Parteibuch Aggregator Feed - Items from date 2010-09-07

Publius: Chicago Mayor Daley Won’t Run for Re-election

Publius — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 19:33:56 +0000

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley says he’s not running for re-election after decades in office.

Daley said Tuesday he’s been thinking about not running for several months and has become comfortable with his decision over the last several weeks. Daley says “it just feels right.” Daley says the time to move on “is now.”

The 68-year-old Democrat has been Chicago’s mayor since 1989.

Matt Kibbe: Andrew Breitbart to Speak at the 9/12 March on DC

Matt Kibbe — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 19:31:02 +0000

On September 12, 2009, grassroots activists from coast to coast flooded the streets of Washington D.C., making history in protest of a wasteful and oversized government.

This year, FreedomWorks and our fiscally conservative allies will assemble once again on September 12th to renew our commitment to a constitutionally limited government, and to remind Washington in one, strong, united voice that we will “Remember in November.”

We’re happy to announce that we will be welcoming Andrew Brietbart to the stage on the West Lawn of the Capitol as part of this year’s event. Andrew will be joining Erick Erickson, Deneen Borelli, Rep. Mike Pence, and many other leaders in the liberty movement to speak out against the out of control spending and the growing size of government. All of the details are listed on our website.

We hope that you can join un in our fight to take America back. We’ll see you in Washington this weekend.

Politico: New Polls Point to Electoral Tsunami

Politico — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:12:00 +0000

Even Politico is sensing the coming wave. From the tireless Mike Allen:

With just two months to go before the November elections, pollsters and political scientists are predicting a blow-out loss for Democrats that could rival the Republican Revolution of 1994.

In a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, most-likely voters say — by a 9-point margin — that they want the midterms to produce a Congress controlled by Republicans, not Democrats.

“If that kind of lead holds, Republicans would almost certainly take back control of the House,” the Journal’s Gerald F. Seib writes.

A new ABC/Washington Post poll gives Republican congressional candidates a 53 percent to 40 percent advantage among “those most likely to vote.”

“Voters were also asked whether they think it is more important to have Democrats in charge of Congress to help support the president’s policies or to have Republicans in control to serve as a check on Obama’s agenda,” the Post’s Dan Balz and Jon Cohen write. “Here, 55 percent say they prefer Republicans, while 39 percent choose Democrats. The GOP’s 16-point edge is double what it was in July.”

Handicapper Stuart Rothenberg warned of a tsunami Monday.

“National and local polls continue to show further deterioration in Democratic prospects,” Rothenberg told his clients. “Given that, we are increasing our target of likely Republican gains from 28-33 seats to 37-42 seats, with the caveat that substantially larger GOP gains in the 45-55 seat range are quite possible.”

Read more here.

Rasmussen: GOP Holds 12 Point Lead in Generic Ballot

Rasmussen — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:27:16 +0000

From Rasmussen Reports:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 48% of Likely Voters would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate, while 36% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent. The survey data was collected on the seven days ending Sunday, September 5, 2010.

This matches the largest advantage ever measured for the Republicans. Three weeks ago, the GOP also held a 12-point lead.

Still, while the margin has varied somewhat from week-to-week, Republicans have been consistently ahead in the Generic Ballot for over a year. During 2010, the GOP edge has never fallen below five points. When Barack Obama first took office as president of the United States, the Democrats enjoyed a seven-point lead on the Generic Ballot.

Results for this survey are compiled on a full-week basis and crosstabs for full-week results and generic ballot trends are available for Platinum Members only.

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, notes that “voters are ready to deliver the same message in 2010 that they delivered in 2006 and 2008 as they prepare to vote against the party in power for the third straight election. These results suggest a fundamental rejection of both political parties.”

A new book by Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen addresses the broader discontent roiling the political landscape this year. MAD AS HELL: How the Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System , published by Harper-Collins, will be released September 14. It can be pre-ordered at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble,Borders, and other outlets.

A commentary by Larry Sabato now projects the Republicans will pick up 47 House seats, eight Senate seats, and eight governorships. These numbers reflect a significant deterioration for the Democrats.

Read the whole thing here.

Capitol Confidential: Boxer Tied to Dubious Waters Cash-for-Endorsement Scheme

Capitol Confidential — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 16:27:51 +0000

Sen. Barbara Boxer D-Calif. , Chair of the Senate Ethics Committee, has paid some $30,000 since 2004 for the endorsement of embattled Rep. Maxine Waters D-Calif. in the context of a scheme that critics charge is unethical and amounts to Waters using her political station to benefit her family members.

