Category Archives: Jason Tolbert

Senate committee discusses Fayetteville Finger this afternoon (part 11)

April 4, 2011 – 1:24 pm

My sons Wilson (on left) and Hunter (on right) went to California and visited Yosemite National Park with our friend Sherwood Haisty Jr. March 21-27.

Fayetteville Responds to the State Democratic Party’s Partisan Pig Trail Gerrymander in radio ad.

Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times at 11:27 am this morning reported:

All eyes are first on the Senate this afternoon as the legislature reconvenes for purposes of attempting to complete action on a congressional redistricting plan.

The Democratic plan — Fayetteville to the 4th and the rest — can pass if 18 senators vote to pull it out of committee and then vote to approve it (though they’ll have to wait until Wednesday or so to do it). Democrats can lose up to three senators. Sounds to me like four are in play.

Jason Tolbert noted:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out but it is doubtful the bill will be passed out of the committee unchanged. 

The committee is split four Republicans and four Democrats and is chaired by Democratic Sen. Sue Madison from Fayetteville.  It is possible the current map could be amended in such a way as to satisfy at least five members of the committee (either four Republicans and one Democrats or four Democrats and one Republican or some other odd combination) but most likely the stalemate will continue at four to four.

If this is the case, the question will become does the full Senate have the 18 votes to pull the bill out of committee.   At least two Democratic south Arkansas Senators – Teague and Taylor – have publicly expressed opposition to doing this and several more Senators are rumored to be on the fence.

If 18 votes can be found, the final vote could be delayed until likely Thursday unless 24 Senators allow for an earlier vote by suspending the rules.

_____________________________

Jason may be right concerning possible changes to the Fayetteville Finger because of Senators like Larry Teague of Nashville, Arkansas. Read below.

Roby Brock reported:

One has a pivotal legislative vote, the other will defend it in court.

Two key Democrats say they are struggling with the controversial “Fayetteville to the Fourth” Congressional redistricting plan.

Senate President Pro Temp-elect Larry Teague (D-Nashville) said he’s “not comfortable” with the map, but doesn’t have an alternative that would satisfy everyone.

“I’ve not been able to get comfortable with it, Roby. I continue to believe that we ought to build upon a plan that nobody loves, but everybody can kind of live with. I don’t know that the Fayetteville plan is it.  I hope that we will have some reasonable minds sit down this week and see if we can’t do something better,” Teague told Talk Business on Sunday.

Democratic Attorney General Dustin McDaniel spoke to a group of Arkansas broadcasters over the weekend. He was asked a question on the topic of Congressional redistricting, which spawned a Talk Business follow-up.

McDaniel said he’s not sold on the “Fayetteville to the Fourth” plan politically.

“I was asked what I thought about the effort to move Fayetteville to the Fourth [District] and I simply said: if I were doing it, I wouldn’t do it that way. From everything I’ve heard from my friends in Pine Bluff and El Dorado and Texarkana, they’re opposed to it because they feel like its going to dilute their voice,” he said.

McDaniel said Fayetteville is “adamantly opposed” to the plan because they feel it extracts them from their northwest Arkansas economic, geographic, and cultural corridor.

 

The House Republican Caucus held a press conference this afternoon to talk about the session, the influence they were able to have on legislative outcomes and plans for the next session.

Video from Jason Tolbert

_____________________________________________

Free-lance columnist Rex Nelson is the president of Arkansas’ Independent Colleges and Universities. He’s also the author of the Southern Fried blog at rexnelsonsouthernfried. com.

Rex Nelson wrote in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on April 2, 2011 a great article called “Arkansas Bucket List.” The readers of his blog http://www.rexnelsonsouthernfried.com came up with a list of things you must do at least once in your life to be considered a well-rounded Arkansan. Nelson asked others to add their suggestions at his website. I am going through the list slowly.

1.Walk through a cotton field in Mississippi County when the cotton is ready to pick. (It is a beautiful site from the road with all the white fields everywhere.)

