Are voters finally turning against the Obama power grab?
We all know that common sense is in short supply these days. I blame in large part the insidious cancer of political correctness -- a scourge that seems to make it impossible for people to speak (and act) in pursuit of the truth anymore. Its a shame, but the combination of political correctness, the liberal media and the over-active tort bar has made wimps of almost everyone in any position of power -- from local school boards to town councils. And, of course, this goes double for those in Washington DC -- who will always put politics and their insatiable thirst for power above doing the right thing for the American people. Fortunately, it appears that the American people may be catching on. As Michael Barone reports, recent polls seem to show that the public is starting to wake up to the big government power grab going on with Obama and his minions:
Last month's Washington Post-ABC poll reported that Americans favor smaller government with fewer services to larger government with more services by a 54 percent to 41 percent margin -- a slight uptick since 2004. The percentage of independents favoring small government rose to 61 percent from 52 percent in 2008. The June NBC-Wall Street Journal poll reported that, even amid recession, 58 percent worry more about keeping the budget deficit down versus 35 percent worried more about boosting the economy. A similar question in the June CBS-New York Times poll showed a 52 percent to 41 percent split.
Other polls show a resistance to specific Democratic proposals. Pollster Whit Ayres reports that 58 percent of voters agree that reforming health care, while important, should be done without raising taxes or increasing the deficit. Pollster Scott Rasmussen reports that 56 percent of Americans are unwilling to pay more in taxes or utility rates to generate cleaner energy and fight global warming.
This is consistent with the most recent Rasmussen poll that shows Obama's approval rating now hovering just above 50% -- in fact, below the percentage of vote he got in the 2008 election. Polls now consistently show that Obama and the Democrats are starting to steadily lose support among the all-important Independent swing voters -- the very same voters who were the difference in the 2008 election. As Ben Smith at Politico notes:
In a potentially alarming trend for the White House, independent voters are deserting President Barack Obama nationally and especially in key swing states, recent polls suggest.
“This is a huge sea change that is playing itself out in American politics,” said Democratic pollster Doug Schoen. “Independents who had become effectively operational Democrats in 2006 and 2008 are now up for grabs and are trending Republican.
“They’re saying, ‘Costing too much, no results, see the downside, not sure of the upside,’” he said.
Predictably, of course, the White House is dismissing any shift in independent support as inconsequential -- the typical hubris of a party that thinks it won a realigning election in 2008.
I have consistently argued that Obama ignores these kinds of polls at his own peril -- for the 2008 election did not reflect a fundamental shift in the American polity from a center-right to center-left orientation.
Increasingly it seems now that people are starting to wake up to the fact that the power grab going on in Washington has come without much thought -- and without any debate. This is an argument that the Republicans seem to be effectively making now, and it is resonating with Independents. Take a look at this very powerful video that Republican Senatorial Committee put out: here
This video -- as well as others up on Youtube and now circulating the net are starting to make A pretty strong case that I think many voters will respond to. The fact is that the Obama Administration has made an unprecedented grab for power in the form of big government programs with almost no debate -- spending trillions of tax payer dollars far into the future, and committing America to a future of higher taxes, onerous environmental regulation with no purpose, and ultimately to sub-standard government-run health care.
Any American without an ideological stick to beat knows there is no common sense in what is going on in Washington. My guess is that this will become crystal clear in 2010, and a huge backlash is coming.
Own a house? Beware climate bill
If you will ever consider buying or selling a house, you need to beware of the Democrats' "cap and trade" bill that recently passed the House of Representatives. It could dramatically lower the value of your property and/or make it very difficult for you to sell it without very expensive and time-consuming upgrades. (Story linked here, with full text below.) They call it a national "retrofit" policy. If it becomes law, you will not be permitted to sell your property until it meets federal energy standards that Congress has not seen fit to define.
In this bill Congress asserts enormous additional (and unconstitutional) power for the federal government, but delegates the practical details to the environmental zealots and other bureaucrats in the EPA and in state governments. Thus nobody in particular can be held accountable for requiring building retrofits that could bankrupt many homeowners and businesses.
Congress is unleashing regulatory pit bulls on unsuspecting citizens while preserving its own ability to deny any wrongdoing. Politicians do know how to cover their posteriors while doing great damage.
If you have ever sold a house, you know how much stress is involved, especially in a weak housing market such as we already have. This bill is all we need to destroy the market and force us to visit Congress with torches and pitchforks.
If the Senate also passes this abomination, President Obama will sign it. But you still have a little time left to influence the Senate vote. I suggest you get to it pronto.
And be sure to remember this insanity in November, 2010.
CNSNews.com Democrats’ Cap-and-Trade Bill Creates ‘Retrofit’ Policy for Homes and Businesses Wednesday, July 01, 2009 By Matt Cover
(CNSNews.com) – The 1,400-page cap-and-trade legislation pushed through by House Democrats contains a new federal policy that residential, commercial, and government buildings be retrofitted to increase energy efficiency, leaving it up to the states to figure out exactly how to do that.
This means that homeowners, for example, could be required to retrofit their homes to meet federal "green" guidelines in order to sell their homes, if the cap-and-trade bill becomes law.
The bill, which now goes to the Senate, directs the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop and implement a national policy for residential and commercial buildings. The purpose of such a strategy – known as the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) – would be to "facilitate" the retrofitting of existing buildings nationwide.
"The Administrator shall develop and implement, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, standards for a national energy and environmental building retrofit policy for single-family and multi-family residences," the bill reads.
