« | »

1994 And 2010? There Are Comparisons

Yet another attempt to reassure the Democrats there is no danger in jumping off the cliff with ‘Obama-Care,’ this a Democrat hack via the Politico:

Hillary Rodham Clinton visited Capitol Hill in 1994 in an effort to lobby support for her universal health care plan.

1994 and 2010? There’s no comparison

By: Martin Frost
October 27, 2009

There has been a lot of nonsense written and uttered during the past few months comparing the 1994 congressional elections with the upcoming 2010 midterm elections.

On the surface, a comparison might seem to make sense. After all, in 1994, newly elected Democratic President Bill Clinton was serving his first two years, and there were Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate. And we all know what happened: Republicans won control of both chambers in a historic rout.

However, that is all that these two very different political years have in common.

First and foremost among the differences was that House Democrats in 1994 were a tired, old majority that had run out of steam after being in control for 40 years…

Also, there were a number of factors at play in 1994 that are not present in 2010. Leading the list was the fact that Democrats had to defend a large number of open seats because of retirements and members running for other offices. A total of 18 such open seats were lost by the Democrats. So far, Democratic retirements have been held to a minimum…

Another difference between the two election years is that Republicans in 1994 actually stood for something. They weren’t just the “party of no.” Then-Minority Whip Newt Gingrich of Georgia and Texas Rep. Dick Armey put together their Contract With America, which gave Republican House candidates across the country a unified platform.

Also, Democrats fell victim to an easily understood scandal: the continuing controversy over bounced checks at the House bank. The current flap over New York Rep. Charles Rangel’s alleged ethical issues has nowhere near the impact of the House bank scandal.

So why do the media continue to make comparisons between 1994 and 2010? The main reason is that the party of the president almost always loses some congressional seats in the first election following a presidential victory, and the problems that Congress faces right now are monumental in scope. The only recent exceptions to this were 1934 (President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first term) and 2002 (President George W. Bush’s first term).

None of this adds up to a landslide for Republicans. The only thing that could result in a major realignment would be high unemployment in fall 2010. Democrats know that and will do everything in their power to stabilize the economic situation.

It’s way too early to come to any conclusions yet about the scope of any potential Democratic losses in 2010. Let’s just say that Republicans should not be making any long-term plans on how to run the House yet.

Martin Frost represented the Dallas-Fort Worth area in Congress from 1979 to 2005. He rose to Democratic Caucus chairman and head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. He is now an attorney with Polsinelli Shughart in Washington.

Isn’t it odd, but Mr. Frost somehow neglects to mention any of Mr. Obama’s and the Democrats’ recent actions, many of which are unpopular with a large majority of the American voters.

Such as the failed bail-outs, the failed stimulus bill, the takeover of much of the auto industry and the financial markets, and of course the upcoming ‘Cap & Trade’ bill and ‘healthcare reforms.’

Other than that, there is nothing for the Democrats to worry about.

But let’s take one of these poison pills, healthcare reform.

Excerpts from this roughly contemporaneous (and blatantly pro-Democrat) timeline from the taxpayer-funded (PBS) MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour, (which we posted back on July 23, 2009), suggests there may be quite a few similarities:

A Detailed Timeline of the Healthcare Debate portrayed in "The System"

Events leading up to Clinton’s Healthcare Address to Congress…

Early August 1994 – Senate and House leaders begin rallying their Democratic majorities behind two pending measures. The first is the crime bill, which has already passed by both houses and been agreed to in a Senate-House conference. Once it is approved, Democrats believe they can pass the respective health bills of Mitchell and Gephardt before the summer break, and then head home well positioned to defend their records before voters in the November elections.

August 3, 1994 – Clinton gives an emotional address in the White House Rose Garden, where he and the First Lady greet six hundred Reform Riders after their buses finally arrive in Washington — timed to coincide with the day Mitchell introduces his health care reform "rescue" in the Senate, and Gephardt introduces his bill in the House. Mitchell’s compromise is much less bureaucratic and government-driven than the Clinton plan. It puts off any requirement that employers provide employees health insurance until early in the next century. It makes a major concession to small businesses by exempting any employer with twenty-five or fewer employees from providing coverage. And it aims at guaranteeing insurance for 95 percent of Americans by the year 2000.

August 9, 1994 – The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) formally endorses both the Mitchell bill and the more liberal Gephardt measure…

August 11, 1994 – … [Democrat] Congressional leaders announce that health care will be delayed indefinitely. Delay and obstruction also tie up the Senate.