2. Listen to live music one Friday night at George’s Majestic Lounge on Dickson Street in Fayetteville.My sons Wilson (on let) and Hunter (on right) went to California and visited Yosemite National Park with our friend Sherwood Haisty Jr. March 21-27.

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Will the Fayetteville Finger pass the Senate? (part 10)

April 1, 2011 – 11:12 pm

Jay Barth on Arkansas Week and Review on PBS said tonight that he that the districts would not change much except for the first district where Rick Crawford would be challenged. He thought the problem for the Democrats there would be simple. Could they energize the Democrats to have a good turnout in the 1st district.

He thought the 2nd district would be a little more Democrat friendly but he could not seeing it tipping the scales too much.

Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times said in his weekly pod cast that he thinks people are making too big a deal out of the Fayetteville Finger. 250,000 people are getting moved to other districts and why is the press making such a big deal out of Fayetteville.

I have to disagree with Max on that one. It is very much a political move that is a big deal. Gerrymandering has always been condemned and it has been done to some degree in many cases, but just rarely is it over the top like this. Seven counties were split in order to pull this off. Even Max himself thought it has a sick joke when he first heard it.

I am starting to wonder if the Democrats will pass the current bill out of the Senate.  Jason Tolbert reported:

Also, a bit of relevant news to a current issue in the Senate. I spoke briefly with Sen. Teague who told me that he is inclined not to pull HB1322 – the Congressional map passed by the House – out of committee.

“I want us to pass a map that everyone can feel good about,” said Teague.

It also appears Sen. Jerry Taylor (D-Pine Bluff) – another south Arkansas Democrat – is likely against the map as well.

“They call it the Fayetteville finger for a reason, and that’s because they’re giving south Arkansas the finger,” said Taylor in an AP story

________________________________________________


By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Fayetteville Finger (part 9)

April 1, 2011 – 7:57 am

 

 

The Arkansas Times Blog (Friday April 1, 2011) reported:  

Rep. Greg Leding of Fayetteville, who voted for the House-approved congressional redistricting plan that moves a portion of Fayetteville from the 3rd to the 4th Congressional District, has issued a statement on his vote.

LEDING STATEMENT (only first part of statement)

“Of all the votes I’ve cast during this legislative session, this one weighed on my mind more than any other. I listened to a great deal of feedback from my constituents, some who supported and some who opposed this bill.”

“Redistricting is a difficult and, unfortunately, can be a divisive process, but as lawmakers, we have a duty to the people of Arkansas to meet the requirements mandated to us by law. I spent the last severalweeks listening to input from my constituents, and although I may not have been able to answer, I took every email, phone call and message into consideration in weighing this decision.”

Lawmakers have been tasked to address redistricting during this legislative session and with only one proposal on the House floor for consideration, I believe we owe it to the taxpayers to address this matter in the timeframe that has been set for us to do so.”

____________________________

I only put the first part of Leding’s statement up because I wanted to show how he basically said that he listened to all those he represented and “some” supported the move and “some” did not. I just wish he would have said, “The overwhelming amount of the people I represent strongly oppose this but I am don’t care what they think!!! I will go ahead no matter how many polls come out showing a vast majority of Fayetteville residents oppose this action!!!” (Tolbert’s poll is prime example.)

Mike Masterson is one of the Northwest Arkansas residents and his thoughts are below:

Mike Masterson (opinion editor of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s Northwest edition) in his article on March 26, 2011 in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette rightly asserted:

 The plan to flagrantly gerrymander Northwest Fayetteville from the Third Congressional District into the southernmost Fourth District is the most corrupted political manipulation I’ve seen in a long while. Remember any legislator who supports this twisted, tortured abomination.

____________________________________

I am a little surprised that Democratic Representatives from South Arkansas did not object either. Jason Tolbert sums up Rep. Matt Shepherd’s objection: In short, a more compact district would be better for both Fayetteville and for south Arkansas both in their representative and in their community of interest.