According to the Washington Times, Waters “has turned political endorsements into a family business, using federal election laws to charge California candidates and political causes to include their names as her personal picks on a sample ballot, or ‘slate mailer,’ she sends to as many as 200,000 South Central Los Angeles voters.”

The slate mailer business, it turns out, is run by Waters’ daughter, Karen, via her public relations firm. Records show that Karen Waters’ firm has been paid more than $350,000 since 2004, and has billed a further $82,000 since California’s June primary, for its services in this regard.

It is a scheme that has been criticized by good governance groups including the Sunlight Foundation and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington CREW .

The Sunlight Foundation, in a blog post last month, equated the scheme to Waters “selling” her endorsement and noted that the amounts of money being paid to Waters’ own campaign committee in exchange for her endorsement often exceed the federal limit applicable to campaign donations.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington CREW meanwhile cited Waters as one of the most corrupt members of Congress in both 2005 and 2006 for operating the scheme. In both years, CREW noted that Waters’ “ethics issues stem from the exercise of [her] power to financially benefit her daughter, husband and son.” The 2005 rating placed Waters in the company of figures like former Reps. Randy “Duke” Cunningham and Bob Ney—both subsequently convicted of corruption-related offenses—and was directly connected to the operation of the political endorsement scheme.

Critics charge that Boxer has actively aided and abetted this scheme, both in the context of her 2004 and 2010 re-election campaigns.

In 2004, Boxer paid $25,000 for Waters’ endorsement. But ahead of this year’s California primary—in which Boxer faced no serious competition– and when it was well-known that Waters was under investigation by the House Ethics Committee, Boxer paid Waters $5,000 for her backing. It is this later payment that those monitoring Waters’ ethical woes say could act as an anchor tied to Boxer’s ankle, as she heads towards November.

“The amount is lower than what Boxer paid in 2004, yes,” said one Republican operative with whom we spoke. “But the Chair of the Senate Ethics Committee paying for an endorsement of an official under investigation for ethics infractions connected to her using her standing to benefit her family when that fact has been widely reported presents a major optics problem, to say the least. Ethics are already something of a surprise Achilles Heel for Boxer. Her committee let Chris Dodd off the hook, and she’s been criticized for using her repeat candidacies for the financial benefit of her family, too.” Added that operative, “This is an attack ad waiting to happen.”

Indeed, Boxer has been called out for steering about $500,000 in contributions made to her political action committee to her son’s consulting firm between 2001 and 2009. Like Waters’ scheme, this arrangement has attracted the attention of CREW, which focused on Boxer in a 2007 exposé entitled “Family Affair.” “Waters’ problems run far deeper, of course,” said the same operative. “But there are some interesting parallels here, to be sure.”

Boxer is facing what some observers say is her toughest political contest in a career that spans three decades, facing off against former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina. The three-term Senator has previously said that she does not expect Democratic ethics scandals, including that of Waters, to affect the race.

Real Clear Politics’ polling average places Boxer about 4 points ahead of Fiorina, with recent SurveyUSA polling showing Fiorina ahead. The race has been rated a “toss-up” by numerous pollsters and analysts.

Obama’s New Tax Idea: the Accidental Anti-Cap-n-Trade

Obama’s New Tax Idea — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:17:29 +0000

President Obama’s imminent proposal to allow businesses to expense capital equipment purchases through the end of next year is something my colleagues at CEI, particularly Marlo Lewis, have been advocating for some time. Not as “stimulus”, mind you though it should have some stimulative effect, which is not to condone the refusal to maintain current tax rates — that is, insistence on raising tax rates — as of January 1 . But as a greenhouse gas emission reduction scheme.

The logic is simple and the Dutch actually showed again, accidentally how this works to reduce emissions: business do not replace capital equipment as early or often as they might like because the tax code disincentivizes it, with depreciation schedules instead of treating it like other business expenses. They therefore postpone purchasing newer, more efficient and typically more energy efficient equipment.

Change that, and they will pull through new technology into use.

In a way that is moving investments forward, a la cash for clunkers. But in other ways it is just smart and the right thing to do.

Here’s the downside: yes, you get emission reductions and not by harming economic growth, but actually encouraging it. However, the political class do not get to reward their constituencies with cap-n-trade wealth transfers from you and me to them, don’t increase the cost of energy, and obtain no new control over our lives.

