david hogberg at the american spectator makes that case. read it all here.

Would Bush and a Democrat-controlled House be an improvement over recent years? Doubtful. Bush is, at best, a squish on fiscal restraint (and that’s being charitable). Last week, House Democrats voted overwhelmingly, 147-45, against a modest earmark reform bill. Sure, Bush might get serious about spending once the Democrats took over, but what would his argument be — that the Democrats were trying to undo all the fiscal restraint he imposed? Indeed, the press would portray him as a cynic, only caring about spending now that the opposition is in power. Since the White House doesn’t seem to have the stomach for such a fight, a more likely scenario is Bush and the House Democrats cutting budget deals resulting in spending increases as bad, if not worse, than what we have now.

There are other areas where the Bush Administration could cut deals with House Democrats that should disturb conservatives. With the Democrats in charge, a Senate-style immigration bill — i.e., amnesty — is far more likely to pass the House. From there it is a quick trip through the Senate to Bush’s signing pen.

Yes, conservatives, myself included, are rightly disgusted with Congressional Republicans’ profligacy. But that disgust is beginning to get through, with Congress recently approving an online database to track spending and the House passing the aforementioned earmark reform. Such efforts will surely stall should Democrats win control of the House. The answer is to keep up the pressure through the grassroots and blogosphere efforts like Porkbusters.A GOP loss of the House in November is just as likely to create more problems for conservatives than it is likely to solve, proving once again that, in politics, there is little virtue in losing.

i think that the grassroots and conservative blogs have made a serious difference in changing the priorities of congressional republicans. (it doesn’t hurt that there is an election coming up either.) will conservatives get everything that we want by keeping republicans in power? the answer is probably not, but we are more likely to get what we want with republicans in charge. there is no reason to believe that democrats will enact strong immigration reform (border security first, no amnesty), make a serious attempt to control spending, or make specific proposals to make it easier to protect our country from terrorist attacks. if those are issues that we care about, the better risk is voting for republicans.

tags: republicans, democrats, ’06 election