I think it is likely that the Republicans will take control of the House this November. The senate is a much steeper hill to climb, but not out of reach. (Personally I think they’ll miss on the Senate, but I withhold final predictions until we are closer and there is more data.)
Regardless of the Senate, I think just from the House we might see some clues to if the republicans truly have becom serious about debt or if that is all just election year smoke and mirrors.
Defunding Obama’s projects and initiatives will be meaningless data. Simple partisianship will compel them that far. What will be telling is if they are willing to cut any program that they are the proponents for and has serious electoral consequences. (Such as Farm Subsidies.)
Color me pessimistic on the odds of this happening. I think that they, the Republicans, have not spent enough time in the wilderness. They’ll attack Democratic spending with vigor, but I think that their own cows will remain most holy and untouched.
I do not think the ‘Tea Party’ will drive the Republican into serious thought about debt and spending.
I would be happy to be wrong. I think that all empires fade and this could be the twilight of our own. Unless we get serious about bringing our financial house in order, very dire consequences could befall our nation. Ones too painful and terrible to contemplate.
What signs would you read as proof the Republicans were serious about this issue?
Let’s see if the new leadership rejects the Ryan Plan without any serious consideration. If they do, then they haven’t learned.
Now my question…
“[Republicans] attack Democratic spending with vigor, but I think that their own cows will remain most holy and untouched.”
What are the Republican “holy cows”?
I would agree that they are serious when they start cutting funding to their own “sacred cows.” With the scale back in in Iraq, can we reduce military spending? (I acknowledge this may be too soon.) Why are we subsidizing farmers if we believe in the free market and market forces?
The situation with Crist has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. The Republican Party in Florida is attempting to privatize and gut public education in our state. Crist, under tremendous pressure from both sides, refused to allow an irresponsible bill related to education (SB6) to pass. Part of this is political manuvering on his part – the Party had already stated that a member of the Religious Right was going to be their national candidtate (for senate, I believe.) and that they were not going to back Crist anyway. Crist could have made the safe bet and allowed the education-gutting bill to pass and he _could_ have had party backing at a later date. He did not do this, because the bill, as it was written, was wrong for education and for Florida. His ambitions have been curtailed by his party’s wrong-headedness, not by his inability to be fiscally conservative. (I live here. I see it. Do not mistake the news reports for reality.)
Question: Do you think the Republican party and its elected officials from 2000-2006 were serious about financial and fiscal matters pertaining to the US debt and budget?
If not, what indicators should someone look for from the presumably Republican House — and perhaps Senate — in 2011 thru 2012 to indicate that they are serious about this issue?
Some Republicans who aren’t serious are getting their asses kicked out of office by Republican primary voters.
Such as Senators Bennet and Murkowsky.
And others are having their ambitions cut short such as Crist in Florida.
The Republican party is most certainly evolving from what it was in 2000. Pork doesn’t buy votes the way it used to.
I also don’t buy your premise that the partisan differences between the parties are meaningless when it comes to fiscal responsibility. In truth the partisan differences on fiscal responsibility are sharpening because the Obama agenda is so radically irresponsible.
Off topic. I was talking about or asking about the Democrats. What signs would indicate to us that the Republicans are serious about the financial situation?
Losing ugly, what the Democrats haven’t learned
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/26/AR2010082605233.html