Thursday, June 26, 2014

Gov. Jindal Has the Right Idea, but I Doubt He Has the Cojones

Fox News recently reported that Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana threatened a "hostile takeover" of Washington in response to the Democrats' "waging war on religious liberty." Although the Republicans like to sound radical, when in office they don't reverse the globalist, politically correct policies of their Democratic partners.

For instance, Ronald Reagan is often held up as an icon of conservative Republicanism, and he certainly did say that government is the problem rather than the solution.  But Reagan added to rather than solved the problem.  Here is the path of total and federal government spending from 1979, the year Reagan was elected, to 1989, the year after he left office:

 Year                               Total (Federal, State, and Local) Spending
                                      (Billions of Not Inflation Adjusted Dollars)*
1979                                                         $807
1980                                                           940
1981                                                        1,073
1982                                                        1,179
1983                                                        1,284
1984                                                        1,354
1985                                                        1,496
1986                                                        1,593
1987                                                        1,662
1988                                                        1.771
1989                                                        1,905

Year                          Federal Government Spending
                        (Billions of Inflation Adjusted Dollars)*

                       Total                 Defense               Total Ex Defense

1979            1,236.89               352.68                      884.21
1980            1,330.19               377.89                      952.30
1981            1,396.36               398.56                      997.80
1982            1,445.63               429.47                   1,016.16
1983            1,507.52               459.93                   1,047.69
1984            1,534.08               484.20                   1,049.88
1985            1,651.21                 515.11                    1,136.10
1986            1,694.21               536.86                   1,157.35
1987            1,674.79               534.40                   1,140.39
1988            1,715.48               532.16                   1,183.32
1989            1,774.33               532.32                   1,242.01

The golden years of Reagan Republicanism were chiefly golden for big government.  First, in inflation-adjusted terms, federal spending in 1988, the last year of Reagan's presidency, was almost $479 billion higher than in 1979, the last year of Carter's presidency.  That's an almost 40 percent inflation-adjusted increase in federal government spending.  In inflation-adjusted terms, defense spending increased by $179 billion, or over 50 percent. Nondefense spending increased from 884 billion to 1,183 billion, an increase of more than 24 percent.

The results of the golden Republican Reagan years were worse than that, though. Much of Reagan's New Federalism involved giving block grants to the states.  It also involved downloading mandates and spending requirements onto the states, which caused (not inflation-adjusted) total government spending to double during Reagan's presidency. 

Reagan shouldn't have been called the Gipper.  He should have been called the King of Government Bloat.

The astronomical property taxes that New Yorkers pay is due to the Reagan presidency. The King of Government Bloat not only hiked government spending dramatically but also opened the door for the Democrats to radically increase state-level spending.

It is nice of Governer Jindal to speak of a hostile takeover, and it's also nice that someone in high office has been willing to say something true about Barack Obama:

Are we witnessing right now the most radically, extremely liberal, ideological president of our entire lifetime right here in the United States of America, or are we witnessing the most incompetent president of the United States of America in the history of our lifetimes? You know, it is a difficult question...I've thought long and hard about it. Here's the only answer I've come up with, and I'm going to quote Secretary Clinton: `What difference does it make?'

Obama was a member of the extremist New Party in the 1990s, something about which he and his propagandists have repeatedly lied.  At the same time, as a product of the Chicago political machine, Obama is crooked. The media has resisted covering his involvement with Tony Rezko. Wikipedia says this:

In 2005 Obama purchased a new home in the Kenwood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (which was $300,000 below the asking price but represented the highest offer on the property) on the same day that Rezko's wife, Rita Rezko, purchased the adjoining empty lot from the same sellers for the full asking price...After it had been reported in 2006 that Rezko was under federal investigation for influence-peddling, Obama purchased a 10-foot-wide strip of Ms. Rezko's property for $104,500, $60,000 above the assessed value.

Given that it was widely known that Obama was a crooked left-wing extremist before the 2008 election, his ideology and his incompetence should surprise no one.  It's nice that Jindal says as much, but if Jindal and his fellow Republicans succeed in a hostile takeover of Washington, will we have to suffer a King of Government Bloat II?  What evidence is there that the current crop of Republicans differs from the King of Government Bloat I? 

The federal government is a failed experiment. A hostile takeover is not the solution.  The takeover of a failed experiment achieves nothing. 

*Source: US Government, Compiled by Chris Chantrill

No comments: