Senate Finance Committee kills Kaine tax hike despite Democratic majority

February 4, 2009

Last week, a House Finance subcommittee shot down Tim Kaine’s tax increase.  Republican opposition was unanimous, which by itself would have done the job, but even a majority of Democrats on the subcommittee voted No.

Yesterday we had a bigger surprise: the Senate Finance Committee, where Democrats hold a 9-7 majority also killed the Kaine tax hike (8-8).

Not only did Roscoe Reynolds (D-20th) cross party lines to vote against it, but even Emmett Hanger (R-24th) - John Chichester’s heir as the most prolific tax-hiking Republican in the State Senate – voted no.

In sum, the number of Republican legislators voting for Kaine’s tax increase stands at absolute zero, while both chambers have killed it.


New Jersey: Republican combeack? Or cruel playback?

February 4, 2009

Jim Geraghty has news of an excellent poll for New Jersey Republicans, along with the caveat that must always come with a poll like this:

New Jersey has broken the heart of every Republican running statewide since, oh, 1997 . . .

Indeed.  In fact, the last Republican in the state of my birth to win more than 50% of the vote statewide was former President Bush – the Elder – in 1988 (Governor Christie Whitman was elected in 1993 and 1997 with 49% and 47% respectively).

Still, in what was supposed to be the beginning of the golden era for Democrats, and in a state where they repeatedly pummel Republicans, good news is good news (Quinnipac, also cited by Geraghty):

While few New Jersey voters know much about him, former U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie, a Republican challenger, leads Democratic incumbent Gov. Jon Corzine 44 – 38 percent in this year’s Governor’s race, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

      This reverses a 42 – 36 percent Gov. Corzine lead in a November 19 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

 In this latest survey, Democrats support Corzine 72 – 10 percent while Christie leads 86 – 7 percent among Republicans and 49 – 24 percent among independent voters.  Men back the Republican 51 – 32 percent while women go Democratic 42 – 38 percent.  Black voters back Corzine 68 – 9 percent while white voters back Christie 52 – 32 percent.

This becomes less surprising when one sees, in the same Quinnipac release, that Governor Corzine has an approval rating of only 41% (50% disapprove).

It’s been a dozen years since any Republican won New Jersey, and this year there is a new wrinkle – a Lieutenant-Governor (each party’s gubernatorial nominee will pick a running mate) – on top of the normal unpredictability that accompanies a campaign.

Still, at the very least, it means the Democrats will have to divert resources from Virginia, which could be a big deal for House of Delegates races.


We may really get change, just not the change the president expects

February 2, 2009

The irony is stunning.  At the very moment when President Obama is preparing the largest political leverage on the memory of FDR in sixty years, the value of said memory is falling faster than home prices.

We are less than two weeks into the Obama Administration – the one that is supposed to replicate FDR’s New Deal.  Yet we are also seeing Amity Shales, author of the revisionist The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, land on Page One of the Washington Post Outlook section with words like these (emphasis added):

It’s reasonable that a new executive in a downturn would want to evoke Roosevelt the leader. Like no other president, Roosevelt inspired those in despair. He kindled hope with his fireside chats on a then-young medium, radio. The new president gives radio talks, but they are also made available on this era’s young medium, the Internet.

But Roosevelt the economist is unworthy of emulation. His first goal was to reduce unemployment. Of his own great stimulus package, the National Industrial Recovery Act, he said: “The law I have just signed was passed to put people back to work.” Here, FDR failed abysmally. In the 1920s, unemployment had averaged below 5 percent. Blundering when they knew better, Herbert Hoover, his Treasury, the Federal Reserve and Congress drove that rate up to 25 percent. Roosevelt pulled unemployment down, but nowhere near enough to claim sustained recovery. From 1933 to 1940, FDR’s first two terms, it averaged in the high teens. Even if you add in all the work relief jobs, as some economists do, Roosevelt-era unemployment averages well above 10 percent. That’s a level Obama has referred to once or twice — as a nightmare.

The second goal of the New Deal was to stimulate the private sector. Instead, it supplanted it. To justify their own work, New Dealers attacked not merely those guilty of white-collar crimes but the entire business community — the “princes of property,” FDR called them. Washington’s policy evolved into a lethal combo of spending and retribution. Never did either U.S. investors or foreigners get a sense that the United States was now open for business. As a result, the Depression lasted half a decade longer than it had to, from 1929 to 1940 rather than, say, 1929 to 1936. The Dow Jones industrial average didn’t return to its summer 1929 high until 1954. The monetary shock of the first years of the Depression was immense, but it was this duration that made the Depression Great.

To understand how dramatic these paragraphs are, and how much they represent a break from the past, consider this: Ronald Reagan repeatedly praised FDR during his 1980 campaign.  The assumption that FDR saved the nation’s economy was not only unanimous, it was de rigeur from the time of his death until the moment The Forgotten Man was published.

Yet now, criticism of FDR’s New Deal can reach the epoch of the Washington establishment – the Outlook front page – while its author can become, as Shales is, a senior fellow in economic history at the Council on Foreign Relations.

In other words, for the first time in over seventy years, the American establishment is willing to acknowledge a debate on the New Deal.

Again, the timing on this is stunning.  The Obama Administration is trying to build support for a massive government intervention into the economy that would rival the New Deal in impact (and move far beyond it in terms of government size and scope).  The president and his aides are trying desperately to make us all believe it’s 1933 all over again.

Yet, even if they succeed in telling us we’re in Great Depression 2.0 (we’re not, but that’s for another post), they may find the American people looking back at FDR’s “solution” with skepticism rather than reverence.

In other words, the Republican Party – having recently reacquainted itself with limited government, could find themselves in a political Over-The-Hedge moment: hibernating in the wilderness one moment, and waking up in an exurban subdivision the next.

In fact, if Rasmussen is accurate about reaction to the “stimulus,” it may already be happening.


Washington Examiner lands Byron York

February 2, 2009

There are many in Washington, suburban Maryland, and northern Virginia who have lamented the long, slow, yet unmistakable decline of the Washington Times.  I have not been among them, because right around the time the Times started slipping, I began reading the Washington Examiner.

Well, today the Examiner reeled in a huge fish: Byron York of National Review:

I have some news to share with you, and it is that I have decided to leave National Review.  Starting next Monday, I will be the chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner. Making the decision to leave has been extremely difficult for me, because my years at — I joined in the last days of 2000, just after the Florida Recount — have been a great pleasure.  I’ve not only had a chance to work with the extraordinary people here, but I’ve also been given the freedom to cover and write about the topics that most interest me.  That’s a real blessing.

What made York so good to read was not only his terrific writing and journalistic skills, but his willingness to challenge the prevailing orthodoxy at his place of employment (BTW, NR itself deserves praise for giving him the freedom to do just that).  For those of us who shook our heads at NR‘s hysterical reaction to the Mitt-Romney-timetable, York was the lone voice of reason.  He has always been a straight shooter.

NR‘s loss is the Examiner‘s gain, but it also means that Republicans and conservatives in the greater Washington area have their choice of newspapers.  I suspect they will, like me, come to choose the Examiner.


Congratulations to the Pittsburgh Steelers . . .

February 1, 2009

. . . and Head Coach Mike Tomlin: Class of 1995, The College of William and Mary.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.