Holding Obey Accountable for Under-performing Stimulus

David Obey authored the stimulus bill and staked his career on its success. That huge object in Obey's mirror is something he can't escape: his record.

ORPO (Obame-Reid-Pelosi-Obey) sold stimulus aggressively on the front end. Unemployment would be held below eight percent if we would just give them a blank check for nearly a trillion dollars.

This is a key issue in the race between Obey and challenger Sean Duffy this year. I want to publish a couple of resources that will help in evaluating Obey's track record in this area.

First a website: http://www.readthestimulus.org/. Note that zero conservative republicans supported the bill in the house and the senate

Then a new video containing an interview of Rep. Paul Ryan by Sean Hannity. Initial observation appears to show a clear, intentional misleading of the American people on jobs numbers related to stimulus investments.





Seems I've read a hundred reports of questionable dispersing of stimulus funds. And as a conservative, running more money through the government does not resonate as effective. How do you feel about the ORPO stimulus bill?

Framing the Debate

One of the most common phrases I hear from supporters of President Obama is "Hey, give him a chance." The idea appears to be that in order for Obama to bring about the positive change he wants for America, we all need to get behind his initiatives and wait in hope for the good things ahead.

Another common objection I hear, perhaps most recently from supporters of Obama and the liberal viewpoint, "All of the arguing and mudslinging in politics is completely disgusting!"

In my humble opinion, each of these comments shows a lack of understanding of the big picture of US politics. May I try to frame the debate a little?

On the right, the conservatives believe that the country will function best with a firm commitment to the US Constitution. This includes ideas of (much more) limited government, strong national defense, and financial responsibility. Limited government, at this point, involves rolling some national power back out to the states, then to cities, neighborhoods, and so on.This also means a commitment to be restrained by the constitution unless it is formally changed by amendment. Financial responsibility means that the government should not be allowed to use "crises" to spend beyond its means.

On the left, the liberals/progressives believe that the country will function best with extensive government programs, centralized power and decision making, and a policy-based economic structure instead of free market capitalism. Their response to the great needs and ills of society is for the government to address and treat the problems.

In short, liberal equals more government, conservative equals less government. The political debate revolves around pushing the center point between government and the private sector back and forth. The TEA partiers are clamoring for less government while the Obama-Reid-Pelosi-Obey liberal camp sees current national crises as an opportunity to make government even more powerful. If you're not sure about my conclusion, ask a devoted liberal what he thinks of trickle down economics.

So, with this frame of reference, the comment "Hey, just give President Obama a chance" would mean allowing the liberal left to push the center line more easily to the big government side. This is not simply about a unique genius of a president who can brilliantly solve our issues. This is about the liberal left marching together to empower government. Four years can have an impact on moving that center line for generations to come. I believe a more informed comment from a liberal might be "Hey, I like Obama's ideas of government solutions and I hope he has a strong enough coalition to take us in that direction."

And going back to the "I wish they'd stop arguing" comment, our big government vs. small government frame of reference works here too. "Stop arguing" means ultimately, let the party in power push the center line  without objecting. Again, generational impact. A more informed comment from a liberal might be, "Wow, these issues are complicated and people have passion on both sides. I better get informed so I can understand what all the passion is about."

I'm a conservative and I want the center line moved back to the right. I believe the people of America have resources and solutions far greater than the government can offer.

In northwoods Wisconsin this year, that means supporting Republican challenger Sean Duffy to overtake David Obey for a seat in the US Congress. The center line has moved farther and farther to the left, to big government, during David Obey's 41 years in that seat. Sean Duffy is a committed conservative who wants to represent the people and set government back into it's constitutionally-authorized limited position. There is a team of conservatives waiting for the strength to push the line back to the right. Let's get Sean in there to strengthen their ranks!

Compassionate Healthcare Heist?

Would it be truly compassionate to pay a hospital bill if it meant stealing the money from innocent passers by? Stated another way, would we hail Bernie Madoff as noble if his $65 billion ponzi scheme heist was actually being routed to finance healthcare for the urban poor? While it has a bit of a Robin Hood flare to it, we'd have to agree that the overall plan was unacceptable and still grounds for life imprisonment.

In order for public policy to be compassionate, it must be truthful. The Obama-Reid-Pelosi-Obey healthcare reform bill makes a number of assumptions which should not form the basis of honest cost projections. And then, with those ungrounded assumptions in place, even then the projections are based on the best-case scenario. History, on the other hand, has shown that such a public program should more reasonably assume worst-case scenario and multiply by 10 in order to approach the reality of the actual costs.

There is ample reason to believe that national health care reform bill is as financially sound as Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme. One might counter that business has been done this way in Washington for years. Agreed, but this terribly invasive plan might actually bring us to tipping points both in public policy funding and in the patience of the American people.