NOVEMBER 2, 2010 AND HAYEK'S ROAD

During the past several months, we have been discussing the upcoming Congressional elections which will be held on November 2, 2010. At this juncture, it is safe to say that our country is in a state of upheaval - and that many, many people are angry. Many of those who supported President Obama are angry because he has not completely transformed America into a European-style democracy that is heavy on government services and "fairness" to those that fall below a certain income level. Many on the right (and many in the middle) are genuinely disturbed and afraid that we have elected a President who really believes that the agenda of the radical left would be best for the land of the free and the home of the brave. While a substantial majority of Americans still believe that a capitalistic system of government is best for the country, a recent poll concluded that an astounding 38% of our citizens believe that a "socialistic" system would be preferable.

Simply stated, the issue all Americans must decide on November 2, 2010, is whether we want to preserve the free enterprise system in America (at least for two more years) or whether we want to travel "the road to serfdom" described by F. A. Hayek in his famous book years ago in 1944. "In that year - when Eleanor Roosevelt supported the efforts of Stalin, Albert Einstein subscribed to the socialist program, and the British Labour Party was planning for a future Labour government" to replace Winston Churchill after World War II, Hayek's The Road To Serfdom "was seen as heretical for its passionate warning against the dangers of state control over the means of production".[1]

What Americans face on November 2, 2010, is a clear choice. Americans who vote for any Democrat on that date will, directly or indirectly, give a vote to the political party that is clearly traveling Hayek's Road. If the Democrats maintain the majority in Congress, the Speaker of the House and also every committee chairman that controls legislation will be Democrats that sign on to the theory that a collectivist society is best for America. Therefore, the assurances of many "Bluedog Democrats" that they will not vote for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker if they are elected really mean nothing because their Party will remain in power, and they will, at the very least, be giving aid and comfort to those that travel Hayek's Road.

The only alternative to traveling Hayek's Road on November 2, 2010, is to "throw the rascals out" and restore control of the Congress to the Republicans. To be sure, many elected Republican officials have compromised their values in the past, and their actions led to the creation of the Tea Party movement. If Republicans do regain control of the Congress in 2010, they act at their peril if they do not heed the angry voices of their constituents. Those constituents are trying to tell them that they want no part of Hayek's Road.

As we approach November 2, 2010, I remain optimistic about America. I see new young leadership slowly emerging within the Republican Party, with new ideas and new energy that will help us take our country back. These potential new leaders are articulate and have the communication skills that will be needed to warn our citizens against the dangers of collectivism in the Twenty-First Century.

---

[1] Introduction to Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom"" (1994, U. of Chicago)

CHRISTINE O'DONNELL

This past week, the fault lines within the Republican Party were laid bare as Tea Party forces, led by former Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska and Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina, stormed the barricades during the Republican Primary elections held on September 14, 2010, and nominated Christine O'Donnell as the Republican nominee for the United States Senate in Delaware, a state that has trended Democrat in recent years and where Vice-President Joe Biden had served as Senator since 1973. Ms. O'Donnell defeated Mike Castle, a well-known moderate Republican who has been a member of Congress since 1993 and was a two-term Governor. Congressman Castle was much better financed than Ms. O'Donnell and was the heavy favorite to win the Republican nomination.

The primary election contest between O'Donnell and Castle was bitterly contested with Castle and national news media pundits, including Fox News contributors Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer, raising serious questions about the truthfulness and integrity of O'Donnell, as well as her financial difficulties with the Internal Revenue Service and financial institutions. She responded by criticizing Congressman Castle for voting for President Obama's stimulus packages and proposed Democratic "Cap and Trade" legislation; and also called upon him to put on his "man pants" after engaging in "un-manly tactics" during the campaign.