 

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Fayetteville Finger, Is it going to happen? YES IT WILL. (Part 8)

March 31, 2011 – 6:57 am

I am posting a great March Madness Moment from the article by A. J. Foss called Ultimate March Madness: The 20 Greatest Moments in NCAA Tournament History

Christian Laettner's game-winning shot ended one of the great games in NCAA Tournament history. Christian Laettner’s game-winning shot ended one of the great games in NCAA Tournament history.

1. 1992 Duke-Kentucky
It is the moment that is replayed every March.  It is “The Shot” or the Laettner game.

With 2.1 seconds to go in overtime and trailing 103-102, Duke forward Grant Hill throws a full-court pass that is caught by Christian Laettner at the top of the key.

Laettner dribbles once after the catch and shoots an 18-foot fade away that goes through the net as time expired to send Duke to the Final Four for the fifth straight year.

Laettner finishes the game with 31 points as he makes all ten of his shots and all ten of his free throws in what most experts consider to be the greatest game in NCAA tournament history.

___________________________________________

What are the Democrats in the Arkansas State House and Senate up to now concerning the issue of the “Fayetteville to the Fourth” movement? I wrote earlier that they were going to succeed in getting this done but it was a political move that will pass because of their political power in the House and Senate and not because the people support this move. (By the way it passed the house already with only one Democrat voting against it, Rep. Lindsey.)

In fact, I pointed to a poll that showed clearly that over 80% of the people in Fayetteville oppose this move.  Since then the Democrats have questioned the results of that poll even though they dare not run a poll of their own. Maybe someday the Republicans will win the majority and consider putting Fayetteville back in the 3rd district?

Jay Barth is M.E. and Ima Graves Peace Distinguished Professor of Politics Chair of the Department of Politics and International Relations Director of Civic Engagement Projects at Hendrix College. He wrote the article Legal Gerrymandering in the Arkansas Times.

The best way for Arkansas’s Republicans to reshape district lines in their favor is to win control of state government by the time the next redistricting process takes place. (A more complex issue is whether they could do that before the next census, as the Texas legislature—driven by House Majority Leader Tom Delay—did in the middle part of the last decade.) For this is an area where elections truly have consequences.

________________________________

Steve Brawner wrote the article “After losing, Democrats try to renew the map.”

The Fayetteville Finger has only one purpose — to pull more Democrats into the First and Fourth districts while cramming as many Republicans as possible into the Third. It’s winning not by persuading voters to a particular point of view but instead by simply shifting them out of the way. That kind of power grab has a long history in American politics — it’s called “gerrymandering” — but we haven’t seen it in traditionally one-party Arkansas until this year.

I’ll give the Democrats this — at least they are being honest about their intentions. And it could be worse. Some districts in other states look like jigsaw puzzles even my mom wouldn’t have tackled. The idea actually appears to strengthen the GOP’s position in the Second District, won in 2010 by a Republican, Tim Griffin.

Still, this kind of game-playing hasn’t been the status quo before and doesn’t need to become the status quo now. Parties should win elections by earning the trust of a majority of voters, not by redrawing maps. Fayetteville belongs in the Third District.

___________________________________________

It now seems the Democrats have put the finishing touches on their Fayetteville to the Fourth plan and that they will pass it like I earlier predicted. Here is what it looks like as reported by Jason Tolbert:

Tolbert comments:

The most glaring feature of the new map is that it still includes moving Fayetteville out of the third and into the fourth….  Gone is the Crawford County Slice and Franklin County move.  Instead that go through Johnson, over the bridges of Madison County to wrap into Washington County and grab Fayetteville…  The connection from Johnson County into Madison County is more dirt roads.

___________________________

We will have to wait and see how this drama plays out in the next few days.

.

.

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Brantley and Brummett on Senator Linda Chesterfield’s speedy vote

March 24, 2011 – 10:10 am

My sons Wilson and Hunter are in California to help our friend Sherwood Haisty in his street preaching ministry in Santa Monica. However, they spent the last two days trying to get into Yosemite National Park after a landslide. They finally got in yesterday. They saw “Half Dome” yesterday.

Half Dome and El Capitan. Nevada and Bridal Veil Falls. These names conjure up so many different memories for the millions of people that have been lucky enough to visit Yosemite National Park.

