As our great nation celebrates its 233rd birthday, all of us here at NextGenGOP would like to wish you a wonderful July 4th. Please have a safe and enjoyable holiday!
Two Governors, Two Weeks, and Two Different Contexts.
Much has been made in the past week about South Carolina governor Mark Sanford and his recent rendezvous to the Southern Cone. Individuals of both parties and many political persuasions have weighed in on the controversy. Even actor Alec Baldwin offered insightful remarks on the matter.
But despite increasing calls for his resignation, Sanford remains in office. Instead, another governor will be resigning before the end of the month; Alaska governor and former GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin. Since her stint on the national, the populist Palin has been shouded in controversy, some warranted some not. Many anticipated that she would be a candidate for the GOP presidential nod in 2012. While expressing a desire to serve her state and her country, Palin was ambiguous about her future plans.
In a matter of two weeks, the Republican Party has now likely lost two promising, relatively young leaders. Much like Sanford, Palin had accumulated political enemies during her tenure as governor. On the national stage, Palin fell victim to unwarranted criticism at times, both within and beyond Alaska. Her recent feud with David Letterman, however, was not one of those times. The scandal which has brought down Mark Sanford from the likelihood of presidential contention was his own doing, and something for which he should receive no sympathy.
Moving forward, Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell, a failed candidate for Congress, will become governor of Alaska upon Palin’s resignation. This could make interesting the upcoming 2010 gubernatorial primaries in the state, for which there are already other potential Republican contenders. Fortunately for Parnell, he will be governing a state that largely has its affairs in order when jobless rates and state budgetary shortfalls have increased nationally.
Palin, whose name was in the national headlines in recent days over a lingering 2008 campaign controversy, will presumably be looking after her family. While there are things not to like about Sarah Palin, she will leave office with her authenticity as a person in tact. The same cannot be said for Mark Sanford, when or if he resigns.
Obama and Clinton are wrong about Honduras.
The Republic of Turkey is generally regarded as a democracy. The latest Freedom House report on electoral democracies asserts such. By virtue of being a candidate country for EU enlargement, Turkey, the easternmost member of NATO is a democracy. However, were Turkey to join the supranational European Union, it would be the only member state where the unelected military plays a role in upholding the constitutional order of the country. In this last respect, Honduras is very much like Turkey. Yet, the President of the United States and his Secretary of State have suggested otherwise.
GOP Finally Pushing Cohesive Message
House Democrats may have passed the global warming bill that promises to hamstring the economy this week, but the GOP put up a fight that may prove strong enough to help derail it in the Senate. Yes, it was a losing effort, but they darn near overcame insurmountable odds in the very Left-leaning House. In that effort, they accomplished something that may pay off incredible dividends down the line, as well – the GOP leadership finally coalesced around a singular message to push between now and 2010. The message might be painfully obvious - who isn’t in favor of job creation? - but legislators have begun to effectively tie it into several major ongoing debates.
- First of all, they have used it to battle back against Obamacare. Knowing that the voters don’t see the public option as an evil bogeyman anymore, Republican efforts have finally shifted away from the ’93/94 playbook and into a more modern argument. They’ve begun to make the case that squeezing out private options in favor of a government-backed plan is an industry-killer, in addition to whatever benefits it might provide. Certainly, other claims are dominant in this defense (rationed care, lack of specialization in US hospitals, etc), but the debate this time has a much more varied, ‘attack on all fronts’ feel to it.
Your first thought at mention of health insurance providers and hospital administrators isn’t usually about those poor people and how they’re going to put food on their table, but cold numbers on jobs lost hits hard in this climate. It’s a hard argument to make, but it seems to be gaining ground with people all over.
- Legislators are weaving the jobs refrain into attacks on the stimulus, too. That seems obvious enough, but the focus has been on highlighting administration failures in understanding the principles of job creation, which can then be repeated ad nauseum in the other debates. Certain subsets of the population will always vote for handouts over job opportunities, but the realistic fear that there will soon be much less to hand out without significant job creation is an effective tool.
