WHY WE NEED TO LET STATES GO BROKE

WHY WE NEED TO LET STATES GO BROKE





Federal Band-Aids won't cover the fiscal problems of such states as New York, California, Michigan and Connecticut forever. State bankruptcy and fundamental restructuring of state and local finance -- and labor relations -- is at hand.



Take Connecticut. In the current fiscal year, $2 billion in federal subsidies have helped tide it over the recession -- a hefty share of its $15 billion budget. But these infusions are one-shot grants, renewed only if Congress acts affirmatively to do so. Other states depend on similar manifestations of federal largess.



In Washington, the House is set to pass a $26 billion aid package this week -- fresh federal aid amounting to about 2 percent of state and local spending. But if the Republicans win control of Congress this fall, it is hard to see any legislative willingness to renew these subsidies.



Instead, GOP lawmakers will point to the examples of New Jersey, Virginia and Indiana -- where conservative governors have slashed spending to avoid tax hikes. In Virginia, Gov. Bob McDonnell has reduced spending to pre-2006 levels.



If Congress fails to renew its subsidies, the more profligate states will face cash shortfalls in the current fiscal year. They'll threaten school closures, prison releases and all manner of mayhem if their subsidies aren't renewed. But the Republicans in Washington are likely to refuse -- asking why the responsible states should bail out the spendthrifts in Albany, Sacramento, Lansing and Hartford.



At that point, the bond markets will start eyeing state (and local) balance sheets more critically -- demanding higher rates or even refusing to lend. California won't be the only one trying to get by on IOUs.



But beyond this tale of woe lies a golden opportunity to reform state governments and redress the imbalance of power between elected officials and public-employee unions.



Absent endless federal subsidies, states will simply no longer be able to afford to give the unions everything that they want. And governors -- many of them newly elected Republicans -- will realize that they can't even afford to honor agreements their big-spending predecessors OK'd.



The GOP Congress should then amend the federal bankruptcy law to provide for a way -- now absent -- for states to declare bankruptcy. (Municipalities can do so under current law, but states have no such relief.)



Here's the key: The reforms must require that states abrogate their public-employee union agreements in the bankruptcy process, just as private corporations like Delta and Chrysler have done. The wage hikes, the work rules, the pension plans all go out the window.



Few states will have the starch to cut benefits for those now receiving them. But most will cut pensions for current workers and all will slice them for future employees. Even the threat will be a powerful bargaining tool.



And beyond the fiscal adjustments, the power of the municipal- and public-employee unions will be broken.



Voters throughout America will loudly applaud if Congress tells the profligate states, "Work it out on your own. Don't look to us for a bailout."



President Obama could veto the bankruptcy reforms -- but a Republican Congress need do nothing to assist states in their plight until he relents. All of the political and financial leverage will be on Congress' side.



The result could be the greatest revolution in state and local governance since public-employee unions came on the scene. The public and the voters would get their local governments back, and the grip of public unions will be weakened. It would be the state and local equivalent of President Ronald Reagan's tough stand against the air-traffic controllers' strike.



Politically, the unions that fund and fuel the Democratic Party would be emasculated, dramatically shifting the national balance of power.



Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's prediction about socialism will have come true for America's states: "Sooner or later, they run out of other peoples' money."



by DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published in the New York Post on August 10, 2010

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!

DEFEATING OBAMACARE

DEFEATING OBAMACARE

Dear Friend,

Please do not fall for the liberal propaganda that health care
"reform" is inevitable and will certainly pass! It can be defeated!

The key is to trigger the same backlash among under 30 voters that has already
materialized among the elderly.

We have produced a new 30 second ad that is aimed at the younger voters and need
funds to run it in all the swing states. We will then poll in each of these
states to show the Senators and Congress how strongly their constituents oppose
the Obama bill. We will also be all over the Internet, Facebook, Twitter, and
all forms of social Internet media pressing the message.

