Newt vs Romney -- 1994 edition

The blog Legal Insurrection posted these two videos from 1994 (link and link):





Of course, with his talk of "picking teams," Romney doesn't mention that of the 202 House Democrats, 101 voted for welfare reform and 101 against. Which team were they on?

Newt and the House GOP wanted to do the right thing. Their concern was not dividing Republicans and Democrats.

Peter Ferrara: "Redeeming Newt"

From his article in The American Spectator:

Newt Gingrich is so right in urging his own "Leadership Now" theme for the Republican House majority. He argues that the House should not wait for the debt reduction Super Committee before passing legislation to address federal spending, the deficit, economic growth, and jobs. The House should show leadership now by passing legislation that will achieve these goals most effectively, demonstrating to the public what conservative Republican victories in the elections next year would accomplish.

On block-granting Medicaid:

Gingrich raises a popular entitlement reform opportunity based on the enormously successful 1996 reforms of the old Aid to Families with Dependent Children program (AFDC), enacted while Gingrich was Speaker of the House.

Those reforms sent the federal financing for the program back to the states in fixed, finite block grants, with states empowered to redesign new welfare programs for the poor -- based on work. If a state's program cost more than its federal allotment, then it had to pay all of the extra costs itself. If its program cost lest, then it could keep the resulting savings.

With new incentives for the states, two-thirds of those on AFDC left the program for real private sector jobs. Their incomes rose by at least one fourth as a result, leading them out of poverty. And costs for the taxpayers dropped by half or more in real dollars compared to prior trends.

Those same reforms can and should be extended to Medicaid and all other federal means-tested welfare programs. Those programs are estimated to cost $10 trillion in total government spending over the next 10 years. The Republican House should act now to pass legislation effectively sending all those programs back to the states with block grants providing the discretion for the states to each enact a completely new welfare system based on work, as Gingrich suggested. That kind of Tea Party federalism would be enormously popular, as would the potential savings of $5 trillion over 10 years. Based on the 1996 reforms of AFDC, the poor would benefit enormously as well.

On energy and federal land:

Gingrich also proposes legislation to increase revenue from oil and gas exploration and drilling through sharply increased federal leases and permits. That could raise $150 billion over roughly 10 years, with more coming from increased economic growth due to more abundant supplies of low cost energy for businesses. Gingrich also proposes to sell federally owned land and other unused and environmentally insignificant federal assets.

Lean Six Sigma:

Gingrich is also pioneering the application of proven business efficiency and waste cutting methodologies known as Lean Six Sigma to government programs and agencies. Instead of waiting for the dangerously centralized Super Committee to develop plans for remaking the entire federal government, Gingrich argues that all 435 members of the House in almost 200 committees and subcommittees should be involved in developing ways to apply Lean Six Sigma business principles to government management, with potential cost savings of over $5 trillion. Gingrich argues that another $700 billion to $1.2 trillion over 10 years could be realized by applying the fraud detection techniques utilized by credit card companies to root out fraud in Medicare and Medicaid.

Ferrara concludes:

If the Republican House can act expeditiously to pass all of these ideas, and send them on to the do-nothing Democrat Senate, then Republicans can take these issues to the people next year, clearly defined.

And they can thank Newt Gingrich​ for many of them.

I have wrote about Ferrara's praise for Newt's ideas here and here.

Yesterday Marked Fifteen Years since Welfare Reform

Yesterday, Newt sent out two tweets from his personal account:

Link.

Today is 15th anniversary of welfare reform. The shift to state control and personal responsibility dramatically improved people's lives.

and

Link.

We should build on success of welfare reform by applying block-granting Medicaid and other means tested federal programs.

For a public policy course, I wrote this paper on welfare reform last year.

Former Representative Robert Walker: Newt "an agent of change"

Excerpts from The Washington Times:

Such leadership is a Gingrich legacy. In 1995, the idea of balancing the federal budget was not only a pipe dream but was the subject of ridicule in sophisticated Washington circles. President Clinton’s budgets showed deficits of hundreds of billions of dollars as far out as the eye could see. It was Newt’s strategy and leadership as speaker of the House that not only changed the terms of the debate that year, but within three years produced real balanced budgets.

When Newt tried to reform the welfare system, Mr. Clinton vetoed those efforts on two occasions. But the persistence of a real leader kept the pressure on, and Newt produced one of the most significant changes in government policy in the latter part of the 20th century - welfare reform.

The American military often holds exercises in which the troops simulate real national emergency situations. On many occasions, they have asked Newt to take the role of president in those exercises. One of the most respected institutions in America, our armed forces, has recognized the capability of this leader for good judgment.

...

A Gingrich presidency holds the promise of real change. For some, that phrase has been a political tool for maintaining the status quo or moving us further down the road toward European-style socialism. Change under a Gingrich White House would be based on values first articulated by our forefathers -- individual liberty, entrepreneurial enterprise, devolved government power and spiritual fulfillment.

Fiscal discipline, good jobs, a government that works, responsible global leadership, world-renowned science and technology, and winning the future would all be featured in a Gingrich administration.

With Newt, the concept of change in the face of adversity is not just a political promise; it is the reality of his entire career. When choosing a president, the American people may want to look at the mess inexperience has produced and decide that a new generation of leadership requires someone who bears the scars of winning in an arena that is tough and unforgiving. Winning the future will require the kind of courage in the public arena that Newt Gingrich has demonstrated before and once again has stepped forward to provide.