- GOP officials are also pushing concerns over job creation in the cap-and-tax debate. People like the idea of stopping global warming – they don’t care as much as the environmentalist zealots would like them to, but they prefer it slightly to doing nothing. When fiscal restraint and responsible budgeting were not enough to dissuade people in this area, the data on economic costs served their purpose by causing 50 Dems who have to answer to their constituents to break ranks. Also, the economic concerns look like they may be sufficient to kill the bill in the Senate, forcing those who did not break with the Left to answer for their job-killing business tax hike in the next round of elections.
Hard numbers related to how much we might lose in foreign direct investment because of this never even came up. Legislators didn’t even have to talk about domestic jobs that would have been created if not for this bill that are now lost. After nailing the administration on its wishy-washy stimulus jobs created/saved numbers, the GOP was able to stay away from such flimsy arguments by talking about how many current positions would be lost and what the bottom line would be for individual families.
House leadership may have lost round one of that last debate, but they went down fighting, which means that any more negative press on it (like the leaked EPA cover-up) will only serve to prove them right all along in the minds of the public as this bill fights an uncertain battle in the Senate.
These individual battles are planting seeds in the minds of voters, so that when they realize that the one-time stimulus-funded projects haven’t created any sustainable work in their communities, there is a known place to look for answers. When the fairy tale is over, and people decide to vote for jobs instead of the hope for jobs, the GOP is beginning to position themselves as the ones who will be there ready to undo all of the damage and false promises. We just have to hope that people realize its time to look for answers before its too late and the damage is done.
Metro Tragedy Presents a Worrying Depiction of Accountability in Government.
The tragedy which occurred just inside the District of Columbia just days ago involving two WMATA trains hits close to home for many in the surrounding area. The 2010 Conservative Political Action Conference will be at a different hotel adjacent to the same Woodley Park/Zoo/Adams Morgan Red Line stop which many used to arrive at or depart from the conference. While CPAC was not near the Fort Totten stop where this calamity occurred, Fort Totten is also on the Red Line of the DC Metrorail system. As such, the train crash is something about which to be concerned, not just for those who live in the area, but those who visit too.
Map of the D.C. Metrorail system.
What has not been widely discussed in the course of the subsequent investigation, however, is the possibility that the planned expansion of the system further into Virginia may have factored into the crash on Monday. Since the beginning of this decade, there has been talk of building the so-called “Silver Line” to connect Washington Dulles International Airport to the rapid-trainsit rail system serving the District and its vicinity. Nonetheless, the planned addition took time to acquire funding and get started.
During the course of the National Transportation Safety Board inquiry into the accident Monday, information surfaced that the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority was warned about structural deficiencies present in its older rail cars back in 2006. Said investigation also revealed that the deficient rail cars were neither retrofitted with stronger materials nor replaced outright; the upgrades would be costly, and progress was underway on devising a plan for the Silver Line. Instead of spending the money to upgrade the trains, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority used its fiscal resources to focus on expansion.
In 2004, a final Environmental Impact Statement was completed for the Silver Line project. This followed on evaluations of other possible options, and consulations with relevant Virginia and federal officials. Initially cleared by the Federal Transit Authority for construction in 2005, the project was delayed due to a shortage of available funds. Further complications arose in 2006 when residents in Northern Virginia expressed concern about specific details of the Silver Line project. As such, revisions occurred, further stalling development.
A series of letters back and forth between backers of the project and federal officials suggest that, even with project approval in 2008, the safety and currency of trains operated by Metrorail went overlooked. Some of the correspondence (pdf) suggested that the WMATA had unresolved issues about which federal officials remained concerned early last year. Despite a failure to verify that the WMATA was meeting its existing obligations, clearance was granted to the Silver Line project earlier this year.
The NTSB inquiry into this accident, already expected to last for several weeks, should be expanded to investigate why the Federal Transit Authority approved earlier this year the costly expansion of a system already failing to meet its obligations. The pricetag attached to the Dulles metrorail project demonstrates that accountability, rather than funding limitations, impacted the severity of the train wreck. The Silver Line is worth implementing, but not at the expense of public safety and meeting existing obligations. If a private corporation put short-term profits over long-term safety, resulting in multiple deaths so close to the eschelons of power , there is little doubt that members of Congress would demand resignations and very public investigations; that the federal bureaucracy has not raised legislative ire in this case is worrying, and suggests much about things to come.