And as many of you know, that is the whole point behind the scheme urgently needed to combat “climate change” why not continental drift? that actually would have no detectable impact, according to anyone, on climate.

For these reasons, President Obama will never accept an argument that adoption of this latest stab at state-orchestrated and temporary stimulus qualifies as the “doing ’something’” his team and the rest of the enviros run around insisting is imperative. But, as the Washington logic goes, if we must “do ’something’”, well, this is ’something’, so let’s just do this. Keep your treaties and energy rationing schemes that, like this, would according to no one actually impact the climate, and declare victory, having done no harm and actually some good.

I’m kidding of course. These people work in Washington. But it is worth mentioning as we go forward that there are other ideas, ones that now even Obama acknowledges are economically beneficial, contrary to cap-and-trade which he boasted is designed to cause energy prices to “necessarily skyrocket”, “bankrupt” politically disfavored industries, and “raise billions of dollars.” This does none of those things. So, which would you choose? If you know, let your elected representatives know, too. Use this moment to inform, persuade, and advance the debate.

Tim Slagle: Obama’s Disease Threatens Our Future

Tim Slagle — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:59:35 +0000

On the surface you would think there is nothing in common between Las Vegas and Washington DC, other than sharing a Nation where The Jersey Shore is a top rated TV show. One city was built on the profits of lawlessness, the other from the profits of law. But the recently proposed $50 Billion dollar stimulus plan suggests they are more similar than Kardashian sisters.

Las Vegas has always astounded me. While I understand the allure of the big shows, bright lights, and wandering Elvis impersonators; I don’t understand the people who actually believe they’ll return from a Vegas vacation richer than they left.

Unfortunately, some look at Las Vegas as a career rather than a diversion; the ones who believe they have stumbled upon a system that will skew the odds in their favor. In turn they become unwilling contributors to an ever-growing spectacle of neon and debauchery.

The entire town was built on a foundation of these “systems.” All the marble waterfalls, the replicas of other cities, and the glass monoliths and pyramids; were financed by people who think they’re smarter than those who own the casinos.

Most of these systems are based on a nonsensical notion of justice in the cosmos. There is a belief in a mystical power that watches over us all, insuring that not everyone has a bad day. For every flat tire there is someone who was driving behind an armored car that forgot to shut it’s back door. For every roasted dung beetle, there is an ice cream cone. For every Paris Hilton there is a Stephen Hawking.

The premise is, that nobody can be a loser every single time. So if you lose one bet, all you have to do is double it on the next game, and eventually, when the cosmos shift, you’ll win everything back and more.

In theory it is possible, since you cannot expect a coin to land on heads forever. There is a chance it will work, but only as long as you have an infinite amount of cash. The spectacular attractions and architecture of Las Vegas stand testament to the amount of times the system has failed

Washington DC is a similar city. In fact , it kind of looks like a Las Vegas replica of Greece. All the marble temples of Bureaucracy, were built by delusional Autocrats, who consider themselves smarter, than the entrepreneurs who actually built this nation. There is also a notion, that the Federal Government has an infinite amount of cash.

The original stimulus failed, as did all the bailouts, TARP, and the public seizure of the auto and banking industry. We’ve lost so much money on Hope and Change, that it’s unlikely even our great-grandchildren will ever pay it back. If Washington was our friend, we’d suggest he put the cards down now, push himself away from the table, and maybe catch a stage show. But like compulsive gamblers denying their disease, this administration wants to double down on a “system” they should have realized was a failure long ago.

We the People are like the delusional lovers of a compulsive gambler, content to imagine a prosperous reality just around the next corner, and deny that the odds are stacked against us. It all sounds so plausible on paper that it just has to work eventually.

The problem that Washington doesn’t seem to grasp: there isn’t an infinite amount of cash. Why would they think that, when they literally have a license to print money? There is no reason to assume there is a bottom to the bank account; it’s like the joke about the guy who thinks he must have money, because he still has a box full of blank checks.

It’s why every round of stimulus has made the economy worse. The laws of economics are as inflexible as the laws of gravity, and just as fatal. They are enforced by powers greater than Hope, and I suggest any person who thinks he will not fall every time he steps off the top of a building, to attempt that experiment repeatedly.

And maybe when you start walking on air, I’ll support your latest round of stimulus.