citizens. If we want to see long term prosperity and job creation, we must put the return the private sector to its rightful place as the engine of the economy. In the prescient words of Milton Friedman,

“Fortunately, we are waking up. We are again recognizing the dangers of an over-governed society, coming to understand that good objectives can be perverted by bad means, that reliance on the freedom of people to control their lives in accordance with their own values is the surest way to achieve the full potential a great society.”

by Rob Noel

President Obama’s campaign was a symphony of feel-good rhetoric and images that appealed to our most basic human nature. It showed us the man who would be our president, a gifted speaker and a master of the trends; it also revealed an American people vulnerable to their passions and easily swept up in frenzy. A year after his election, we can peel back the charming words of “campaign Obama” and observe the disappointing results of President Obama – results for which our generation must pay.

Much of the criticism surrounding his first year centers on broken campaign promises. But the biggest thing he promised us was just “change.” Has he kept this promise? In a word: yes. It just wasn’t exactly the kind of change America expected. Instead of bipartisanship we have reports of congressional Democrats being locked out of meetings for even discussing a bill with Republicans. Instead of transparency and “all bills being online for five days prior to voting” we have 1,500 page bills being voted on at 1 a.m. without even Congress having read them. Instead of earmark reform we have billions of dollars in pork and 9,000 earmarks in one bill. Instead of a lobbyist-free government we have a czar-packed, lobbyist-filled administration. Instead of a strong foreign policy we have a bowing, apologizing president, a dramatic increase in terror-related incidents on U.S. soil and, of course, a “peace” prize. And, despite the President’s predictions regarding his stimulus package, the debt will have nearly doubled and all we have to show for it is a substantial rise in unemployment.

As pundit Bill Bennett put it, Obama is “in a war with reality.” This reality has hit America like a cold shower. Approval ratings of Congress, Obama and the Democratic Party have fallen by double digits according to leading pollsters. Obama has a lower approval rating at this point in his presidency than any other president in the 71-year history of approval polling.

An autopsy of Obama’s first year reveals more than just a few impossible promises. It reveals a fundamentally flawed liberal mindset: that the American people and their economy are powerless to affect change and growth without the help of government. Liberals wield the big government message to seem compassionate and to make conservatives look heartless. Yet Obama, who promises to have the interests of the poor and needy in mind, has taxed the job-makers and proposed cutting tax deductions on the charity of wealthy individuals. This from a man who has given an average of only 3 percent of his annual income to charity since 2004. (Sen. John McCain donated 18 percent to charity in 2006 and a whopping 26 percent in 2007.)

Obama’s out-of-control spending of other people’s money has not only killed jobs and failed to stimulate the economy, but it has increased our debt tremendously. Ironically, it is the college students who had such a heavy hand in electing Obama who will have to pay for his fiscal irresponsibility. It is also the college students who will not be able to find jobs due to the crippling burden that has been placed on businesses.

So let’s set the record straight. Republicans do not believe in abolishing all financial regulations, just those that choke growth and limit options. We believe that the less small businesses have to pay in taxes, the better chance they have to grow… and to hire. Republicans believe very strongly in charity, just not government-mandated charity. We believe in an American people who are free to earn, free to keep, free to give, free to spend, free to try, and yes… free to fail.

Has Obama stolen our freedom and ruined America? Nah. I believe history will prove Obama’s first year to be something like a bad haircut: it’s too much change, there’s little you can do about it, and it will take a long time to fix itself.

The writer, a sophomore majoring in political communication, is the GW College Republicans communications director.