The Senate races to watch in 2010

There is a major shift going on in American politics. In November of 2008, following elections that brought Obama to the White House and significant majorities for the Democrats in the House and Senate, it seemed likely that the Democrats would dominate the Executive and Legislative branches for years to come. Republicans hoped that there was a chance they could take back the House, but the Senate, in the near future, was a pipe dream. In recent weeks, that dream has become a nightmare for the Democrats.

It became very scary for Democrats when a Senate seat held by a Kennedy for almost 50 years found itself in Republican hands. Scott Brown won a race, in spite of the fact that the state is 3 to 1 Democrat. Even before this upset, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) announced he would not seek reelection. Christopher Dodd (D-CT), one of the most influential and longest serving members of the Senate, decided not to run after a year of accusations of political improprieties rocked his campaign. Now we have Evan Bayh (D-IN) announcing, essentially, that he is no longer "in love" with the Senate and is planning on moving on. His decision was so sudden, he gave his party less than a week to find someone to file for his seat. The "filibuster proof" Senate is already history and there are now thirteen races that looked very much in the hands of the Democrats that could be in the GOPs'.

Arkansas. Sen. Blanche Lincoln has been on political life support for months. Her approval numbers are in the tank. She has sheepishly supported Obama's agenda and, now that her numbers are in serious trouble, she is lecturing Majority Leader Harry Reid for doing too much, too quick. In spite of the fact she has only attracted "B team" talent in Rep. John Boozman (R), she finds herself behind in a recent poll by 23 points.

Colorado. Michael Bennet (D) faces a tough race since he began from the position as an appointee (replacing Ken Salazar who joined he Obama Administration). He has no elective office experience, which is always dangerous. Furthermore, his nomination is anything but a shoe in, facing a tough primary challenge in the Colorado's Speaker of the House (Andrew Romanoff). Worse still for Democrats, the GOP seems behind Lt. Governor Jane Norton, whose numbers appear stronger than either Bennet or Romanoff).

Delaware. New England has been a safe haven for the Democrats for years and the seat that is up for grabs is one that was once in the hands of the sitting Vice President, Joe Biden. Beau Biden, the Vice President's son and Attorney General, has already declined a run, leaving this a very safe race for former Republican governor and current Congressman-at-large, Michael Castle.

Illinois. The President's own Senate Seat is ripe for the GOP, according to many political pundits and Mark Kirk (R) may be the perfect candidate to replace Roland Burris. Kirk is a moderate from suburban Chicago, conservative on economic and defense issues and with moderate social views. In this open seat he will take on Alexi Giannoulias, the state treasurer, who could be a strong candidate, but has serious problems due to his relationship with former Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich. It appears that Kirk has, at least, an even chance of winning.

Indiana. This sate has been largely "red" for years but has been held solidly by Evan Bayh, a moderate Democrat hat learned to fit the state well. The race could have been tough ffor Bayh, acing former Senator Dan Coates (R), with Bayh pulling out, it now looks like a state that is solidly in the GOP column.

Kentucky. This open Republican seat is full of intrigue. This seat is currently in the hands of Jim Bunning who has considered his low poll numbers and has concluded that he is one of the most vulnerable candidates in the country. This caught the attention of Secretary of State Trey Grayson who was endorsed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Grayson is strong, leading both Democrats battling in their primary in the polls. However, Rand Paul (son of Rep. Ron Paul), whom I knew as we were both activists in politics in college, is providing a tough primary challenge. Fortunately for the GOP, his numbers are better than the Democrats also.

Missouri. Kit Bond is giving up his seat and this could be the Democrats' best chance to get a Senate office that is in the GOPs' hands. However, the political environment has changed significantly and could fall either way. The Democrats offer a very strong candidate in Secretary of State Robin Carnahan (daughter of the late former Governor Mel Carnahan and Senator Jean Carnahan). Meanwhile, the GOP is running former Republican House Whip Roy Blunt. Carnahan has a slight lead, but pundits on both sides see this as a toss up.

Nevada. Harry Reid is poised to join a club that I do not think he wants membership. Like former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD), he could find himself a leader of his party in the Senate that becomes unemployed running for reelection. Nevada is considered the best chance for a GOP pick up. His numbers are in the very low range (20s). Potential Republican opponents included Lt. Governor Brian Krolicki. Although Reid has serious money (an important element in winning such a race), this seat should be in the GOP column in 2011.

