
Before she dropped out of the GOP presidential race, Michele Bachmann waxed apocalyptic about how 2012 is the Republican Party's only chance to repeal the health reform law. "We cannot afford to have a candidate who fails to understand the complexity of Obamacare or the urgency of its repeal," the Minnesota congresswoman said in an often-repeated line. "Because, we have only have one chance for repeal, and that's 2012."
There's truth to this statement: if Republicans fail to capture the presidency this time around, repealing some or all of the law becomes far more difficult later, even if the GOP sweeps Congress in 2012 and wins the White House in 2016 with equal determination to squash it.
"The 2012 election will be the most important in the history of our health care system because it will determine whether the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is implemented or repealed," wrote Harvard health policy expert David Blumenthal in the New England Journal of Medicine. "The consequences for Americans and their health care will be huge."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The Super Committee is poised to fail after markets close on Monday -- which is to say the 12 members weren't able to agree on a package of new revenues and lower spending to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion over 10 years. That was their charge, and insofar as they didn't do what they set out to do, they "failed."
But if Republicans and Democrats keep failing to agree on this stuff for the next year and change, the result will be an extraordinary decrease in federal deficits -- many multiples of what the Super Committee was tasked with finding.
We've been over this before, but the point is actually stronger now than it was earlier this year, because of the outcome of the debt limit fight. Between the looming expiration of the Bush tax cuts and other temporary tax provisions ($4.8 trillion), a large, scheduled drop in Medicare physician reimbursement rates ($300 billion), the soon-to-be triggered penalties for Super Committee failure ($1.2 trillion), and the resulting savings on servicing the national debt ($900 billion), deficits are set to drop by over $7 trillion automatically, unless Congress affirmatively stops it. That's on top of the $1 trillion-plus dollars Congress banked in the debt ceiling fight.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Congressional Democrats weren't surprised Tuesday to learn, in a story first reported by the Wall Street Journal, that White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley had handed a big chunk of his portfolio over to senior adviser -- and former acting Chief of Staff -- Pete Rouse. Indeed, they've been living under the new regime for several weeks, and according to one highly placed Senate Democratic aide the improvement has been self evident.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Democrats will continue their push to pass pieces of President Obama's jobs bill by forcing another test vote, in just over a week, on legislation to fund key infrastructure projects, and to seed an infrastructure bank, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced Friday.
The legislation would provide $50 billion worth of direct investment to transportation and other infrastructure projects, and create a federal infrastructure bank, with authority to loan money to states and private companies to build out public-use infrastructure.
The kicker is that it will be paid for with a 0.7 percent surtax on income over $1 million a year. That's a slight tick higher than the minuscule surtax Democrats proposed to pay for legislation to hire teachers and emergency first responders that Republicans filibustered late Thursday night.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)If the left and the right are proxies in a class war, then they're currently fighting to win a battle of public perception. Each side wants the public to see them as on the side of the beleaguered many against the powerful few.
Democrats are vying for victory by supporting tax increases on millionaires and the "Buffett Rule," which posits that all millionaires should pay at least the same effective tax rates as the middle class. The Occupy Wall Street protesters have turned "We Are The 99 Percent" into a rallying cry.
How do you argue against that? By obscuring what the fight's really about, and perpetuating the sense that hundreds of millions of people are gaming the system. To do this, conservatives and Republican elected officials are citing recent data to create the impression that a small majority of people in the country pay all the taxes, and nearly half (a large minority) pay nothing at all. It's a false impression, and when you break down who comprises this now-famous "47 percent" -- the poor, the disabled, and the elderly -- it makes you wonder why anybody thought it was a good idea to pick a public fight with them.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republican and Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill were supposed to spend the weekend breaking an impasse over emergency disaster assistance that threatens not just to cripple FEMA but also to shut down the entire government.
According to a top congressional source, they've gotten nowhere, with both parties unwilling to cave. But one eventually must.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Thursday said Democrats overwhelmingly support President Obama's jobs bill, despite opposition from a handful of loud party conservatives.
"Let me just say that what you're suggesting is anecdotal. ... the plural of anecdote is not data," Pelosi said in response to TPM's question at her weekly Capitol press conference. "Our caucus is very unified in support of the American Jobs Act and the fact that it is paid for. It may differ with some provisions within it, or the pay-fors, but they do not differ in the fact that we must get behind it."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and of the three caucuses of black, Hispanic and Asian members of the House would like a word with President Obama before his Thursday jobs address.
