Common Sense Prevails - Barely

The failure of the $700 billion bailout plan ... um, rescue plan... um, economic stabilization plan... oh heck, let's just call it what it was - a bailout plan. Well, it failed to pass the House, which means common sense prevailed:

"Doing nothing is not an option," House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said after seeing the $700 billion emergency package for the nation's financial systems fail 228-205 on Monday.

Actually, commons sense probably took a back seat to self-preservation. I believe some people voted their conscience, but I believe the majority of Congress voted based on self-preservation (i.e. pass this bill and you're not getting re-elected in November, and you're going to personally have to face the economic downturn like the rest of us).

Now, the question remains: Will Congress continue to do what's right and let the market correct itself? Unfortunately, I'm not very optimistic. The Dow Jones Industrial average tumbled over 777 points yesterday to close at 10,365.45.

Oh no, the sky is falling! Wait a second. That's still higher than it was 5 years ago at this time. And, you know what? That was less than a 1% loss. Sure that's a lot in one day, but that doesn't quite seem like an "everybody get out your soup bowls" type of loss, does it? For the record, I did have soup for lunch yesterday, and felt well nourished until dinner. But, I digress.

In fact, there are a good number of economists that don't believe we are going to see one out of four people unemployed as we did during the Great Depression (subscription):

Hearing some of the dire predictions for an economy struggling to avert a financial collapse, it's easy to recall 1930s photos of people huddled in soup lines or traveling the country for work, and wonder what a depression would look like in the modern world.

Experts say that won't happen. Yes, banks are failing and the stock market plunged Monday. And, yes, there is genuine concern that, regardless of the government's $700 billion bailout proposal, the United States could still land in a severe recession.

But despite the alarms, including dire warnings from President Bush, economists insist there is no risk of a second Great Depression because, for some time now, the U.S. economy has been in the midst of a very different, less-threatening phenomenon: "the Great Moderation."

The Great Moderation. Folks looks around you. We need moderation. We're a society living in excess. Our houses are bigger than we can afford or need. We eat too much and have the health problems to show for it, and we've become a society of spenders instead of savers. Moderation might not be such a bad thing.

So, what's the worse part of this credit crunch? We won't have access to cheap credit for which we don't qualify. We may actually have to start living on a cash basis instead of in a credit accrual spending reality. And, let's not lose sight of the root cause of this credit crunch. No, not greed. It's this taken from John Mauldin's Weekly E-Letter (he argued for the bailout):

Because of a new accounting rule (called FASB 157), banks had to mark their illiquid investments to the most recent market price of a similar security that actually had a trade. Over $500 billion has been written off so far, with credible estimates that there might be another $500 billion to go. That means these large banks have to get more capital, and it also means they have less to lend.

I'm not a 100% sure, but I believe that new accounting rule emerged as part of Sarbanes-Oxley - the government's last great idea in response to the Enron fraud financial crisis. So, does the government need to print $700 billion in new money to avert this "economic crisis." No, although they have to do is kill Sarbanes-Oxley and let failing businesses fail.

There is an upside to all of this. People suddenly became aware again that investments have risk, and spending money you don't have may not be the smartest move. Eventually, the piper has to get paid.

A final note: Congress, if you want to get your approval rating up, don't be wishy washy here. Let the market work.

Democratic Ass Whisperer

Well, I've got good news for the Martin Heinrich campaign. It looks like Mr. Heinrich is off the hook. No, I'm not talking about that whole "I got principally paid to lobby, but broke the law because I didn't register" deal. That is still a BIG problem.

However, he is no longer the winner of the cheesiest campaign commercial of the 2008 election season. That award now belongs to Democratic Ass Whisperer and candidate for State Representative Scott Hudson from Michigan:



If I were Mr. Hudson's opponent, I would stop producing my own commercials and just pay to air Mr. Hudson's ass whisper spot again and again.