There is a bill to put the issue of raising funds for Arkansas roads before the people. Let me take a look at what actually happened to that bill earlier this week.

John Brummett in his article “Let us vote on this truck offer,” Arkansas News Bureau, March 24, states:

Yet the bill got hung up for a while in the Senate Transportation Committee by Republican members, who compose a 5-3 committee majority and who either opposed the measure outright on a blanket anti-tax basis or insisted they wanted only to amend it in two particulars.

The first idea for an amendment was to cap the diesel tax for farm vehicles. The second was to authorize the governor to call only one such special bond election, not one over and over again until he and the highway industry wore voters down.

All this got gummed up in dramatic controversy and procedural trickery the other afternoon.

A special meeting of this Transportation Committee was called after daily adjournment of the Senate. Apparently with only four of the eight committee members present, state Sen. Linda Chesterfield of Little Rock, a Democrat and the chairman, declared a nonexistent quorum and speedily proclaimed the bill passed on a voice vote.

Four Republicans had not arrived, either thinking the meeting was to begin 10 minutes after adjournment instead of the very moment of adjournment or because they needed to go instead to a simultaneous meeting on proposed constitutional amendments.

The one Republican in attendance, Bruce Holland of Greenwood, could have insisted on a roll call vote that would have revealed the absence of a quorum, but did not.

Sen. Jake Files, Republican of Fort Smith and a committee member, stopped by the meeting, then headed to the other session on constitutional amendments where he was sponsoring one of the proposals.

He did so, he told me, secure in the belief that the bill would not be brought up because parties were still working in good faith, he thought, on those amendments.

It was sneaky and heavy-handed on the part of Democrats, thus par for the course. But it was naive and inept on the part of Republicans, too — also par for the course.

Max Brantley has a different take on what went down. Brantley observed:

More on the diesel tax increase, which came out of Senate committee yesterday in a speedy voice vote. Since then, Republicans have been howling that Committee Chair Linda Chesterfield did them dirty by calling for a voice vote and declaring the bill approved with only four people in the room. All agree a quorum of five was present to hold the meeting, but Republican Sen. Jake Files soon absented himself and the voice vote was held without him.

That left only Republican Sen. Bruce Holland in the room when Chesterfield waved the bill out. I still believe the Republicans understood what was up. Republicans have five seats on the eight-member committee. They only have two in place when the meeting on a big tax increase starts and one quickly leaves the room? They make no objection to the voice vote? Senate rules are clear: It takes only ONE senator to question a quorum. It takes only ONE senator to ask for a roll call. Fireball Holland was in the room. He could have stopped the train but he didn’t. I don’t think it was an accident, though Republicans are all rushing to their favorite mouthpieces for sympathetic retelling of the tale of dirty ol’ Linda…

When it’s over, I’m betting the diesel tax will be extracted by majority vote as rules allow and pass the Senate. Republicans will vote against it and keep their anti-tax record clean. This should be accompanied by a decrease in the heated rhetoric about dirty tricks because it’s clearer than ever that some, if not all, committee Repubicans were up to their necks in the events they’re now moaning about. This is bad form. It also rolls downhill. Other side deals and hidden agendas are threatened if Republicans try to have their cake and eat it, too, on things like the diesel vote.

_______________________________

Today Max added:

Special notice for the five Republicans on the eight-member Senate Transportation Committee.

Sen. Linda Chesterfield, the chair, has called a committee meeting immediately after adjournment. The House bill to refer to voters a 5-cent increase in the tax on diesel to back highway bonds is on the agenda.

Absences require a doctor’s excuse (Sen. Irvin, an independent physician, not your husband or Dr. Bledsoe), will be required). Homework-eating dog excuses are frowned upon. Water breaks after a quorum is declared are ill-advised. Vote or shut up.

______________________________________

Jason Tolbert put it this way:

The fallout continues from the shenanigans pulled yesterday in the Senate Public Health Committee.  The meeting was hastily called after the full Senate adjourned where the chair of the committee – Sen. Linda Chesterfield (D-Little Rock) – quickly ruled that Speaker Moore’s proposed nickel increase on the diesel tax passed on a voice vote. She called it so fast that no one from the press had time to get to the room.

