I can’t say it any better than Tina Korbe:

No matter what measure you use, government spending has increased since 1965. Total government spending has more than doubled. Federal spending per household has increased from $11,431 in 1965 to $29,401 in 2010, for an increase of nearly 162 percent. That would all be fine if revenues had kept pace — if, in the same time period, the United States hadn’t also acquired more than $15 trillion in debt.

Under the Obama administration, the deficit and debt has only increased — and, to make matters worse, for all three years of Barack Obama’s presidency, the federal government has indulged in high levels of spending without an official budget. What could possibly be the result of such directionless spending other than unprecedented deficits and increased debt?

The Democrat-controlled Senate is directly to blame for the lack of a budget. Even when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and the White House, the Congress didn’t bother to pass a plan. Now that Republicans control the House, the House has passed a comprehensive budget plan — but the Senate has still done nothing. The Senate is the true do-nothing chamber, but the president will almost assuredly blame the House as the inactive chamber.

I’m honestly at loss for words here, as Ms. Korbe points out Pres. Obama and Senate Democrats will undoubtedly try blame House Republicans for the lack of a budget, but the reality is they did their job and passed a comprehensive budget plan last April.

It’s Harry Reid, and Senate Democrats who have failed to fulfill one of their most basic responsibilities and it’s they who should be held to account.

Democrats want tax hikes to be the first item negotiated in “super committee” deficit-reduction talks, trying to force Republicans to confront an issue at the heart of this year’s budget fights, sources told Reuters.

The tough stance by Democratic members of the powerful 12-member congressional panel reflects the party’s wariness that Republicans might try to sideline the issue of revenue increases in the negotiations.

“They’ve raised the idea of doing taxes first,” a Republican aide involved in the discussions said on Friday on condition of anonymity.

Heh, when I first read this on Saturday afternoon, I couldn’t help but laugh… Democrats are as predictable as sunrise, they’ve spent the last several years demonizing “the rich” and trying to divide us along racial, cultural, socioeconomic lines. The numbers however tell a different story:

In 2007, 390,000 tax filers reported adjusted gross income of $1 million or more and paid $309 billion in taxes. In 2009, there were only 237,000 such filers, a decline of 39%. Almost four of 10 millionaires vanished in two years, and the total taxes they paid in 2009 declined to $178 billion, a drop of 42%.

Those with $10 million or more in reported income fell to 8,274 from 18,394 in 2007, a 55% drop. As a result, their tax payments tanked by 51%. These disappearing millionaires go a long way toward explaining why federal tax revenues have sunk to 15% of GDP in recent years. The loss of millionaires accounts for at least $130 billion of the higher federal budget deficit in 2009. If Warren Buffett wants to reduce the deficit, he should encourage policies to create more millionaires, not campaign to tax them more.

The millionaires who are left still pay a mountain of tax. Those who make $1 million accounted for about 0.2% of all tax returns but paid 20.4% of income taxes in 2009. Those with adjusted gross income above $200,000 a year were just under 3% of tax filers but paid 50.1% of the $866 billion in total personal income taxes. This means the top 3% paid more than the bottom 97%. Yet the 3% are the people that President Obama claims don’t pay their fair share. Before the recession, the $200,000 income group paid 54.5% of the income tax.

The “rich” as defined by President Obama and Democrats in congress are a very small majority of tax filers who already pay a disproportionate share of the total federal income tax bill. The notion that we solve our budget problems by raising taxes on that small majority is nuts.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t look at the revenue side, what I am saying have to do it in a comprehensive way that a) broadens the tax base and b) flattens tax rates… There just aren’t a enough “rich” people that can be taxed at a high enough rate to make a significant difference on difference on the revenue side.

The government has to cut spending and make comprehensive reforms to the tax… in short we need more people paying taxes, simply shifting more and more of the burden onto a small minority of taxpayers isn’t going to solve our budget problems.

