Views on the News
February 6, 2010
Views
on the News*
Last year, President Obama swept into office on a promise to confront tough choices and now released a budget proposing the largest debt and spending spree in American history. The budget reveals that overall federal outlays will reach $3.72 trillion in fiscal 2010, and keep rising to $3.834 trillion in 2011. As a share of the economy, outlays will reach a post-World War II record of 25.4% this year. In fact, this year's proposal shows annual budget deficits as much as 49% larger than last year's proposal, raising the debt by an additional 6% of GDP over the same period. The budget submitted by President Obama is not quite dead on arrival, but it’s not even worth debating the point. Set aside the fact that it is based on overly optimistic growth assumptions and policy decisions that are only remotely feasible. It is a spending spree that will drive up both taxes and deficits. Annual deficits under the Republican Congress have become monthly deficits under the Democrat Congress. In addition, the President's budget would:
· Permanently expand the federal government by nearly 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) over 2007 pre-recession levels;
· Raise taxes for 3.2 million small businesses and upper-income taxpayers by an average of $300,000 over the next decade;
· Borrow 42 cents for each dollar spent in 2010;
· Run a $1.6 trillion deficit in 2010--$143 billion higher than the recession-driven 2009 deficit;
· Leave permanent deficits that top $1 trillion in as late as 2020;
· Double the publicly held national debt to over $18 trillion; and
· Increases
taxes by $2.8 trillion worth over the decade.
Buried in the
budget are the impacts from several proposed legislation initiatives:
·
Quantifies
$597 billion of new health care entitlement spending, and $712 billion of new
taxes;
· Shows the impact of “cap and trade” as a blank line to be filed in later after the budget is already passed hiding additional tax burden associated with this economy killing program;
· Recommends a National Energy Tax to raise $843 billion;
· Gives states $25 billion to extend the “stimulus” bill Medicaid subsidy;
· Add
another $1 billion to the “stimulus”
bill high-speed rail projects; and
· Add $1.35 billion to continue the President’s “stimulus” bill “Race to the Top” education challenge.
President Obama would run up more
debt over his eight years than all other Presidents in American history, from
George Washington through George W. Bush, combined. The national debt figure does not
include the $5 trillion of Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac mortgage-backed debt! In
January 2007 when Democrats took control of Congress, the CBO projected an $800
billion surplus over the ten-year period FY2008-2017. Today, covering the same period (including the
actual deficits from FY 2008 and FY 2009 as well as what the President proposes
in his budget for fiscal years 2011 through 2017), that
$800 billion surplus turns into a $9.2 trillion deficit. As
a result of these deficits, net interest spending would reach $840 billion in
2020. President Obama has offered a
budget that does nothing to address the nation's serious short-term and
long-term fiscal problems, and indeed makes them worse. By doubling the national debt over
pre-recession levels, America could head toward the tipping point when rising
debt levels will become too large for global capital markets to absorb,
potentially triggering a financial crisis, an interest rate spike, and gigantic
tax increases. Runaway spending
is the problem, yet Obama’s budget includes no plan for long term restraint. All of this spending must be
financed, and so deficits and taxes are both scheduled to rise to record
levels. The reality is that even these
still-high deficits are based on assumptions for growth and revenue gains from
record tax increases starting January 1, 2011. Even these huge tax
increases won't be enough to pay for the spending that this Administration is
unleashing in its first two remarkable years.
