Obama hoping for Republican win of the House?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703703704575276931429180508.html?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular

* JUNE 7, 2010

Pelosi's Loss Could Be Obama's Gain

A pivot to the center (and re-election) would be easier without the House speaker.


By FRED BARNES

In Washington these days, President Obama is rumored to be hoping Republicans capture the House of Representatives in the midterm election in November. There's no evidence for this speculation, so far as I know, but it's hardly far-fetched. If Mr. Obama wants to avert a fiscal crisis and win re-election in 2012, he needs House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to be removed from her powerful post. A GOP takeover may be the only way.

Given the deficit-and-debt mess that Mr. Obama has on his hands, a Republican House would be a godsend. A Republican Senate would help, too. A Republican majority, should it materialize, could be counted on to pass significant cuts in domestic spending next year—cuts that Mrs. Pelosi and her allies in the House Democratic hierarchy would never countenance.

...

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-IT774_barnes_D_20100606182523.jpg

...

Over the past 50 years, it should be no surprise which president has the best record for holding down discretionary spending. It was President Reagan. But who was second best? President Clinton, a Democrat. His record of frugality was better than Presidents Nixon, Ford and both Bushes. Mr. Clinton couldn't have done it if Republicans hadn't won the House and Senate in the 1994 election. They insisted on substantial cuts, he went along and then whistled his way to an easy re-election in 1996.

...

...

Mr. Obama would be in a position to make his long-awaited pivot to the center. With Republicans in charge, he'd have to be bipartisan. He'd surely have to accede to serious cuts in spending—even as he complains they are harsh and mean-spirited. Mr. Obama could play a double game, appeasing Democrats by criticizing the cuts and getting credit with everyone else by acquiescing to them.

Mr. Clinton did this brilliantly in 1996. He fought with Republicans over the budget, winning some battles, losing others, as he lurched to the center. He twice vetoed Republican welfare reform bills, then signed a similar measure. He was hailed as the president who overhauled the unpopular welfare system.

...

Originally posted by zeeblebot
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703703704575276931429180508.html?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular

* JUNE 7, 2010

Pelosi's Loss Could Be Obama's Gain

A pivot to the center (and re-election) would be easier without the House speaker.


By FRED BARNES

In Washington these days, President Obama is rumored to be hoping Republicans ...[text shortened]... Mrs. Pelosi and her allies in the House Democratic hierarchy would never countenance.

...

Barnes could be intuitively correct. Bill Clinton benefited from just such a takeover.

For the faithful, Clinton became sympathetic, having to deal with those waskally Wepublicans, and for the center he got credit for balancing the budget which those same pubbies did for him.

Originally posted by normbenign
Barnes could be intuitively correct. Bill Clinton benefited from just such a takeover.

For the faithful, Clinton became sympathetic, having to deal with those waskally Wepublicans, and for the center he got credit for balancing the budget which those same pubbies did for him.

There are two major contributing factors to the budget being balanced. The first one is the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which simultaneously raised taxes and cut spending. It passed with every single Republican voting against it.

Prior to that was landmark legislation that, among other things, led to the creation of the Internet (also called the 'Gore Bill'😉.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Performance_Computing_and_Communication_Act_of_1991

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
There are two major contributing factors to the budget being balanced. The first one is the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which simultaneously raised taxes and cut spending. It passed with every single Republican voting against it.

Prior to that was landmark legislation that, among other things, led to the creation of the Internet ( ...[text shortened]... l'😉.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Performance_Computing_and_Communication_Act_of_1991

note that the nadirs in spending correspond with the later parts of the senior Bush's presidency and the portion of Clinton's presidency that was overseen by a Republican Congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/104th_United_States_Congress

The One Hundred Fourth United States Congress was a meeting of the legislative branch of the United States federal government, composed of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. It met in Washington, DC from January 3, 1995 to January 3, 1997, during the third and fourth years of Bill Clinton's presidency. Apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives was based on the 1990 United States census. Both chambers had Republican majorities for the first time since the 1950s. Major events included passage of elements of the Contract with America and a budget impasse between Congress and the Clinton Administration that resulted in the Federal government shutdown of 1995.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

...

Fiscal Year Budget of President Party of President Federal Spending Federal Debt Gross Domestic Product Inflation Adjustor[6]
Billions[7] Adjusted[8] Increase Billions[9] Adjusted[10] Increase Billions[11] Adjusted[12] Increase

...

1990 Bush Republican $1,253 $1,590 6.1% $3,206 $4,067 8.3% $5,735 $7,277 2.8% 0.79
1991 Bush Republican $1,324 $1,610 1.3% $3,598 $4,374 7.5% $5,935 $7,215 -0.8% 0.82
1992 Bush Republican $1,382 $1,624 0.9% $4,001 $4,703 7.5% $6,240 $7,334 1.7% 0.85
1993 Bush Republican $1,410 $1,615 -0.5% $4,351 $4,987 6.0% $6,576 $7,536 2.8% 0.871994 Clinton Democratic $1,462 $1,642 1.7% $4,643 $5,216 4.6% $6,961 $7,820 3.8% 0.89
1995 Clinton Democratic $1,516 $1,662 1.2% $4,920 $5,395 3.4% $7,326 $8,033 2.7% 0.91
1996 Clinton Democratic $1,561 $1,673 0.7% $5,181 $5,554 3.0% $7,694 $8,248 2.7% 0.93
1997 Clinton Democratic $1,601 $1,684 0.7% $5,369 $5,647 1.7% $8,182 $8,606 4.3% 0.95
1998 Clinton Democratic $1,653 $1,721 2.2% $5,478 $5,704 1.0% $8,628 $8,985 4.4% 0.96
1999 Clinton Democratic $1,702 $1,746 1.5% $5,605 $5,750 0.8% $9,125 $9,361 4.2% 0.97
2000 Clinton Democratic $1,789 $1,789 2.5% $5,628 $5,628 -2.1% $9,710 $9,710 3.7% 1.00
2001 Clinton Democratic $1,863 $1,821 1.8% $5,769 $5,638 0.2% $10,058 $9,829 1.2% 1.02
2002 Bush Republican $2,011 $1,929 6.0% $6,198 $5,945 5.5% $10,377 $9,954 1.3% 1.04
2003 Bush Republican $2,160 $2,018 4.6% $6,760 $6,316 6.2% $10,809 $10,099 1.4% 1.07
2004 Bush Republican $2,293 $2,082 3.2% $7,354 $6,677 5.7% $11,500 $10,441 3.4% 1.10
2005 Bush Republican $2,472 $2,165 4.0% $7,905 $6,923 3.7% $12,238 $10,717 2.6% 1.14
2006 Bush Republican $2,655 $2,249 3.9% $8,451 $7,158 3.4% $13,016 $11,024 2.9% 1.18
2007 Bush Republican $2,730 $2,263 0.6% $8,951 $7,419 3.6% $13,668 $11,329 2.8% 1.21

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
There are two major contributing factors to the budget being balanced. The first one is the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which simultaneously raised taxes and cut spending. It passed with every single Republican voting against it.

Prior to that was landmark legislation that, among other things, led to the creation of the Internet ( ...[text shortened]... l'😉.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Performance_Computing_and_Communication_Act_of_1991

the Gore bill didn't "create the Internet" 😵. possibly you weren't born yet, or have forgotten.