Sen. Bruce Holland (R-Greenwood) – who voted against the bill’s passage – tells me this morning that he was the only Republican present when vote was called along with the three Democrats on the committee.

“I was surprised that the bill was presented because we were working on an amendment and it was my understanding that it would not be run until the amendment was added,” said Holland this morning

_____________________________________

What is going on here? My head is spinning and I can not figure it all out. At least in the gerrymander debate it is clear that the Democrats are throwing Mike Ross under the bus to try and get a Democrat in the 1st district, and they will stop at nothing to take every last Democrat out of the 3rd district even it probably will get challenged in court.  

________________________________________________

Japan

Waves of tsunami hit residences after a powerful earthquake in Natori

The worst affected areas are thought to be Miyagi, Fukushima and Iwate prefectures. In Iwaki, Fukushima, water swept through the town.

 

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Candidate #2, Former Arkansas Gov Mike Huckabee: Republican Presidential Hopefuls (pt 3)

March 15, 2011 – 4:12 pm

 Jason Tolbert in his article “Huckabee’s painful presidential tease,” (Arkansas News Bureau, March 13, 2011) notes:

The last few weeks former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has been all over the news. Of course, the sudden burst of media corresponds to the release of his latest book. But a former governor of a rural state does not get a lot of press for a book release without something more enticing.

Thus, we are subjected to a long and painful tease, hinting that he might run for president again in 2012. In one interview with CBS and pushed out by his political action committee, he said he “very well may” run again. In a media availability at the National Press Club, he said running for president is “very much an option that he is considering” and that he is “seriously and genuinely contemplating it.”

I could list all the quotes but you get the idea. Of course, he is very careful not to go too far, which he admits is motivated by the fact that if he does, he has to give up his multi-million dollar contract with Fox News for his weekly cable talk show as well as his daily radio broadcast with Citadel Media. Just last week, Fox suspended their contracts with both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum as they are “serious concerning” running for president.

In this respect, Huckabee is stuck between the proverbial rock and hard place. But this delicate dance between hinting at a presidential run while maintaining his media empire is becoming increasingly painful to watch.

Max Brantley thinks Huckabee will run. In his post, “Huckabee edges towards race,” (Arkansas Times Blog, March 15, 2011), Brantley notes:

I think Mike Huckabee is going to run for president, but I think he’s going to finesse the decision as long as possible to hang onto the money he makes as a non-candidate with his radio show (now on 560 stations) and his show on Fox News, which recently booted two commentators who’ve made not much more presidential noise than Huckabee.

Polls continue to show him a Republican front-runner (albeit in a weak field.)

He leaks that he’s “50-50” on the race.

The director of his PAC is in South Carolina, courting politicos.

He’s found you can say just about anything about Obama and get away with it, while firing up the base.

Much as he likes money, he probably suspects there’s a REAL pot of gold at the end of a presidential rainbow, not to mention all those limos, jets, gifts and perks he loves so much.

Wonder if the campaign HQ will be in his putative home state of Florida? It sure is remarkable how often he and Janet are seen around Arkansas. Does DF&A monitor that sort of thing when people live here but claim residency elsewhere to avoid income taxes.

________________________________________________
I think that Huckabee will run, but will put it off in order to make more money. The funny thing about Brantley’s last sentence is that liberals just can’t have it both ways. They praise Dale Bumpers for raising the state income tax to 7% and they get made when wealthy Arkansans leave the state for places like Texas, Tennessee and Florida that do not have a state income tax.

Who knows if Huckabee will win in Iowa again?

Mike Huckabee
By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Mike Huckabee | Comments (0)

Tolbert: The Democrats claim Bush Tax Cuts are to blame for everything wrong in economy (Real Cause of Deficit Pt 2)

March 11, 2011 – 7:29 am

 

Brian Riedl Heritage Foundation on Freedom and Prosperity Radio 8-28-10.wmv

Washed away: Where there was once a coastline populated with homes and factories, powerful waves triggered by the tsunami devour anything in their path. Only a scattering trees remainWashed away: Where there was once a coastline populated with homes and factories, powerful waves triggered by the tsunami devour anything in their path. Only a scattering trees remain
This morning I woke up to horrible news of the earthquake in Japan.

