A Gingrich groupie, and Gingrich is wrong:
First, the paean
to Gingrich by Rick Moran:
I’m absolutely convinced Newt Gingrich would love to be president. But every time he starts making noises like a candidate, he seems to back off as if remembering his sky high negatives and problematic personal life.
This is a shame because if ever we needed an idea man in the White House - someone who could grasp the essentials of a problem and offer a solution (some more viable than others), it is the former speaker, public intellectual, and I believe, the primary carrier of the Reagan legacy today.
Listening to Gingrich speak is a treat for the mind and his columns are equally thought provoking. His latest points up something that many in the MSM and pundit class are ignoring; that the vote in California rejecting tax increases was, at bottom, a vote against the political establishment and a victory for the grass roots:
Okay, enough of that
But what about Gingrich's column
in the Washington Post on the California initiatives that has Moran so excited? Here are some excerpts:
Five taxing and spending measures were rejected by 62.6 to 66.4 percent of the voters.
Sacramento politicians will now reject the voters' call for lower taxes and less spending and embrace the union-lobbyist-bureaucrat machine that is running California into the ground, crippling its economy and cheating residents.
Five initiatives failed (1A 1B 1C 1D 1E
) but to characterize them all as "taxing and spending measures" is dishonest.
While they were solidly rejected, the one that was rejected the most was 1E
(66.4%), which would have reduced services to the mentally ill by transferring money from a special tax to the general fund.
Close behind, and within a hair of being the second most rejected initiative was 1D
(65.8%), which would have reduced the budget for the California Children and Families Program by transferring money from a special tax to the general fund.
You can argue that Californians don't like taxes, but you cannot say that Californians are opposed to spending, because otherwise they would have voted Yes on initiatives 1D and 1E. Californians voted to keep two benefits programs intact.
This is what Gingrich doesn't tell you.
Clearly, the state has to come to terms with its conflicting wishes, but Gingrich cannot argue, based on the election results, that Californians are currently opposed to spending on programs for the poor and unfortunate.
Newt's mantel must be crowded with his trophies - wives, that is. Is the Eye of Newt still wandering? Lynne Cheney should write his bio.
In other words, both measures would strip funding away from services to the mentally ill and the Children and Families program and throw them into the roaring, out of control bonfire of the general fund.
The proposition was to "start" balancing the budget on the backs of children and the mentally ill, while the public employee unions run wild.
The electorate basically told them to stuff it up their ass and set it on fire, which was the correct response.