After losing the primary election, Congressman Castle has now declined to support O'Donnell in the general election in November. On election night, Karl Rove pronounced that Republicans, although previously favored to win handily, will now likely lose the Delaware Senate seat and with it, the majority and committee chairmanships in the Senate to Harry Reid and the Democrats. Krauthammer recently opined on the BILL O'REILLY SHOW that O'Donnell has only one chance in ten to win in November, although adding: "I hope I am wrong." Senator Jim DeMint responded by saying that he would rather for the Republicans to nominate a losing candidate that stands for something, rather than to nominate a winning candidate that does not embrace conservative values. O'Donnell, for her part, taking note that she had been branded a "wacko", denounced her critics as "anti-American" in one of her speeches following her primary victory.

After all of this drama following the September 14, Republican Primary election, one can legitimately ask whether divided Republicans can nevertheless win the November Senatorial election in a blue state, or whether traditional conventional wisdom applies - that a divided political party traditionally loses (following the logic and advice that Ben Franklin once gave to his colleagues during the American Revolution - that "we either hang together or we will hang separately").

Although the Delaware Senate race was really not on my radar screen until a day or two before the primary election, what has happened since O'Donnell's victory is in many ways reminiscent of what happened during the Congressional race in North Mississippi (MS-01) during a special election held two years ago. In that race, after the appointment of Congressman Roger Wicker to replace Trent Lott as United States Senator, several prominent Republicans ran in a heated and ugly primary to take Wicker's seat in the House of Representatives. The race became so heated that the defeated candidate in the run-off election refused to publicly support the new Republican nominee. The result was that a Democrat was elected to Congress in MS-01 for the first time in many years. Now, chastened Mississippi Republicans are united in a spirited effort to regain Wicker's old House seat.

O'Donnell supporters correctly state that these are not ordinary times and that frustrated Americans, especially conservatives and independents, seem ready to "throw the rascals out" during this election season. If this is true, O'Donnell still has a chance to win in Delaware where her Democratic opponent, Chris Coons, is a far-left attorney and county executive who has fully supported the Obama agenda and now downplays a piece he wrote for the Amherst College newspaper - "Chris Coons: The Making of a Bearded Marxist." However, it would help O'Donnell's chances if Castle would fully embrace her candidacy and she would graciously accept his support.

Jim DeMint is correct that Republicans want new and different type leaders who are not perceived as RINOs - Republicans In Name Only. If Christine O'Donnell is elected Senator, Republicans will certainly have found a different type leader in Delaware

HALEY BARBOUR FOR PRESIDENT?

What is becoming abundantly clear is that Mississippi's Governor, Haley Barbour, will give serious consideration to becoming a Republican candidate for President in 2012. This is as it should be for several reasons. Haley's past record of achievement and service to his Party have been spectacularly successful. Over the years, he took two relatively low-profile jobs, Chairman of the Republican Nation Committee and Chairman of the Republican Governors' Association, and through strong leadership transformed them into highly effective influential positions within the Party. As Chairman of the RNC and later as Chairman of the RGA, he has significantly and single handedly contributed to the growth and success of the Republican Party across this nation.

As Chairman of the Republican National Committee in the 1990s, he worked with Newt Gingrich and other Republican Congressional leaders to implement their now-famous "Contract for America", which directly led to the first Republican takeover of the House of Representatives since World War II. Likewise, as Chairman of the Republican Governors' Association, he took a position, previously with little influence, and has made the RGA into the premier fundraiser and strategist for the Party nationally, as we approach the crucial Congressional elections on November 2.

As Governor of Mississippi, it is conceded by supporters and detractors alike that Haley has performed brilliantly and successfully, resisted tax increases in state government, and fought for a balanced budget, while effectively pushing for economic development and work force training, as well as for increased spending in key areas like education. He deservedly received national praise during the Hurricane Katrina disaster, and his crisis leadership skills as Governor were favorably contrasted with the job performance of the hapless Democratic Governor of Louisiana, who appeared ineffective and overwhelmed by events during the disaster that descended upon the people of Mississippi and Louisiana in 2005.