March 11 (Bloomberg) — Japan was struck by its strongest earthquake in at least a century, an 8.9-magnitude temblor that shook buildings across Tokyo and unleashed a tsunami as high as 10 meters, engulfing towns along the northern coast. At least 26 people were killed by the 33-foot wave and many are missing, according to state broadcaster NHK Television. Bloomberg’s Mike Firn reports. (Source: Bloomberg)

I remember back in December of 2004 when the huge tsunami hit Thailand, and I read about it in the newspaper. Little did I know that the Chinise supplier that provides us with Mopbuckets was vacationing there at the time. He had gone down to the beach and the day looked so nice that decided to rent a boat. Therefore, he went back to his hotel room to get the money and make the phone call. Then he heard a crashing sound and water started to flow through his hotel window, and he was on the 4th floor. Communications were cut off and his factory assumed he had been killed.

__________________________________________

Jason Tolbert in his article “Analyzing the Bush tax cuts,” (Arkansas News Bureau, August 8, 2010), rightly notes:

The Democrats’ talking points center on framing the tax cuts as the “Bush tax cuts.” In their world anything associated with former President George W. Bush is automatically bad. Suddenly these “Bush tax cuts” are to blame for all things wrong with the economy, particularly the deficit. They claim that “extending the Bush tax cuts” will skyrocket the deficit and would be fiscally irresponsible.

Riedl is the author of the article “The Three Biggest Myths About Tax Cuts and the Budget Deficit,” (Heritage Foundation, June 21, 2010), and the next few days I will be sharing portions of his article.

Before coming to Heritage in 2001, Riedl worked for then-Gov. Tommy Thompson, former Rep. Mark Green (R-WI)., and the Speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly. Riedl holds a bachelor’s degree in economics and political science from the University of Wisconsin, and a master’s degree in public affairs from Princeton University.

The surging budget deficit will likely dominate the national economic debate for years to come. Even after the recession ends, persistent trillion-dollar deficits are projected to double the national debt by the end of the decade. In the absence of reform, the financial markets will eventually respond by withdrawing capital, pushing up interest rates, and demanding immediate budget reforms—much like Greece is currently experiencing.

Putting the federal budget on a sustainable path will require drastic reforms. Balancing the budget by 2020 would require either eliminating one-third of all spending, raising taxes by 50 percent, or a combination of the two. This enormous budget constraint will set the framework for all budgeting decisions—from taxes to health care, from education to Social Security.

Finding a solution to growing deficits requires first correctly diagnosing their cause. Both recent and future budget deficits have been blamed largely on the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, and to a lesser extent on the war on terrorism, but the data contradict these myths. In reality, spending is almost exclusively the problem:

  • The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were responsible for just 14 percent of the swing from the projected cumulative $5.6 trillion surplus for 2002–2011 to an actual $6.1 trillion deficit. The vast majority of the shift was due to higher spending and slower-than-projected economic growth.
  • President Barack Obama’s assertion that most future deficits will result from the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Medicare drug entitlement is based on faulty methodology, but is still wrong even using that methodology.
  • Above-average spending, not below-average revenues, accounts for 92 percent of rising budget deficits by 2014 and 100 percent by 2017.
  • Nearly all rising spending will occur in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and net interest payments.

Deficit reduction efforts should focus on the source of the problem: rising entitlement spending. Any attempt to split the difference between broad-based tax hikes and spending cuts should be rejected outright as a false solution.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Taxes | Comments (1)

Will Senator Pryor be re-elected or not? (Part 3)

March 9, 2011 – 8:00 am

Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the CATO institute, explains that the rate of return on social security will be much lower for todays youth.

Steve Brawner wrote in his article “Tiptoeing toward the third rail,” (Arkansas News Bureau, Jan 9,):

Social Security has long been considered the “third rail” for American politicians, meaning it’s like the electrified third rail that powers a train and lies alongside the tracks: touch it, and you die.

Tuesday, Sen. Mark Pryor tiptoed toward it.

Pryor was speaking to the Little Rock Rotary Club when, according to a report by Arkansas News Bureau writer John Lyon, he said this: “We have to take a hard look at entitlement programs, including the sacred cows of Medicare and Social Security, and admit that we cannot bring our spending into balance without changes in these programs.”

He went on to say, “The (deficit) problem is real. The solution will be painful. There is no easy way out. Everything must be on the table.”

Thinking people in Washington, and I like to think that’s most of them, know that what Pryor said is true, but they also are afraid that telling that truth is the equivalent of stepping on that third rail. That’s because Medicare and Social Security are popular programs that directly benefit seniors, the age cohort that most often votes. And of course, most of the rest of us expect to be seniors someday.

But you can’t balance the budget without doing something about Social Security and Medicare because those programs are becoming so big and are growing so fast. Along with Medicaid, they already take up more than 40 percent of the federal budget. That percentage will grow much, much higher as the baby boomers age. According to the recently released report of the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, by 2025 — that’s 15 years from now — projected government revenues will be sufficient only for Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid and interest payments on the national debt.

That means if we want to have a military, or a border patrol, or interstate highways, we’ll have to pay much higher taxes and continue borrowing, probably extensively from China…

Pryor knows he is fortunate not to have been on the ballot this year. Were that so, he might very well have lost despite his pragmatic record, general likability, and last name. And he knows that what he said to the Little Rock Rotary Club will be used against him when he runs for re-election in 2014.

I have already pointed out reasons that Pryor’s re-election bid may be in trouble:

1. He has been hypocritical about the appointment of Federal Judges.

2. Southern states have almost completely moved away from Democrats. (Jason Tolbert actually made this observation concerning a poll in Arkansas showing that voters for the first time in history were “inclined to vote for the Republican versus the Democrat in a race when considering only party identification.”)

3. Pryor’s statement that it must take 10 to 20 years to balance the budget is not the reality we must face. We can do it in 5 years just by freezing our current level of spending.

4. Pryor has not listened to the people of Arkansas and the polls that indicate that they opposed Obamacare, and he teamed up with the liberal Democrats to force it through the Senate even after Scott Brown was elected.

Now Brawner praises Pryor for saying that Social Security is on the table. I am encouraged by that too. However, we must move to privatize Social Security or it will fail. There is no way around this economic reality. Thirty countries have moved in this direction and the results have been outstanding. Chile did this in 1980 and now they are reaping the benefits.

Will Mark Pryor get re-elected? I don’t think he will unless he thinks outside his Democratic box on issues like Social Security Reform. Brawner is right to bring up the issue of the baby boomers. The current system we have will only get worse as the baby boomers born in 1946 to 1964 continnue to apply for Social Security benefits.

It is ironic that Max Brantley and John Brummett think the reddening of Pryor is a bad thing (“The reddening of Mark Pryor,” Arkansas Times Blog, Nov 30, 2010), but I think it will be the only way he will save his job in a state like Arkansas.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Social Security | Comments (0)

Candidate #2, Former Arkansas Gov Mike Huckabee: Republican Presidential Hopefuls (pt 2)

March 8, 2011 – 4:05 pm

Jason Tolbert in his article “A Thousand Pardons,” Arkansas News Bureau, Feb 20) states:

In contrast to his predecessor, Gov. Mike Huckabee, who issued over 1,000 pardons and commutations, Beebe has only commuted one sentence.

“I am pretty liberal on pardons after people have finished their sentence and if it is a nonviolent crime, particularly kids that have been involved in drugs or something like that,” explained Beebe on his monthly call-in radio program a little over a year ago. “Commutations where you shorten somebody’s sentence and let them out early is something I have been very reluctant to do and I have done it once in three years.”