In a Tuesday letter provided by a source, the leaders, who speak for a majority of House Dems, sought to make sure that Obama keeps his eye on the jobs crisis, which has disproportionately hit minority groups.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) strongly chided the GOP today for using a movie clip from the film "The Town," in which two criminals agree to a revenge attack, in order to rally lawmaker support for Speaker Boehner's new debt bill currently being rewritten in the House.
The playing of the clip, organized by members of House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy's (R-CA) staff, happened in a closed-door caucus meeting on Tuesday. It features Ben Affleck's character asking for a friend's aid in order to "hurt some people."
"Who are they planning to hurt?" demanded Wasserman Schultz, adding: "Unfortunately that short clip from 'The Town' tells you everything you need to know about their approach to the negotiations over the debt ceiling," she said, after showing the clip to the attending media.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)As a sign of just how reluctant conservatives are to throw in their lot with House GOP leadership and pass their plan to avoid default, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) suggested to reporters Tuesday that the votes aren't there yet.
"We're going to have some work to do to get it passed," Boehner said at a brief press conference in the lobby of RNC Headquarters. "But I think we can."
Democrats are whipping against the bill, to prevent Republicans from claiming bipartisan support for their plan. And if all Dems vote no, Boehner has a slim margin for error if he's going to squeeze his plan through the House. More than three dozen Republicans have pledged in the past not to support an increase in the debt limit unless and until Congress passes a Constitutional amendment requiring balanced budgets, slashing spending to historic lows, and functionally prohibiting tax cuts. If they all adhere to that pledge, Boehner's bill can't pass.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Democrats today unleashed a torrent of criticism against the GOP's Cut, Cap, and Balance Act which passed the House late last night via a heavily partisan vote, re-branding it as a political scheme that would "kill medicare" and one that would never pass in the Senate.
"Let me make this as simple as I can: the Republican scheme to cap, cut, and kill medicare is dead on arrival in the senate," declared Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) at a press conference in Washington. "[It] would wreak havoc on our country's seniors, the middle class, military preparedness, and our country's standing in the world - their plan to cut, cap, and kill medicare is the Ryan plan on steroids."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)CBS News released a poll Monday morning outlining Americans' response to the ongoing negotiations on raising the debt ceiling, and one thing is clear: everyone involved is taking a hit.
71% of respondents disapproved of Republicans' handling of the debt talks, with only 21% approving. But beyond the lack of general buy-in to their legislative tactics, CBS reports that they even face a challenge in convincing their own base.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Congressional Democrats introduced a bill today that would take some of the sting out of last year's controversial Citizens United decision by empowering shareholders to weigh in before a corporation makes any political contribution.
The Shareholder Protection Act is a last ditch-effort by Democrats to stem the tide of unlimited political expenditures that corporations will surely use to influence the 2012 election, and one wisely crafted on the conservative premise that shareholders' wallets ought to have the same level of free speech protection as the corporations they helped create.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)President Obama tried to use the bully pulpit to pressure Congressional leaders to wrest free of some of their ideological binds and come together to hammer out a long-term debt deal, warning both sides he would not accept a temporary 30- to 60-day stop-gap fix.
"I have been hearing from our Republican friends that it's a moral imperative for us to tackle our debates and deficits in a serious way," Obama told reporters at a briefing Monday. "So what I've said to them is let's go. It is possible for us to construct a package to involve both parties to take on their sacred cows."
[TPM SLIDESHOW: Battle Over The Budget At The White House]
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Social Security benefit cuts may be a bridge too far for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). But what if Republicans and Democrats alike just agreed to refer to a benefit cut by another name.
That's how key negotiators have decided to treat one policy proposal, popular in Washington, that would simultaneously raise tax revenues and reduce Social Security benefits. As explained at length here, the idea is to peg federal Cost of Living Adjustments to a new, stingier measure of inflation.
Experts say the new index (the so-called Chained Consumer Price Index) is a more realistic metric for measuring inflation's impact on peoples' behavior. But the fact remains that if the change goes through as part of a grand bargain to lower deficits and raise the debt limit, retirees will receive less money each month than they're currently promised.