Related

• Recession Is the Outlook, Despite Manufacturing Report – Larry Kudlow, The New York Sun

Christian Schneider explains:

The Wisconsin Constitution requires a quorum of three-fifths of the Senate in order to pass a bill that “imposes, continues or renews a tax, or creates a debt or charge, or makes, continues or renews an appropriation of public or trust money, or releases, discharges or commutes a claim or demand of the state.” For weeks, it had been known that Republican senators could separate the fiscal provisions of the bill from the proposed collective-bargaining changes, which were seen as non-fiscal. However, there was speculation that, if a bill was brought to the Senate floor that contained only the collective bargaining changes, it might not have the votes to pass.

On Wednesday night, the bill passed with a number of provisions that could be considered “fiscal,” such as the requirement that many government employees contribute 5.8 percent of their salaries to their pensions and pay 12.6 percent towards their health-insurance premiums.

GOP senators consulted with the Legislative Fiscal Bureau on this point, and were sent a memo indicating that while there were some “fiscal” provisions of the bill, these provisions didn’t technically make an “appropriation,” and therefore were not subject to the three-fifth quorum requirement. This allowed senators to keep the bill virtually intact, which the GOP felt helped bolster their argument that all the collective bargaining changes were, in fact, fiscal in nature.

What is perhaps most stunning is that Fitzgerald’s maneuver tonight seems to have caught the Democrat Minority Leader completely off guard. Senators Miller and Fitzgerald have access to the same legislative attorneys and were likely given the same options for resolution.  “I think [Miller] actually thought he was going to win,” said one GOP source.

Frankly, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for the fleebagging Democrats or the public employee unions who have been acting like a bunch spoiled children for the past three weeks… As Bob Owens notes: “if you refuse to take part in representative democracy, and in fact encourage your representatives to abdicate their roles as your representatives within the government, don’t cry foul when the elected officials doing their jobs find a way to pass the legislation before them.”

And that’s really the bottom line here, to paraphrase President Obama, Elections have consequences, and Republicans won. Democrats in state legislature and the leaders of the states public employee unions had a choice to make they could either participate in the process and work with Gov. Walker and the Republican majorities in legislature to find a compromise. Or they could stomp their feet and whine about unfairness or how “This is not democracy!”… They chose not to participate and got run over by the process.

Related

• Why I’m Fighting in Wisconsin – Scott Walker, Wall Street Journal
• Strange But True Provisions of Collective Bargaining – Office of Gov. Scott Walker
• Capitol Chaos: Lawmakers Get Death Threats – WTMJ Radio
• Endgame in Wisconsin – Robert Costa, National Review Online

Playing a game of political chicken, Democratic senators who fled Wisconsin to stymie restrictions on public-employee unions said Sunday they planned to come back from exile soon, betting that even though their return will allow the bill to pass, the curbs are so unpopular they’ll taint the state’s Republican governor and legislators.

The Republicans rejected the idea that the legislation would hurt the GOP. “If you think this is a bad bill for Republicans, why didn’t you stand up in the chamber and debate us about it three weeks ago?” said Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald. “People think it’s absolutely ridiculous that these 14 senators have not been in Wisconsin for three weeks.”

The Wisconsin standoff, which drew thousands of demonstrators to occupy the capitol in Madison for days at a time, has come to highlight efforts in other states to address budget problems in part by limiting the powers and benefits accorded public-sector unions.

Sen. Mark Miller said he and his fellow Democrats intend to let the full Senate vote on Gov. Scott Walker’s “budget-repair” bill, which includes the proposed limits on public unions’ collective-bargaining rights. The bill, which had been blocked because the missing Democrats were needed for the Senate to have enough members present to vote on it, is expected to pass the Republican-controlled chamber.

