Certainly not. the House and Senate are nominally Republican, but moderate RINOs in the Senate number 5-7 and with 49 Democrats that makes a RINO+Democrat majority. There are no more than 40 or so reliable *conservatives* in the Senate.
In the House, it is about the same, but at least we have a conservative leadership with guys like Tom DeLay who mostly are able to get conservative bills through the House.
If we had a conservative majority, we would be drilling in ANWR by now. We arent because even thought Bush admin supports it, no Democrats do, and there are enough Republican RINOs against it so it doesnt happen. If we had a conservative majority, we would never have seen CFR pass - that bill was passed by 100% Democrats and enough RINO Republicans to make it a majority bill.
The same holds for other bills - you talk of "amnesty". Of course, the Democrats have PROPOSED OUT AND OUT AMNESTY - 'legalizing' illegal aliens and changing the status of millions to getting a quick path to citizenship. IF THE DEMOCRATS INCREASE THEIR SENATE NUMBERS BY 2 AND THEIR HOUSE NUMBERS BY 14 THAT IS WHAT THEY WILL PASS!! Please, observe the real 'lay of the land' on the political battlefield. We are out on the right flank, and the battle is joined at the center. Breaking away will cause conservatives to lose power rapidly and leave America run by Socialists... This is not hard to imagine. Gore nearly was president, and a 3% shift in polls would make the whole Federal government fall into a liberal Democrat 100% power. It's closer and more dangerous than you think.
Bush is now about ready to sign, sans protest, an omnibus bill that's $500B in the red. Given the war that is currently on and the expenses associated with that, given the cut in reveneues from first the recession and then the tax cuts which jump started the economy but which depress revenues for a while, I dont find the deficit to be the biggest issue. The biggest issue is the trend in spending in the long term... you say later:
Two points: 1) Discretionary spending will be up considerly more than 1% You dont know that - Bush has proposed effectively FREEZING discretionary spending. IF we have a conservative majority Congress in 2005 we can easily hold that line. With Demcorats in charge, who knows. 2) Bush's own words of assurance says nothing about even attempting to control non-discretionary spending. And yet you miss out on a BIG POINT - Bush has actually openned the debate on reforming Social Security - he is proposing setting aside SocSec taxes to worker-owened accounts. They call it "non-discretionary" precisely because the only way to change the cost trajectory is to change laws. Bush is doing the right and IMHO courageous thing of openning that debate.
As with the other debates, it will only go our way if we have a Conservative majority in Congress... Conservative - not "republican" with a bunch of McCain, Spectre, Chuck Hegel, Snowe type Republicans... but Conservatives - like Santorum, Lott, George Allen, Sununu, DeLay, Tancredo, Mike Pence, Pat Toomey, Saxby Chambliss, Pete Session, Sen Sessions, Charles Norwood, Ron Paul, Joe Barton, Sam Johnson, Chris Cox, Mitch McConnell, etc. As you clearly know, the "R" label doesnt guarantee being a conservative - but anyone in Congress without an "R" is surely NOT Conservative.
For the point you make - that the 3R led government has been in control for two years ... It has been frustrating to see that things I care about - Like ANWR - dont get passed, and things that are too moderate/liberal do. But in all areas you need to look carefully. In the Medicare drug bill for example, The Senate had a majority - 49 Democrats and a few Republicans who had ALREADY passed a more expensive, Liberal, a govt-controlling drug prescription benifit bill. Had we had a Gore President and a few more Democrats, the idea of medical savings accounts and trying medicare choice programs would be a pipe dream. So are we better off without prescription drug plan at all??? Conservatives forget unconvenient facts: The majority of elected officials in Congress, Democrat and Republican - and the President - were on record in favor of a drug benefit. The real debate was (a) getting a consensus and (b) finding out where the consensus was. ... In the end, the bill was disappointing in many respects but not as expensive as it otherwise would have been had conservative lawmakers like DeLay not been at the table at all.