(“Obama’s Budget Seeks $2 Trillion More in
Spending and Deficits Than Last Year” by Brian M. Riedl dated February 1, 2010 published by The Heritage
Foundation at http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm2787.cfm
“Stimulus: Secret sequel in the budget”
by Tami Luhby dated February 1, 2010 published by CNN
Money at http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/01/news/economy/stimulus_extensions/index.htm
“The President’s Priorities” dated
February 2, 2010 published by The Wall Street Journal at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107204575039671922399114.html
“RSC Policy Brief: Highlights of the
President’s FY 2010-2020 Budget Proposal” by Tom
Price dated February 2, 2010 published by Republican Study Committee at http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/PolicyAnalysis/2010PolicyBriefs.htm
)
The
weight of Obama's own arrogance is triggering his own demise, because in his
case his ego is his Achilles' heel. The
Obama regime had all the power: the White House; a majority in the House; a
majority in the Senate; and a compliant liberal media. Almost from day one, Obama began
unconstitutionally usurping power by nationalizing banks and the auto industry. During his State of the Union speech, Obama
used his "bully pulpit" to
bully the free market, banks, insurance companies, Republicans, and even the
Supreme Court. Obama governs the Chicago
way: no compromise; simply seek to destroy your opponents. At town hall meetings across America, "we the people" passionately said
"no" to government-run
health care. As an exclamation point to
our national "No," hundreds
of thousands of protesters showed up in Washington, D.C. Unbelievably, the Reid/Pelosi tag-team are
still conniving and scheming to force ObamaCare down
our throats. While the Obama regime
appeared powerful, unstoppable, and spreading "like a green bay tree," a change was happening across America.
Americans were awakening from their
Night of the Living Dead Obama zombie trance.
Following key losses in November, Republican Scott Brown's shocking win
in Massachusetts confirmed that Obama's spell has been broken. While the TEA Party movement has played an
extremely vital role, Obama's biggest problem has been his arrogance and his
ego. Contemptuously, Obama believes he
can use America's ignorance of history and the facts, his superior intellect,
and his amazing oratorical skills to ignore the Constitution and the will of
the American people. Obama arrogantly remains relentless in his quest to implement
his rejected overreaching agenda despite an America that no longer supports him
or his leftist agenda.
(“Ego, Obama’s Achilles’ Heel” by Lloyd
Marcus dated February 3, 2010 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/ego_obamas_achilles_heel.html
)
Obama was
elected based on his charisma, and political magic as a blank slate that
devotees projected onto him what they wanted or wished, but the reality of
actually governing the country has demolished his fragile facade. Much like the Greek Icarus,
who was enamored with his ability to fly, saw his wax wings melt by the sun, so
goes Obama’s popularity melted when Americans woke up to finally look at
results from his leftist agenda. There
was no internal coherence to the coalition that swept him to power. There was understandable racial pride on the
part of the African-American community that came around to his banners after it
ditched the Clinton dynasty. There was
cultural "cool" and racial
absolution for the white professional classes who also embraced him. He had won an election, but he took it as a
plebiscite granting him a writ to remake the basic political compact of this
republic. Obama's self-regard, and his
reading of his mandate, overwhelmed all restraint. Democrats acted on the belief that speed was
of the essence to the Obama team and the powerful barons in Congress. Americans
are waking up with a whopping Obama-hangover, and it's not a pretty sight. Daily,
it dawns on ever more Americans that the man in the White House is not the one
they thought they met when he waltzed onto the stage and stole their hearts at
recent Democratic National Conventions. The
economic “stimulus,” ObamaCare, the large deficits, the bailout package for the
automobile industry were nothing short of a
fundamental assault on the givens of the American social compact. The hubris of Obama would allow him to
pontificate on any and all topics and he and his teleprompter quickly became
over-exposed. Obama was smitten with his
own specialness. Europeans contributed
to his hubris by overdoing the enthusiasm for the star who
had risen in America. For his part,
Obama played along, and in Ankara, Cairo, Paris and Berlin he offered penance
aplenty for American ways. While the
Europeans and Muslim crowds hailed him, they damned his country all the same. The close call on Christmas Day at the hands
of the Nigerian jihadist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab demonstrated that the terrorist threat had
not receded. The President tried to
recover by finally proclaiming “we are at War.”
The "bluest" of
states, Massachusetts, voted in a Senator who had behind him three decades of
service in the National Guard, who proclaimed his pride in his "army values" and was unapologetic
in his assertion that it was more urgent to hunt down terrorists than to
provide for their legal defense. There had been that magical campaign of 2008 moment and the
true believers want to return to it, but reality is merciless, so the magical spell
is broken.