TPM, on the hand, says no and offers up this quote from state Sen. Chris Larson released this statement:

Sen. Miller’s comments are taken out of context in the Wall Street Journal article just released. Dems will return when collective bargaining is off the table. That could be soon based on the growing public opposition to the bill and the recall efforts against Republicans. Unfortunately, the WSJ fished for the quote they wanted, skipping this key step in logic: we won’t come back until worker’s rights are preserved.

So who’s right? No idea, your guess is as good as mine. All last week we heard reports about dissension in the ranks and how some GOP Senators might break ranks and scuttle their party’s efforts. This strikes as more or less the same kind of noise. Frankly I don’t see either side backing down anytime soon, the democrats in particular have painted themselves into a corner… if they come back Governor Walker’s Budget Repair will most likely pass. If they don’t the Governor has warned that layoffs could begin in about 15 days.

I know a lot of you are worried about the polls showing Gov. Walker’s plan is unpopular in Wisconsin, I’m not… One of the dirty little secrets of poll is that how you ask the questions can greatly effect the way people answer. That’s something Scott Rasmussen digs into this morning. O tend to think once the bill passes and people realize that it a) really does save money, b) are still getting the services they want c) discover that Gov. Walker’s reforms aren’t all that drastic public support will rebound.

Update: The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is reporting that fleebagger in chief Mark Miller wants a meeting with Goc. Walker “near the Wisconsin-Illinois border” before they’ll return:

The leader of Senate Democrats hiding out in Illinois is seeking a face-to-face meeting with Gov. Scott Walker and the Senate GOP leader.

Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Monona) said in a letter sent out Monday that he wants to meet with Republicans “near the Wisconsin-Illinois border to formally resume serious discussions” on Walker’s budget repair bill. Two other Democratic senators met with Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) last week in Kenosha.

Oh come on, personaly, I’d agreed to the meeting and then slap the cuffs on him moment he crosses the border… This is beyond silly, Sen. Miller and his fellow fleebaggers are acting spoiled children throwing a tantrum. If they want a voice in the process, they should get back to the capitol… Stomping you feet and pouting while instead of hiding out in Illinois is not leadership.

H/T: Hot Air.

A House ethics panel found senior Democratic lawmaker Charles Rangel guilty of 11 of the 13 counts of House ethics violations lodged against him. The New York congressman wasn’t in the hearing room when the announcement was made.

“This has been a difficult assignment,” said the chairwoman of the panel, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D., Calif.) as she announced the decision. “We have tried to act with fairness led only by the facts and the law, and I believe that we have accomplished that mission.”

The panel of eight lawmakers reached its decision midway through a second day of closed-door deliberations. As the long-anticipated disciplinary hearings began Monday, Mr. Rangel walked out in protest, saying he no longer had a lawyer, and shouldn’t be forced to proceed until he could raise money to hire one.

The panel deadlocked 4-4 on one charge: whether Mr. Rangel’s effort to raise money for a college center named after him constituted an attempt to get a personal benefit. Mr. Rangel had denied that he gained personally from having such a center named in his honor, and some Democrats on the panel had appeared sympathetic to that argument.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), the panel’s chairman, said there was “clear and convincing evidence” against Congressman Rangel. The matter now heads to the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct which will consider punishment for Rep. Rangel.

I wouldn’t expect much in the way of fireworks, the ethics committee investigation recommended a reprimand from the outset and I wouldn’t expect any worse than censure… which basically public scolding.

Democrats could strip him of his committee chairmanships and assignments if they so chose, but no formal rule on that.

A few quick comments…

First, 5-6 to seats in the Senate where all we could realistically hope for. Anyone predicting Republicans would pick-up 10 seats and gain control of the Senate was deluding themselves.

Second, even in a wave election candidates and campaigns matter. Republicans lost winnable races in Nevada and  Colorado because of flawed candidates or bad campaigns. In Colorado Dan Maes, the Republican candidate for Governor imploded after a series of mini-scandals including revelations he had embellished his resume.