New Hampshire. This is another rare opportunity for Democrats to pick up a seat that is currently in the GOPs' hands. Judd Gregg is retiring and the Democrats have an impressive candidate with Rep. Paul Hodes. Fortunately for Republicans they have a top-tier candidate of their own in former Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, who leads in the polls. Money and polls are on the Democrats side at this time, but the political winds could change everything.

There are several other "hot" seats to watch in 2010. New York provides an usually safe seat for Democrats, but the change in the political environment and a strong GOP candidate could even change this situation. In North Dakota, the retirement of Byron Dorgan (D) and the addition of Governor John Hoeven (R) into the race have made a Republican pickup almost certain. In Pennsylvania, Democrat "convert" Arlen Spector faces a tough reelection campaign since members of his own party does not trust him (remembering him as a Republican) and the GOP rank and file seems to have disdain for him. Former Congressman Pat Tooney (R) seems poised to create an upset in the Keystone state.

If you like politics, 2010 will be an interesting year to watch, its implications on public policy will be most profound.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is also host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650). Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Massachusetts Senate Race: A Referendum on Health Care Reform

Who would have guessed that a seat held by the Kennedys since the 1950s may find itself in the Republican column? A state wide seat in which registered Democrats out number Republicans 3 to 1? The news media is attributing these amazing turn of events -- with the Republican challenger leading in some polls -- to the general discontentment towards the party in power in both the White House and the Congress. Maybe, but I do not think so. I think it is much more personal than that.

One of the main reasons why voters are entertaining turning over one of its Senate seats to a Republican is that the people of Massachusetts have seen the future of socialized medicine and they know it doesn't work. They have been under a health care bill since 2006 that mirrors, in many respects, the Obama plan navigating through the Senate.

Forbes magazine has pointed out that many of the voters of Massachusetts are unhappy with the plan and for several good reasons. In an article titled "MAss Disaster," writer Sally Pipes exposes some of the ugly truths surrounding the socialized health care bill that has plagued the state.

Pipes reminds the reader of some words that have haunted then Governor Mitt Romney. "'Will Commonwealth care cost taxpayers more? No!' So wrote Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in November 2004, the economy then still in full bloom. 'Neither the state nor the taxpayers can afford to pay more.' She goes on to point out that "It's worth pondering ex-Gov. Romney's promises just over three years after he crossed partisan lines to reform health care in the Bay State. The Obama administration and congressional Democrats are modeling reform on the Massachusetts model, promoting bureaucratic health exchanges, increased restrictions on health insurance and vastly expanded taxpayer-subsidized care. Like Romney, they promise more coverage at lower cost, even as the evidence suggests otherwise."

So what do the people of Massachusetts think about the socialized health care experiment they have been a part of? The Forbes piece notes that "Only one in four considers the reform a success. Just one in five thinks it has made health care more affordable." I'm sure that many of the one-fourth work in government or they are among those that had no health insurance before and do not know quality care when they see it. They certainly are not seeing it in their own state.

A plan that was touted as a way to increase coverage without excessive government spending has had the exact opposite effect:

• Medicaid has increased by 76,000 enrollees and the subsidized plans by 177,000.


• Forty-six percent pay no premium, and


• another 12% are highly subsidized.


• A mere 19,000 have signed up for the non-subsidized private plans offered through the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector. These were the plans that Romney and others said would help contain costs.

To make matters worse, the bill is very costly. Most citizens are looking at spending 10 percent of their incomes on premiums or face impressive fines. So high, in fact, are the premiums, 20 percent of the state's residents have become exempt from the coverage. Many of these moved to Medicaid (as seen above), but at least 3 percent of the population are still without coverage. Instead of reducing costs, like the politicians promised as the bill navigated through the legislative process, it has significantly increased costs and has the government scrambling for revenues. Recently the state has taken a page out of Obama's book and has put a hit on smokers at the tune of $1 a pack.

So how will the state fight the growth in health care costs? The same way socialist health care systems have fought such runaway costs for years; through a bureaucracy that will cut doctors' income, moving patients into manage care, and the establishment of price controls. In other words, through the development of the same type of rationed care that dominates much of the world today. These are the exact type of approaches Massachusetts is pursuing.

The people of Massachusetts already know this type of health care does not work and that is why they are so close to electing a Republican like Scott Brown to the US Senate.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

ACORN is on the Run

Child prostitution, voter fraud, tax evasion, and financial support for prostitutes and pimps are among the many headlines that have plagued the controversial Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). The timing of these stories could not be worse for the controversial organization. We are a little more than a year away from the next election cycle and there are many members of Congress in both Houses, including the Senate Majority Leader (Harry Reid) who are fighting for their political lives. In spite of President Obama's love and admiration for ACORN (he, in fact, actually worked for it and with it for many years), the Congress wants to distance itself from an organization that has received millions of taxpayer dollars because it continuously finds itself in the news for all the wrong reasons.

The US Senate has taken the action to deny ACORN's funding. This was surprising to many. I was not very shocked, because this was exactly in line with the survival instincts of those who serve in Congress. This is not moral indignation on the part of most of these members, but raw fear that their days in power are numbered.

I was surprised, however, by the number of people who voted for this reform. The Associated Press stated that "The 83-7 vote would deny housing and community grant funding to ACORN, which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now." The numbers of those who stayed in ACORN's camp was few indeed. Politico.com notes that "Only a handful of Democrats sided with Acorn on the vote: Illinois Sen. Roland Burris, Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey, Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse."


The Associated Press notes that ACORN's crash has been fairly fast and furious:

• Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb), noted that ACORN received $53 million in taxpayer funds since 1994 and that the group was eligible for increased funding in the pending legislation, which funds housing and transportation programs (part of the hundreds of millions mentioned before). The organization's behavior has led to it being in its current situation of being cut off from funding.


• To make matters worse, the Census Bureau severed its ties with ACORN, saying it does not want the group's assistance on efforts on the decennial count. This was one of the more important functions for the organization.


• In recent months, Republicans have become increasingly critical of the group, which "advocates for poor people," because conducted a massive voter registration effort last year and became a target of conservatives when some employees were accused of creating false registrations with names like "Mickey Mouse." In the past week prosecutors in Miami, Fla., arrested 11 people for falsifying hundreds of voter applications during a voter registration drive last year. The organization face similar legal problems in half of the states nationwide.

In the end I must conclude that the huge number of votes against ACORN does not make the Congress a "Hall of Courage" but a nest of cowards who have seen the writing on the wall. The American people are angry and those who find themselves supporting this kind of organization will be held accountable.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Mr. Franken Gets Lost in Washington

I found it more than funny seeing Sen. Harry Reid guide newly elected Senator Al Franken to the podium to discuss his priorities as he takes his office. Franken, with that Saturday Night Live smile and "gee golly" expression, was memorable. One of his opponents will use this when, or if, Franken runs for reelection.

Franken has completely out done himself by becoming the US Senator from Minnesota. In spite of the fact that many are crying that he has stolen his way into this elite club, Franken is in and Washington will be watching closely.

I worked in DC for many years, first as an aide to US Senator Gordon Humphrey (R-NH) and later with several think tanks and political organizations. I also was a friend with members of the US House. Members in that "lower chamber" are noted for their rough and tumble antics, propensity towards individuality, and constant fight to be recognized. The US Senate is the exact opposite. That organization is very much like a prestigious club, designed for the "best and the brightest" from each state. Compared to the US Senate, the House of Representatives is like Animal House.

Animal House, the famous movie developed by many of the people behind Saturday Night Live, would likely be a great place for Franken, since that program made him famous. He could even pull gags on his colleagues and be voted most popular, at least on the Democrat side of the aisle. This is not the case with the US Senate. You could see the look of anxiety on Harry Reid's face as they walked up to the microphone. The Majority Leader appeared to be holding his breath. There is this simple belief that, with many states literally electing dozens to US House seats based on their population, there is something special about the US Senate. Al Franken challenges that conventional wisdom.

Besides having among the most extreme views in the Senate (he may proved to be to the left of socialist Bernie Sanders), he has some of the most unusual behavior. He speaks his mind when and how he wants, regardless of how inappropriate it may be. It will be fascinating to see what kind of committees he ends up being on. A few likely possibilities are Veterans Affairs, Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Indian Affairs, and the Joint Committee on the Library. They are going to try to put him in a place to minimize his air time and minimize the damage, he would likely place on his Democratic colleagues. On the other hand, it is the Democrats, so he could end up in the most important Committee assignments. We will have to see. Franken isn't leaving entertainment, he is just laying the groundwork for his next movie, "Mr. Franken Gets Lost in Washington."