(“The Obama Spell is Broken” by Fouad Ajami dated January 31,
2010 published by The Wall Street Journal at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704094304575029110104772360.html?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular
“Watch Obama’s Actions, Not His Words” by
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown dated February 5, 2010 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/FloydandMaryBethBrown/2010/02/05/watch_obamas_actions,_not_his_words
)
Once
the policy intentions of the Obama Administration and their allies in Congress
became clear, people started turning away from their elected officials in
record time. The last 12 months
have brought clarity to our political system. Not only had the American people voted the
Democrats into office, but they had put the left-wing in charge. The elements that view European-style
socialism as a model for America now had the opportunity they persistently and
surreptitiously pursued for more than a generation. Democrats launched two major, and unpopular,
legislative initiatives and carried out wholesale takeovers of several large
private enterprises. Those people who
actually understood the “Cap and Trade”
bill were profoundly alarmed by its effect on the nation’s economy. Americans of all stripes were sufficiently
disgusted by the complexity, deceit, and utter bribery wrapped in the Health
Care Bill to affect one of the largest electoral upsets in modern American
politics. Americans have been
conditioned for over forty years by the mainstream press that the policies
being proposed by the current administration are what this country needs. The most prestigious newspapers have
relentlessly editorialized on the errors of Republican policies and the
goodness of the left’s wisdom. Most
Americans are still viewing the left-wing slanted media, but they’re no longer
duped by the media mouthpieces. For
forty years, any pretense of even-handedness has been tossed aside on college
campuses. Students continually must
endure classes where college professors express their left-wing opinions freely
and without recrimination. Ultimately,
the lack of free interchange of ideas has turned out wave after wave of college
graduates who are hopelessly indoctrinated.
In 2006, far more Americans identified themselves as conservative (38%)
than liberal (24%). Four years later, after
a year of Obama, the figures are similar, except that now, only 21% state they
are liberals; a nearly two-to-one edge for conservatives! Americans
still believe that private enterprise is more effective than government
programs. They believe charity is
compassionate and that government programs are not. Americans have been most upset with
Republicans when they have bought into the left-wing’s policies and started
acting like Democrats. When Republicans
started spending like leftists and loading the
national budget with earmarks, the American people voted them out of office. Americans understand that less government
means more freedom. Historically,
Americans have always rejected the efforts of the left to turn our freedoms over
to a controlling central government. The
icing on the cake was the death of the Air America radio network. In the only example of the left-wing
attempting to communicate its message through the mass media where they clearly
labeled themselves and their views, they crashed and burned. Americans saw
with a clear eye what would continue to happen under left-wing leadership, and
through the ballot box have resoundingly said NO in Virginia, New Jersey, and
now Massachusetts.
(“Proud American” by Bruce Bialosky
dated February 1, 2010 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/BruceBialosky/2010/02/01/proud_american
)
A year ago, President Obama had a tantalizing political
opportunity to remake America in his image but when revealed the American
people rejected first the ideas then the man.
