One of the reasons I’m sanguine about the elections this year is that I sense a sea change in the political climate against spending. I’m hardly the only one. Just for instance, there’s E. Thomas McClanahan of the Kansas City Star. The election of Chris Christie and Scott Brown in deeply blue states argues the same thing. So does the success of the tea parties.
But the Democrats and, especially, the Obama administration are deeply committed to ever greater spending. Even the so-called Blue Dog Democrats, supposedly fiscal hawks, mostly signed on to ObamaCare, which, if fully implemented, will increase federal spending the way the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is increasing pollution.
More, the Obama administration is joined at the hip to the biggest engine of spending in town, the public employees’ unions. Mort Zuckerman details just how destructive the nexus between politicians and public employees’ unions has become. Michael Barone points out that the administration is pushing Congress to spend an additional $23 billion to prevent teacher layoffs this year. This is in addition to the one-third of last year’s stimulus bill that went to prevent layoffs of government workers.
Might this largesse have anything to do with the fact that labor unions gave Democrats $400 million in the last election cycle? Might the Pope be a Catholic? That’s why only Republicans can ride this tide of public anger at spending and public employees’ unions. If they do, it will lead on to fortune.