However, despite all of Haley's successes over the years, there is another compelling reason why he should become a Presidential candidate: that is because, unlike many of his Republican colleagues, he speaks clearly (although with a southern accent), authoritatively, and with credibility on issues of national importance during a time when most Americans are searching for answers. They want to know (1) how to solve America's economic problems; (2) how to protect the homeland; and, (3) indeed, how to protect the American way of life after the recent economic meltdown and the imposition of Obamacare and other socialistic measures thrust upon us by the President, Nancy Pelosi, and the Democrats.

My best guess is that when Americans go to the polls in the November, 2010, Congressional elections, all three of these issues will be on the minds of the voters, with an emphasis on issues (1) and (3). I also believe that when the voters go to the polls in 2012 to elect a President, these same issues will be on their minds, but with an emphasis on issue (2).

When the time comes in 2012 to determine who can best protect the homeland, I believe Americans will be looking for (as Haley puts it) the "anti-Obama" - someone, like Haley Barbour, who will put American first.

THE BEAUTY CONTEST AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

In recent weeks, various pundits in Mississippi have begun to speculate about what some have called the upcoming "beauty contest" - that is, the Mississippi election in 2011 to determine who will succeed Haley Barbour as Mississippi's next Governor. In years past many statewide candidates trying to raise money to fund their "down-ticket" races for offices such as Treasurer, Insurance Commissioner or Auditor, have lamented that donors were only interested in giving money to their favorite candidate in the "beauty contest" - which does aptly describe the fact that, indeed, the Governor's race is the "main event" in the quadrennial statewide elections.

At this juncture, it appears that both the Democrats and the Republicans will stage healthy primary elections for Governor in 2011, with credible candidates that will stir the interest of the party faithful and lead to a clear choice between traditional Democratic and Republican values. However, there has been some speculation that prominent "wild-card" candidates might enter the race as independents or representing minor political parties, which could force the election of Mississippi's next Governor to be decided by the state house of representatives if the leading candidate in the November, 2011, general election fails to receive over fifty per cent (50%) of the votes cast.

According to Article 5, Section 140 of the MISSISSIPPI CONSTITUTION OF 1890, "The person found to have received a majority of all the electoral votes, and also a majority of the popular vote, shall be declared elected." However, Article 5, Section 141 then says "If no person shall receive such majorities, then the house of representatives shall proceed to choose a governor from the two persons who shall have received the highest number of popular votes . . . by VIVA VOCE vote . . . ." Section 140 of Article 5, of the Constitution, which was amended in 1982, states that persons receiving the highest number of votes in a legislative district of the house of representatives are awarded "electoral votes" for as many votes in the house of representative as that legislative district is entitled to receive.

The 1999 race between Democratic Lieutenant Governor Ronnie Musgrove and Republican Congressman Mike Parker was the closest gubernatorial race in Mississippi history. Out of almost three quarters of a million votes cast, Musgrove won 8300 more votes than Parker in a four-way election, but fell a fraction of a percentage point short of receiving a majority, as required by Mississippi's Constitution. Since neither candidate received a majority of the popular vote, the Mississippi House of Representatives had to select the winner. They chose Musgrove - the first time in modern history the election of a Mississippi governor was decided by members of the Legislature.

It is noteworthy that Article 5, Section 143 of Mississippi's Constitution also says that . . . "[a]ll other state officers shall be elected at the same time, and in the same manner as provided for election of governor". Mississippi has eight (8) "state officers" who are elected by a statewide vote, namely: Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, Insurance Commissioner, and Commissioner of Agriculture. The upcoming November, 2011, state elections in Mississippi will be held at a time when the mood of the electorate (reflective of the national mood) is one of anger, frustration and unpredictability. Numerous third-party candidates will likely enter the fray, and they will likely get a substantial number of votes. For example, candidates from the right-of-center Libertarian Party (Ron Paul followers) have been consistently receiving at least one (1) percent of the vote in Mississippi elections where that Party has fielded candidates for some time now.