Our attack focuses on the fact that the uninsured will have to pay a tax of $1,000 each if they won't buy insurance and will have to pay 8-12 percent of their income to get the insurance. We also zero in on taxes on pacemakers and other medical equipment and on how the plan will force up family health insurance premiums by $1700 per family.

It is a great campaign, but we need funds to get it across.
We have raised $2.6 million so far and have used it to great
effect, moving seniors against the bill in huge numbers.
Now we need to put on a comparable campaign aimed at the young.

And we only have a few weeks before the bills will be voted
upon in each house.

Please give us funds now! As much as you can! $1,000 checks are
appreciated and, of course, anything smaller is welcome too.

Click here to watch the new ad and to make a donatation to help run it in
all swing states!

https://www.newsmaxstore.com/contribute/lav/

Your health care and mine is on the line. This is our last and best chance
to stop it from being eviscerated by Obama!

Yours,

Dick Morris

Join me, Dick Morris, on the 2010 Newsmax Cruise. Click Here.

www.newsmaxcruise.com

BEATING OBAMACARE

BEATING OBAMACARE

Dear Friend,

In this video commentary, I make the case against Obamacare and explain how to beat it.

To access the video - Go here!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjUNKqaTFfg

(If the link is not active, please copy and paste it into the "Address" field of your web browser)

Please forward this email to any friends or family who may be interested in viewing my video commentary!

Thanks for watching,

Dick

CATASTROPHE by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

Full Title: How Obama, Congress And The Special Interests Are Turning A Slump Into A Crash, Freedom Into Socialism, And A Disaster Into A CATASTROPHE...And How To Fight Back

Order a copy of CATASTROPHE - Go here!

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/?page_id=573

View Dick's videos on YouTube, Go here!

http://www.youtube.com/user/dickmorrisreports

Browse Dick's book CATASTROPHE - Go here!

http://browseinside.harpercollins.com/index.aspx?isbn13=9780061771040&WT.mc_id=AUTHWEB_CATAS_BROWSE_062609

Sign-up to follow Dick on Twitter - Go here!

http://twitter.com/dickmorristweet

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!

OBAMA, GM: YOU BREAK IT, YOU OWN IT

OBAMA, GM: YOU BREAK IT, YOU OWN IT

By DICK MORRIS



GM, now renamed Government Motors, has a new CEO:
President Barack Obama.
By replacing the head of the company and demanding a restructuring of its board in return for further TARP aid, Obama has taken upon himself the responsibility for the future of the company. As Gen. Colin Powell said when Bush was considering invading Iraq and toppling the Saddam Hussein government there: "If you break it, you own it." Now it is Obama's company.

This move will backfire big time! The auto giant is very, very unlikely to be saved by this current TARP infusion. Doubtless it will need more in the near term. But the resentment now focused on the management of the company will then turn to Obama. Having demanded a replacement of the management, it is he who will be held responsible for the company's future.

And each time GM asks for more money, Obama will face a choice: take personal responsibility for laying off 100,000 auto workers or anteing up the additional cash. By inserting himself so deeply into the management of the company, Obama makes himself central to its future. If Obama lets the company fail, having already extended credit, he will have all of Michigan on his case. If he keeps coming up with more and more tax money, he will earn the contempt of the voters.

Socialism has its price. By taking over the management of a company, you become the determinant of its fate in the public's mind.

Obama does not seem to realize that government takeover is the beginning, not the end, of the problem. He should have stuck with being president and left making cars to others.

And, as the new CEO of General Motors, what will his policy be on corporate compensation? Will the public tolerate his letting his new company pay salaries sufficient to attract the talent necessary to salvaging the firm? Or will he have to rely on a bunch of kids right out of school, willing to work for one or two hundred thousand a year, for the company's salvation?

When it comes to the hard work of cutting retiree health benefits, reducing salaries, laying off workers and closing plants, is Obama willing to resist calls for his intervention? Is he up for taking the blame for all the "heartless" measures GM will have to take to salvage its future? He has put himself squarely in a position to pay a steep political price for his assumption of power at GM.