And if you think Democrats are playing dumb because they want a deal, think again. They're some of the biggest supporters of this plan.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Several weeks after Republicans and Democrats began high-level negotiations to slash federal spending by trillions of dollars -- the GOP's price for raising the national borrowing limit, and avoiding a catastrophic debt default -- Democrats finally peeped up. New tax revenues, of some kind, of some amount, would have to be part of the deal.
The group, led by Vice President Joe Biden, had already identified nearly $2 trillion in cuts to discretionary and mandatory spending programs -- nearly enough to raise the debt limit through the end of 2012 and take a contentious issue off the table this election season.
That's when Democrats said, "your turn to give!" and put $400 billion in tax cuts on the table. Republicans balked. No tax hikes at all. Some Republicans have left the door open to closing certain indefensible loopholes. But party leaders have tried, for all intents and purposes, to take the tax code off the table. Cuts only.
The Democrats' response, from the rank and file up to President Obama, has been a political twofer. If Republicans are taking all taxes off the table, then they're playing reverse Robin Hood -- demanding trillions in cuts to social programs while refusing to budge on preferences to unfathomably wealthy special interests. It's class war, but in tactical sense. If they can make the GOP feel so uncomfortable that they agree to end special tax favors for the ultra-wealthy -- even if those favors don't ultimately cost that much money -- then maybe they can break the anti-tax firewall and encroach on $400 billion.
Here's what they're focusing on.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)They've made it explicit. Democrats are accusing Republicans of trying to sabotage the recovery -- or at least stall it -- by blocking all short-term measures to boost the economy, even ones they previously supported.
In a Capitol press conference Wednesday, the Senate's top Democrats argued that Republicans don't want to pass measures like a temporary payroll tax holiday for employers because they'll improve President Obama's re-election chances.
"Our Republican colleagues in the House and Senate are driven by putting one man out of work: President Obama," said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL).
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)After two weeks of controversy, the consulting giant McKinsey & Company has broken its silence. The group came under fire from health care reformers for publishing a contrarian study finding that President Obama's health care reform law will prompt large numbers of employers to stop offering health insurance benefits -- and for refusing to publish its methodology or survey results.
Under public pressure from top Democrats in Congress and from professional peers, the firm has issued a long statement partially defending the study and explaining the roots of the kerfuffle. McKinsey has also released both the survey materials and results that provided the data from which its report was drawn.
"We stand by the integrity and methodology of the survey," reads an official statement from McKinsey. "The survey was not intended as a predictive economic analysis of the impact of the Affordable Care Act."
If the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. comes clean about the methodology behind its recent report that claims "Obamacare" will significantly undermine worker's health benefits, they'll have plenty of allies -- among conservatives.
A new line is gaining traction among health care reform opponents. They claim that McKinsey is entitled as a private company to keep its survey materials private -- and if they cave, they'll unleash a wave of administration bullying and antagonism against businesses on a White House enemies list.
"In economic terms this is the equivalent of a journalist being told to reveal their source," said Fox Business host Stuart Varney on Fox News Friday. "[I]f congress finds out which companies are indeed going to leave ObamaCare, then they will be subject -- maybe -- to all kind of pressure. Intimidation. Bullying. They may be on an enemy's list. There may be retribution against those companies."
In response to this, the anchor noted, "If you are an American insurance company and you say to McKinsey, 'You know, we are curious how this is going to affect us and how it's going to affect the people that we cover and the companies we're involved in, we would like to hire you privately to do a study to give us information on that. I think most folk would say that's a closed circle. That's a business arrangement. You give us the research and we'll pay you for it."
Watch:
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A bitter, behind-the-scenes fight over the GOP's Medicare phase-out plan has bubbled out into the open, and now Democrats are openly charging Republicans with censoring their communications with constituents.
Several House Democrats are petitioning House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), in a letter first reported by Roll Call, to step in and stop Republicans on the House Administration Committee from blocking Democratic Medicare mailers.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A growing chorus of progressives is calling on Democrats to keep their mouths shut when it comes to Rep. Anthony Weiner's (D-NY) future -- and are dismissing the Democratic calls for Weiner to step down as another sign of the timidity of the party.
It's not so much that Weiner didn't screw up royally, they say. It's that they say it's just not that big a deal, and making it into one falls into a Republican trap. And, besides, they say, as long as Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is still walking the halls of the Capitol, why should the left be forced to lose one of its most ardent supporters?
