Published Work


President Obama Has Left the Middle Class Behind

Town Hall 

Almost a year before the Iowa caucuses, the fight for the middle class is already well underway. President Barack Obama made income inequality the centerpiece of his State of the Union address, and Hillary Clinton has been honing a populist narrative in recent appearances, though presumably not in her paid speeches to the likes of Goldman Sachs.

But as Republican presidential candidates prepare to run, it is absolutely imperative that they articulate to middle-class families just how badly Democrats have failed them. The truth is that President Obama has left middle class voters behind and they would fare no better under a Hillary Clinton presidency.

While the top 10 percent of earners have seen their incomes rise, middle class families are making less than they did in 2009. According to Forbes, “families in the bottom three income quintiles saw their average net worth drop anywhere from -13% to -21% from 2010 to 2013 … while the net worth of upper income families increased anywhere from 2% to 14%.”

To read the full article, click here.


Hillary Clinton and the wealth factor: Is she 2016's Mitt Romney?

Fox News

Hillary Clinton’s "Hard Choices" book tour was supposed to lay the foundation for her 2016 presidential run. Instead, it has exposed a fatal flaw in Clinton’s presumed path to the Democrat nomination: She has a Mitt Romney problem.

In 2012, President Obama successfully demonized Mitt Romney as out of touch with mainstream America. Obama pointed to the fact that Romney had a four-car garage with an elevator and worked for Bain Capital. 

Romney didn’t help himself either. His “47 percent” comment, although taken out of context, only further hurt the former Massachusetts governor. As a Mitt Romney supporter, that isn’t easy to admit.

In the end, Obama’s attacks worked. According to the Boston Globe, “voters preferred Romney’s visions, values, and leadership.” Yet, “‘Obama beat Romney by an astonishing 81 to 18 percent margin on the question of which candidate ‘cares about people like me.’” According to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, Hillary Clinton faces a similar scenario.

To read the full article, click here.


Democrats have a Koch problem

POLITICO

As Senate Democrats brace for what looks to be a bruising election cycle, Majority Leader Harry Reid remains hellbent on demonizing David and Charles Koch as a central part of his campaign strategy. He is even planning a vote in the Senate to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, citing the brothers’ campaign spending — which could top $125 million this year, according to a new report in POLITICO — as one of the reasons. But as Democrats gear up to make the Kochs the boogeymen of 2014, their strategy faces some real problems.

Election season has barely begun, but Democrats have already launched an all-out assault against the billionaire brothers. Reid’s Senate Majority PAC has spent millions of dollars in campaign ads attacking them, while the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee unveiled a digital campaign called “The GOP is addicted to Koch.” Vulnerable Democrats across the country have made the brothers a central talking point on the campaign trail. Reid has even taken to the Senate floor to attack the Kochs, calling them “power-drunk billionaires” and “un-American” and accusing them of “trying to buy America.” So far, Reid has mentioned the Kochs at least 100 times on the Senate floor.

But if you pull back the curtain on the Democrats’ Koch brothers’ song and dance, you find that the premise of their campaign is not only flawed but actually underscores how hypocritical the party is when it comes to campaign finance. The reality is that it’s the Democrats who have a Koch problem.

Despite the millions in ads and the invective from candidates, a recently released Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows the brothers are relatively little-known. Half of the Americans surveyed don’t recognize their names, and a paltry 21 percent have negative feelings about them. Moreover, at a time when Americans list the economy and jobs as the top issues they are facing, demonizing these two individuals seems trivial. And in many of the states where vulnerable Democrats, like Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, have made the brothers a campaign theme, many voters owe their livelihoods to Koch-owned enterprises.

Full article is here.


Why the ‘war on women’ propaganda won’t work

Daily Caller

Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid are getting ready to dust off the 2012 “War on Women” playbook and reuse it this election cycle. As a Republican woman, I say bring it on.

While Pelosi, Reid and their cronies try to scare women voters with overplayed “War on Women” propaganda, they are missing the big picture. Republicans aren’t at war with women, but recent studies indicate women are at war with Obamacare. A CNN/ORC International survey shows that 60 percent of women oppose the disastrous healthcare law.

In 2010, Republicans took back the House by historic margins largely because of Obamacare. A study in the journal American Politics Research showed that their support for the law cost incumbent Democrats 5.8 percentage points at the polls. Heading into the president’s second midterm election, which historically means significant losses for the party in the White House, Republicans are once again on solid ground. With history on our side and support for the healthcare law down with key demographics like millennials and women, Republicans are poised to make significant gains in the Senate this November.

It’s not surprising why the law is so unpopular, particularly with women. Eighty percent of women make the healthcare decisions for their families. By passing the Affordable Care Act, Democrats took that right away from them, and in many cases forced them to pay more for fewer options. Before Obamacare was passed, the majority of Americans were happy with their insurance plans. Now, as a result of the law, their plans have been cancelled or altered, premiums have skyrocketed, and businesses have cut workers’ hours and jobs.

Full article is here.


Republicans Need to Look Past November

Roll Call

The headlines look good for Republicans. Political prognosticator Nate Silver has recently predicted that Republicans have a 60 percent chance of taking back the Senate this November. Election guru and CQ Roll Call columnist Stuart Rothenberg has projected gains of four to eight seats.

As a young Republican woman, I should feel confident about the future of the party, but I don’t. I am worried that a victory this November will mask deeper problems in the party.

The 2012 election results highlighted the need for change. President Barack Obama won soundly with women, young voters and minorities, signaling a deep disconnect between these key demographics and Republicans. It was also a year where comments like Todd Aikin’s “legitimate rape” painted the party as extreme and out of touch.

For evidence, look no further than the Republican National Committee’s autopsy of the party’s 2012 failings. The detailed report conceded that many voters believe Republicans are “scary,” “narrow minded,” and “out of touch.” The party of “stuffy old men.” This perception hasn’t changed and we continue to lose ground with growing demographics of voters in this country.

Full article is here