His party enjoyed a
blowout election and the Democrats had hefty majorities in both houses of
Congress. Obama had stratospheric
approval ratings and the support of a nation profoundly fearful of the future. The Republicans were leaderless and viewed as
devoid of ideas. Then Obama threw it all
away! He outsourced chunks of his job to
a left-wing congressional leadership that has learned nothing and forgotten
nothing for the past 35 years. What came
next was one appalling legislative blob after another: the stimulus package
that hasn’t stimulated, the cap-and-trade monster, the health care power-grab. When Obama assumed office, he was still
something of an enigma. The bottom line
is that he isn’t a good politician. Politics
is an art, and Obama’s basic competence is highly suspect. He lacks the personal radar an effective
politician must have to know when you’re on solid ground and when you’re
tilting at windmills. Obama has spent a
year tilting at windmills and has been revealed as a weak leader whose
credibility is shrinking, and also the ranks of his followers. He has succeeded mainly in uniting his
opposition and dividing his own camp with House and Senate Democrats openly
sniping at one another. The hard left, Obama’s
base, is writing him off as inept. Despite
its enormous cost, last year’s “stimulus”
package has failed to live up to expectations, but that does not stop him from
asking for another spending package focused on “jobs.” On health care, he
offered no suggestions to deadlocked Democrats as to how they should pass a
bill disliked by most Americans. Obama
is stubborn and his advice is to keep trying what isn’t working. Like Jimmy Carter, Obama squandered much of
his political capital in his first year. When he took office, the economic landscape
was completely transformed, but he refused to put off health care and “cap and trade,” even though voters viewed
the economy was a much higher priority. He
has a different problem when it comes to his handling of foreign policy. He sold out the Czechs and Poles on missile
defense to appease Russia, and got nothing in return. He stuck with “engagement” on Iran, missing an opportunity to voice full-throated
support for the Iranian opposition. In
dealing with China, he shrank from the topic of human rights. The question raised by French President
Nicolas Sarkozy, “Is
he weak?” must be answered in the affirmative. The media portrait of Obama during the
campaign made much of his cool, unflappable temperament but that ignored his
most telling qualities. Stubborn and weak is not what we want in a President, so it
is no wonder he’s already talking about the prospect of a single term.
(“The President’s ineptness quite clear after
a year” by E. Thomas McClanahan dated January 30, 2010 published by The
Kansas City Star at http://www.kansascity.com/275/story/1717714.html
)
There
are significant disagreements over the speed and extent of climate change, the
danger it poses, and its precise causes, and recent findings may remove its
scientific basis. Earth’s climate
has changed many times over millions of years.
Environmentalists have embraced a theory that climate change is caused
by human actions and must be controlled to save the planet. The Government is convinced that the debate
is over, won by the scientists who insist that climate
change is the result of the carbon dioxide generated by human activity. Environmentalists are now embarked on the
project of "decarbonising"
the economy; since carbon-based energy provides most of our electricity and
powers nearly all of our transportation.
The impact of their plans is a colossal, and colossally expensive, task. After years in which global
warming activists had lectured everyone about the overwhelming nature of the
scientific evidence, it turned out that the most prestigious agencies in the
global warming movement were breaking laws, hiding data, and making inflated,
bogus claims resting on, in some cases, no scientific basis at all. We've been given some clear answers
that weren't serious, ranging from the famed "hockey stick" diagram, that entirely
misrepresented planetary temperature trends; to smaller assertions such as,
"all the glaciers in the Himalayas
will have melted by the year 2035." This latter we now know was made up from whole
cloth, like the polar bear die-off, and a great deal of nonsense about Arctic
and Antarctic ice cover. There is not a
single aspect of the "anthropogenic
global warming" hypothesis that has been left standing by recent
revelations, and more shoes drop every day.
Meanwhile correlations between solar activity and climate change have
been ignored. Recent correlations have
shown that changes in climate precede carbon dioxide changes, thus totally invalidating
the entire “cap and trade” approach. Hyping the climate threat
increasingly doesn’t look like an accident: it looks like it was a conscious
political strategy for income redistribution that has now been revealed as a
hoax. The CFC/ozone depletion theory
that caused a ban on CFCs has since been proven to be a hoax caused primarily
by nature and economically a tremendous waste of money. The pesticide scare that caused DDT to be
banned has since been scientifically disproven as a hoax but the ban doomed
millions to a bleak death in Africa. It is about time that the Congress finally kills the “cap and trade” legislation since it is a
junk science hoax whose only purpose is a stealth international redistribution
of wealth scam.
