Friday, August 30th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Issues, Obamacare
Once again, Rep. Bill Shuster (PA-9) has shown that he is not down for the struggle against Obamacare. At a town hall meeting this week, he said, “”I’m all for defunding ObamaCare. I don’t think it’s going to prevail.”
Well, to the extent it won’t prevail it is because of people like Shuster who communicate to the Democrats that they will always blink first and surrender on the issue. And no, he is not all for defunding. He refused to sign the letter committing to defund Obamacare in the budget process.
At some point we must ask what the purpose of electing Republicans is if they will always reauthorize every odious piece of legislation passed under the Democrats. We all understand that we can’t countermand every big government program that has been in place for years. But Obamacare has still not been implemented, and it is extremely unpopular. Now is our only chance to disrupt it.
Wednesday, August 28th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Videos
We’ve been posting videos from supporters of defunding Obamacare. It’s only fair we give equal time to the opposition.
Our friend, Bill McKubby, radio show host/DJ from south Georgia, put this together last night. It was inspired by Erick Erickson’s recent post The Meatloaf Caucus.
Tuesday, August 27th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Debt, News
When Republicans summarily decided to “suspend” the debt ceiling law at the end of January many conservatives were scratching their heads. Why would Republicans completely avoid using the debt ceiling as leverage to promote our priorities and shrink government?
Well, among the many lies that were told to us at the time was the following too-clever-by-half pearl of wisdom. Leadership aids contended that by suspending the law until May 18 instead of raising the debt ceiling by a dollar amount, the Obama administration would not have the ability to create a contrived panic deadline. The only problem with this plan was that it failed to take into account that the Treasury could still employ “extraordinary measures” to forestall the final debt ceiling deadline. Coupled with the new tax money pouring into the Treasury as a result of the McConnell tax hikes, Jack Lew was able to push off that date indefinitely.
Not surprisingly, he is setting his own deadline just two weeks after the CR expires:
Tuesday, August 27th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Issues
It’s comments like the one from McConnell’s campaign yesterday that are driving dedicated activists out of the Republican Party. In response to our radio ads simply highlighting his voting record, McConnell responded by calling Matt Bevin’s supporters “fringe.”
What people like Mitch McConnell and Karl Rove fail to understand is that the hardworking base of the party is not fringe. They might be ashamed of that base, and in part, that is why these people are trying to get rid of us and look for a new base. However, they will learn very quickly that the mainstream of the conservative base has had enough with failed leadership; they have had it with 80 years of losing to the progressives; they have had it with Republican leaders selling us out.
Breitbart News did something interesting – something that other news outlets should have done a while ago. Instead of being lazy and relying on the usual suspects for quotes in a story, they actually went around to local tea party leaders in Kentucky to gauge their reaction to McConnell’s comments.
Here is a sampling from their interviews:
Scott Hofstra of the United Kentucky Tea Parties said it appears McConnell is “trying to minimize his own base is what he’s doing.”
“He calls us ‘fringe’ but there are a whole lot of people in the state who are very upset with his lack of leadership,” Hofstra said. “He’s trying to minimize us by calling us ‘fringe.’ But there are a whole lot of people so he can’t really call it ‘fringe.’”
Dustin Stockton, a national Tea Party activist who leads Western Representation PAC and has been intimately involved in elections and the grassroots movement in states across the country including Kentucky since 2010, has not personally endorsed anyone in the Kentucky Senate race this year. But he did tell Breitbart News he is not happy with McConnell’s “fringe” comments about Tea Partiers. “It’s a ‘fringe’ position to run for reelection with a disapproval rating hovering around 50 percent,” Stockton said of McConnell. “This is just another case of the establishment putting their personal enrichment over the good of the cause.”
Senator McConnell is going to learn very quickly that money can’t buy you love. There are diminishing returns once you’ve surpassed the first few million worth of smear ads. It’s easy to magnify distortions and half-truths in a 30-second ad, but it is a lot harder to engage in a thoughtful conversation about his views on amnesty, the debt ceiling, the CR, funding for Obamacare, bailouts and pork-barrel spending. These “fringe” people in Kentucky actually want to engage in a long-form discussion about the issues. They are actually pretty smart, Senator.
