The Four Horsemen of the Dem-apocalypse

The art of leadership is saying no, not saying yes. It is very easy to say yes.

-Tony Blair

Much focus has been on the National Government since the election of 2010. Of course, the real story of that election remains the overwhelming victory of Republicans in the state legislatures. 88 chambers had elections with Democrats dominating 52-33 (2 equal and 1 non-partisan), and now Republicans dominate 53-32 (2 equal and 1 non-partisan), picking up nearly 700 seats.

The importance of these legislators lies in the fact that they represent the first crop of tea party candidates that will reform the political process from the bottom up. Yes, there are tea party candidates nationally, but the access to our state legislators makes it easier to maintain influence.

Missouri remained red, but with term-limits, many new legislators have come to office. The Senate has a veto-proof majority, and the House is near veto-proof. However, the influx of tea party influence has not been all roses and butterflies. Leadership, especially on the House side, seems more intent on horse-trading politics than accommodating the new tea party mentality.

On the other hand, 4 state senators seem to get it. Senators Jim Lembke (R-St. Louis), Brian Nieves (R-Washington), Rob Schaaf (R-St. Joseph) and Will Kraus (R-Lee’s Summit) have taken a principled stance on a number of issues, but one in particular has earned them the ire of Missouri’s establishment media and Democrat governor.

These senators have been using a filibuster to prevent Missouri from accepting federal subsidies on extension of unemployment benefits past 79 weeks. Missouri became the first state to reject this federal largess, but only because the state senate has been unable to vote on it (the state house already agreed to accept the federal largess under Speaker Steven Tilley (R-Perryville)).

Senator Nieves endearingly refers to the $80+ million as “Chinese money,” and I think many would argue he is not far from the truth. Those that do not understand what the last two years was all about need a gut check. The arguments against the filibuster include those that claim the federal government will just spend the money elsewhere. The Feds may very well do that, but that does not make a good argument for the federal government to continue spending money like a progressive benefactor of George Soros (sailors have taken enough beating over the years).

Another issue the 4 senators have taken a principled stance on pertains to around $189 million in education funds. Senator Lembke’s stance over this and other federal spending issues focuses on the national debt. What good will federal money be for state programs if federal finances implode under the mountain of debt being accumulated? If we learn to live within our means now we will not have to worry about any future federal financial crisis. And if the national government, especially the tea party caucus, gets the message, money could be spent on reducing the debt, rather than bribery money for the states.

Missouri does not need “re-distributed” wealth to fund irresponsible government policy. More states should consider this sort of principled response to federal money, and if the Feds continue with this sort of bribery, states ought to consider withholding federal tax money altogether.