(“We need facts, no spin, in the climate
debate” dated January 31, 2010 published by http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/7113594/We-need-facts-not-spin-in-the-climate-debate.html
“The Death of Global Warming” by Walter
Russell Mead dated February 1, 2010 published by The American Interest at http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010/02/01/the-death-of-global-warming/
“Manipulating the Climate Numbers” by David
Warren dated February 3, 2010 published by Real Clear Politics at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/02/03/manipulating_the_climate_numbers_100154.html
“The CFC Ban: Global Warming’s Pilot Episode”
by David S. Van Dyke dated February 4, 2010 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/the_cfc_ban_global_warmings_pi.html
)
The American people don’t want a government takeover of
health care that limits choice and competition, funnels $1 trillion from
American taxpayers to insurance companies in its first dozen years (2014 to
2025), cuts Medicare Advantage benefits by an average of $21,000 per enrollee
in its real first decade, and contains enough shady backroom deals to make
Jimmy Hoffa blush. Most of all, the American people don’t want a $2.5 trillion bill
that does all of that
and still fails to do the one essential thing: lower health care costs. Obama has asked for “a better approach,” and a small bill exists that includes seven
real reforms that together would lower costs, significantly increase the number
of insured, and be deficit-neutral:
·
Cut
costs by preventing runaway malpractice lawsuits. Relieve doctors from having to practice
costly defensive medicine, by capping noneconomic and punitive damages, while
continuing to allow unlimited economic damages to compensate for financial
loss. Cut costs by allowing Americans to buy insurance across state
lines. Allow Americans to shop for coverage from coast to coast, whether
from lower-mandate states at lower prices, or from higher-mandate states at
higher prices.
·
Cut
costs by allowing lower premiums for healthier lifestyles. Repeal federal
regulations that ban companies from offering more than a 20% discount to those
who eat and drink in moderation, exercise, or don’t smoke.
·
Increase
access to health insurance by ending the unfair tax on the uninsured (and
self-insured), giving them a tax-break similar to that which is already
available to those with employer-provided insurance. Provide refundable annual tax-credits of
$2,500 per person or $5,000 per family directly to the American people, not to
insurers. Leave employer-provided insurance, its tax-exempt status, and the
rest of the tax code, intact.
·
Provide
further help for those who are uninsured and have expensive preexisting
conditions, by increasing federal support for state-run or state-organized
high-risk pools. Help all 50 states to establish or organize
such pools.
·
Convert
some federal funds into block grants to states, and reallocate the savings
resulting from reducing the number of uninsured. Provide block grants to reimburse hospitals
for treating the uninsured in emergency rooms.
·
Implement
additional reforms from the House Republican health bill. Adopt regulatory reforms in the small group
and non-group markets, standards for electronic administration, an abbreviated
approval pathway for follow-on biological products, and HSA reforms.
A
recent McLaughlin and Associates poll found that Americans would prefer more
modest steps to health care reform by almost three to one (61% to 21%), which
should tell Congress to start over and give the American people what they want
(“The
Small Bill” by Jeffrey H. Anderson dated February 8, 2010 published by The
Weekly Standard at http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/small-bill
)
Obama's
entire approach to the war is driven by his belief that Muslim extremists
didn't become terrorists because of their ideology but because we have
mistreated them. He thinks we
have goaded potential terrorists into becoming terrorists and given existing
terrorists further cause to hate us. Obama expects to turn all that around with euphemisms ("man-caused disaster," "overseas contingency operations"),
a flurry of lofty rhetoric (the world O’pology tour),
a few symbolic steps (closing Gitmo) and certain
policy reversals (Mirandizing terrorists and trying
enemy combatants in civilian courts). The result of his posture of relaxation and retreat has been
an unmitigated disaster. He went
out of his way to avoid identifying the Fort Hood jihadist as a terrorist; he
admonished us not to jump to any conclusions about the Christmas underwear
bomber; he promised to close Gitmo with no plan to
relocate the prisoners; he moved the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to ground
zero with utterly no consideration for the local or national security
implications involved; and his Justice Department allowed the Christmas bomber
to lawyer up after only 50 minutes of interrogation. He just can't seem to grasp that the real
world involves more than street organizing, speechmaking, symbolic gestures and
his grand appearance on the world stage as a veritable messiah. His miscalculations are disturbingly
naive. The
verdict on Obama's messianic approach is already in: despite his overtures, his own CIA director,
Leon Panetta, just testified that al-Qaida is growing and gearing for an attack
in the United States in the next three to six months.