Monday, August 26th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, News, Press
For Immediate Release:
August 26, 2013
Madison Project Airs Radio Ad in Kentucky
Hits McConnell on his record of hypocrisy
Washington, D.C. – The Madison Project PAC today released a new radio ad holding Senator Mitch McConnell accountable for his record in Washington – one that fails to match the image of Kentucky values he seeks to evince. The radio ad will air statewide as part of our first of many attempts to unveil the truth about Mitch McConnell’s failed leadership in Washington.
To listen to Madison Project PAC’s new Radio Ad entitled “Would a Conservative?” click here.
“Instead of focusing on petty opposition hits, we’re committed to engaging in a long-form discussion over Mitch McConnell’s record and the direction of the Republican Party,” said Drew Ryun of the Madison Project. “For years, McConnell has succeeded in playing the old Washington double-game of talking the conservative talk at home, while undermining conservatives in the Senate. He is using his millions in special interest funds to run a personal smear campaign in an attempt to distract voters from his 30 years of failed leadership. Madison Project will see to it that the voters in Kentucky know the truth about McConnell’s record. As he continues to secretly push amnesty and undermine the conservative effort to defund Obamacare we will expose him.”
NOTE: Attached is the text of the radio ad.
The Madison Project supports and raises money for conservative candidates that have demonstrated a commitment to full-spectrum conservatism. The Madison Project website can be found at http://madisonproject.com/
Monday, August 26th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, News, Obamacare
Throughout the August recess, Rep. Mark Meadows (NC-11), who was supported by the Madison Project during last year’s primary and general election, has been working on getting as many Republicans in the House to sign onto a defund Obamacare letter. A total of 79 members joined Meadows in signing the letter committing to defunding Obamacare through the upcoming budget bill. Obviously, there are a handful of members that joined the letter late in the game for political expedience, but we will take what we can get.
Here is the text of the letter:
Here is the list of signatories in alphabetical order:
Thursday, August 22nd, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Economy, News
There’s nothing like a new batch of environmental, labor, healthcare, and financial regulations to jump start a lethargic economy, right? As The Hill reported yesterday, with Obama’s cabinet in place for his second term, the rogue agencies are ready to rule by executive fiat. These radical new executive nominees are chomping at the bit to regulate our economy to death, over and beyond what has already been promulgated during Obama’s first term:
“Just how many of the rules are enacted — and how strong they will be — will depend, in part, on Obama’s handpicked regulators.
In the span of three days in mid-July, the Senate confirmed Labor Secretary Thomas Perez, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy.
All three oversee agencies with significant rule-making authority and are seen as likely to regulate with gusto.”
Let’s take a trip back to memory lane. How in the world did these clowns get confirmed without promising to stay within the confines of the law and not creating new regulations? Don’t the Republicans have 45 seats in the Senate?
Tuesday, August 20th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Issues, News
The media is finally realizing that there is a growing wave of conservative grassroots support to throw out the failed Republican leaders who currently waste conservative seats in Washington. The latest flaccid Republican who is gaining a lot of attention is Senator Lamar Alexander.
Earlier today, Senator Alexander wrote a letter in the Tennessean to his constituents stating, “I stay true to my conservative ideals.” First, I’d like to give him credit for actually engaging in a dialogue with his constituents. Unlike Mitch McConnell to his north, who is not man enough to defend his record, opting instead to engage his constituents through embarrassing smear ads, Lamar is attempting to make the case for another six years. Unfortunately, he fails to move beyond platitudes and distractions.
One good way to do that is to send to Washington a conservative, problem-solving former Tennessee governor with a record of getting results: Auto jobs. Better schools. Better roads. Balanced budgets. Low taxes. Low debt.
Hmm..I’m not sure what he means by auto jobs – perhaps, he is referring to his support for continuing the auto bailouts government motors into 2009 [Roll Call #148, 4/2/2009]? Or perhaps, he means the Cash for Clunkers boondoggle he supported [ Roll Call #270, 8/6/2009]?
As for schools, how can we have better schools when Senator Alexander supports officious federal control over the education system?
Better roads? Lamar voted against ending the failed federal highway policy and devolving transportation authority to where it belongs – the states [Roll Call #36, 3/13/2012].