August 15, 1994 – [Democrat] Mitchell threatens to keep the Senate in nonstop, round-the-clock session until Republicans agree to start voting…

August 25, 1994 – Democratic leaders of both congressional chambers give up on health care and announce they are letting their members go home for their much-postponed vacation. Neither the Senate (where Democrats outnumber Republicans fifty-six to forty-four) nor the House (with a Democratic majority of 257 to 176) has come close to passing, or even voting on, any health bill.

Late August 1994 – Democrats begin preparing for the November elections by distancing themselves from their President — and from the reform he has attempted.

Early September 1994 – Top aides to Kennedy, Mitchell, and Chafee, in round-the clock sessions, prepare a final compromise bill that will be ready when Congress returns on September 19…

Congress reconvenes. Mitchell hopes to set aside four days for Senate debate on the new Mainstream bill and then schedule a straight up-or-down vote. Republicans begin mobilizing for a filibuster to keep the bill from reaching the floor. Supporters realize they don’t have enough votes to break the filibuster…

September 26, 1994 – At a news conference in the Capitol, George Mitchell pulls the plug on health care reform.

September 27, 1994 – William Kristol of the Project for the Republican Future spell out the next stage of the battle plan to change the makeup of Congress. "I think we can continue to wrap the Clinton plan around the necks of Democratic candidates." Some observers urge the White House to make some kind of public statement about special interests, all the money expended, and the fact that most Republicans were clearly committed from day one to killing reform, but no statement is forthcoming.

October 7, 1994 – Congress adjourns.

November 8, 1994 – Voters deliver a massive repudiation of President Clinton, break the forty-year hold of Democrats on Congress, restore Republicans to power at ever level of government, and set the stage for a further test over the nation’s ideological future in 1996. In two years the Democrats have gone from a controlling majority 258 seats in the House of Representatives to a minority of 204. In all the contests House, Senate, and gubernatorial seats, not a single Republican seeking reelection loses.

The Republicans won in a landslide by wrapping the Democrats’ ham-fisted attempt to nationalize healthcare around their necks.

Just imagine the voters’ fury if it actually passes and they have the time to realize just how much it will change their lives — and how much it will eventually cost them.

They could very well punish the Democrats again.

Which is exactly why our one party media is now spending so much time telling us it can’t.

So we have come to the point where the Democrats in Congress have to make a choice.

They can vote for ‘Obama-Care’ — or they can vote for their political survival.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, October 27th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

10 Responses to “1994 And 2010? There Are Comparisons”

  1. BigOil says:

    One difference leading up to 2010 is the greater intensity of opposition to Democrat party imposed fascism. What I’ve witnessed at tea party protests and town halls is a tidal wave of opposition building a full year ahead of the elections. During historically low midterm election turnout, intensity of opposition will be a key to throwing the bums out.

    A rout seems like an inevitablility – with the first shot across the bow coming next week in VA, NJ, and NY.

  2. proreason says:

    Arthur Laffer told Beck yesterday that he can undo all of the damage the Libwits could do, including the Health Nightmare, in a long weekend. He said he helped Margaret Thatcher do it in Britain. Of course, that assumes he has the legislative authority to do it. i.e., changes in the tax code and authorization to de-nationalize industries, etc..

    That was the most comforting thing I’ve heard sinc Nov 4, 2008.

  3. Right of the People says:

    Be afraid libretards, be very afraid.

    It’s hard to believe the dummies in Congress would vote for something as radicalizing as the health care swindle or crap and tax that might upset their rice bowl but you never know. If they do, I think we will see such a groundswell of anger from both sides once the public realizes what’s happened and the rout will be on. My only fear is that the folks who get voted in to replace the morons presently serving might not get the hint that we the people will no longer be content with “business as usual” and pass some other annoying and or expensive legislation. You would hope they will be smart enough. We’ll see pig, we’ll see.

    After the Won™ and all the damage he might do, it’s going to take a lot to restore this country to where it should be. I just hope we’re up to the task.


  4. Liberals Demise says:

    Pack yo bags liberals on both sides of the aisle. Your days are numbered and we are counting down!

  5. Tater Salad says:

    What about these comparisions????

    Pretty good summary of what is known – how much more is hidden ?