Most troubling is the sense that Obama cannot have thought this through. He can't have planned this. President Clinton used to say at strategy meetings that we needed to think three or four moves ahead and not just "kick the can down the road." Obama is clearly not following his predecessor's advice. He realized GM needed money. He knew the public would have a fit if he gave it. So he decided that he would appease his electorate by exacting blood from the company's management and directors by using his guillotine on some of its old gray heads.

But, had he thought before he acted, he would have realized that it would have been far better to have criticized GM from a distance even as he extended more money -- rather than to, in effect, take over the company.

The president's protestations that the government does not want to own a car company are quite beside the point. It's his now, and he better figure out what to do with it.

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2009. REPRINTS WITH PERMISSION ONLY***

HOPE FOR MCCAIN: POLLS SAY HE'S CLOSING THE GAP

HOPE FOR MCCAIN: POLLS SAY HE'S CLOSING THE GAP

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN



Iraq isn't the only place where the surge seems to be working. John McCain's gains over the last five days are remaking the political landscape as Election Day approaches.

The double-digit leads Barack Obama held last week have evaporated, as all three of the top tracking polls (the most current and reliable measurements out there) show McCain hot on Obama's heels.

Zogby had Obama ahead by 12 points last week - now it's down to four. His margin in the Rasmussen poll has dropped from eight points to three in the last few days. Gallup shows only a two-point difference.

In each news cycle, Obama is on the defensive - staving off accusations of closet socialism and trying to wriggle out of his once overt advocacy of income redistribution. "Spreading the wealth around" has become the anti-Obama slogan - and might become the epitaph for his candidacy, just as "brainwashed" was for George Romney and "Where's the beef?" was for Gary Hart.

And, as we head to Halloween, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's image is returning to haunt Obama. Yes, McCain refused to use the issue in his own campaign - but independent groups like goptrust.com are using funds from tens of thousands of individual donors to run ads featuring Wright and his relationship with Obama. Just yesterday, a tape surfaced in which Obama described Rev. Wright as "the best the black church has to offer."

The double dose of Obama's support for spreading the wealth around and his affiliation with the toxic Rev. Wright are eroding his once-formidable lead.

If the stock market doesn't send us all into shock again, the election could be very close - with the undecided vote looming large. The key question is: About whom are they undecided?

At the height of the financial crisis, voters couldn't decide if McCain was really a maverick or just a Bush clone. But the spotlight has shifted: It's no longer McCain who is caught in its glare, but Obama.

As the Democrat moved convincingly ahead last week, voters began to seriously consider what kind of president he'd be. Bush and McCain seemed increasingly irrelevant as people pondered whether they really want to trust Obama with this kind of power.

By this point, the nature of the undecided vote has likely shifted from people who are torn between wanting change and worrying about Obama to people who have basically decided not to back Barack but haven't sufficiently collected their thoughts to come out for McCain.

Then there's the so-called Bradley effect - where white voters lie to pollsters and say they are backing the black candidate when they're not.

To date, it's been a myth: As The Wall Street Journal reported, Tom Bradly had lost his lead in the polls by the time California voted on his bid to become governor. But it may be real this year.

Undecided voters may be reluctant to say they're not voting for Obama. They may be concealing their real intentions by saying they're undecided. (They might even not have come to grips with their intentions themselves.)

High turnout may also be a wild card. On the surface, it seems sure to bolster Obama's chances as large numbers of poorer, less educated, younger and minority voters turn out to vote for the first time.

But the swelling turnout may have gone beyond this social outreach. And, as it does, it can help McCain. After all, white voters back McCain by double digits. If the contest inspires them all to vote, Obama will lose.

So we approach Election Day with the possibility of a rerun of 2000 plainly before us. McCain has closed to a point where the race will likely be very, very close - and we'll have to stay up very, very late on Election Night.

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!