Elections have Economic Consequences



To all my fellow conservatives who slept through the last election in order to "teach the GOP a lesson"....yeah thanks guys. We really appreciate that one.

Now the socialist economic chickens have come home to roost after hiding in the dark corners of Democratic Party congressional offices with the dust bunnies for the last 12 years.

I know, I know. Even with a GOP majority we got some pretty hair-brained economic laws, especially as of late. Just look at the abomination known as Sarbanes-Oxley, one of the worst pieces of economic regulations with a hyphenated name since Smoot-Hawley. Sarbox is so bad, there are only two people left who think it was a good idea. Sarbanes and Boxley. Ooops...better make that just one.

But anyway, just this week we see the real post-"100 hours" Democratic agenda coming forward. The election may have turned on a war going on in 2006, but the new old Congressional committee chairmen are going to focus on 1976. You know....the good old days!

We see Charlie Rangel introduce a clever scheme to raise taxes by not raising taxes! Alacazam! Actually he wouldn't raise tax rates. Instead, he would lower the income threshold required to pay one of the upper tax rates. This is somewhat ironic, especially since the Dems top tax mantra is "The Rich don't pay their fair share!" Well this policy wouldn't affect the Rich* at all. But it would force more Middle-Class** to move up into the higher tax brackets and thus become Rich. Good thinkin' Charlie... I am sure everyone in the 28% tax bracket is going to love this one.

Next up is newly coronated chairman of some important committee, Barney Frank, flamboyant Congressman from my ex-homestate of Massachusetts. Barney "...introduced the “The Protection Against Executive Compensation Abuse Act” to address the problem of runaway executive compensation....". Yee-haw! The Dems still have a woody for Enron justice, and I am sure have plenty of bills in the hopper like this one that will make people feel good, but do absolutely nothing . To begin with, all that this bill would do is require corporations to allow shareholders to have non-binding vote on the company's executive compensation. Like I said, at least the shareholders might feel warm and happy with their new-found "full-disclosure", but the company would have to do nothing but state with a serious tone "We are going to take this under advisement in our deliberations..." Another Democratic win for self-esteem!

But the bigger issue is why is Congress even sticking their nose in this issue. OK, stupid question. It will play well with the Unions and all of Lou Dobbs' faithful viewers. But in reality Congress has no say in what a company pays its execs, nor should it. And if shareholder are upset about that subject they can take matters into their own hands. They don't need Congressional butt-inskis to do it for them. Shareholders could demand such 'say on pay' provisions from their companies, as many already have. Or in the ultimate vote, shareholders could vote with their feet and sell their shares. Don't like the way the company does its business in the boardroom? Get the heck out and buy something else.

Democrats, please stay away from the business of business. We are sick of the entirely predictable consequences that come from your "good intentions"

* Copyright - Democratic National Committee
** Copyright - Lou Dobbs

Posted: Thu - March 8, 2007 at 08:08 PM          

©