Getting Tripped Up by Your Own Story

I've read this over and over and over again. I've read it to myself, and out loud. Those of you have called me an idiot and moron in past comments, might be right. Because, for the life of me, I can't understand what Martin Heinrich is saying here (subscription):

Heinrich, a former Albuquerque city councilor, said he was paid principally by the Coalition for New Mexico Wilderness to lobby for the creation of the Ojito Wilderness northwest of Albuquerque. The federal legislation passed in 2005.

Federal law requires registration if a lobbyist receives more than $5,000 in a six month period from an organization, and spends more than 20 percent of his or her time on lobbying activities of the organization.

“There was never a time when I was paid that much to lobby anyone,” said Heinrich. “Now, I did other things that I was compensated for, but I never made that much money lobbying any entity, either state or federal.”

How can you say that you were "principally" paid to lobby, and also say that your compensation was for other things? You can't, right? I mean, you can, but it doesn't make any sense. This is just like that Patricia Madrid's eight seconds of silence. All she had to do was answer the question honestly, and she would have in all likelihood been a member of Congress. I wouldn't have liked it, but I'm just being honest here.

Likewise, all Martin Heinrich had to do was to admit that he screwed up and pay the $50,000 fine, and this would have been water under the bridge. We already know from his failure to get a business license that following government regulations forced on everyone else is not one of his strong suits.

Of course, there is an ironic twist to all of this. During the Democratic Primary, Martin Heinrich made a point of calling for a federal investigation (subscription) of one of his opponents for failure to follow the letter of the law:

Martin Heinrich, running in a four-way Democratic primary race for the 1st Congressional District seat, will ask for a federal investigation into opponent Robert Pidcock's campaign financing because Pidcock did not report loans to his campaign in the time frame required by law.

But, this is the kicker...

Jon Blair, who is managing Heinrich's campaign, said Heinrich would file a complaint that could result in fines to Pidcock's campaign if he is found to have violated the law.

"He's not abiding by the law that every candidate in the country manages to abide by," Blair said.

I guess it takes one to know one.

Martin Heinrich's Friends in Congress

According to Democracy for New Mexico, Martin Heinrich, the Democratic candidate for the 1st Congressional District, is holding a press conference today with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer:

From the Martin Heinrich for Congress campaign: Martin Heinrich will host a press conference and tour of Sandia National Laboratories with Steny Hoyer, the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, this Wednesday, September 3rd, at 3:15 PM.

I must admit that I'm surprised that Martin Heinrich has no problem in sharing the stage with a Congressman who has a shown a well documented disdain for members of the Hispanic caucus:

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a moderate from Maryland, was beside himself. Congressional Quarterly reports that he jabbed his finger on the House floor at Joe Baca, the California Democrat who chairs the Hispanic Caucus, and yelled, "How dare you destroy this party? This will be the worst loss in 10 years.

Mr. Baca was having none of it. "You see this on the [voting] board?," he yelled back. "This is against me. This is against me personally." Luckily for Democrats, C-Span's microphones did not pick up the exchange. But it was audible to reporters in the press gallery.

Well, I guess New Mexicans might want to call Heinrich's campaign office and ask him
to explain how he can embrace a man who believes that Hispanic leaders are trying to destroy the Democratic Party?

Tom Udall Aligns With Litigating Radicals

Our nations founders believed that a separation of powers and a series of checks and balances were a critical component to maintaining a Democratic society. It is for this reason that we have three separate branches of government each with their own unique role - the Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial.

In a nutshell, the legislative branch crafts our laws. The executive branch enforces our laws, and the judicial branch rules on whether or not enforcement of those laws violate our Constitution. This is the basics of our government that everyone is supposed to learn at an early age in school.

On a daily basis, this separation of power comes under attack by radical groups that believe that their agenda is more important than the balance of power created by the Constitution of the United States. One such group is Earthjustice. Read this excerpt from their President's vision:

We function like a law firm in some ways because we represent clients and we don't go to court in our own name. The clients' effectiveness is strengthened by the legal clout and other skills we bring to the issues on which we work together, and the breadth and depth of our work depends on our working with clients.

But, we are not like a law firm in the fundamental sense that we identify critical issues and strategies that need to be moved forward, rather than just wait for clients and cases to show up. We think about what kinds of clients are needed to best advance the particular cause. We bring judgment, experience, and strategic leadership to the problem, working with the clients to figure out what needs to be done in court and elsewhere to achieve lasting results. Our powerful and diverse array of regional offices take on litigation that will make a difference in the places they know best as well as cases that will set nation-wide policies that other groups can use in their own advocacy.

In addition to our unparalleled litigators, we have lobbyists in Washington D.C. who are skilled at moving the politics forward and at protecting our victories from Congressional attack.

In other words, they use the judicial system to do something it was not intended to do - namely the creation of new laws , and then try to prevent Congress from doing what it was intended to do - namely, pass laws. It is these actions, not their environmental cause, that makes them a radical group. Their vision is to try and disrupt the underlying fundamentals of our Democratic system.

So, where does Congressman Tom Udall fit into all of this. Well, a quick Google search of "Tom Udall" and "Earthjustice" shows that Congressman Tom Udall is a reliable ally for this radical environmental group. When they need a pawn in Congress to introduce a bill or an amendment to support their judicial activist efforts, they have been able to count on Tom Udall time and time again.

Earthjustice is one of those groups that keeps America reliant on foreign oil by fighting at every turn domestic oil and gas exploration. When we feel the pinch at the pump, we have radicals like Earthjustice and Congressman Tom Udall to thank.

Democrats Try to Silence Dialog with Gen Y

The Democrats have long positioned themselves as the political party of the younger generation. And, it is widely assumed that if Generation Y turns out to vote in large numbers, Barack Obama's chances of becoming our next President increase significantly.

So, it comes as a big surprise that the Democratic leadership in Congress is trying to shut down the outreach of its members through popular online sites:

New lines are being drawn about the restrictions Members face when using the Internet.

House Minority Leader Boehner today released a memo, entitled the “Internet Freedom Alert”, criticizing a letter sent by Rep. Capuano to the Chairman of the Committee on House Administration.

Member Web use restrictions are among the main Open House Project priorities, and one of the chapters of the report is about the restrictions set by the Franking Commission, which operates under the Committee on House Administration. (This chapter was written by David All and Paul Blumenthal.)

Boehner’s letter today rightly sounds the alarm about Capuano’s newly proposed Franking commission guidelines.

Studies have shown that online forums are the town halls of years past for a whole new generation of Americans.

A recently released survey shows that Generation Y prefers to connect with government online in an interactive manner similar to the way they seek out news and other information.

The survey was commissioned by Meritalk, an online community of government information technology specialists, to examine the information-gathering habits of Gen-Y and its priorities for the next administration. A poll of 2,000 people born between 1977 and 1990 showed that 88 percent will obtain their news online during the next four years. Seventy-four percent want more information on government spending and programs, and 85 percent said they want the next president to reach out to the public online at least monthly.

"Generation Y really wants direct, honest, genuine communication [from the government]," said Liz Vandendriessche, spokeswoman for Meritalk. She said that through its research, Meritalk sought to capture how the fundamental relationship between government and citizens is changing.

Keeping all of this in mind, this recent action by Democratic leaders really begs the question, "What are they thinking?"

Tom Udall Attempts to Rewrite Recent History

It looks like Congressman Tom Udall has a new TV spot that is a little less than honest when it comes to his record on funding for Los Alamos labs:



At the end of the ad Congressman Udall says:

That's why I voted for funding to expand the mission of Los Alamos to create new jobs in counterterrorism and energy research. I'm Tom Udall and I approved this message because we have to do what's right for New Mexico.

Ok.... let's see... let me try and start this off with a positive. That is Tom Udall in that ad. We can all agree that he should be doing what's right for New Mexico. And, there is no question that Los Alamos plays a critical role in countering terrorism and energy research.