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Chuck Grassley Provides Signs of Life for GOP

For months, and maybe years, Republican rank and file have been seeking signs of life from a party that has been limping along for ages. The GOP has become the "me too" party, or "the light" version of the Democrats, or many other cliches that can be used for a party that has become dysfunctional.

Every once in a while, we see signs of hope. Many were excited when John McCain chose Gov. Sarah Palin as a running mate. Gimmick or not, it was nice for the dominant moderate force of the party to recognize that conservatives still matter. The latest cause for excitement has come from an unlikely source, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA).

I've known Grassley for decades and almost worked for him back in the 1980s (instead I worked for Sen. Gordon Humphrey of New Hampshire). He was then, and still today, anything but an "activist" Senator. He is very soft spoken and not particularly sharp witted or sharp tongued. He is a fairly typical "middle America" personality. Subdued, soft spoken, and matter of fact. He is one of only 28 Senators in history to have made more than 10,000 votes, something he wears as a badge of honor (something that I deem a little suspicious). The 75 year old has been in the Senate since 1981 and in the US House for six years before that. In other words, he has almost 35 years of working in DC behind him.

This unlikely hero for Conservatives is getting attention for taking President Obama on in a way that we are not use to seeing these days. Politics is too genteel for my liking and the US Senate even more so. This very elite club is known for treating its colleagues and the President with "kid gloves." Meanwhile, millions of Americans are looking for someone to speak up. Enter Chuck Grassley.

The Senator, in his 70s, has used an unlikely vehicle for getting the message out as well. Pulling a chapter out of Barack Obama's book, his platform, of all things, is Twitter. Today, the Senator gave the following status report, ignore the grammar, the Senator is taking typical Twitter liberties:

"Pres Obama you got nerve while u sightseeing in Paris to tell us 'time to deliver' on health care. We still on skedul/even workinWKEND."

This 140 characters (give or take a few) has started a social networking revolution and has gotten conservative Republicans excited again. It is time for the GOP to start drawing lines in the sand and holding this Administration and its minions accountable for its arrogance. That is the kind of thing that could revive the dying Republican brand.

This particular issue, the rationing of health care, is absolutely crucial in fighting to defend the greatest health care system in the world (warts and all). If Republicans want to be relevant again, they will speak with force and passion, use Twitter, Facebook, Myspace, YouTube and every other tool they can think of to win back the hearts and minds of the American people. Our freedoms and future hang in the balance.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

If it Appears Your Member of Congress is "Out of Touch"...

It seems that our Members of Congress are "out of touch," when it comes to their constituents needs. While we are talking salary cuts and job losses, they are giving themselves pay raises. While the government is talking about making it impossible for us to afford private health insurance (in an effort to ration health care through socialized medicine) as they tax and regulate insurance policies out of existence, they have the finest health insurance in the world.

Members of the US House and Senate are each given an expense account that allows them to make purchases and leases that are designed to help them represent their constituents more effectively. The Wall Street Journal reports that "House members get a government expense allowance of $1.3 million to $1.9 million a year. Senators get $2.9 million to $4.5 million. The disparity is based on several factors, with lawmakers whose home states are far from Washington, for example, typically receiving more to cover their higher travel expenses." Yes, that is per person.

So where do these millions of dollars go? Here are a few examples cited by the Journal:

• Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) spent $24,730 in taxpayer money last year to lease a 2008 luxury Lexus hybrid sedan.


• Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) spent $1,435 on a digital camera.


• Democrat Eni Faleomavaega, the House delegate from American Samoa, purchased two 46-inch Sony TVs.


• Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) spent $84,000 worth on personalized calendars, printed by the U.S. Capitol Historical Society, for his constituents. One could argue that this Congressman used taxpayer dollars towards his reelection efforts, since it is simply promotional material. He was not available to the Journal for comment.


• Rep. Rodney Alexander (D-LA) paid $20,000 for a 2009 lease on a Toyota Highlander, a hybrid SUV.


• Rahm Emanuel (D-IL and now President Obama's Chief of Staff) showed such expenditures included printing, recording a $33,000 printing expense in the fourth quarter of 2008.


• Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) spent $2,793 on a Panasonic Toughbook laptop, which is marketed to the military, in September of 2008. Yes, this is the same Jefferson who was implicated in a scandal that included $90,000 found in a freezer in his office (bringing new meaning to "cold, hard, cash").

These accounts are often plagued with vague citations and are hard to monitor. Furthermore, there is an expiration date on these dollars. If they are not spent in a certain time frame, the dollars don't carry on the next year, but start with a new budget. Because of this, many found these expenditures all the more offensive in the last quarter of 2008. As many Americans were trying to buckle down and prepare for an economic storm, Members of Congress and their staff were enjoying taxpayer dollars.

The Wall Street Journal points out that "The review showed that the increased year-end spending went not only toward equipment but also to fund year-end 'bonuses' to aides. The average House aide earned 17% more in the fourth quarter of the year, when the bonuses were paid, than in previous quarters, according to an earlier Journal analysis. Payments ranged from a few hundred dollars to $14,000." It also went on to point out that "The records show that some lawmakers spent heavily in the final months of the year to draw down allowances before the end of December -- a time when U.S. households were paring their budgets and lawmakers were criticizing Detroit auto executives for taking private aircraft to Washington to plead their case for taxpayer funding."

There is talk about making these records available online and in more detail for both the House and the Senate so taxpayers can better keep track of the expenditures of their elected officials. That, and reconsidering how much they have available to spend, are reforms long over due.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Is Illinois Poised to Get a GOP Senator?

Illinois use to be known as the "Land of Lincoln," but in recent years may be better described as the "Land of Corruption." After a series of governors who spend their retirement years in jail and a new one (Blagojevich) seemingly not far behind, I think many citizens of Illinois are ready for change, especially when we consider how its latest Senator was appointed.

Roland Burris was chosen a US Senator by then Governor Blagojevich after a scandal broke out that the latter was being accused of actually trying to sell Obama's seat. It was concluded that Burris was some how above the scandal following an impeachment committee hearing that the Senate appointee testified. During that hearing he indicated that he had only spoken with Blagojevich Chief of Staff Lon Monk and there was no discussion for "pay to play." However, it appears the Feds may have recorded conversations that indicate that Burris had several other discussions with those connected to Blagojevich. The question is, did such recordings lead to Burris modifying his list of contacts?

USA Today reports that "Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., said Monday that it is "positively not true" that the reason he filed an affidavit revealing new contacts with ousted Gov. Rod Blagojevich's associates was because federal authorities had told him conversations had been secretly recorded." Republican legislators are using this modification of this list as grounds for an investigation and GOP leaders around the country are wetting their lips at the prospects of getting that seat on the GOP side. With barely sixty votes and the power of the filibuster, the Democrats can hardly afford losing such an important seat, but Burris is extremely vulnerable.

The next election for Burris is 2010 and with the exception of one short six year term (of Senator Peter Fitzgerald), Illinois has been represented exclusively by Democrats for decades. This is clearly a Democratic state. But how much more can this poor state sustain when it comes to the quality of government? It is poised for a serious house cleaning like Washington, DC saw following Watergate.

Following two years of absorbing the costs and trauma of Barack Obama's "stimulus package" I think many more House and Senate seats will be found off the Democrat's column. 2010 should be an interesting year.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Caroline Kennedy Does Not Vote Often, But Still Wants to be a Senator

The recent comments by Caroline Kennedy regarding her lack of electoral participation in past political campaigns reminds me of Adam Sadler in the Wedding Singer. The main character, Robbie Hart, decides to pursue serious money by applying for a job at a bank. He tells the interviewer "No, sir, I have no experience, but I'm a big fan of money. I like it, I use it, I have a little. I keep it in a jar on top of my refrigerator. I'd like to put more in that jar. That's where you come in." Those familiar with the movie know that this memorable line didn't help poor Robbie land the job.

Fast forward to reality and you have Caroline Kennedy applying for an even bigger job -- the US Senator representing the state of New York -- and sounding very similar to poor Robbie. You can almost hear her, "I don't really vote, but I like power, and I certainly want more of it by being chosen to the Senate." In fact, she wants the seat held by her late uncle Bobby. After all, it is a family business, she seems like a logical candidate. But then she is haunted by the experience question. Not only does Kennedy lack any substantive policy experience to speak of, she has often decided that voting in elections (including the actual seat she is running for) wasn't worth her time. In retrospect, she has been "dismayed" by her lack of voting.

