What the Midterm Election Results Mean

Dr. Gerard Emershaw

The GOP took control of the Senate in the 2014 midterm elections and increased their control of the House of Representatives. While it is essentially the rule that the party in the White House will lose Congressional seats in midterm elections, these results were particularly difficult on President Obama and the Democrats. Unified government has been rare in recent decades. Presidents Clinton and Obama each enjoyed Democratic control of Congress for only two years during their administrations while President George W. Bush enjoyed Republican dominance in Congress for more than half of his two terms in the White House. President Obama will finish his second term as a lame duck.

While even a crystal ball would be inadequate to predict what Congress or the White House may attempt to do in the next two years, the following is a list of likely possibilities.

1. The Budget

The continuing resolution, the funding bill which keeps the federal government from shutting down, expires on December 11. Incoming Republican Senate Majority leader vows that although the GOP plans to use the budget to force President Obama to change policies, there will not be a government shutdown. It is likely that another continuing resolution will be passed by the outgoing Congress before the end of the year. The budget battle in 2015 may prove to be very interesting, however. There is likely to be a bitter split within the Republican Party in Congress between Tea Party legislators such as Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and the more moderate Rockefeller RINO types.  House Republicans are likely to be more conservative, but their Republican colleagues in the Senate are likely to be wary of pushing a budget that may be seen as too extreme. In 2016, 24 of the 34 Senators up for re-election will be Republicans, and several of these will be from traditionally blue states. This strongly suggests that to avoid a shutdown and to avoid the appearance of extremism that could harm moderate Republican re-election bids in 2016, the GOP will steer a cautious course and attempt to pass a budget that is bipartisan.

2. Keystone XL Pipeline

After the budget, the top GOP priority with their new majority is to pass a bill for the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline, a 1,660-mile pipeline from Alberta, Canada, to Texas that has been under consideration for six years. The State Department has been reviewing the pipeline proposal, and a pending lawsuit involving the pipeline’s route through Nebraska has left this review in limbo. While it appears that the Senate has a filibuster proof majority in favor of the pipeline, it is unclear whether there are enough votes (67) to override a veto. President Obama is likely to veto any Keystone XL Pipeline bill that may pass before the State Department completes its review. However, if the issues concerning Nebraska and any other similar issues can be resolved, there is a good chance that a compromise can be hammered out between the GOP and the Democrats. With the economy likely to remain a major issue in 2016, President Obama may be willing to desert his environmentalist activist supporters in order to help bring about what is a widely popular piece of legislation.

3. Immigration

President Obama continues to claim that he will seek to do something major on immigration before the end of the year, likely some form of amnesty for illegal aliens. Senator Ted Cruz and five other Republican Senators have warned that they will do everything possible to prevent the President from doing an end run around Congress on the immigration issue. Dealing with immigration is a power directly given to Congress in the Constitution. Any attempts on the part of President Obama to grant amnesty through executive action would be blatantly unconstitutional. With the problematic Obamacare as his only true domestic achievement, the lame duck President may very well risk the fallout that will result and bring about amnesty through Executive Order.  Americans are divided on the issue of amnesty for illegal immigrants. In a recent Huffington Post/YouGov poll conducted just prior to the midterm elections, 46% opposed a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants while 40% were in favor. President Obama’s handling of the immigration issue was among the lowest in terms of approval by the American public, resulting in any action on it being delayed until after the election. President Obama has shown little respect for the Constitution and has defied the limitations that it imposes again and again. However, there may be room for a compromise that will give President Obama the amnesty that he seeks while granting the GOP the stricter border control that it desires. Mitt Romney has recently suggested that the GOP should pass immigration reform that includes some form of amnesty. While there is evidence that the GOP can succeed in the near future and win elections even without passing amnesty, mainstream Republicans may do it in an attempt to broaden its appeal among Latino voters with the 2016 election in mind. President Reagan, who was more conservative than the average mainstream Republican Senator today, compromised on amnesty in 1986, so it is not implausible that the GOP will do something similar before the 2016 elections.

4. War

President Obama’s foreign policy has been a disaster. He has acted unconstitutionally by waging war in Libya against the Qaddafi regime and in Iraq and Syria against the Islamic State. He has indirectly aided the Islamic State and other Jihadists in Syria and Iraq. He continues his unconstitutional drone campaign in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. All of this continues to threaten the United States with future blowback. In addition, President Obama continues to maintain a posture with Russia that is further threatening to reignite the Cold War.