So, what's the problem? Well, Congressman Udall, knowing everything above, actually voted TO CUT FUNDING for Los Alamos labs. Of course, don't just take my word for it. You can can go back and read about Tom Udall's vote to cut funding for the labs last summer. Oh, and let's not forget the lack of concern that Tom Udall showed when layoffs were announced at Los Alamos because he wouldn't fight to protect their funding.

Look, Tom Udall is entitled to vote for his own priorities. But, he should not get a pass on trying to rewrite his history to run away from his votes to cut funding for our labs.

What's Tom Udall Doing in Congress?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but what Tom Udall is doing in Congress is voting to raise taxes on the middle class, families and small businesses. Of course, don't take my word for it. Instead, read what Democratic Congressman Bill Foster (IL-14) had to say about the tax bill that Tom Udall voted to pass:

“I can’t support a budget, from either party, that raises taxes on the middle class. This bill hurts families all across the 14th District by eliminating the 10-percent bracket for lower-income taxpayers, reinstating the marriage penalty and increasing taxes on small businesses and investments.

I campaigned on a platform of middle class tax relief, and I was elected to Washington to bring about change. When asked to choose between my party and the people I represent, I will choose the families of the 14th District every single time.”

Before my readers on the left start leaving comments about how Congressman Bill Foster is just some sort of rogue Democratic Congressman, I think you ought to watch the recent video endorsement by one of the Congressman's supporters.



So where does that leave us? Well, I think that leaves us with a novel concept that Tom Udall might want to consider... putting families before party. Congressman Tom Udall wants to become Senator Tom Udall, yet he's voting to eliminate the 10-percent bracket for lower income taxpayers.

In case you're wondering what someone in the 10-percent bracket is earning, if they're single, the answer is up to $8,025 per year. If they're married filing jointly, it is $16,050 per year. Let me put that another way. We're talking about people barely making the minimum wage, and Congressman Tom Udall voted to raise their taxes.

Is there any wonder that most people think Congressman Tom Udall is too liberal to be elected to represent everyday New Mexicans in the Senate?

Gasoline at a $100 Per Gallon

That would be devastating if gas became that expensive, right? Wrong. I hope gas prices keep going up. Don't get me wrong, I'm cringing at the pump just like everyone else. But, I've got faith in American ingenuity to solve that problem. And, it's already happening.

Open a copy of Brandweek, and it seems the Smart Car is all the rage. Flip on the television and the cars being advertised are the ones able to deliver more than 30 MPG. Look in the newspaper, and you can read an article on the plug and drive cars of the future (subscription):

An automotive revolution could soon appear in a driveway near you— a car that needs a lot less gasoline than the one sitting there now.

Depending on how you drive it, the car may need no gasoline at all. Most of its energy, if not all, could come from plugging it in and charging it all night.

You see, we don't need Congress to dictate auto fuel economy increases. We just need to rely on the market to drive consumer demands. It's unfolding right before your eyes. Take note.

As gas price continue to increase, it is not just the car choices that will change. Where people live will change too. All of the concern about "suburban sprawl" will become a non-issue as people choose to make their homes in communities where they can live, work and play without burning gas to get from one place to another.

Free markets trump government intervention every time.

Fruit Fly Research in France

So, I always thought New Mexico's special interest spending of taxpayer's money at the state level was ridiculous. But, it looks like that tilapia farm in Hidalgo county that got shot down two sessions ago is nothing compared to the type of earmarks coming out of one Congressman's district in Pennsylvania.

RedState hope to take it back with Chris Hackett. Mr. Hackett, a CPA, is both a fiscal and social conservative. He is pro-life and anti-earmarks. His opponent, Chris Carney, has been spending federal dollars on earmarks claiming they bring the bacon home to the tenth. The problem is, Carney can't explain how his vote for fruit fly research in France brings jobs home. Chris Hackett, on the other hand, can deftly explain how growth in Washington kills jobs in the 10th.

Fruit fly research in France paid for by American Taxpayers? That's just too much. It's no wonder presidential candidate, Senator John McCain thinks a one year moratorium on federal earmarks is a good idea.