If the third party candidates in Mississippi's 2011 elections gain sufficient votes to deny the front runner a majority of the popular vote and/or the electoral vote in 2011, the legislators who are members of the state's house of representatives will decide the winner. There are 72 Democrats and 50 Republicans presently serving as members of the House. If such an election were held today by voice vote in that legislative body, the presiding officer of the meeting would be the Speaker of the House - Democrat Billy McCoy.

ARE THE DEMOCRATS HEADED FOR A THUMPING?

After the 2006, Congressional elections, President George W. Bush commented that Republicans took "a thumping" in the House races; and indeed they did, losing control of the House leadership and bringing Speaker Nancy Pelosi to power after twelve years of Republican control.

Michael Barone, the highly respected political analyst for the WASHINGTON EXAMINER, and the author of THE ALMANAC OF AMERICAN POLITICS, believes it is likely that the House Democrats will be the ones taking the thumping in the November Congressional elections this year. In fact, he states that unless the shift of opinion away from the Democrats so evident in the polls turns out to be illusory, "House Democrats are headed toward historic losses." In an article written for REAL CLEAR POLITICS, dated July 29, 2010, he tells us why.

In his article, Mr. Barone points out that in regard to the generic ballot question ("Which party's candidate will you vote for in elections to the House?") asked of voters by most pollsters, the current realclearpolitics.com average shows Republicans ahead by 45 percent to 41 percent. Ten of 15 major opinion polls conducted in July asking the generic ballot question showed Republicans to be ahead; with Democrats leading in four (twice by 1 percent), and one poll showing a tie.

He then tells us that, historically, the results of the generic ballot question by pollsters "… has tended to under-predict Republican performance in off-year elections." Thus, Mr Barone boldly predicts that Republicans "… may be on the brink of doing better than in any elections since 1946, when they won a 245 - 188 margin in the House - larger than any they've held ever since."

In 1994, Michael Barone wrote an article in U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT in which he was the first to suggest that Republicans could actually gain the 40 seats then needed to capture a majority in the House of Representatives. This year, the results of the generic ballot polling, plus astounding polling results that show numerous attractive Democratic incumbent congressmen trailing their Republican opponents all across America, lead Mr. Barone to believe that a sea change of major proportions will take place in the House of Representatives elections in November.

If such a major shift occurs, Republicans would likely win not only the hotly contested congressional races such as the race between incumbent Travis Childers and Republican challenger Alan Nunnelee in Mississippi 1, but Republicans would also likely sweep aside such long-time Bluedog Democrat stalwarts such as incumbent Gene Taylor in Mississippi 4 as well.

On this past Sunday's talk show, FOX NEWS SUNDAY, Bill Kristol predicted that Republicans will pick up as many as 60 seats in the House races in November, 2010. I believe Kristol read Michael Barone's article in REAL CLEAR POLITICS before making such a prediction.