Most Republicans in the Congress are not noninterventionists like former Congressman Ron Paul or foreign policy realists like Senator Rand Paul. Therefore, it is increasingly likely that the GOP-controlled Congress will sanction President Obama’s unconstitutional warmongering, blessing it with the illusion of constitutionality. Congress may even encourage President Obama to widen the war against the Islamic State. Given that the GOP has favored invasion, regime change, and nation building over the Democrat strategy of more selective bombing and droning, the likelihood is that President Obama will continue or even escalate his warmongering approach to foreign policy during the next two years.

5. Audit the Fed

Former Congressman Ron Paul fought in vain for years to pass legislation to audit the Federal Reserve. A version of Paul’s bill was passed in the House, but Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid continually prevented a similar measure from being voted upon in the Senate. Senator Ted Cruz has vowed that a GOP takeover in the Senate would mean that the auditing the Federal Reserve would become a top Republican priority. This raises many questions which will be answered over the next two years. Will the GOP have the courage to pass Audit the Fed in the Senate? Would President Obama veto such a bill? Could supporters find enough votes to override a veto? Would an audit of the Federal Reserve truly have teeth? What would an honest and thorough audit of the Federal Reserve find? How would the American people react?

6. Obamacare

Senator Mitch McConnell, the soon to be Republican Senate Majority Leader, has already openly stated that a full repeal of Obamacare is not on his mind. While, of course, President Obama would veto any such legislation, the fact that the GOP is unwilling to even use that option to make a statement speaks volumes. McConnell claims instead that the GOP will use the appropriations process in order to bring about a “partial” repeal of Obamacare.

What does this mean? In short, it means that Obamacare is here to stay. The GOP will at most attempt to tweak it a little bit around the edges, perhaps saving pennies on the dollar. However, as almost always, big government never gets any smaller. Despite having had majorities in the past and having had full control of the federal government at times in the recent past, the GOP has never repealed any Collectivist Nanny State Progressive machinery. The New Deal is alive and well as is the Great Society’s “War on Poverty” and the Department of Education.  In addition, the GOP has made government even larger when it could, adding Nixon’s “War on Drugs” and Bush’s Department of Homeland Security. Not only will Obamacare still be around come 2016, it is likely that similar to the unconstitutional programs of the New Deal, Obamacare will still be around 75 years in the future.

(For a much more detailed discussion of government and political issues, read my new book The Real Culture War: Individualism vs. Collectivism & How Bill O’Reilly Got It All Wrong. Available now on Amazon in both print and Kindle.)

Hobby Lobby and the Perpetuation of Obamacare

by Dr. Gerard Emershaw

In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court ruled that the contraceptive mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) violates the First Amendment religious rights of closely held for-profit corporations by violating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The RFRA states: “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” By a 5–4 margin along traditional ideological lines, the Court struck down the contraceptive mandate of the PPACA in the case of closely held for-profit corporations which have religious objections. The owners of Hobby Lobby claimed that being required to cover certain forms of contraceptives such as Plan B and IUDs violated their religious rights because they consider these particular contraceptives to be akin to abortion.

Justice Alito stressed that the ruling was very narrow and only applied to closely held for-profit corporations objecting to a law on religious grounds. He claimed that few situations would arise which would be relevant under the holding. While the First Amendment religious freedom aspect is the one which most commentators have focused upon, there is a far more important aspect that has been overlooked. It does bear noting, however, that granting a corporation—even a closely held one—religious rights is dubious. A corporation is not identical with its shareholders. If business owners wish to have their company as their alter ego, then they are perfectly free to establish their business as a sole proprietorship or a partnership. By forming a corporation and gaining the benefit of limited liability, shareholders in a closely held corporation give up the right to use their business as their alter ego. A corporation is a fictional person which has a fiduciary duty to produce profits for its shareholders. It is simply not the kind of entity which has religious values. While the personhood that is granted to corporations is a legal fiction aimed at defending the Constitutional rights of shareholders, granting freedom of religion to a corporation seems to be taking things at least one step too far.