Republicans Have a Shot at Udall's Seat

Well, normally we wouldn't. Hey, I'm nothing if not pragmatic. The reality is that the numbers in that Northern Congressional seat make it just short of impossible.

However, Steve Terrell is painting a picture that should make more than a few northern elephants stand up and take notice:

House Bill 1156, which won unanimous approval of both legislative chambers and was signed into law by Gov. Bill Richardson, makes it tougher for candidates to get on the primary ballot.

Before the new law, candidates won a place on the ballot if they received at least 20 percent of the delegate votes at their party’s preprimary convention. Those who got less than that magic figure still could get on the ballot by submitting additional petitions with signatures of registered voters to the secretary of state.

The new law got rid of the petition option. Those who get less than 20 percent are out of luck.

Only trouble is, the large number of Democratic candidates in District 3 could increase the chances no candidate reaches the 20 percent mark at the preprimary convention. And, under the law that passed, there is no provision to get anyone on the ballot with less than 20 percent.

Here’s a little nightmare for Democrats: No candidate gets enough delegates to secure a place on the ballot. The GOP runs one candidate who automatically wins a Congressional seat in a heavily Democratic district.

Gotta love technicalities.

Mayor Chavez Changes Gear

Oh what a bummer! It looks like Mayor Chavez has decided to abandon his gubernatorial campaign website for 2010 (see the last listing):


Now, he has decided to change gears. My favorite line from his announcement speech:

I know that in my gut the national and state GOP will fight mean and dirty. Their war effort and power are at stake. But in my heart, I know they no longer represent the mainstream of their party or New Mexico.

Say What! Republican power is at stake? Um, exactly where are we talking about? The Democrats control both Houses of Congress. The Democrats control both bodies of the state legislature. Am I missing something?

And, what did our esteemed Mayor forget to mention in his announcement speech:

All together, the city collected $10,611,397 in revenue [through red light cameras] and handed over $2,844,920 to Redflex. This left the city with between $5.8 and $7.8 million in net profit. The precise figure is not known as officials charged as photo enforcement expenses a number of part and full-time police officer salaries as well as the entire administrative hearing office budget. The audit report sidestepped the question of whether the ticketing program has had any beneficial effect on traffic accidents. It mentioned that police could claim only two of the nineteen intersections with cameras might have seen a decrease in accidents.

Kinda makes you wonder if he is elected Senator, whether or not he would be pushing for a national red light program. After all, it has been just so dang profitable for the City of Albuquerque.

A Rare Tom Udall Post

I don't spend a lot of time writing about U.S. Representative Tom Udall (D). Mostly, because he really doesn't seem to do much to write about - positive or negative. Sure, some bloggers and the MSM gave him a lot of ink when Udall was appointed to the House Appropriations Committee:

It wasn't an accident, fluke, luck or anything else of that nature. It had been in the works for a long time. And it was evidence that playing by the old rules still works quite well, thank you.

Udall had been working at getting a seat on this most powerful of all committees ever since former Rep. Joe Skeen announced his retirement almost five years ago. Skeen had been on the Appropriations Committee for many years and had chaired several of its subcommittees.

That made Skeen a "cardinal," a title given to Appropriations subcommittee chairmen because of the tremendous power they wield. Udall won't be chairing a subcommittee anytime soon, but that's where he's headed.

So, what does Representative Udall do after all of these years of trying to get into the powerful Appropriations Committee?

The House approval, on a 312-112 vote, would cut nuclear weapons spending by the Department of Energy by $396 million— 6 percent.

The Senate, meanwhile, is pushing a $213 million increase— 3 percent. To come up with a final spending plan, leaders of the two bodies must come together to reconcile the differences between the two spending plans.

Sorting out the differences in the nuclear weapons budget involve larger questions about how much money is available for related energy and water projects in fiscal 2008.