MISSISSIPPI'S 2011 ELECTIONS

In a recent column in the Jackson, Mississippi, Clarion Ledger (July 21, 2010) ("Will Legislature reassert dominance after Barbour era?"), longtime journalist Sid Salter addressed an interesting and relevant issue that has not previously been discussed publicly this year in Mississippi, although it has without doubt been discussed privately among potential candidates and others. While many of Mississippi's political pundits are focusing on the upcoming "beauty contest" (the Mississippi Governor's race), the role of the tea parties in the upcoming Congressional elections, or whether or not Haley Barbour will pull the trigger and run for President, I believe that Sid has put his finger on the single-most important issue facing Mississippians in the Magnolia State's 2011 statewide elections. How that issue is decided will shape the philosophical direction that Mississippi will take in the next four to eight years on the great issues of the day - Medicaid and Medicare; funding for public education; eminent domain and the role of government in economic development; taxation; crime; and generally the role of government in our everyday lives.
Sid is correct when he says that "[h]istorically, the Legislature has operated as the strong dominant policy maker in state government and the governor served in a more ceremonial and opinion-making role." This was certainly true in the twentieth century when virtually every Governor that held office, along with many scholars and others, proclaimed that the power of the Governor's office should be strengthened. In fact, some of Mississippi's most distinguished scholars and leaders during those years called for a constitutional convention in Mississippi with the express goal of doing away with certain elective offices and making them subject to gubernatorial appointment. In short, the Governor and the executive branch of state government appeared to be totally over-matched by the powerful legislative branch, which held the purse strings to the coffers housing taxpayers' dollars. Year after year, regardless of who held the Governor's office, the legislative branch was dominant, and its leadership was unified.
This political reality slowly began to change, however, with the coming of the two-party system in Mississippi. As more and more Republicans were elected to the state Legislature, the opportunity for conservatives to gather together and to support common goals increased. The real legislative shift, however, has taken place in the twenty-first century. In 2001, there were 86 Democrats in the Mississippi House of Representatives, 33 Republicans and 3 Independents; while in the State Senate, there were 34 Democrats and 18 Republicans. Today, the House still has 72 who call themselves Democrats but there are also 50 Republicans, who have formally organized themselves, adopted by-laws, and elected a floor leader, a conference chairman, and other officers in a manner similar to the structure of the Republican Conference in the Congressional House of Representatives. There is a real chance that there will be enough Republicans in 2011 to elect a GOP Speaker of the House.
In the State Senate, where Republican Lieutenant Phil Bryant presides, there are currently 27 Democrats, but there are also 25 Republicans. During the Barbour Administration years, Republicans have controlled the Senate with the help of a few conservative Democrats.
During the eight years of the Barbour Administration, Republicans in the Mississippi Legislature have basically agreed on most issues and maintained party discipline. In so doing, they greatly enhanced the power of the Governor. Whereas Governors were confronted in past years by a united legislative branch intent on holding tightly to the reins of state government and minimizing the power of the Governor's office, battles in state government suddenly shifted after 2001 to more healthy ideological battles between political parties on pocket book issues rather than endless fights between the Legislature and the Governor over which of the two branches of government would dominate the political landscape.
Since 2001, the elected leaders of both political parties have had healthy and constructive debates on public issues such as taxes, education, and health care; and the people have been better off for it. As a result, our citizens have been better informed and have not been distracted by side issues that have held the state back for generations. In essence, the emergence of a healthy two-party system in Mississippi has silenced any discussion of a need for a constitutional convention to enhance the power of the Governor or the executive branch.
The question has been raised as to whether a Republican Governor elected in 2011 could maintain party discipline among the Republican legislators in the years ahead. In his column, Sid asks a good question: "Does Mississippi want a strong governor like Barbour -- or a more traditional governor like former Governors Ray Mabus or Bill Waller, Sr.?" A second question might be whether the people want to continue to have a healthy two-party system in the Legislature, which will surely result in a strong support group in the legislative branch for whoever is elected Governor. The answer to these questions will determine the direction Mississippi will take in 2011 and beyond. One would think that Republicans have the advantage in 2011 - unless they get over-confident and begin fighting among themselves

DO WE WANT IT BADLY ENOUGH?

As we approach November, 2010, the nation's attention is beginning to turn to the Congressional elections which will take place on November 2nd. Here in Mississippi, two of our four Congressional seats are being hotly contested - both presently held by Democrats. In Mississippi's First Congressional District, Travis Childers, the Blue Dog incumbent who was elected two years ago to replace Republican Roger Wicker after Wicker was appointed to the United States Senate, is facing a strong challenge from Republican State Senator Alan Nunnelee. Childers is a former Chancery Court Clerk, a powerful position in county government in Mississippi, and he hails from rural Prentiss County, near Tennessee in the extreme northeast corner of the State and in the foothills of Appalachia. Nunnelee comes from the more urban and Republican-leaning City of Tupelo, which is located just south of Prentiss County and also in the northeastern portion of the Congressional District.