What Iranian Protestors Can Teach Us About Being American
Plenty has been said about President Obama’s response, or lack thereof, to the situation in Iran. This is one issue I will not attack him for. I do not think our dear POTUS fully understands that he is supposed to be “The Leader of the Free World” and I also think his Fourth of July invitation to Iranian diplomats is in extremely poor taste. Yet, I understand why he does not want to provide the Iranian Regime with the “American foil” they would love. Considering our less than stellar history of meddling in Iranian politics, it might have been wise to let the Europeans take the lead on this one. Still, I hope President Obama uses his international star power to inspire “change” in the places that need it the most.
I am not going to pretend to be an expert on Iranian politics. I am not going to pretend I know what those protesters are going through, although I thank my grandfather every chance I get for not allowing me to be born and raised in a similar position. The word brave does not do them justice. Our generation of Americans has never, and most assuredly will never, had to display the mass quantity and quality of courage that has been required of our Iranian counterparts the past few days. I am not saying we are incapable of it, Americans have always been capable of it when needed. Fortunately for us, however, our democratic values are enshrined in our culture, protected by the generations that preceded us, and they are not going anywhere.
We will have innumerable debates in the coming months, lively debates with our government leaders regarding the economy, foreign policy, and healthcare, but none of us will have reason to feel our lives are threatened. We will not have our internet access shut down for criticizing President Obama’s healthcare plans. Our friends on the left did not get arrested for their criticisms of former President Bush.
Most importantly, none of us will ever have to be Neda. I know the video is graphic but I hope everyone who has ever criticized the American government will watch it, along with this one. This is not me saying we should refrain from criticizing our government. I myself do so often and believe it is necessary. But too often we take our right to criticize for granted. We forget there are so many who do not have that right. So many people around the world right now are risking their lives, disagreeing with their governments so that one day their children can take the right to disagree for granted like we do. Disagreement is what makes America what it is, it is what makes our democracy work. Our founding fathers did not always agree and they made sure Americans would always be allowed to state their opinions without fearing a government backlash.
If there is one thing that Republicans and Democrats can take away from what is going on half a world away on the streets of Tehran, it is that our system works, regardless of its flaws, that countless others would risk everything for the rights we have, and that we should honor those rights in every way possible. So the next time you hear people disagree with a government position, feel proud, even if you disagree with them.
The Obama-Biden Administration
Republicans are winning the messaging war on health care reform, and the tide is turning on the national debt. However, The President’s approval numbers remain much higher than those of his policies. The man is either in an extended honeymoon or just too darn likeable. Many rightly assumed he would remain bulletproof for some time with his oh so dreamy ways, though there are signs of slippage. Until we can define the man as misguided and attack his policies more easily, Republicans ought to attempt to define the administration itself as inept through the dumbassery of one Joe Biden.
If Democrats could portray Bush as an evil warmonger through the gruff caricature of Dick Cheney, then the GOP could certainly appropriately label the ham-handed distribution of stimulus funds through the visage of the current VP. Mr. Biden is currently travelling the country announcing Recovery Act projects and talking about how they will create jobs down the line, as in a road work project causing bulldozer-builders to see an increase in sales, which causes bulldozer engine parts suppliers to see an uptick and thus tool and die shops experience an era of milk and honey, etc. But one-time expenditures don’t result in capital investments – why would Caterpillar buy a new fleet of bulldozers because I-70 added a lane outside of Kansas City one time? Nothing happens to stimulate the economy except a temporary reprieve for the work crew that actually tackles the specific project. They’ll be in exactly the same situation once the work is done, making the Recovery Act a sort of opiate of the struggling.
Sustainable jobs come through targeted tax breaks to small businesses currently squeezed out by state taxes and employment caps. We ought to use a trillion dollars worth of budgetary flexibility to reduce the federal income and allow businesses to pop up where mismanaged ones fail, instead of taxing growth to pay for short-term fudging of the numbers – but now I’m just preaching to the choir.
