Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip, explained the vote against the House “Stimulus” Bill:
“Democrats turned the bill into a pork-fest. There was almost nothing in the bill that pro-growth Republicans liked. . . . There was five times more money in the bill for resodding the Capital Mall than for job-creating tax cuts.”
Mike Pence of Indiana declared:
“This was our first step back toward a unified opposition to big government spending plans.”
More than one Republican said that, despite great respect for President Bush, they found it liberating no longer to have to vote on his continual demands for government expansionism.
“Yes, we know that voters are still angry at us because of the growth of government under Republican rule in the last several years,” Mr. Pence admitted.
“But this vote sent a message that we will fight against the Pelosi Democrats when they conflict with our core principles.”
It’s refreshing to know that Republican leadership in the House has rediscovered some Conservative values. We can count on one hand real Conservatives on K Street but are pleased they delivered a unanimous vote against the Pelosi “pork bill” disguised as “stimulus.”
It’s now up to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to demonstrate the same leadership an deliver at least a near-unanimous vote against the plan that would validate what House Republicans did this past week. Indeed!
In my mail box from The Heritage Foundation:
The truth is that the vast majority Obama’s Trillion Dollar Debt Plan has nothing to do with stimulating the economy and everything to do with permanently redistributing spending and power away from the private sector and toward government. That is why the plan is costlier than the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.
That is why it is larger than the entire GDP of India.
That is why the plan will send our debt-to-GDP levels to unprecedented heights.
Remember, only 15% of the spending in this debt plan goes to infrastructure. So where does the rest of the money go? Obama’s Trillion Dollar Debt Plan doubles the size of the entire Education Department and according to the New York Times, expands government health care spending in a way that fundamentally “rewrit[es] the social contract with the poor in ways [the left] have long yearned to do.”