Perhaps part of this reluctance is based on the damage — both political and otherwise — that Beebe has observed from some of the high-profile prison releases occurring under Huckabee. Most notably are Wayne Dumond, who raped and murdered a Missouri woman after being paroled under Huckabee’s watch, and Maurice Clemmons, who went on to murder four police officers in Washington years after his sentence was commuted by Huckabee.

This is Huckabee’s biggest challenge to overcome. Can he overcome it? I think he can. If he doesn’t then we will be stuck with Mitt Romney who basically imposed Obamacare on his state when he was governor. Can Romney be forgived for that? I think he can since he has since changed his position.

Did we forgive George Bush in 1988 for being pro-choice originally? We sure did. In fact, my former pastor, Adrian Rogers, had a chance to visit with Bush several times. He told him that the Religious Right did not have enough votes to get him elected on their own, but if he ever went against the pro-life view then they could definately derail his election bid.  

I think that Huckabee would be willing to change his view on this prison issue, and if he does then I think he will be electable.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Adrian Rogers | Comments (0)

Candidate #1,MN Gov Tim Pawlenty: Republican Presidential Hopefuls (Part A)

February 17, 2011 – 8:37 am

HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com

An ultratough new version of Tim Pawlenty showed up at CPAC to demonstrate that he’s got what it takes to save America.

Jason Tolbert reported today:

Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty was briefly in town this morning to meet with a select group of Arkansas Republicans.  He visited with privately with Lt. Gov. Mark Darr and Secretary of State Mark Martin along with Republican Party Chairman Doyle Webb before meeting with a larger group at the Republican Party offices in Little Rock.

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is pictured below with Lt Gov. Mark Darr:

https://i0.wp.com/tolbertreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/PawDarr.jpg

I have always heard that the Republicans choose the guy whose turn it is while the Democrats are attracted to the unknown guys like Jimmy Carter. If that holds true then Pawlenty doesn’t have a chance.

Jeffery Bruner wrote a piece “Tim Pawlenty tests presidential appeal,” (Dec 24, 2010) and he made some good points:

After spending a year traveling the country to campaign for conservative candidates and speak at Republican gatherings — in effect, testing the presidential waters — Tim Pawlenty is about to embark on a new tour as an author.

The outgoing Minnesota governor’s book tour will also be a test of his appeal as a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2012. So far, his star seems as dim as it was when he announced that he would not seek re-election as governor, igniting speculation that he would seek the GOP presidential nomination.

Still, some political experts say Pawlenty is making all the right moves, regardless of whether they are paying off immediately, and that could brighten his chances of breaking into the top tier of potential candidates.

“He’s taking the right steps he needs to take to run a campaign,” said Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. “But when the question is, ‘Why Pawlenty? What’s the base of support that he has that no one else has?’ It’s hard to answer that right now.”

Despite all that he’s done, Pawlenty has a lot more work to do to become competitive, said Allan Lichtman, a presidential scholar at American University in Washington.

“He’s got a lot of candidates to leapfrog over,” Lichtman said, naming 2012 potentials Sarah Palin, the former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee; former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney; former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee; and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

In the past three to four decades of Republican presidential primary history, no virtual unknown has emerged to capture the GOP nomination, Lichtman said. That is a phenomenon more familiar to Democrats. Capturing a party’s nomination with little national name recognition would require riding a hot issue or building a superior field operation, Lichtman said.

“Democrats have had unknowns come out from nowhere … but Republicans have no history of it,” Lichtman said. “The best model is George McGovern. He did it with both a major issue, the (Vietnam) war, and with grassroots organizing.”

In 1972, McGovern of South Dakota won the Democratic Party nomination on an anti-war platform over establishment favorite Ed Muskie of Maine.

The likelihood of Pawlenty being able to pull off a similar coup is virtually nil, Lichtman said.

“Something strange would have to happen for him to get the nomination,” he said.

But there’s nothing odd about the tour Pawlenty will begin after his book, “Courage To Stand,” in which he writes about growing up in the meatpacking town of South St. Paul, hits the shelves on Jan. 11. He follows Palin and Huckabee as potential 2012 candidates promoting a new book. Gingrich also has a book out.

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)