The New York Times notes that "She did not vote in any of the last four primary elections for New York City mayor. Nor did she vote in the general election of 1994, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan, whose Senate seat Ms. Kennedy now aspires to fill, was elected to his fourth and last term." The article goes on to point out that "a review by The Daily News indicated that Ms. Kennedy, a Democrat, has not voted in about half of the 38 contested elections since 1988, most of them primaries."

Caroline Kennedy is well down the road of being middle age and has little to show for her Kennedy name. Her role has largely been ceremonial. The last surviving member of Camelot, the keeper of the Profiles in Courage award, but little else to show for her efforts. It appears now she has more than a little remorse and is trying to play catch up by pursuing one of the most important positions in the US government. There is, after all, only 100 US Senators. They serve for six years (such a long time is a luxury in politics), their fingers touch every major Presidential appointment and have a profound impact on policy not afforded to many other elected officials. It would seem that a person who wanted to hold such a high office would want to cut their teeth on at least one or two positions before the Senate.

The US Senate is usually the reward for years of works in politics or policy. When it comes to the substance in the case for Caroline Kennedy, there really is not any. But she is, after all, a Kennedy. If she is chosen by Governor David Patterson of New York it will be because he is lost in the legend and romance of Camelot or because of orders from President-Elect Barack Obama (a big Caroline fan). It won't be because she is the best candidate for the job, which is what the Senate and New York needs and deserves.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Christopher Dodd Has to Go

I am not at all sympathetic of the plight of the automobile industry. The Big Three of Detroit have largely brought their terrible situation upon themselves through decades of bad decision making. In spite of this reality, I was offended when Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT) informed the CEOs of Ford, Chrysler, and GM that if they wanted money for their companies, they needed to go. This is the same Christopher Dodd who has been on the Senate Banking Committee for years and oversaw the financial debacle of Wall Street that led to an $800 billion bailout at taxpayers expense. This is the same Dodd who has fueled record government spending for years that has led to our debt of trillions of dollars.

As chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Dodd proposed a housing bailout on the Senate floor in June 2008 that would assist troubled mortgage lenders such as Countrywide Financial. Condé Nast Portfolio reported that in 2003 Dodd had refinanced the mortgages on his homes in Washington, D.C. and Connecticut through Countrywide and had received favorable terms due to being placed in what was later called the "Friends of Angelo" (Countrywide's CEO) program. Dodd received mortgages from Countrywide at allegedly below-market rates on his Washington, D.C. and Connecticut homes. Dodd has not disclosed the below-market mortgages in any of six financial disclosure statements he filed with the Senate or Office of Government Ethics since obtaining the mortgages in 2003. The Senator's home state Hartford Courant reported Dodd had taken "a major credibility hit" from the scandal.

If direct payment has influence, the problem is even more widespread. Countrywide has also contributed a $21,000 total to Dodd’s campaigns since 1997. Dodd has also received $70,000 in campaign contributions from Bank of America, which is buying Countrywide, in the last year-and-a-half before the Countrywide Financial loan scandal surfaced. Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the only other Senators who have received more money from Bank of America than Dodd. However, no politician has received more contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than Dodd's combined $133,900.

Marcus Cicero, when discussing the Roman Empire, said "the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled..." Dodd's throwing stones in a glass house and maintaining a straight face in the process, is arrogance at its height. Senator Dodd needs to go and should be a part of a serious "house cleaning" that should be seen in both the US House and Senate. It is true that, in the end, many familiar faces like Dodd would disappear. That would be a face lift the US could afford.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

McCain Advocates "Trickle Up" Economics

As John McCain's chances for reelection appear to be dwindling, his desperation becomes more obvious in his policy proposals. During the second debate with Barack Obama, McCain argued how he hopes to see the $700 billion bailout be implemented. After all, it will be the next President who implements the vast majority of this program with only a few months left in the Bush Administration.

McCain proposed something that is far more likely to come from the mouth of a Democrat -- a very liberal Democrat at that -- than a Republican stalwart. McCain proclaimed that he wants a significant amount of the money to go to bailout those in foreclosure directly. If you are about to lose your home and are months behind, the government should step in and rescue you. This is certainly better than helping the Wall Street fat cats, right?

The problems that come from such a policy are numerous. Such a plan will spread the moral hazard so rampant today to the general consumers. You will find them falling into the false sense of security that, no matter how bad the decision one makes you will get bailed out.