    The amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and explanatory brochures that described his
    tax liabilities. True: http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2009/01/timothy_geithner_obamas_nomine.html

    The amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Dominican Republic rental property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn’t speak Spanish. True http://www.nypost.com/seven/09102008/news/regionalnews/rangels_spanish_excuse_128444.htm

    The INCREASE in the amount of petty cash each of our Congressional representatives voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an economic meltdown. That’s a $40 + million INCREASE! http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/its-recession-congress-gives-lawmakers.html See video here from Fox

    $1 33 ,900:
    The amount Fannie Mae “invested” in Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also “invested” over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama. True: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html

    The amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities. True: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123335984751235247.html?mod=googlenews_wsj Wall Street Journal

    The approximate amount of income and deductions that Tom Daschle (D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the use of a car service, $83, 33 3 in unreported income, and $14,963 in charitable contributions. True: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123335984751235247.html?mod=googlenews_wsj Wall Street Journal

    The amount of “sweetheart” mortgages Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do so. Countrywide was once the nation’s largest mortgage lender and linked to Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago in Pennsylvania , Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in mortgage assistance following “a state investigation that concluded that Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them.” True: http://rightvoices.com/2008/08/21/more-sweetheart-loan-details-on-senator-chris-dodd-d-ct-chairman-of-the-senate-committee-on-banking-housing-and-urban-affairs/

    The estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton Foundation in an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous requests by government officials to turn it down. True: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/20/nation/na-holder20

    The amount of TARP money provided to community bank One United despite the fact that it did not qualify for funds, and was “under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses.” It turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a key contributor to the Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank’s former directors. True: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123258284337504295.html Wall Street Journal

    The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV) accumulated in four years time according to The Washington Post through earmarks of “tens of millions of dollars to groups associated with his own business partners.” True: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/14/AR2006051401032.html Washington Post

    ($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarking related to his son’s lobbying efforts. The son, Craig Obey, is “a top lobbyist for the nonprofit group” that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the “Stimulus” package. True: http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/a_plan_for_stimulus_money_national_parks/C530/L37/
    and this as a list of these related stories: http://search.yahoo.com/404handler?src=news&++++fr%3D404_news%26ref%3Dhttp://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/01/obama-democrats-by-numbers.html&url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090129/ap_on_go_co/stimulus_national_parks_2

    ($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious conflict-of-interest as “a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband’s firms.” True: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/22/MN310531.DTL

    ($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called “Stimulus” package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN group under the auspices of “Community Stabilization Activities”. ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio . True: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/stimulus-economy-percent-2295331-bill-pelosi

    $1,646,000,000,000 ($1.646 trillion):
    The approximate amount of annual United States exports endangered by the “Stimulus” package, which provides a “Buy American” stricture. According to international trade experts, a “US-EU trade war looms” which could result in a worldwide economic depression reminiscent of that touched off by the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act. True: http://www.asiaing.com/2008-national-export-strategy-the-new-global-main-street.html and http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/01/022685.php Background: Smmot-Hawley Act: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot-Hawley_Tariff_Act

    It’s becoming a culture of corruption and stupidity. In addition, these folks appear to be above the law. All of the aforementioned are still in office, living like the royalty they think they are. Remember folks: This all happened in just the FIRST QUARTER!

  6. Chuckk says:

    In 1994 the Republicans were swept into office by anti-government conservatives and many others alarmed at the growth and direction of government. But once in power the Republicans governed as conservatives for maybe 30 seconds before turning into Dem-lites.

    It will be very difficult, if not impossible, for the Republicans to muster the enthusiasm of enough voters to repeat 1994.

    Everyone is familiar with the old saw “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” The Republicans have fooled conservatives more than twice. The country needs a new party that is truly conservative.

  7. canary says:

    Chuck. yep, anymore it’s the lesser of two evils. I think they all have so much dirt on each other, and scratch backs. Make deals. This is the most disappointed I’ve been with the Republicans, but most the Democrats are insane.

  8. Tater Salad says:

    You think about this.

    “As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name.

    America gave him the White House based on the same credentials…”

  9. Right of the People says:

    We need a viable third party for true conservatives with Sarah Palin as it’s head. Polls show the country is more conservative than liberal. If we had a party full of candidates that could offer a REAL difference maybe we could sweep the Democraps and the RINOs out of DC.

    • proreason says:

      Rush thinks that is a bad idea.

      He says what we need to do is what Reagan did.

      Take back the Republican party.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »