Dependency Will Destroy Our Republic

Yesterday, The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis Director, Bill Beach, presented at The Heritage Foundation’s weekly Bloggers Briefing. Unfortunately, I was a few minutes late, but the gist of Mr. Beach’s presentation was that the seventh annual Dependency on Government Index shows that this country is increasingly dependent on government. See a primer Mr. Beach wrote for The Foundry here, and the full report here.

I had seen the primer last week, and was confused as to why Beach had written the following:

Most disturbing of all, all of the evidence points to even more rapid increases in dependency ahead, which well could threaten democratic government.

No, of course dependency on government is not good, but if we don’t necessarily correlate dependency with government control- though, of course, they generally go hand-in-hand- how does that destroy the (as Beach put it) democratic underpinnings of our republic?

Beach’s answer was simple (if paraphrased for this post): in order to have a functioning civil society and republic, there had to be an appropriate separation between the public and the private. It made a lot of sense, though admittedly it was more profound when he said it than when I typed it.

The core of Beach’s presentation was terrifying. Not only are we going into incredible debt, we are not solving the entitlement issues so crucial to erasing that debt over time. Add private sector subsidies and bailouts, military overspending, welfare programs etc. we have a perfect storm. As Beach put it, we have 40% of taxpayers not paying taxes. These people vote on how federal money is spent, but have no skin in the game.

Solutions offered by Beach: stop expanding the programs that exist (including making them more efficient); tax reform through expanding the tax base by encouraging fewer taxes paid by each person but more people included in the tax system (thus, with more people having skin in the game, more people will watch how the programs work); and Congress needs to get control of mandatory spending. Other, side solutions include generally living within our means (government-wise) and holding down inflation.

The presentation can be heard here. I think Beach does an excellent job of talking about conservative policy principles as well as showing how conservative philosophical principles will help on the humanitarian level more than dependency programs. I encourage everyone to listen to Beach’s presentation by clicking on the Blog Radio on the top right of the page. It is the first presentation of the Briefing, so just hit play and enjoy. Or, rather, don’t enjoy, but be inspired to step up and become part of the solution.

The Heritage Foundation Bloggers Briefing

Rob Bluey, The Director of Online Strategy for The Heritage Foundation, was kind enough to invite me to the weekly Bloggers Briefing held at The Heritage Foundation every Tuesday. Today’s speaker was Representative Mike Pence (R-IN), a leading conservative in the House and the first Member of Congress to have a blog, which can be seen here.

Below are my takes from the event:

1. I met a number of interesting people, including Dan Kotman, Press Secretary for American Solutions and Steve Johnston, Associate Director of New Media for the office of the Republican Whip. I also met bloggers from Think Progress and RedState, and managed to give my card for www.thelobbyist.net to all of these people.

2. Pence spoke and, as always, was excellent (this is the third time since October I have heard him speak in person). He turned down the opportunity to run for the Senate this year, and he said it was because he wanted to lead a “conservative majority” in retaking the House in 2010. When asked if he wanted to run for President in 2012, Pence said of course he did (as he said, “Isn’t that the American Dream?), but that it would depend on the time and circumstances. He also said he was staying because he felt it was his “duty.”

3. The Think Progress blogger- a very brave young man, showing his face and speaking up, I might add- asked Pence about the Citizens United vs. FEC decision by the Supreme Court last week. In short, Pence made two points: first, that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” means just that. Secondly, he said he agreed with the great conservative writer George Will, in that transparency was the issue at hand, not who can and cannot have freedom of speech. He said he would have no problem with a requirement that all Members of Congress should have to put received funds on their websites at the end of every day.

One thing Pence avoided answering by sticking to the transparency and freedom arguments was the Think Progress blogger’s second question, which was what did Pence think of the ramifications of the SCOTUS decision regarding international funding of campaigns. Pence made reference to the Democrats having to pay back such funding in the 1990s, said foreign funds should not have influence on our elections…and then never really answered the question any further.