Lower taxes? Lamar voted to pave the road for an online sales tax run by a cartel of states [Roll Call #62, 3/22/2013]. He also voted for the “Fiscal Cliff” tax hikes – the largest tax increases in American history, coupled with $332 billion in stimulus spending [Roll Call #251, 1/1/2013]
Balanced budgets? Lamar voted for the massive $1 trillion food stamp/farm bill [Roll Call #141, 6/6/2013]
Low debt? Lamar voted for the massive $2.4 trillion debt limit increase – the largest in history – giving Obama a free credit card to get passed the 2012 elections[Roll Call #123, 8/2/2011].
I stood up to President Obama at the White House health-care summit.
Actually, you co-sponsored the individual mandate in Wyden-Bennett before Obama ever conjured up Obamacare. And you refuse to stand up to him now and defund the law.
I helped block the president’s unconstitutional labor board nominees.
Yes, but you voted for his replacement nominees who are just as anti-worker’s choice as the previous nominees [RC# 191, 7/30/13: RC#194, 7/30/13]. You helped cut the deal to let through all of Obama’s executive nominees, including Todd Jones for ATF Director, the man at the scene of the crime during the Fast and Furious scandal.
Last month, I helped to enact a market-based plan that reduced interest rates on loans for 200,000 Tennessee students going to college this fall.
There is nothing market-based about continuing to indiscriminately subsidize all bachelor’s degrees and randomly peg the rates to the 10-year Treasury note.
He goes on to use the old “Freedom to Fish” legislation as a distraction from the more important issues where he has joined with Chuck Schumer to undermine conservatives. There is no mention of his support for the reckless open borders/amnesty proposal [Roll Call #127, 5/17/2006: Roll Call #168, 6/27/2013], his support for Cap and Trade style regulations [Roll Call #201, 11/10/2011:[Roll Call #139,6/20/2012], cloture on gun control [Roll Call #95, 4/11/2013], his vote for Tom Perez has Secretary of Labor [RC#177, 7/17/13], his vote to confirm Chuck Hagel and Samantha Power to important foreign policy positions, or his vote to confirm Andrew Hurwitz to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, one of Obama’s most radical judicial nominees [Roll Call #118, 6/11/2012].
Monday, August 19th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Elections
At present, there are twelve incumbent Republican Senators who plan to stand for reelection in 2014. The Cook Political Report rates all of the incumbents “Solid R,” with the exception of Susan Collins from the blue state of Maine who is rated “Likely R.” In other words, every Republican from a Romney 2012 state is not even remotely vulnerable. Let’s review each incumbent juxtaposed to Romney’s margin of victory last November.
Alabama – Jeff Sessions
- Romney-60.55%, Obama-38.36%: Romney+22.2%
Idaho – Jim Risch
- Romney-64.09%, Obama-32.40%: Romney+31.7%
Kansas – Pat Roberts
- Romney-59.66%, Obama-38.05%: Romney+21.6%
Mississippi – Thad Cochran
- Romney-55.29%, Obama-43.79%: Romney+11.5%
Oklahoma – Jim Inhofe
- Romney-66.77%, Obama-33.23%: Romney+33.5%
South Carolina – Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott
- Romney-54.56%, Obama-44.09%: Romney+10.5%
Tennessee – Lamar Alexander
- Romney-59.42%, Obama-39.04%: Romney+20.4%
Texas – John Cornyn
- Romney-57.15%, Obama-41.37%: Romney+15.8%
Wyoming – Mike Enzi
- Romney-68.64%, Obama-27.82%: Romney+40.7%
Now, among the aforementioned names are a number of members who will get much-needed primary challenges next year. But none of the incumbents can be accused of showing any vulnerability in a general election.
Whoops…I forgot one incumbent up for reelection – Mitch McConnell in Kentucky. He is not rated Safe R, Likely R, or Lean R. He is rated a tossup!
Thursday, August 15th, 2013 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Uncategorized
Here is Daniel’s book review of Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments posted at RedState
Over the past year, I have dedicated my time to helping elect conservatives in an effort to ensure that at least one political party represents our constitutional form of government. But even as I sweat and toil for this endeavor, I have realized that elections are not enough to restore our liberty. In fact, it is scandalous that our liberties should be subject to the outcome of elections in the first place.
What if we are not successful in electing more Constitutional conservatives? What if the statists outgun us with all the special interest money they received in return for their votes against the Constitution? Should we be denied our liberty just because we lack the parallel resources to convince low information voters that they have no right to infringe upon our liberties?
