For fiscal sanity, draw a line at the US Senate

For two years I have been warning people about the major legislative avalanche we can expect following the elections of 2010.  Pollsters, pundits, and candidates themselves are well aware that the Democrat majority will be brought to an end in the US House and replaced with a Republican majority.  There may not be quite the change in the Senate, but Democrat leaders in both the Congress and the White House know that the party will soon be over.

Imagine November 2010 when Members of Congress face mid term elections. From what I can tell, it will make 1994 look like a cake walk for Democrats. That is saying quite a bit, considering the Democrats held a 56 percent majority in the Senate at that time and was changed to a 55 percent Republican majority. In the US House it went from 258 Democrats to 204 and 176 Republicans to 231. It was the first time in decades that the Republicans held both Houses of Congress. It was a slaughter for the Democrats and many considered it a referendum on Bill Clinton's first two years and a reaction to corruption among Democrats in the US Congress (of particular concern was the large number in that party that wrote bad checks at the House bank that were covered by taxpayer dollars).  Such scandals are laughable compared to the type of things Congress is involved in today, with its massive deficit spending and members of the party leadership facing serious ethic charges.

In 2010 we have millions of Americans angry over bailouts to major businesses and an ambitions President with a political agenda that has under gone very little vetting, including his major health care bill. We have seen arrogance and elitism from Obama like we have witnessed from no other president and he has, ironically, gone around the world apologizing for the "arrogance" of the American people. He has given us our first double digit unemployment in over a quarter of a century (in real numbers) and spent more in the first hundred days of his administration than Ronald Reagan did in two terms. The President, and those who support him, are very vulnerable.

With a major change in the Congress, Democrats are going to have, what they consider, "unfinished business."  Short of a miracle, it appears Barack Obama will be a one term president (his polling numbers are now comparable to Jimmy Carter in 1980), so if they are going to get things "done" they will have to do it with a defeated Congress.  I think they will be glad to give away parting presents in the form of socialistic programs to those voters that gave them pink slips.

With that, those who are concerned about the economic future of the country and our freedoms in general, need to draw a line at the feet of the ten members of the GOP in the US Senate that are facing elections themselves in 2012 and remind them that their electoral success depends on the fight they provide in the form of filibusters to hold up a Congress that could be out of control  Those members are Jon Kyle of Arizona, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, John Ensign of Nevada, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, and John Borrasso of Wyoming.  The GOP could also have a couple more through special elections.  All of these people need to be told to filibuster at every opportunity they get or suffer consequences in the 2012 elections.  It would only require a couple being firm about this to bring the legislative process to a halt. 

Some will be less than helpful, Kay Bailey Hutchison seems to be thinking about walking away from public life, Olympia Snowe could easily find herself defeated in a GOP primary, Scott Brown (being from Massachusetts) can always be expected to march to a different drum.  But for some, this could resonate and even position them to be national heroes in the eyes of many.  But they need to be reminded they are next and told to fight the battle against a very dangerous lame duck Congress.