4. I managed to put a plug in for www.rightosphere.com. A CATO blogger sitting next to me immediately began asking me about www.Race42012.com, which he said he enjoyed reading.

5. I asked Pence two questions. The first was would he prefer a Republican majority in the House or a conservative majority? He stated that he believed the new conservative majority would be made up of a new generation of leadership in Washington, DC, but never answered the real question I had, which was the difference between conservatives and Republicans.

The second question was what would a new conservative majority in 2011 push for their first step in transparency. While he never directly answered the question, he did reference negotiating bills in front of the public and a couple of other basic points that are slipping my mind at the moment.

6. Four excellent quotes from Pence:

A. On the expected move by President Obama to try to freeze billions of dollars over three years: “I never met a spending freeze I didn’t like.” Pence was also asked when he had first heard about this freeze proposal, and said it was in December, when Republicans recommended it to President Obama at a jobs summit. 

B. “Any gesture at fiscal sanity would be welcome.” Pence said , however, that Republicans would compare that proposed freeze to the laundry list of expected spending programs in tomorrow’s State of the Union speech. 

C. “This isn’t anymore about debates about actuarial perfection – this is about what kind of country we are.” Possibly the best quote of his 50-minute presentation (including Q & A). Pence made the point that the bailout in 2008, the stimulus from 2009, the takeover of the private industry etc. by the government was about who we are as a country regarding the role and size of government, as well as regarding personal responsibility. Regarding the latter, Pence was almost entirely directing his comments at Wall Street.

D. Paraphrased: “Two things have happened [since I came to Washington in 2000]. My opinion of national government has gone down and my opinion of the American people has gone up.”

*Originally posted at THE LOBBYIST.

Punishing the Guilty- Unless We Don’t

The Heritage Foundation nailed it in their Morning Bell yesterday:

The TARP program has so far distributed $247 billion to more than 700 banks. Of that, $162 billion in principal and $11 billion in interest and dividends have already been repaid. Except for AIG, almost all banks that received taxpayer money are expected to pay back the American taxpayers in full. As The New York Times reports: “The losses from the bailout fund are expected from money paid to rescue Chrysler and General Motors and the insurance giant American International Group, and from a program to help homeowners avert foreclosures.”

So the real deadbeats that are not giving us “our money back” are not the banks, but the union-backed car companies and failed government mortgage modification programs. But guess what? The White House has chosen not to include the car companies among the institutions that will pay this so called “Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee.” Also exempted are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored entities that helped create the crisis.

It’s time we told our elected officials to stop picking winners and losers, and voted in people who are in favor of term limits and in favor of a separation of business from government. Beyond liberal or conservative, these are the issues that are so important to America. After all, when Howard Dean, Markos Moulitas and Arianna Huffington agree with The Heritage Foundation…perhaps it’s time for- and I dislike using this word- change to how our system works. Of course, it’s up to us, the voters and citizens of America, to make said change.

Media Holding Democrats Accountable on Transparency

Over the last few weeks, there has been talk of not having the traditional “conference” to meld the Senate and House health care reform bills. I laughed off such thoughts, as transparency is something this administration and congressional leaders have been hammered for over the last several months. However, it appears I was wrong. Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) and House Majority Leader Pelosi (D-CA) are setting things up so they will not have to have the conference, and instead get the “conference” bill without a conference.

This is bothersome. However, a number of media sources are doing their job and calling for the Obama administration to open the melding process to the public. (H/T to The Heritage Foundation’s “The Foundry.”) Let’s make our voices heard in support of C-Span’s efforts and make certain Democrats know they should have full transparency in this debate or face the wrath of the voters come November.

Health Care Updates

Lawsuits galore from at least a dozen states over the individual mandate, says The New York Times. The Times cites a Heritage Foundation legal analysis on the subject that is being used by many mandate opponents, including the Florida Attorney General highlighted in the article, to show how such an individual mandate is unconstitutional.

Other conservatives are attacking the mandate by reminding us that the Congressional Budget Office had multiple issues with the idea during the Clinton health care reform efforts.