These are the questions our Founders dealt with when they warned of Elective Despotism, the ability of sleazy politicians to manipulate a ‘majority rule’ system to limit the rights of the individual. That’s why they created a Republican form of government, one which only granted the federal government enumerated powers, irrespective of which party or group of individuals obtains political power.
Sadly, we have deviated from our constitutional form of government over the past century. That’s why Mark Levin has written The Liberty Amendments, a set of proposed constitutional amendments that will unambiguously downsize the federal government by targeting specific loopholes that have allowed the statists to adulterate our Constitution. Far from this being a radically new vision, Levin proves – through founding documents and floor debates at the Constitutional Congress – how his ideas are in line with what the Founders envisioned in our Federal government. It’s just that after years of deviating from the Constitution, it has become clear that we need very specific limitations on federal abuses – abuses that have gone far beyond the imagination of our Founders – in order to restore the Republic.
Mark Levin is proposing ten amendments to the Constitution. Each one is written in thoughtful language so as to preclude any ancillary problems:
1) Term Limits: He proposes limiting service in both the House and Senate to 12 years. Yes, we’ve heard all the arguments about elections being the best limit. But the past 100 year has proven that to be false. As someone who works day and night to throw the bums out, I can tell you that is nearly impossible to throw them out with the amount of money they raise – precisely for their abuses of power. Levin also proves that limiting time in office was a highly regarded proposal during the Constitutional Congress.
2) Repealing the 17th Amendment: Levin proposes repealing the 17th amendment and vesting state legislators with the power to elect senators so that the power of states is not diluted, as originally feared by the framers of the Constitution.
3) Restoring the Judiciary to its proper role: The Judiciary was never meant to be an all-powerful institution in which five men in robes have the final say over every major policy battle in the country. In order to end judicial tyranny, Levin proposes limiting service to one 12-year term, and granting both Congress and the state legislatures the authority to overturn court decisions with the vote of three-fifths of both houses of Congress or state legislative bodies.
4) Limiting Taxation and Spending: Levin proposes a balanced budget amendment, limiting spending to 17.5% of GDP and requiring a three-fifths vote to raise the debt ceiling. He also proposes limiting the power to tax to 15% of an individual’s income, prohibiting other forms of taxation, and placing the deadline to file one’s taxes one day before the next federal election.
5) Limiting bureaucracy: He proposes an amendment to limit and sunset federal regulations and subject the existence of all federal departments to stand-alone reauthorization bills every three years.
6) Defining the Commerce Clause: Levin writes an amendment that, while technically unnecessary, is practically an imperative to restoring the original intent of the Commerce Clause. The amendment would make it clear that the commerce clause grants not power to actively regulate and control activity; rather to prevent states from impeding commerce among other states, as Madison originally intended.
7) Limiting Federal power to take private property
8) Allowing State Legislature to Amend the Constitution: Although the Framers intentionally made it difficult to amend the Constitution, they did so to preserve the Republic they created. However, the progressives have illegally altered our Republic through a silent and gradual coup without using the amendment process. If we are going to successfully push the aforementioned amendments, we will need an easier mechanism to force them through. The proposed amendment allows states to bypass Congress and propose an amendment with support of just two-thirds of the states (instead of three-fourths) and without convening a convention.
9) State Authority to Override Congress: A proposed amendment to allow states to override federal statutes by majority vote in two-thirds of state legislatures. The last two proposals are rooted in the idea that the states only agreed to the Constitution on condition that their power would not be diluted and that all federal power is derived from the states.
10) Protecting the Vote: A proposal to require photo ID for all federal elections and limit early voting.
Taken as a whole, there is no doubt that these amendments would restore our Republican form of government. Every proposal is backed up by scholarly analysis of the Framers’ view on the proposal, an overview of what has changed since the founding, and the rationale for why the proposal is necessary. You should read the entire book. As someone who is busy reading all the current news every day, this is the only political book I made time to read all year.
Now I know some of you thumb-sucking conservatives out there will pessimistically dismiss this as an impossible pipe dream; the same people who scoff upon our ability to throw out terrible Republicans in primaries…until we successfully do so. However, it is quite evident that nothing will change substantially, even if we win an election here or there, until we strike out at lynchpins of power within the current system. No proposal will be successful overnight. This will take years or decades. But it is a goal worth pursuing.
Remember, many of the principles of the Tea Party were dormant for many years, and have now filtered into the mainstream.