Posts Tagged ‘Evan Bayh’
February 16th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
Evan Bayh Learns the Value of the Private Sector

As the reasons for Senator Evan Bayh’s (D-IN) decision not to run for re-election this year trickle out, it sounds like the life-long politician has learned that the private sector – not government – is the engine that drives human prosperity. When asked today about his future plans, Bayh responded:

“But if I could create one job in the private sector by helping to grow a business, that would be one more than Congress has created in the last six months. If I could help educate our children at an institution for higher learning, that would be a noble thing. If I could help a charity, cure a disease or do something else worthwhile for society — that’s what has motivated my life and that’s what I think Congress needs to focus on, things that will help the American people meet the challenges they face in real ways in their daily lives. That’s what I want to do with my life. And if you’ll invite me back on your show in 11 months, I’ll be able to tell you!”

Although it is too bad Bayh won’t be in Congress spreading that message, the Republic is strengthened if even just one Democrat can learn the truth about where true fulfillment lies.

February 15th, 2010 at 11:38 am
Bye, Bye Evan Bayh

And the Democratic retirements just keep coming! Even though a Daily Kos poll showed Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) with a 20 point lead over former Republican Senator Dan Coats, Bayh announced today that he will not seek re-election this year. With Coats now the odds-on frontrunner, one has to wonder if Congressman Mike Pence is regretting his decision to stay in the House of Representatives instead of challenging Bayh.

Getting back to Bayh, since he has the third most cash of any senator up for re-election this year and has never lost a political contest, I wonder if this recent hit from the Left persuaded him that there isn’t much of a constituency for a self-styled moderate Democrat. It’s one thing to be hit from the Right for not being conservative enough, but when the activists and the money people in your own party start hammering you for not carrying enough water for an increasingly unpopular liberal agenda, well, Bayh can probably find better things to do. Unlike Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh isn’t willing to save the Democratic Party from itself by running in spite of its base.

January 27th, 2010 at 1:42 am
Millions for Democratic Losses, But Not a Pence for Republican Victories
Posted by Print

Bad news for political junkies — what could have been the title fight of the 2010 midterm elections in the U.S. Senate has been called off.

RedState reported this morning that conservative Indiana Congressman Mike Pence has decided against challenging moderate Democratic Senator Evan Bayh for his seat this year.

No doubt that it would have been an uphill fight. Bayh comes from an extremely popular political family in the Hoosier State, and his own career as a centrist governor-cum-senator has endeared him to his electorate. He’s also towards the bottom of the list of Democrats in the Senate who are threatening to conservative principles (and one of the few who sees the folly in the liberal thrust of the current Democratic leadership).

Yet the fact of the matter was that Pence was outpolling Bayh (albeit narrowly) without so much as announcing. Pence’s victory could have gone a long way towards driving a total electoral scramble in November.

Hopefully, the talented, able, articulate Pence goes back to the grindstone in the House. If he’s passing up the Senate race to take a crack at the White House (as RedState suggests he may be), he’s trading the improbable for the virtually impossible. Only one sitting U.S. Representative has ever been elected to the presidency — and Washington isn’t exactly brimming with people looking to replicate James Garfield’s legacy.

January 26th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
They Just Don’t Get It…

Seemingly oblivious to the message sent by Massachusetts voters – on behalf of the entire nation – last week, Congressional leaders appear to be working to rally support in their caucus behind a series of procedural tactics in an effort to salvage their extremely unpopular health care “reform” bill.  The Associated Press reports:

Democratic congressional leaders are coalescing around their last, best hope for salvaging President Barack Obama’s sweeping health care overhaul. …

Democratic congressional aides, speaking on condition of anonymity because the issue is in flux, said the latest strategy involves using a special budget procedure to revise the Senate bill.

The procedural route — known as reconciliation — would allow a majority of 51 senators to amend their bill to address some of the major substantive concerns raised by the House. That would circumvent the need for a 60-vote majority [in the Senate].

Fortunately, at least two Senate Democrats have voiced their opposition to using reconciliation as a way to circumvent the traditional legislative process.  Calling the tactic “ill-advised,” Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) said today he does not support the move.  Likewise, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) signaled that she opposes passing health care reform via reconciliation.  (H/T  Daniel Foster at The Corner)

It’s unclear at this point whether Pelosi and Reid will garner the support necessary to pull off the procedural move.  Regardless, the fact that they’re even trying proves once again their extreme arrogance.  They just don’t get it.

November 12th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
And They Wonder Why We Have Tea Parties

In one of the best critiques of action without regard to consequences, celebrated chaos theoretician Ian Malcolm said about overzealous experts that they were “so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

From bio-ethics to evidence-based public policy, it is astounding that the 220 members of the U.S. House of Representatives and at least a score of senators who support the Obama Administration’s health care “reform” plan cannot answer the following question:

It’s one of the most basic, kitchen-table questions of the entire reform debate: Would the sweeping $900 billion overhaul actually lower spiraling insurance premiums for everyone?

No one really knows.”

And it’s not just that people haven’t read the bill, or studies analyzing its impact on the cost of health care. It’s that the data doesn’t exist.

At a recent Senate health committee hearing, two health care rivals – Douglas Holtz-Eakin, an economic adviser to Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign, and Jonathan Gruber, an economics professor whose work is cited often by the White House – agreed comprehensive, objective evidence wasn’t available for small and large businesses.

“It’s insane,” Holtz-Eakin said.

Agreed. Thankfully, at least one Democratic Senator thinks information – not just assurances – is needed before committing American taxpayers to a trillion dollar decision.

The lack of data prompted Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) to request a broad analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on premiums, which he said was “a basic, bottom-line question that we have to have answered before we can decide if this is an intelligent thing to do.”

Now we see why Senator Bayh didn’t make the cut to be Vice President. He likes to consult factually-based, non-partisan research before voting in favor of the largest expansion of federal social services in 40 years.

Characteristically, top Obama advisors have a different view – one that chooses the devil we don’t know instead of the devil we do.

“I think you could always use more data,” (White House Health Czar Nancy-Ann) DeParle said, but added that “we have plenty of data on where things are and where things are headed without reform.”

Did you catch the barely concealed contempt for “business as usual” and the stifled urge to blame the previous administration?

All this would be comical if there weren’t a $787 billion stimulus package in circulation, the consequences of which still defy an ability to be measured or predicted. To their credit, some Democratic caucus members are joining Senator Bayh’s (belated) rush to judge the health care “reform” bill on its merits.

Lawmakers say they are hungry for data that assures them they are not voting for a bill that does the opposite what they have intended.

“I want to see an objective, third-party analysis from people who don’t have a conflict of interest,” said Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.). “I like evidence.”

Good. So do the people being asked to finance health care “reform” unto the nth generation.

You can read the entire article from Politico here.