In Nevada, Sharron Angle had every advantage imaginable… She was running against Harry Reid, a wildly unpopular incumbent in a state that leads the nation in unemployment and foreclosures and she lost.

I don’t think Ms. Angel was a bad candidate, I do think she ran a bad campaign. For starters her campaign was slow to transition from the primaries to the general election and she was savaged by Harry Reid for weeks before she responded. Yes, I know she was short of cash after the primaries, but she raised and spent a record amount of money in the general election… It wasn’t a lack of money that lead to her loss — ultimately I think it was the combination the pounding she took from Sen. Reid and his allies coupled with one to many seemingly small gaffes and her unwillingness to engage the media.

I can’t overemphasize that last point… The media may be a bunch jackals, but whenever a candidate refuses to engage and answer question it leaves voters thinking they have something to hide. Whether they want to or not candidates have to engage with reporters. When they don’t voters get suspicious.

Lastly, I agree with Haley Barbour, it’s time for new leadership at the RNC. Whatever Michael Steele’s strengths the RNC was wholly ineffective in this election cycle and for that reason alone the committee needs to choose a new chairman when Mr. Steele’s term is up.

Anyway, a few interesting election tidbits… In Iowa voters fired three Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of gay marriage. Color me unsurprised, I’m agnostic on the issue of gay marriage… I think it’s an inevitability. That said, the decision to legalize  gay marriage should be made by state legislatures not the courts. If the courts are continue insert themselves into the debate and usurp what should be a legislative decision there’s going to continue to be a backlash, including calls for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

In Oklahoma voters approved a measure that would bar judges from using international law or Islamic law when deciding case. Liberals are of course incensed and threatening to sue.

Voters in Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah all approved ballot measures that would amend their state constitutions to better protect the secret ballot in organizing elections. Call it a shot across the bow of unions who are pushing for a “card check” check law that would do away with secret ballots in union organizing elections. For the most part Americans don’t like idea the government to taking away a workers’ right to a secret ballot and they certainly don’t like the idea of workers to be pressured into joining a union.

Voters in Florida Overwhelmingly approved a nonbinding resolution calling for an amendment to the Constitution that would require the federal government to balance the budget without raising taxes. This got 3.5 million votes so it can’t be dismissed  as some obscure nonbinding resolution people paid no attention to… It really is the spending, stupid.

Last but not least, according to net neutrality opponent Scott Cleland all 95 Democrats who signed the Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s net neutrality pledge lost their reelection bids. I’m not sure what to read into that other than Tuesday was really bad day for Democrats. Regardless, I have to wonder when so called “net neutrality” supporters will get it through their heads that too much government regulation is the problem?

Edit: It occurs to me  I should mention the biggest winner of the night was Sarah Palin… Ms. Palin endorsed 43 House candidates and 12 Senate candidates in this election cycle. Of the candidates she endorsed, 30 won House seats and 7 won Senate seats. And their were several races still to be decided.

Sure, a couple of her higher profile candidates lost, but at a minimum that’s a 67% average.

Related

• 2010 Election Maps – ABC News
• Poll: GOP candidates top Obama in hypothetical 2012 race – Cnn.com
• President Obama still isn’t listening to the American people – Nile Gardiner, Daily Telegraph
• Racist Tea Party? GOP Welcomes Diverse Cast of Newcomers – Buy Benson, Townhall.com
• You think ’10 was tough? Check out ’12 – The Hill
• The Midterms: Lessons Learned and the Way Forward – Sarah Palin, National Review Online
• Devastation: GOP Picks Up 680 State Leg. Seats – National Journal
  

When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

Pelosi has served as speaker in the 110th and 111th Congresses.

At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi’s first day as speaker, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (8.67 trillion), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department.  At the close of business on Oct. 22, it stood at $13,667,983,325,978.31 (13.67 trillion), an increase of 4,997,387,083,005.27 (or approximately $5 trillion).