The House bill could mean the loss of 900 jobs at Sandia National Laboratories and even more at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Democrat Tom Udall, who represents Los Alamos, voted in favor of the bill. New Mexico Republicans Heather Wilson, whose district includes Sandia, and Steve Pearce voted against it.

Ouch.

Cutting Security Funding and Increasing Pork

Somethings are expected. For example, when the Democrats took over from the Republicans in Congress, it was a pretty safe bet that there would be some changes. However, no one could have predicted the type of vindictive changes that have in fact took place.

First, you had a Democratic Committee Chairman playing politics with the memory of a war hero, and now you have the Democrats willing to undermine national security to settle old scores:

“I am surprised by the extent to which the House Appropriations Committee has gone out of its way to single out Los Alamos, and to some extent Sandia. The House bill is stunningly punitive in its treatment of Los Alamos. This bill would be devastating for Los Alamos, surrounding communities and New Mexico overall,” said Domenici, who is the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee that funds DOE and the national laboratories.

And, you can't even argue these cuts are being done in the name of fiscal responsibility. Why not? Well, because the Democrats have already demonstrated a willingness to sidestep their own rules designed to shed light on frivolous earmarks.

Yeah, this all makes sense. Slash national security budgets in a time of war and make it easier to increase unaccountable spending for pork barrel projects. Aren't you glad you voted for change?

That Didn't Take Long

I remember something about the Democrats making all kinds of promises about the type of changes they would make in the first one hundred hours of controlling Congress:

If all goes according to plan, the House will get through its hundred-hour agenda in 15 days, or 360 hours, by standard definition. Today, the House will take up an ethics package. Tomorrow, new budget controls.

And, speaking of Congressional budget controls:

After promising unprecedented openness regarding Congress' pork barrel practices, House Democrats are moving in the opposite direction as they draw up spending bills for the upcoming budget year.

Democrats are sidestepping rules approved their first day in power in January to clearly identify "earmarks" — lawmakers' requests for specific projects and contracts for their states.

Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contracts in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by the House Appropriations Committee chairman to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them.

Now, that's got to be a new low: Creating a new rule in January and sidestepping it in June. You Independents, who read this blog, might want to keep that in mind for the next election.

Medal of Honor Recipient Deserves Respect

It's not often that I blog during work hours. After all, a guy has to make a living. But I just came across something that is probably one of the most offensive partisan acts I've seen come out of Congress in a long time.

Take a moment and watch the video that shows the floor discussion between the Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Veterans’Affairs, Bob Filner (D-California) and the ranking Republican, Steve Buyer (R-Indiana):



Naming the VA Medical Center in Albuquerque after New Mexico war hero and Medal of Honor recipient, Raymond G. 'Jerry' Murphy, was a bipartisan recommendation that enjoys the support of the entire New Mexico Congressional delegation. In fact, you can view the original press release in its entirety on Senator Jeff Bingaman's website. But, in a nutshell, this is the type of man we are talking about:

"Jerry Murphy was a true American hero who in war and peace dedicated himself to others. I am proud to have known Jerry and to have been able to call him my friend. It is a privilege to play a part in bestowing this deserving honor on a great man and a great American," Domenici said. "I will work with our House counterparts to get this bill passed and enacted as soon as possible."

"Jerry Murphy bravely served our country. While he was recognized during his life with a much-deserved Medal of Honor, we are now a step closer to ensuring that the memory of his service to our country—and his fellow veterans—will live on," Bingaman said.

So, why isn't this bill, which incidentally has the support of the VA Department as well as the New Mexico Department of Veterans' Services, Albuquerque Armed Forces Advisory Association, American Legion, American Veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Military Order of the Purple Heart and the Vietnam Veterans of America, being heard.

A very simple and offensive answer: "Companion legislation (HR.474) was introduced in the House by Representative Heather Wilson."

That's right, the Democrat leadership in Congress is willing to insult this Medal of Honor recipient's memory rather than let the legislation be carried forth by a Republican they so badly want to see defeated.

This is wrong. There are no two ways about it. This is wrong.