We at CFIF have consistently highlighted the peril of federal, state and local government efforts targeting…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
New Study Shows How Overregulating Short-Term Lenders Harms Consumers

We at CFIF have consistently highlighted the peril of federal, state and local government efforts targeting the short-term consumer lending sector.

Less than two years ago, we specifically sounded the alarm on a New Mexico law artificially restricting interest rates on short-term consumer loans.

Well, a new study entitled "A New Mexico Consumer Survey:  Understanding the Impact of the 2023 Rate Cap on Consumers" that surveyed actual borrowers confirms our earlier warnings:

Key findings include:

•Short-term,small-dollar loans help borrowers manage their financial situations, irrespective of the borrower’s income.

•The rate cap has failed to improve the financial wellbeing of New Mexicans, specifically those who had previously relied on short-term, small-dollar loans.

•…[more]

November 27, 2023 • 03:57 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
The Myth of Republican Obstructionism Print
By David Harsanyi
Sunday, June 20 2021
Perhaps Harwood is unaware that Trump faced more procedural delays in his four years in office than any president in history – actually, more than all other presidents in history combined.

The political media have spent the entire Joe Biden presidency up to this point pressuring holdout moderate Democrats to join the left's efforts to destroy the legislative filibuster. One way they do this is by cobbling together revisionist histories that cast Republicans as uniquely obstructionist and undemocratic.

CNN's White House correspondent John Harwood lays out that history in broad strokes: "for Clinton's 1993 deficit-reduction plan: 0 Republican votes for Obama's 2010 national health care plan: 0 Republican votes for Biden's 2021 covid-relief plan: 0 Republican votes the modern GOP response to Democratic governance is total resistance."

What he fails to mention is that after President Bill Clinton's "deficit-reduction" bill, the GOP, often in significant numbers, voted for a slew of big policy reforms: 16 Senate Republicans voted for the Family and Medical Leave Act; a telecommunications reform passed 81-18, with only one Republican voting nay; the welfare-reform compromise bill passed 78-21; the Brady Act gun-control bill only passed because of Republican support; the North American Free Trade Agreement passed 73-26; Biden's crime bill passed 95-4; just to mention a few.

Of course, in those days, parties would bend over backward to compromise when writing wide-ranging bills so they could claim bipartisan support. This was often the case during the George W. Bush years as well. The Patriot Act was a bipartisan bill. No Child Left Behind, co-written by liberal "lion" Sen. Ted Kennedy, passed 87-10 in the Senate.

It was the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 that frayed the political order in ways from which we haven't recovered. For the first time in contemporary history, a political party unilaterally crammed through a national reform without any buy-in from half the nation. So, while it's true that not a single Republican supported President Barack Obama's 2010 "national health care plan," it's also true that not a single Democrat has voted for any of the dozens of bills to repeal "Obamacare."

Harwood is also right that Biden's 2021 "covid-relief plan" garnered zero Republican votes. Yet, the CNN correspondent again seems to have forgotten that Democrats filibustered and blocked Republican coronavirus-relief bills dozens of times. You know how many Democrats voted for President Donald Trump's tax-reform bill? Zero. Democrats filibustered Sen. Tim Scott's criminal-justice reform bill. They used the filibuster to block funding of Trump's border wall. They blocked Sen. Ben Sasse's Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act -- a bill that did not restrict abortion but merely compelled doctors to try to save babies who survived them.

Perhaps Harwood is unaware that Trump faced more procedural delays in his four years in office than any president in history  actually, more than all other presidents in history combined. According to a Politico analysis, Bill Clinton faced a total of 15 filibusters by the Senate in his two terms. Obama faced 175 in eight years. Trump faced over 300 in only four.

I've noticed that many liberals attempt to circumvent this prickly reality by pre-writing history: "Is there any doubt that the GOP would end the filibuster for good  in a heartbeat  if it served their purposes?" asked ABC News senior national correspondent Terry Moran, rhetorically. Indeed, there is great doubt, considering that Trump had publicly pressed Sen. Mitch McConnell to blow up the legislative filibuster on numerous occasions, and the Senate leader refused.

Let's not forget either that Democrats blew up the judicial filibuster. And when it backfired, and Republicans followed the new rules Sen. Harry Reid had instituted, Democrats tried to redefine judicial confirmations as "packing the Court." There is a perpetually evolving set of rules, and the constant is that these rules must benefit Democrats.

It was also Democrats, led by Biden, who blew up the norms of decorum and bipartisanship in the Supreme Court confirmation hearings when they politicized the nominations of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. Only three Democrats voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch. Only one Democrat  Sen. Joe Manchin  voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh after Democrats smeared him with their unsubstantiated charges. And not one Democrat voted for Amy Coney Barrett. Five Republicans voted to confirm Elena Kagan, and nine voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor before Mitch McConnell followed the "Biden rule" on Merrick Garland.

There's really nothing wrong with inaction in Congress if the country is fundamentally at odds over policy  which is clearly the case these days. The system is built  and political parties exist  to stop each other's excesses. In that regard, the filibuster has been one of the most effective tools in preserving some semblance of proper constitutional governance.

Now, political parties might be right or wrong, but only one clamors to blow up the rules every time it doesn't get its way. And just because Harwood seems to be under the impression that the only vote that matters in Washington is one that propels liberal initiatives doesn't entitle him to rewrite history.


David Harsanyi is a senior writer at National Review and the author of the book "First Freedom: A Ride Through America's Enduring History With the Gun." 

COPYRIGHT 2021 CREATORS.COM

Notable Quote   
 
"If they made nothing else clear, elite university presidents testifying Tuesday certainly showed they're not serious about dealing with antisemitism.The Harvard, MIT and University of Pennsylvania chiefs all admitted that antisemitism is a problem, but dodged and weaved about confronting the hate.All quickly retreated to a 'free speech' defense, claiming their hands are tied by their duty to allow…[more]
 
 
— New York Post Editorial Board
 
Liberty Poll   

Given the large and growing number of U.S. House retirees, are you more concerned about the loss of experienced veterans or more hopeful by the potential of new talent?