The President and Congressional Democrats love to criticize Republicans for “wanting to return to the policies that got us into this mess”… The problem with that argument is that Congressional Democrats have essentially doubled down on the big spending, big government policies of George W. Bush and former House Speaker Denis Hastert. Who as CNSNews notes “enjoys the distinction of having increased the debt more than any other speaker except Pelosi.” Having added $3.1 trillion to the debt during his tenure as Speaker.

To put this in to perspective it took 207 years from Frederick Muhlenberg who became the First Speaker of the House on on April 1, 1789 to February 23, 1996 more than a year into Newt Gingrich’s speakership for the amass $5 trillion in debt. Since then the national debt has skyrocketed to 13,667,624,992,210.96 (13.677 trillion) as of October 22, 2010.

The government’s current spending are unsustainable, it’s time we held our elected leaders accountable and returned to the type common sense, constitutionally limited, fiscally responsible government our founding fathers intended.

Previous

• Big Spender: Obama Has Now Borrowed $3 Trillion
• It’s the Spending, Stupid

It’s official: The Obama administration has now borrowed $3 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

It took from 1776, when the United States became an independent country, until 1990, the year after the Berlin Wall fell signaling victory in the Cold War, for the federal government to accumulate a total of $3 trillion in debt, according to the Treasury Department. It only took from Jan. 20, 2009, the day President Barack Obama was inaugurated, until Oct. 15, 2010, for the Obama administration to add $3 trillion to the federal debt.

The overall debt of the federal government, according to the Treasury Department, is now $13.666 trillion.

Republicans are far from blameless here; they’ve done more than their fair share of debt accumulation over the years. One things certain though, they’re pikers compared Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the Democrats who currently control Washington… these clowns have done in twenty months what it took previous Democrat and Republican administrations 214 years, from 1776 to 1990, to do.

At this rate Barack Obama is going to drive the car out of the ditch and right off a cliff!

H/T: Doug Powers.

Related

• How the Fed Is Holding Back Recovery – David Malpass, Wall Street Journal (Subscription Required)

If at first you don’t succeed, get some friends in high places to shut your opponents up. That’s the latest Washington power play, as Democrats and liberals attack the Chamber of Commerce and independent spending groups in an attempt to stop businesses from participating in politics.

Since the Supreme Court’s January decision in Citizens United v. FEC, Democrats in Congress have been trying to pass legislation to repeal the First Amendment for business, though not for unions. Having failed on that score, they’re now turning to legal and political threats. Funny how all of this outrage never surfaced when the likes of Peter Lewis of Progressive insurance and George Soros helped to make Democrats financially dominant in 2006 and 2008.

Chairman Max Baucus of the powerful Senate Finance Committee got the threats going last month when he asked Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman to investigate if certain tax exempt 501(c) groups had violated the law by engaging in too much political campaign activity. Lest there be any confusion about his targets, the Montana Democrat flagged articles focused on GOP-leaning groups, including Americans for Job Security and American Crossroads.

Mr. Baucus was seconded last week by the ostensibly nonpartisan campaign reform groups Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center, which asked the IRS to investigate whether Crossroads is spending too much money on campaigns. Those two outfits swallowed their referee whistle in the last two campaign cycles, but they’re all worked up now that Republicans might win more seats. Crossroads GPS, a 501(c)(4) affiliate of American Crossroads supported by Karl Rove, is a target because it has spent millions already in this election cycle.

Where were Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center in the last election cycle Barack Obama’s campaign was accepting millions of dollars in untraceable contributions? As the Journal notes they apparently swallowed their referee whistle while that was going on, but now that Republicans and conservatives appear to be on verge of retaking Congress in November they show up and start demanding investigations of conservative groups?