(“The
‘Messiah’ Isn’t Delivering Peace” by David Limbaugh dated February 5, 2010
published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/DavidLimbaugh/2010/02/05/the_messiah_isnt_delivering_peace
)
The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) report has been
transformed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates into a analytical
justification for current defense plans and programs but lacks a force
structure necessary to prepare for an uncertain future. As the second sentence of the QDR states, "first and foremost, the United States is a nation at war," but
the remainder of the report and, more critically, the long-term budget, reflect
an administration more interested in ending wars than winning them, and ready
to "manage" American
decline rather than preserve American leadership. The QDR makes no attempt to answer the basic
question of defense planning of how much is enough? It does not even attempt to articulate a
force-planning construct, such as the "two-war
standard" of past reviews. In
particular, the QDR:
·
Substitutes
"risk management" for victory. Success in war does not go to the best
"balanced" but to the
strongest force. The purpose of strategy is not merely
to equalize all threats but to reduce the threat to a safe level.
·
Freezes
the size of the force and defers modernization. Events since 9/11 have shown that
size matters; the U.S. Army and Marine Corps cannot keep up with the pace of
operations without mobilizing hundreds of thousands of reservists and National
Guardsmen every day. The QDR caps the active Army at 45 brigades, three less
than the 48 planned for at the end of the Bush administration. The Air Force
fleet is smaller and rapidly aging; the Navy has fewer than 300 ships compared
to the Reagan-era fleet of 600. The gap between
American strategic ends and military means grows and grows.
·
Puts
Budgets Before Strategy.
Despite the legal requirement to define strategic needs first and then derive
force size, structure, programs and budgets, the Obama
administration imposed defense budget limits that have, by the Pentagon's own
admission, constrained the review.
The 2011 budget proposal is a reflection of Obama priorities. Despite the "national security exemption" from a
proposed freeze to "discretionary"
budgets and the unanticipated $30 billion-plus cost of the Afghanistan surge,
the level of military spending remains at post-World War II lows.
(A Nation at War, an Administration in Retreat” by
Tom Donnelly dated February 1, 2010 published by American Enterprise Institute
at http://www.aei.org/press/100052
)
Obama did Republicans a favor by meeting with House GOP
lawmakers and reminding them of what they need to do to regain political power
in the next election. Republicans have lost the perception of
fiscal discipline and must demonstrate with innovative ideas how with GOP
leadership the economy would be better and return to growth. Republicans pointed to their opposition to
the $787 billion stimulus and the president’s budget as evidence of their
commitment to fiscal responsibility, but voting “No” is not enough. There are
at least four major obstacles standing in the way of a Republican resurgence
over the next nine months:
·
Tea
Party movement.
Republicans must come to terms with these grassroots conservatives to
incorporate their freedom and liberty agenda.
·
Cash
shortage. Republicans
have been bleeding membership and cash as Independents abandon the party. Fundraising with increase once the party
recommits to its conservative values and Independents recognize that the GOP
may represent their positions again.
·
President
Obama: Although the President
is a likable figure, voters increasingly dislike his ideas for change.
Republicans must nationalize elections to link local candidates to the nationally
unpopular liberal Democrat agenda.
·
Obstructionist
label. Republicans need
to embrace the “Party of No” label as a proud repudiation of the leftist
agenda. Republicans must then replace
this negative label with a positive “Party
of Better Alternatives” by documenting a platform of better ideas.
The biggest challenge that Republicans have is how to exploit
the alternative media to deliver factual information directly to voters unfiltered
by the liberal Mainstream Media.
(“Obama reminds GOP it must work hard to
reclaim seats” by Jon Ward dated January 30, 2010 published by The Daily
Caller at http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/30/obama-reminds-gop-it-must-work-hard-to-reclaim-seats/
“New media help conservatives get their
anti-Obama message out” by Jerry Markon dated
February 1, 2010 published by The Washington Post at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/31/AR2010013102860.html
)
* There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news. I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning. Individual issue updates this week include:
· Budget at http://returntocommonsensesite.com/dp/budget.php
David Coughlin
Hawthorne, NY