Worse still, what type of message does it send to the vast majority of Americans that figured out how to pay their mortgage even with the sub prime problem? I am sure the government, with all of its brilliance, will create a window for which people who prove they have had late payments will be able to participate as well. I have said all along that this $700 billion is a down payment. We are looking at $1.5 trillion by the time we are through.

What about those who already lost their homes? Tough luck. This bill is all about timing, not fairness. Those poor souls will simply have to lament their loses.

This bailout is fundamentally wrong and very dangerous to the long term prospects of this economy. It has done little to positively effect the markets and does far more at raising questions instead of answering them. It has essentially led to the socializing of our banking system and has damaged the respect for risk that is necessary in maintaining a free market economy. Members of the House and Senate who voted for this bill will find themselves haunted by it.

Kevin Price articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Questioning the Constitutionality of the Senate Bailout Bill

I hate to bore the Congress with details, but there is a little passage in the US Constitution that could very well haunt the Legislative Branch if the House of Representatives passes the Senate bailout bill. Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution states that "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills. " Simply put, the bailout package had to come from the House and the one that Congress is now considering is therefore, unconstitutional.

Modern practitioners of political science are dismissive of requirements such as this. They argue that, "this is a formality" or "a mere question of protocol," but has nothing to do with the substance of the Constitution. Reality? It has everything to do with the substance.

When the Founding Fathers developed our Constitution, they wanted the Legislative Branch to be broken into two Houses for reasons in addition to making sure large states and small states had fair representation. They also wanted to make sure that the government would be extremely deliberative about making changes in law. The US House of Representatives are up for reelection every two years and typically represent smaller populations than the Senate. They are closer to the people than the US Senate which faces reelection in six year cycles (and only approximately one-third at a time). This means the Senate can afford to take risks that the US House cannot usually take.

Proof is in the pudding. The US House took on this bailout bill earlier this week and voted against it. That bill was dead and a new bill needed to be created. According to the US Constitution, that begins in the US House. Instead the Congress is being driven by expediency instead of rule of law and they started from scratch (adding $100 billion more in the process) in the Senate where it passed in a body where many of the members have four years before they face reelection. That bill is now in the House and those members are now being told by the upper body to "jump in, the water is great."

Senators should have voted against the bill because of its unconstitutionality. US House members should now do the same, regardless of the merits of the bill itself (which are few, considering the costs). Unfortunately, discussions about constitutionality are relegated to law schools and not where laws are created. However, this cloud could follow these members to their reelection efforts or maybe all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Kevin Price articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

The Senate Bailout Plan: "That's Not All..."

The bailout bill the US Senate passed reminded me of one of those late night infomercials. You know the ones where the company isn't convinced that you are going to buy something so they throw in "that's not all, oh no, that's not all." You see a very similar approach to selling this bailout in the final legislation passed by the Senate.

The original proposal that came from Treasury Secretary Paulson and President Bush was a mere two pages long. The US House got its hands on it and it became a little more than 100 pages long. There is no reason to worry, however, because Harry Reid (D-NV) has announced that the Senate has made it better by bringing it up to 451 pages and by adding over $100 billion to the final bill. If more is better, we certainly got that from this bill that passed by a very wide margin.

Fiscally Conservative Republicans put the breaks on the bailout bill that came to the US House because they thought it was too wasteful and transferred to much power to the federal government. So adding more pork and power to the government will make it more likely to pass? We will have to see.

So what will you find in this multi-layered package:

- Tax Breaks for Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)

- Tax Breaks for Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)

- 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)
- Tax earmark “extenders” in the bailout bill.- Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)

- American Samoa (Sec. 309)

- Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)

- Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)

- Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)

- Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)

- Railroads (Sec. 316)

- Auto Racing Tracks (317)

- District of Columbia (Sec. 322)

- Wool Research (Sec. 325)

Who knew that Indians were about to go bankrupt? Considering they have their growing gaming interests, I thought we might be able to borrow money from them. The above are just a few of the examples that were added. I encourage you to read the bill in its entirety, if you have a few days to spare. I think it would make sense also to find out how your Senator voted on this bill.

In the end, however, I see this bill passing in the US House. There are specific tax breaks for small to medium size businesses to help encourage their recovery, tax relief for those hit by the recent natural disasters (hurricanes in the South and tornadoes in the Midwest), and there is an increase in the requirements on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (up to $250,000 from $100,000), putting more responsibilities on the banks.