Also, good times for Democratic Members of Congress and their trial lawyer buddies. Apparently, the latter worked really hard to make sure their industry wouldn’t get tagged in the health care reform efforts, and Democrats appeased them. Of course, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean made clear this would happen months ago. Unfortunately for Democrats, the CBO used real numbers and evidence to show tort reform would save the public $54 billion over ten years. (Conservatives, this is where we write, call, e-mail and fax our Senate and House Members of Congress to tell them they are not representing us…)

For fun- H/T to Ed Morrissey at Hot Air- here are some lobbying numbers from the law industry. Surprisingly, Republicans have averaged around 25% of lobbying efforts from lawyers since 1990. I didn’t expect it to be that high.

Reid’s Bill Could be the End of Private Insurance

The following was originally published and is the sole property of FrumForum.com

The left blogosphere is denouncing Obamacare as a triumph for private insurers. But Robert Book of the Heritage Foundation argues that it is much more plausible the operations of the plan will extinguish the private insurance industry.

The Senate bill would force private plans to spend a minimum amount on paying medical claims and tax excessive premiums.? The tax on those premiums however would not count towards the limits.

As Robert Book explains:

It would be very easy for regulators to become to develop a plan ?with a minimum benefit package that is high enough (say, above $8972 in average claims) that makes it literally impossible for health plans to break even, let alone make a profit.

Sam K. Theodosopoulos is the Editor of the GW YAF Blog.

Government Employees & Salaries Growing

The Washington Examiner and NRO, among others, criticize the growing number of employees on the government roll. I think the NRO piece does a better job of going after the real problem covered in the USA TODAY- not that the government is adding employees (yes, it’s a problem, but let’s allow the liberals to do their Depression-era employment strategy until the recession ends) but that in 18 months the number of Department of Transportation employees making $170,000 or more has gone from one (uno, a singular individual, whatever you want to call it) to over 1,600. That’s quite a jump, and it’s not the the only excessive pay jump analyzed at all three links above.

Of course, the same people adding to the government rolls (i.e., Democrats) killed the D.C. Voucher Program recently, even though it not only saves millions of taxpayer dollars but also educates its students- poor minorities, by and large- better than the horrific D.C. public school system. The Washington Post has the depressing story.

Senator Reid Is Going To Bite The Dust- Again

You saw it here first (or second, or third (twelfth?)- the point is, you saw it here). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is going to lose on the public option, and it’s going to crush health care reform, his ability to effectively lead the Democratic caucus and possibly his already-tough reelection. Here’s what’s going on:

On October 21, a delayed cloture vote on the so-called “Doc Fix” failed miserably in the Senate. Watching the vote happen with trepidation, I was very pleased that the vote went against the bill, which the CBO estimated would have cost over $240 billion?for the next?ten years. The vote was 47 in favor and 51 against, something of a surprise given Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) expectations of a victory in the vote. As David Frum and The Heritage Foundation explained, Democrats wanted to pass the bill outside of the final health care bill because doing so would?allow the a deficit-neutral bill to pass without noting the cost of the “Doc Fix” in the final legislation.?After the vote, it became clear that the most likely method of including the “Doc Fix” in this year’s health care bill would be to put it in the final bill, adding $247 (or so) billion to the final cost of the bill (or some variation thereof).

Normally, this wouldn’t be a huge blow to Reid- after all, losses happen all the time in Congress. However, he delayed the vote at least once (it was originally supposed to be held on October 19), and by putting?up and losing out on the?cloture vote, it’s becomes clear Reid was blindsided. Embarrassingly, just before the vote, Reid blamed the AMA for misleading him, which is a very unseemly way to act as a leader.

Now Reid is claiming he has the votes to pass the public option. Or, as is also claimed, he has the votes to pass the procedural step of getting the 60 votes necessary to move it forward, before only getting the required 51 to push the final bill through. To me, this smacks of desperation, making the claim so soon after the major loss regarding the “Doc Fix,” where he also thought he had the votes. Remember, too, that numerous Democrats have claimed opposition to the public option, and so has Republican Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME), possibly the only Republican who will support a final Democratic health reform bill.