Besides the sustainability questions, the whole issue of jobs created versus jobs saved deserves more scrutiny in the MSM than it receives. When the administration puts the nation’s credit rating, federal reserves and the strength of its currency at risk for a debatable program, defended with made up numbers, the public ought to have some questions. Instead, we ignore the CBO’s repeated warnings that the administration is pushing every important decision onto the next President, lying over and over again to pass whatever they like.
Whenever questioned, Biden shifts the blame, even though he is the quasi-czar of this massive boondoggle. If he can’t answer the serious questions that abound, then no one can and we’re all in a lot of trouble. This is important stuff and it’s time we handled it appropriately.
Grass-roots activists are questioning the explanations, but we need to get a coordinated attack from the RNC as we’ve seen with the costs of health care reform. As much as activists would like to bypass party officials, the reach they have with the vast majority of the electorate through the MSM is crucial and needs to be utilized. Without it, the majority of the public (the part that doesn’t crunch federal budget numbers) is going to go on happily hoping that they get a job soon, while instead nothing improves and the future falls apart around them. Joe Biden, and President Untouchable, are the ones tearing it down, and we need to stop allowing them to do it in shadow.
Recent Events Indicate Relevance of New Media
How disappointing. When Time magazine put Barack Obama on the cover a few months ago, few if any actually thought that the old media would actively neglect is role, and treat President Obama like a second FDR. Unfortunately, recent events have shown this to be the case.
In recent weeks, NBC ran television specials on the topic of how the White House works. Instead of facing criticism from other ”news” operations for being uncritical of a politically ambitious administration facing mounting ethical issues, NBC seems to have started a trend. ABC in the United States intends to air a “national conversation” on health care, but has inconspicuously denied opponents of the administration’s proposals the chance to run a paid advertisement before the broadcast expressing their point of view. Not to be outdone, CBS will grant President Obama an infomercial free of charge on Father’s Day later this month. The trumpeting of folly by various media outlets justifiably has irritated the leadership in the GOP.
Fortunately, the American people may be seeing past this reckless and obscene media conduct. The wasteful spending carried out by this administration is no longer just alienating foreign governments. It seems now that the New Deal way of doing things, of increasing bureaucracy and governmental intervention are among the worst ways to fix a slowed economy in times of relative peace. As President Obama and his administration push left in the name of progress, the allies his predecessor is said to have alienated have moved right. To be fair, the President of the United States is not alone in his approach; the British Prime Minister is also spending his nation into oblivion. As a result, the British people seem inclined to back the Conservative Party in their next election.
While the old media in the United States continues to neglect its proper function, however, the significance of new media becomes clearer. Be it in the health care reform debate, or in sustaining a political calamity in the Shiite theocracy that is Iran, new media is relevant. Presumably, the slowing down of President Obama’s great forward leap towards irresponsible California-like spending practices has happened in part due to the efforts of new media. As with the (first) New Deal, those skeptical of higher degrees of governmental control may be able to lessen the excess desired by individuals leftward in orientation. Nonetheless, any probable change in the U.S. health care system will fail to address the excessive role played by the federal government in the daily lives of average Americans.
Doctors understand that a state-centric reform of health policy is bad for the country, and other reforms respectful of liberty have been iterated. Among the populace, however, the present debate seems lacking. Those who are intellectually consistent, and believe in a fundamental right to privacy should oppose government-run health care. Those who feel that the government should not dictate to consenting adults what they do in the privacy of their own homes should, if consistent, oppose the government dictating health care decisons to individuals. Those who advocate for personal choice cannot consistently also support governmental tax penalties on private insurers to fund a public system. Indeed, those who believe that the government does not belong between a patient and a physician cannot, if consistent, advocate for greater governmental interference in health care. The fear-mongering tactics in use by the present administration are nothing short of disappointing.
Knowing that new media exists and could be making a difference is not enough. The role played by technology in the so-called “Green Revolution” engineered by supporters of Mir-Hossein Mousavi in Iran will be analyzed for years to come. However, little doubt can exist that technology will have impacted its longevity and its ultimate consequences. But, the tensions in Iran do not exist because the technology exists. Rather, the tensions in Iran exist due to the utilization of technology by those seeking to redress the excesses of the ruling regime there. New media tools can check the excesses produced by the current administration and broaden the public debate on important issues facing the country, but only if utilized.