Regardless, when you combine these investigative requests with President Obama’s recent (and apparently baseless) attack on the Chamber of Commerce we appear to have reached a new low in American political discourse. Never mind that such attacks are beneath a sitting president, they smack of of same sort transparent McCarthyite tactics that Democrats love to accuse Republicans of using. It’s impossible to ignore the unprecedented level of hypocrisy here… never mind that Democrats are using the exact tactics they regularly attribute to Republicans. Barack Obama ran on the explicit central promise of uniting and healing the nation, instead his administration done nothing but divide us by resorting to the same tired class warfare rhetoric that Democrats have always used. If the President wishes to blame someone for the predicament Democrats now find themselves in he needs look no further than his own failed leadership.

It’s a sad testament to the character of the President and the Democratic Party that they’ve sunk to using the basest of political tactics — leveling baseless charges with the intention of damaging their opponents in the final weeks of a campaign to try and blunt what appears a coming Republican landslide… It’s beyond despicable. It smacks of desperation… and worse yet it only serves to deepen divides this administration has already created.

Update (October 12, 2010 @ 11:30 a.m.): Ed Morrissey hits the nail precisely on the head over at Hot Air this morning:

It’s not just “Democrats” who are demanding that the Chamber of Commerce prove itself innocent.  It’s the executive branch of the American government demanding it, including its two top officers, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.  They have publicly accused the Chamber of illegal operations without a shred of evidence, basing their official actions on an unsubstantiated allegation from John Podesta at the Center for American Progress.  That is nothing short of an attempt by this administration to intimidate its political opponents into silence.

That is an unconscionable affront to the rule of law, and it reeks of the McCarthyism that the Left supposedly reviles.  Without a public price paid for this attack on dissent from the highest offices in the government, this will become the norm and we will be less free as a result.

Ed’s right, the Democrats have been trying to criminalize political differences for years… And this is the result. If we don’t back push back it’s only matter time before they succeed and we find our liberties gone.

Related

• Rove, Gillespie Slam Obama for Spreading ‘Baseless Lie’ Over Foreign Contributions – Foxnews.com
• White House staff exodus exposes Obama to charges of disarray – The Guardian
• Why Obama Is Losing the Political War – Mark Halperin, Time.com
• Some Democrats uneasy with attacks on Chamber of Commerce – Los Angeles Times

What the Journal doesn’t mention is that Democrats have become so brazenly corrupt that should Brown they may try to delay swearing him in until after the Senate has voted on health care reform:

It looks like the fix is in on national health-care reform – and it all may unfold on Beacon Hill.

At a business forum in Boston Friday, interim Sen. Paul Kirk predicted that Congress would pass a health-care reform bill this month.

“We want to get this resolved before President Obama’s State of the Union address in early to mid-February,” Kirk told reporters at a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast.

The longtime aide and confidant of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who was handpicked by Gov. Deval Patrick after a controversial legal change to hold Kennedy’s seat, vowed to vote for the bill even if Republican state Sen. Scott Brown, who opposes the health-care reform legislation, prevails in a Jan. 19 special election.

“Absolutely,” Kirk said, when asked if he’d vote for the bill, even if Brown captures the seat. “It would be my responsibility as United States senator, representing the people and understanding Senator Kennedy’s agenda. . . . I think you’re asking me a hypothetical question but I’d be pleased to vote for the bill.”

~ ~ ~

Friday, a spokesman for Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, who is overseeing the election but did not respond to a call seeking comment, said certification of the Jan. 19 election by the Governor’s Council would take a while.

“Because it’s a federal election,” spokesman Brian McNiff said. “We’d have to wait 10 days for absentee and military ballots to come in.”

Another source told the Herald that Galvin’s office has said the election won’t be certified until Feb. 20 – well after the president’s address.

That Democrats would even hint at such underhanded tactics should surprise no one… Particularly after the after the tactics used by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid used to effectively bribe Senators into voting for his health care reform bill on Christmas Eve!

Related

• 41st What? – Jules Crittenden

Previous

• Ted Kennedy: Hey Lets Change Elections Rules… Again