In spite of such assurances, I have to question whether the trade offs of our freedoms and the potential socializing of our financial systems is worth the short term "stabilization."

Kevin Price articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

The 50 Richest Members of Congress Might Surprise You

Recently, while taking my boys to Scouts, I indulged in one of my favorite guilty pleasures -- listening to Michael Savage. I admit, I can't handle him in massive doses, but his depth of knowledge is amazing and his candor is off the chart. I often get the next blog idea from listening to his show. Tonight he spent some time discussing the 50 richest members of Congress (source: Roll Call). He focused on how these politicians (whom he referred to as "mobsters") were rich and planning on staying that way through the policies they perpetuate to bail out financial institutions. I will make a few different observations.

• The top ten may come as a surprise to many. Seven of the top ten were Democrats and not Republicans. This included number one, former Democratic nominee for President John Kerry (D-Mass). So much for the "party of the poor" mantra that the Democrats love to rally around. No wonder the American voters had a difficult time buying Kerry's case that he was "for the poor" and worth close to a quarter of a billion dollars ($230.98 million).



• Twenty-one of fifty are in the Senate, although the house out numbers them four to one. The Senate is a millionaires boys club if there ever was one, with one-fifth of them worth at least 7 digits. The list ends at 50, there are probably several more between $999K and $5 million (the bottom of the list) that are among these numbers.



• Some of the richest might surprise you. I would think most Americans had not heard of Jane Harman, Darrell Issa, Robin Hayes, Vern Buchanan, and Gordon Smith. Each are worth $28 million or more.



• Others are household names. John Kerry (mentioned before, the former Democratic nominee), Rockefeller (yes, from that family, a great grandson of the financial giant), and Edward Kennedy (who also enjoys family money).

The bottom line is that both Houses of Congress are homes of enormous affluence and neither party can accurately argue that they are some how "for" the poor because of their personal lives. The Democrats have been postured as the party "for the poor" by both their own communications and by the media for decades. The only true measure is in the policies they promote. And then it isn't money going to the poor or tax breaks for particular groups, it is measured by the impact policies have on poverty.

Ironically the best example of fighting poverty happened when both parties worked together. A Republican Congress and a Democrat President essentially wiped out "poverty as we knew it" by signing bills that put strict limits on how long one could be depended on government, which provided incentive for people to move towards higher incomes and work. As a result of that policy the percentage of poor has declined over the last decade after years of growing in number.

Kevin Price articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Senator Joe Biden, Behaving Badly

Senator Joe Biden launched his very weak bid for the Presidential race of 08 with a splash and now he might drown in it. The senator from the small state of Delaware, with very little name ID, and even less hope of winning, appearantly wanted to make a big impression early on his campaign. Boy, did he ever.

Biden (D-DE) has served in the Senate for decades and had a reputation of being liked and intelligent (also extremely liberal), so when he described opponent Barack Obama (D-IL) as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy" to run for president, he raised more than a few eyebrows. I'm sure if he were a Republican, he not only would have been force to get out of the race, he would probably have to give up his seat in the Senate. It is just the way it is, I assume.

I'm sure he is sending notes of apology to Jessee Jackson, Al Sharpton and all the other blacks who have tried running for President in the past and is explaining how he "didn't mean it that way." I'm dying to actually hear an explanation of what he did mean. Biden didn't have much of a chance anyway, but this will likely finish him off as a serious contender in '08 (Democrats have short memories when it comes to their own, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia (photo) was a member of the Ku Klux Klan).

The question is, now, why did he do it?

* Was it a desperate attempt to get headlines for a campaign that was lagging far behind from the start?

* Was it a back handed compliment to the Junior Senator from Illinois?

* Was it a pronouncement of frustration because Obama came from no where just a few years ago and is now the biggest star of his party? Meanwhile, Biden has been in the Senate for 35 years (making me 10 at the time he got there and making me feel very young). I think anyone could be jealous of a new comers "rock star" status being acquired in such a short period of time (OBama is my age and is in his first year in the Senate). This last choice would be my guess.

In the end, Biden is dismissing Obama as just another empty suit that is biting off more than he can chew. Taking such an approach with someone so popular in his party, makes Biden look like the poster child of sour grapes.