It continues: "The purpose of the REEP program is to facilitate the retrofitting of existing buildings across the United States."
The bill leaves the definition of a retrofit and the details of the REEP program up to the EPA. However, states are responsible for ensuring that the government’s plans are carried out, whatever the final details may entail.
"States shall maintain responsibility for meeting the standards and requirements of the REEP program," the bill says.
Replacing Ritter & Bennet
Slated on Backbone Radio, July 12 Listen every Sunday, 5-8pm on 710 KNUS, Denver... 1460 KZNT, Colorado Springs... and streaming live at 710knus.com.
Let's face it, Colorado's top elected offices are a near-vacuum at present. There is "no there there" with Gov. Bill Ritter or Sen. Michael Bennet. Both Democrats are empty suits as far as leadership is concerned, and weak in the polls as a result. Election year will soon be here. Josh Penry of Grand Junction has his eye on replacing Ritter. The Colorado Senate Republican leader may formally announce this Saturday, and he'll be my guest on Backbone Radio this Sunday.
Ken Buck of Greeley is formally in the race to replace Bennet, and the Weld County DA is campaigning statewide among Republicans, 13 months ahead of the August 2010 primary. He'll join us on the show as well.
Plus Marvin Hutchens on Obama's wrong-foot foreign policy... wrong on Iran, on Honduras, on Russia... and Brian Schwartz on the phony promises of government health care.
Plus Daniel Hannan, the British conservative member of European Parliament who lit up YouTube with his scolding of Gordon Brown last spring and electrified a Denver audience last month.
Backbone Radio is your resource for intellectual ammo in the political wars, along with a winning attitude to keep spirits high. Plan our broadcasts into your Sundays -- and remember our podcasts are online 24x7.
Yours for a new broom, JOHN ANDREWS
Ag lobby blew it on climate bill
Maybe when climate-change regulators strangle the economy and carbon-counters turn gas, oil and electricity into expensive luxuries, farmers will recognize how our "friends" in Washington, D.C., sold us out in the name of political compromise. Capitol Hill's agriculture lobby had a choice: withhold support from the Waxman-Markey climate control bill or agree to a compromise that provides cover to rural-district Democrats who support it.
Without those rural votes, Waxman-Markey was bound for the shredder. With those votes, it barely garnered the minimum needed for passage.
Colorado's delegation illustrates the chasm between Democrats with a real-world understanding of agriculture and those whose concern is as sincere as that pair of jeans they bought for county fairs.
Rep. John Salazar, a San Luis Valley potato farmer, staked out his "no" vote early, recognizing that Waxman-Markey will drastically increase energy costs.
Meanwhile, freshman Rep. Betsy Markey, a former staffer to then-Sen. Ken Salazar, voted for the bill, claiming that "critical adjustments were made to protect the agriculture industry." At least that's what the agriculture lobby told her.
Markey is simply "dancing with the ones who brung her." Defenders of Wildlife spent $1.6 million to beat up her opponent last fall; those who think Markey isn't a hard-wired environmental extremist are kidding themselves.
However, the economic illiteracy of the agriculture lobby is embarrassing. Waxman-Markey's threat to farmers and ranchers isn't limited to the carbon emissions of trucks, tractors and flatulent livestock.
In March, a dozen ag lobbying organizations -- including National Association of Wheat Growers and National Farmers Union -- agreed on nine "Principles for Greenhouse Gas Legislation."
Not one of those principles addressed fuel or energy costs. Yet Waxman-Markey will increase electricity rates by an estimated 90 percent and fuel prices by 58 percent, according to Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis. The analysis projects cap-and-trade will reduce net farm income by 28 percent by 2012 and 94 percent by 2035, That's in addition to $1,241 per year that cap-and-tax will add to the average household's energy bill.
Farmers recognize those costs, but agriculture lobbyists seem just as clueless as lawmakers who think milk and bread come from the grocery store.
Worse still, these lobbyists seem more concerned about "being at the table" than whether the deal they strike will hold up. Simply put, agriculture lobbyists agreed to create a new bureaucracy in exchange for promises that bureaucrats won't regulate agriculture and might even pay farmers for carbon sequestration and tree planting.
EPA's analysis sees little upside for agriculture, anticipating declining crop production due to higher input costs and fewer acres for livestock grazing if landowners are paid to plant trees instead.
The agriculture compromise resulted in a 300-page amendment released at 3 a.m. on the day of the vote. How many congressmen (or lobbyists) read the amendment or the 1,200-page bill? Now ag lobby compromisers want the Senate to hold hearings to examine how these special provisions will work and "the effects of the complete bill on the industry."
It's a little late for that now, boys and girls.
These "principles" were naïve from the get-go. Avoiding regulation that doesn't exist is much easier than expecting special treatment from regulators when the agriculture vote no longer matters.
Agriculture is "a major polluter," according to those who believe trading trillions in higher taxes, higher energy costs, and lost jobs for a minuscule possible reduction in temperatures is a good deal. Once the carbon caps are enforced, will climate-change zealots and non-exempt industries continue to give a pass to agriculture?
For that matter, does anyone believe that China, India or Russia will restrict their carbon emissions once the U.S. unilaterally imposes this burden on our economy? In military or trade matters, giving away everything you have to trade would be recognized as foolishness.
All of this adds up to a rotten deal for agriculture and for everyone who consumes what we produce. Maybe these agriculture lobbyists will understand that when they're out of a job, too.
Mark Hillman is a wheat farmer who also served as senate majority leader and state treasurer. To read more or comment, go to www.MarkHillman.com