In the end, I suspect Reid will end up looking as bad as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) did after miscalculating the first House bailout vote last fall. Boehner barely held onto his leadership slot, but given the criticism of Reid offered by the influential Daily Kos (see here, for example) and other popular liberal voices in and out of Washington- in addition to the support for the public option by Senators such as Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Charles Schumer (D-NY)- I think Reid is setting himself up for a huge loss in leadership support.

In short, the public option will probably not make it into the final Senate bill, showing Reid’s inability to lead his caucus, costing him support from Senator Roland Burris’ (D-IL) and other Democrats for the final bill. This will shut down health reform, showing his caucus it may be time for “change” within the party leadership and also setting up a race in Nevada where Reid’s constituents may very well decide it’s time for “change” to come to Washington from their state.

Heritage Foundation Holds Event for DC School Voucher Program

Yesterday, The Heritage Foundation blog?advertised its new video, “Let Me Rise.” The video, described as “a 30-minute film about the school choice debate in our nation?s capital and around the country,” will continue the fight for school choice that teachers unions are so against, and that our nation’s children so desperately need. In particular danger right now is the DC School Voucher Program, which for a fraction of the normal cost of a DC public education ($7,500) students are put through an educational system that is safer for them, gives them a better education and saves the public millions of dollars. Unfortunately, most Democrats are so beholden to teachers unions they are trying to shut the program down.

Here’s the kicker: the students are mostly minorities. I thought Democrats wanted to bring minorities up.

Conservatives Just Don’t “Get It”

You’ve heard this right?  Conservatives just don’t “get it” when it comes to technology, social networking, and Internet marketing.

Really?

I’m so sick of hearing this.  What secret technology recipe do Dems and liberals hold in this medium?  What have they done that is so damn special?  Everywhere I turn I’m being fed this line about how liberals have cornered the market on online politics.  Why?  Because the Obama campaign used Twitter, Facebook, and put a donate button on their campaign website? Please…

MoveOn.org is certainly a big player in some areas of webspace, and they have no equal in the conservative cybersphere…yet.  TheVanguard.org argues that they will be the conservative answer to Moveon.  This is a promise we have heard before, so I will remain cautiously optimistic.  But while we are on the subject, what is it that MoveOn has on it’s website that is so mind blowingly special?

I circled it for you in case you are a conservative/libertarian that just doesn’t “get it”:

The MoveOn page is filled with rhetoric and articles.  As an aside if you look closely you will pick out blatant misleading numbers all on one page. Their email sign up claims 4 million members.  The article under “Success Stories” claims 5 million members in the title.  While just under the title the actual story print claims 4.2 million members.  I wish my boss paid me an extra 80% on every 20% of the dollar I made.  But I digress.

The big FTW that liberals all other the Internet sipping their techno-lattes are getting all worked up about is how many email addresses MoveOn has collected via what boils down to a newsletter sign up box, a donate button, and a graphic icon link to their Facebook and YouTube fan sites.  That’s it folks.  That’s what the big liberal Net geniuses  are walking around heads in the clouds over.  High-five guys! You conquered the Internetz!

What is the actual gain from this?  MoveOn had close to $60 million in donations in 2004, and unless usual donors took their money straight to Obama, it’s safe to assume that the number was close to that in 2008.

While not in direct competition, The Heritage Foundation had a similar endowment in 2008 and also holds a similar size contact list.  Being that Heritage is a think tank, and not a social club, many of their priorities are different.  But there endowment certainly allows them to compete in the same spaces that a group like MoveOn is battling for ground in.

But what are the real numbers here?  Why can’t conservatives compete in the webspace like they do in talk radio in meatspace?  Why don’t we get it?  What aren’t we getting?

WHAT WE DON’T GET IS THAT WE HAVE BOUGHT INTO A LIE THAT WE “DON’T GET IT”.