The more important feature about the case is what it demonstrates about the future of Obamacare. Hobby Lobby is not going to derail Obamacare. Employees of corporations such as Hobby Lobby will either do without one benefit of the PPACA or the Obama administration will find some other way to accomplish the same end as the contraceptive mandate—most likely allowing such corporations to pass the buck and force taxpayers as a whole to somehow foot the bill. Justice Alito—a supposedly conservative Justice—suggested as much in his opinion. The manner in which socially conservative Republicans have celebrated this holding foreshadows an ugly truth. Obamacare is here to stay. Any talk among Republicans about getting rid of the PPACA appears to be nothing but lip service. Given that neoconservatives do not care about deficits or about domestic policy in general and given that RINOs were in favor of corporatist health care back when it was viewed as a more free market alternative to a socialistic single payer system, this should come as no surprise. Republicans have a nasty habit of eventually acquiescing to new progressive Nanny State programs. While the GOP once opposed the programs of the New Deal and the Great Society, it has long since resigned itself to making minor tweaks to these socialistic programs. These so-called conservatives are content to save taxpayers pennies on the dollar by making welfare, unemployment insurance, Medicare, etc. a little more efficient. Even Ronald Reagan for all his huffing and puffing about eliminating the Department of Education ultimately did nothing about it. It is alive and well. Bigger and better than ever. Well, bigger at any rate.

Obamacare is patently unconstitutional. However, it appears to be here to stay. The GOP is likely to use it as a scapegoat when it needs to toss red meat to its base, but like the New Deal, the Great Society, and the Department of Education, the PPACA is going nowhere. In addition to using it as a symbol of the progressive bogeyman, the GOP will now apparently use Obamacare to fascistically pick winners and losers in a crony capitalist fashion. This First Amendment loophole created in Hobby Lobby is likely the first of many. Exemptions to particular mandates in Obamacare will be used by both Democrats and Republicans as a way of granting favors to partisan supporters.

Justice Roberts should take no solace in the fact that he defended the Constitution in the Hobby Lobby case. Two years prior he ignored the Constitution so egregiously that he destroyed his reputation beyond redemption.

Is RINO Ryan Really Racist?

by Gerard Emershaw

Congressman Paul Ryan is a RINO. There is no doubt about that. His voting record screams “RINO” at the top of its lungs:

YES on TARP
YES on Economic Stimulus Act of 2008
YES on $15 billion bailout for GM and Chrysler.
YES on $192 billion additional anti-recession stimulus spending.
YES on prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients
YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks
YES on Head Start Act
YES on No Child Left Behind Act
YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent
YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant
YES on emergency $78 billion for war in Iraq & Afghanistan
YES on Budget Control Act of 2011 to raise debt ceiling
 

The only thing that supposedly gave Ryan any conservative cred was his budget proposal. Remember, the one that progressives labeled “social Darwinism?” Remember, the one that did not actually cut any spending?

Paul Ryan is not truly a conservative. There is no crime in that. Neither are the vast majority of Republicans these days. But is the Wisconsin Congressman also a racist? In a recent radio interview with Bill Bennett, Ryan made the following statement:

We have got this tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work, and so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with.

Ryan is correct that there is a joblessness problem among blacks in the inner city. Black unemployment in general is consistently twice that of whites. But the question is why so many black men in the inner city are unemployed. Is it really that they are lazy? Is it that they do not understand “the value and the culture of work?” Or is it more complex than that?

Paul Ryan is likely not a racist. The race card is played far too often in modern American politics, and it accomplishes nothing. However, Ryan’s statement is racist in that it inappropriately blames the victim. This has become the hallmark of Republican racism. The Democrats tend to espouse positions that are equally racist. Instead of blaming the victim, Democrats praise the victimizer—the government with its welfare programs which only foster dependence on the state. Democrats believe that poor minorities are not intelligent or hard working enough to make it on their own without the Nanny State. The Republicans believe—despite bashing the Obama economy when it is convenient—that blacks and other poor people in America simply do not wish to work hard enough to become middle class.

Individuals in the black community in the inner city certainly deserve some blame for the appalling economic situation there. However, they are victims. The federal government has systematically destroyed the economy. It has allowed the Federal Reserve has destroyed the value of the dollar. It has allowed corporatist draconian business regulations to force small businesses to close their doors. It has allowed illegal immigration to become an economic problem. All of these economic scourges combine to create the dismal employment situation. This problem affects those in poorer regions the worst. Paul Ryan and his fellow RINOs should work on fixing the economy and then after they have done that, then they can cast judgment upon others adversely affected.