Saturday, January 31, 2009

Politics of Hope


We LOVE this. The new kind of politics of hope. Eight hours of debate in the House of Representatives to pass a bill spending $820 billion - or roughly $102 billion per hour of debate.

Only 10 percent of the "stimulus" to be spent on 2009.

Close to half goes to entities that sponsor or employ (or both) members of the Service Employees International Union, federal, state, and municipal employee unions or other Democrat-controlled unions.

This bill is sent to Congress after President Obama has been in office for seven days. It is 680 pages long. According to my calculations, not one member of Congress read the entire bill before this vote. Obviously, it would have been impossible, given his schedule, for the president to have read the whole thing.

For the amount spent, we could have given every unemployed person in the United States roughly $75,000.

We could give every person who had lost a job and is now passing through long-term unemployment of six months or longer roughly $300,000.

There has been pork-barrel politics since there has been politics, but the scale of this pork is beyond what had ever been imagined before - and no one can be sure it will actually do much stimulation.

Further, no one can be sure that we are not already at the trough of the recession - such that this money will be spent mostly after the recovery is well under way.

How long until the debt incurred under this program is so immense that it causes a downgrade in the nation's sovereign debt? What happens to us then?

This has been a punch in the solar plexus to the kind of responsible, far-seeing, mature government processes that are needed to protect America. This is more than pork-barrel - this is a coup for the constituencies of the party in power and against the idea of a responsible government itself. A bleak day.

Unfortunately, it is only the latest in a long series of such days stretching across decades of rule by both parties, to the point where truly responsible government is only a distant echo of our forgotten ancestors.

The staff at Ulster Politics wishes we could take credit for this analysis.... but we must give credit where credit is due... article written by Ben Stein and appeared in the NY Post

Writer, actor, economist and lawyer Ben Stein lives in Beverly Hills and Malibu. From the Web site of The American Spectator, spectator.org.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

The Republican Party owned the high road on controlling federal spending for some time. After winning the House in 1994, the Republicans pushed through the Contract with America. Bringing a balanced budget to the nation for the first time in decades. For all the complaining by the left about all of that, a large part of what Clinton claims as his legacy was a result of the Contract with America.

Unfortunately, being in power in the House for over a decade as well as an attempt by the Bush administration to steal away from Democrats issues such as education reform and prescription drug benefits for those on Medicaire, caused Republicans to lose their way on that issue. This needs to serve as a wake up call for fiscal Conservatism to again become an important plank in the Republican platform.

Pres. Obama and the left have been making attempts to redefine Conservatism so they can claim some Conservative credentials and even invoke the name of Ronald Reagan. The absurdity of this is lost on too many people.

The nation needs the Republicans to again define themselves as the party of fiscal prudency. If Republicans do not stand up and define themselves, then the left will define them and in very nasty terms, much as Pres. Bush allowed the left to define him for much of his Presidency.

Clark Richters said...

I got new blogging SLIPPERS.

Anonymous said...

Mario and his executive board have to be replaced. Who wants to replace Mario and put the republicans on the winning path?

Anonymous said...

hey 10:44 -

Sadly,, under Savago's regime, almost all of those qualified & eager to help the Grand Old Party were slapped in the face & rejected, mainly due to PJS' insecurity & fear of people smarter than he is, ( not to difficult to be smarted than Savago )

He turned off many extremely qualified leadership types by his rudeness, ego & stupidly SELFISH - GREEDY actions.

Beatrice Havranek is a prime example & there are many, many others.

Look no further than Pete Savago for the dearth of smart promising leaders in the Republican Party.

Start from ZERO now & go upward, i am afraid.