Freedom Line Blog

Below is one of the latest cartoons from two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.

View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.

From a story today in The Hill:

Four House Democrats who have proposed significant spending cuts were chastised at a recent caucus meeting for targeting programs senior appropriators had deemed vital, according to lawmakers and aides.

Reps. Gary Peters (Mich.), John Adler (N.J.), Jim Himes (Conn.) and Peter Welch (Vt.) introduced an amendment to the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development spending bill that would cut a dozen programs — totaling $1.4 billion — that had been added on top of President Obama’s initial budget request.

It was an effort to target a few government programs to chip away at a massive budget deficit — just as House leaders, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), have ordered committee heads to do.

Read the full story here.

Democrats in the House of Representatives just approved the Senate-passed health care bill by a vote of 219-212.  They did so without any Republican votes and against the will of the American people. 

November can’t some soon enough.

Politico.com reports:

In a surprise move today, Democrats decided to vote on the Senate bill directly instead of using the so-called Slaughter Solution, a procedural maneuver that would have shielded them from a direct vote on the bill.”

Now it’s time to “Kill the Bill.”

The Hill newspaper recently surveyed key House Democrats on where they stand on ObamaCare.

Twelve representatives who voted yes on the House-passed health care bill in November are “Undecided.”  Among others who voted yes in November, Rep. Michael Arcuri (NY) is “Leaning No” and Representatives Russ Carnahan (MO) and Jim Oberstar (MN) are “Leaning Yes.”  Eleven House Members who voted for the Stupak Amendment in November are in the “Firm No” category.

View the full list here.

The arrival of 2010 ushers in yet another federal election.  This year, every seat in the House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate is up for grabs.

A new study from the polling firm Public Opinion Strategies demonstrates that President Obama’s approval rating could determine the fate of his strong Democratic majorities in Congress.

Public Opinion studied midterm election results and presidential job approval numbers from 1962 to 2006.  The results aren’t too surprising, but they are nevertheless discouraging for the current party in power.

Even a strong approval mark of 60% has only historically garnered the president’s party one seat in the House.  For example, President Ronald Reagan had a 63% approval rating in 1986, but Republicans still managed to lose five seats in Congress that year.

An average approval rating of 50% to 59% historically results in an average loss of 12 seats.  President Obama’s current approval rating is 50%.

If his approval rating dips below 50%, he may be welcoming Speaker John Boehner in 2011.  When the president’s approval rating falls below the Mendoza Line (50%) for politicians, his party loses an average of 41 seats, or one more than Republicans currently need to take back the lower chamber.

Generally, a president’s popularity and tenure in Congress are inexorably linked.  When November arrives, President Obama will learn that lesson anew.

Stay tuned for more coverage by CFIF on the 2010 elections.

Lost during the health care fight in the Senate over the holidays were the votes in the House over yet another round of central planning stimulus provisions.

On its last roll call vote, the House narrowly, 217-212, passed an $180 billion “jobs for main street” bill that will exacerbate the federal deficit by another $64 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Not surprisingly, not a single Republican offered to support a third/fourth stimulus bill filled with pork-barrel spending and empty wealth transfers.  Democrats defected as well, with 38 voting “No.”

Now, the CBO has officially panned the legislation.  The final price tag over the next decade will be more than $180 billion, meaning Congress authorized $967 billion in 2009 alone for “stimulus” spending.

With all this, the unemployment rate remains at 10% and poll numbers indicate that no amount of wealth redistribution will increase Democratic majorities come Election Day.

Tonight, the House of Representatives voted 220-215 to narrowly pass Speaker Pelosi’s 2,000-page, trillion-dollar-plus health care “reform” bill.

Just one Republican, Rep. Joseph Cao (Louisiana) voted “Yea.” Thirty-nine Democrats joined with all other House Republicans in opposition.

Immediately following the 2006 elections, when Democrats took control of the House of Representatives, then-Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi said, “The American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history.” 

It wasn’t the first time Pelosi (and other current Congressional leaders) made that promise.  Nor was it the last.

Today, nearly three years later, the lead story on Politico.com begins:

A leaked document shows that House ethics investigators are probing the activities of nearly three dozen lawmakers…

“The House ethics committee said Thursday that it was opening two new investigations — one into the foreclosure scandal of Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.) and one involving financial questions about Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and her husband.

“But shortly after the committee met, chairs Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) interrupted proceedings on the House floor to say that an internal document on secret committee proceedings had been leaked to The Washington Post — and that it would name the names of many other members who had drawn the attention of either the committee or the Office of Congressional Ethics.

“According to the Post, the document identifies more than 30 House members.”

Read the full Politico.com story here. 

The Washington Post had the scoop.  The report by the Post’s Ellen Nakashima and Paul Kane can be read here.

From Mike Soraghan, TheHill.com: 

“Politically vulnerable Democrats say Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other House leaders aren’t offering them the protection from tough votes that they did in the last Congress.

“Conservative Democrats fear that dozens of members could be swept out of their districts in the midterm election next year, and that fear has been intensifying in recent weeks.”

So why don’t they take an easy vote?  The Democratic House Caucus decides who will be Speaker.  We’d be willing to bet that just about anyone voting to remove Pelosi could have their seats in perpetuity.