Childers is a friend and associate of the Speaker of the Mississippi House of Representatives, Billy McCoy, who also is a native of Prentiss County. Childers is also the logical heir of longtime former First District Congressman and populist Jamie Whitten, who was known for "bringing home the bacon" for his constituents while at the same time attacking the "left-wingers" in Washington. Nunnelee, on the other hand, is a fiscal conservative who has served effectively as chairman of the powerful Senate Finance Committee in the Mississippi Legislature during trying economic times; and, in cooperation with Governor Haley Barbour and Lt. Governor Phil Bryant, has helped the State balance its budget and preserve its rainy-day fund while at the same time preserved and increased Medicaid payments for the needy and enacted increased spending for education. Just as important, Nunnelee apparently has a united Republican Party behind him as he approaches the general election and has received the endorsements of his two opponents in the Republican Primary, who he defeated without a run-off after a spirited primary election contest. Mississippi Republicans will recall that Childers, the Democrat, won the Congressional seat to replace Wicker two years ago, after a bitter Republican Primary in which the Republican nominee failed to receive the endorsement of his defeated Republican opponent.

This year, Republicans as well as Tea Party conservatives, appear to be lining up behind Nunnelee although the National Rifle Association has endorsed Childers. On the other hand, Democrats also appear to be united in backing Childers, as evidenced by a recent fund-raising invitation sent out for Childers by a group of traditionally Democratic sponsors, including the Second District Congressman, Bennie Thompson who has great influence over the substantial African-American vote in the First Congressional District.

Recent polls have been published which show that Nunnelee presently leads Childers by less than 10 points, but most observers understand that this Congressional race is only just now beginning, although the candidates have been campaigning for months. What is clear at this juncture is that the majority of the citizens of the First District are upset and concerned about the economy and the future of America in general. Many now link Childers with President Obama, which is a plus for Nunnelee at the present time.

The race between Nunnelee and Childers is now clearly on the radar screens of both national parties and their Congressional campaign committees; and both candidates will be well financed as they campaign to the wire on November 2nd. Democrats understand that they must hold on to Congressional seats currently occupied by Blue Dog Democrats such as Childers, and must give him some latitude to take public positions on issues such as health care and gun rights that will appeal to conservative voters, without threatening to strip him of party seniority benefits. On the other hand, Republicans understand that if they are to recapture a Congressional majority in the House of Representatives and stop the out-of-control spending and government bailouts that have been a part of the Obama agenda, they simply must win districts where the voters are basically conservative. Simply put, if Republicans cannot win this year in the First Congressional District in today's environment, the District is likely to remain in the hands of the Democrats for the foreseeable future.

In my judgment, the race between a Nunnelee and Childers will be close and a "trend-setter" nationally. If Childers wins, look for the Democrats to lose some seats in the House of Representatives but retain substantial control with Nancy Pelosi re-elected as Speaker of the House (with the support of Childers). If Nunnelee wins, look for the Democrats nationally to have a long night.

If Mississippi Republicans can stay energized and united in the months ahead, Nunnelee should win this election. However, it is important that Republicans have a strong voter turnout in Tupelo and the northeast Mississippi area surrounding populous Lee County, where many self-styled "yellow dog Democrats" reside (citizens who would vote for a Democrat even if the candidate is a yellow dog). Just as important, it is crucial for Nunnelee that Republicans have a strong turnout further west in populous DeSoto County as well, which enjoys the fourth largest population in Mississippi and where most of its citizens work in Memphis and look to the Memphis media for their news. On occasions in the past and particularly in Presidential elections, voters in DeSoto County have turned out to vote in tremendous numbers and with substantial Republican majorities. In other elections, without national impact, voter turnout in DeSoto County has often been abysmal.

Voter turnout will likely determine the winner of the Nunnelee-Childers race on November 2nd. If Republicans want to win badly enough, this is our chance to take back the seat we should not have lost in 2008.