Giving Democrats a Taste of Their Own Medicine
One of the many successful strategies that Democrats have used against Republicans as of late is the age-old “divide and conquer” strategy. Their success has depended on breaking our formally big tent into many small tents while greatly expanding their own. But in expanding their big tent into a huge tent, the Democrats have left us an opening to return the favor. Two articles appearing on Politico the past few days show us that centrist and leftist Democrats are not playing nice with each other. President Obama seems to have his hands full with a few more pertinent issues, so playing party referee is probably not on his to-do list.
This is why Republicans have to exploit the differences between centrist and leftist Democrats while we still have a chance. Regardless what wing of the Republican Party you belong to, chances are you are completely against government-run healthcare. As the Politico article explains, this solidarity is not evident on the other side of aisle. Centrist Democrats have major issues with the Administration’s healthcare proposals. On issues such as healthcare, the large Democratic majority numbers are misleading. Just like during the latter end of FDR’s New Deal Era, when conservative Democrats in the Democratic majority joined Republicans to form a new conservative Congressional majority to block some of President Roosevelt’s most extreme initiative, Republicans would be wise to form allegiances with centrist Democrats in order to block some of President Obama’s most worrisome plans.
At the same time, Republicans should do whatever they can to drive a wedge between centrist Democrats and leftists, especially during primary season. During the 2008 Presidential Primaries, Democrats did everything in their power to look like they got along, even when they didn’t, and (some) Republicans did everything in their power to draw distinctions between themselves and fellow Republicans, too often breaking Reagan’s 11th Commandment. It was little wonder that Democrats were indeed united at the end of their primaries and we weren’t. So we should do everything we can to help those Democrats who want to make non-competitive primaries next year a little more competitive. After all, New Jersey Democratic Governor Jim Corzine put some of his money into complicating the Republican Gubernatorial Primary this year. Why shouldn’t we do the same?
When it comes to using the divide and conquer strategy, this is one case that Republicans should act like Democrats.
Confirm Sotomayor Now
To be perfectly honest, I’m glad to see Republicans backtracking from their attacks on Sonia Sotomayor. No, I don’t think she possesses the right temperament or restraint for the Supreme Court, but I don’t think we could have gotten a much better candidate than the one Obama gave us. Think of the right’s restraint as not looking a gift horse in the mouth.
Sotomayor’s status as a wildcard leaves open the possibility of the Left having found their David Souter. Yes, her lack of a position on life issues is almost hard to believe, and her position on the Second Amendment is absurd, but the conservatives who have spent the most time with her seem to be the least concerned. She’s also scaring a good deal of people on the left, and the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Hypothetically, let’s assume worst-case scenario and say that we are actually certain of her positions on various issues and they’re worse than previously thought, we must still ask ourselves this: are we going to get anyone better? A Democratic President with a large majority in the Senate means that we could very well be debating how best to ‘bork’ another Ginsburg or Stevens. Instead, he picked someone who could fall anywhere between those two bastions of liberal judicial philosophy and a moderate swing position.
Obama’s other current nominees certainly fit the liberal mold, leaving one almost surprised that the first opening on the nation’s highest court was not a more sure-fire activist. Republicans in Congress still seem lost in the wilderness on any given day and Dem leadership that just recently took over the majority would have been looking to get behind a large and sweeping change. All of that considered, we’ve been given a wildcard to replace a liberal seat – we couldn’t have realistically hoped for much more.
There is value in fighting the nomination on principle, demanding a more strict, originalism-believing jurist. However, the tradeoff of practicality for principle in this case is quite high. In their opposition to Sotomayor, Republican officials and media personalities have called her a racist, denigrated one of the largest Hispanic political apparatuses in the nation and, honestly, looked impotent. If we have zero expectation of actually overturning the nomination, and every one that follows until we get another Scalia, then we ought to get out of the way, herald the greatness of a Latina justice on the Court and get her in before the President reconsiders his selection.