… in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

?Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

Look at the numbers:

MoveOn is winning the Facebook war.  That’s pure Paris Hilton “hot” right there.  You guys can trade pictures and make cute references to the Messiah’s newest portrait in your status bar.  But Facebook isn’t the only application in webspace.  Liberals claim to be controlling everything.  But the numbers don’t add up.  The DNC less than half the subscribers or channel views than the much webspace belabored RNC on YouTube.  And the RNC easily rivals MoveOn in YouTube channel subscribers, falling behind by only 500 subscribers, but actually having 65,000 more views of channel content.  And Twitter, the Internet rage that is constantly talked about by liberals like they invented it is completely dominated by conservative and libertarian organizations!  In fact MoveOn and the DNC don’t even have representation on Twitter.  And let’s not even discuss individual members of Congress’ Twitter or Facebook adherence.  They all have them.  No one has an advantage.

So why are liberals and media outlets always saying that conservatives “get it”?  Because of Obama.

The Obama campaign’s technology effort which receives ravenous attention didn’t invent these applications or even use them any differently than anyone else in the conservative movement, with the exception of my.barackobama.com which allowed individuals to organize local events online.  Ultimately a brilliant strategy.  But It is no secret that Obama implemented an 18 month online social networking strategy, while John McCain simply pushed hard at the end, running what amounted to be a 72 hour “get out the vote” train wreck.  The reality of what happened last year was that Obama’s team produced an in depth Internet strategy from the very beginning.  The Internet was not just a webpage used to promote his candidacy and explain his policies.  It was used to connect like minded individuals through various ranges of social networking.

This isn’t something new to conservatives and libertarians.

It was new to John McCain’s campaign staff and John McCain.  And by the time McCain got on board with a decent Internet strategy, that ship had sailed, and Obama’s web presence was rolling down a mountain like a Mac truck with no brakes.  When liberal pundits are issuing their insults toward the other sides comprehension and use of Internet applications, they are thinking of the Obama campaign specifically, and not the broad strokes.  What Obama did with technology and did early was a great move.  But the uses of tech in his campaign was not some secret cauldron of witch brew which only liberals had the necessary skills to use.  Conservatives have been using the same tools for years.  And when we saw them being used by Obama and used successfully, we were sitting around all thinking, “This stuff should be obvious, we are all using it, why isn’t McCain.”  Conservatives have it right.  They’ve “got it”. In fact if you want a closer look at how well they get it, look to efforts like CEI’s openmarket.org, bureaucrash.com, globalwarming.org, or the Heritage Foundation’s stopspendingourfuture.org, 33-minutes.com or their joint venture ReadTheStimulus.org.  Or try RedCountry.com, RedState.com, TopConservativesOnTwitter.com (#tcot), atr.org (Americans for Tax Reform), netrightnation.com; these go on forever.

The RNC’s loss of Cyrus Krohn is a tough blow.  But you can’t build an empire with one hammer.  And furthermore, the duties of the RNC specifically does not necessarily need to be creating and implementing new widgets and whatzits.  It needs to be making sure that the next candidate is.  If the RNC was behind at some point then let’s be clear, the RNC is not the conservative movement.

Realistically, there is also more to the story.  While conservative get technology and use it effectively, the last campaign was riddled with problems.  Mixed messages and feelings over the Bush policy, the party being sporadic with their message, and many conservatives feeling like they were being left behind and no strong voice to represent their political ideology.  At the same time, Democrats were very united.  Not by Twitter or Facebook, but by a common theme, ‘Paint McCain as another Bush — No more Bush!”

For conservatives to rebound, and additionally re-capture the votes of moderates and libertarians they don’t need to just use technology well.  Getting a lot of followers on Facebook or Twitter will not win an election.  Conservatives need a unified voice, a return to traditional conservative values, and a common theme.

Which they have found, in Obama.

-nick

?I have heard there are troubles of more than one kind.  Some come from ahead and some come from behind.  But I’ve bought a big bat.  I’m all ready you see.  Now my troubles are going to have troubles with me!?