It's not clear how far this will develop. Defending Weiner is not something many are willing to do. But for some progressives, the response to Weiner is another sign of the Democratic party letting its left wing down.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Even though Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) couldn't find it in his heart to do his full part in ponying up to help his party in elections, he managed to donate to Rep. Charlie Rangel's legal defense fund, according to a TPM search of his campaign finance records.
Weiner cut a check for $2,000 to Rangel's defense fund in January to help defray the roughly $2 million in legal fees Rangel amassed after a nearly three-year investigation into a string of financial irregularities, which resulted in a House censure last year.
But the embarrassed and embattled Weiner has yet to donate any money to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee so far this cycle. The stinginess has been duly noted, party insiders say, and has contributed to his reputation as a shameless self-promoter who was only using his Congressional post as a stepping stone to the New York mayor's office.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The words "voted to" could come back to haunt House Speaker John Boehner.
In his weekly Capitol briefing with reporters Thursday, Boehner made an unmistakably false claim. "The only people in Washington, DC who have voted to cut Medicare have been the Democrats when they voted to cut $500 billion in Medicare during Obamacare," he said. Given a chance to walk it back, Boehner's spokesman did not.
Even if you leave out the key modifier "voted to" this is far from true. Both parties have actually "cut" Medicare many times over the years. Republicans in particular haven't just voted for cuts, but passed legislation that presidents either signed or vetoed.
That happened repeatedly in the 1990s, as laid out in detail here. In late 1995 and early 1996, it precipitated a government shutdown. In 1997, it resulted in the Balanced Budget Act.
But if you leave the modifier in, this turns into a huge whopper.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Democrats are riding high on their victory in Tuesday's special election in NY-26 -- a Republican district that turned blue largely because the GOP has now aligned itself with a plan to phase out Medicare and replace it with subsidized private insurance. And Democrats won't let voters forget it.
In an implicit admission that they're now heavily vulnerable on this issue, Republicans -- particularly Senate Republicans -- are threatening to revisit their attack on Democrats for cutting Medicare as part of the health care law that passed last year. Underlying that threat is another one: if Democrats and Republicans reach a deal on the debt limit that involves further Medicare cuts then it's likely that for every Republican who supports privatizing Medicare, there will be a Democrat who voted at least once to cut Medicare.
In a Capitol press conference Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took on the major differences between cutting and basically eliminating.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Could Republicans be in for a hard time next year now that the auto industry is struggling back to its feet? Democrats say yes. On a Tuesday morning conference call with reporters, former Democratic Govs. Jennifer Granholm (MI) and Ted Strickland (OH) said voters in their states are enjoying thousands of new jobs thanks to the auto industry bailout Republicans (these days, anyway) love to hate.
And with Chrysler completing its repayment of $7.6 billion in federal loans six years early, Democrats say the Republicans running for president -- all of whom slammed the bailout program, they say -- have found themselves on the wrong side on what has turned out to be a successful jobs program.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Is it possible that Democrats will squander the political advantage on Medicare that they just regained over Republicans? It could happen.
At his weekly Capitol briefing with reporters Tuesday, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) confirmed what aides in both parties have been telling reporters: Cuts to Medicare will be on the table in deficit and debt limit negotiations, led by Vice President Joe Biden.
After arguing that Democrats made significant headway toward extending Medicare's solvency with the health care law, Hoyer said, "Do I believe that there are other things we can do related to Medicare? The answer is I do. I'm not going to get into articulating each one, but my expectation is they will be under discussion by the Biden group."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) offered an unusually blunt assessment of the sources of U.S. debt in a Monday speech before an audience of Republican and Democratic elder-statesmen -- calling Republicans on the carpet for creating systemic deficits, then holding U.S. creditworthiness as hostage to a highly contentious right-wing ideological agenda.
In a Monday speech at the Bipartisan Policy Center, Hoyer said both parties are responsible for addressing the country's unsustainable fiscal trajectory. But he insisted on reminding Republicans that they did far more than Democrats to create the debt, and in so doing, he prompted one famous audience member to attempt to rebut the claims extemporaneously.
"It is not tenable for us to hold ransom the creditworthiness of the United States," Hoyer said, adding that the GOP's negotiating posture "ignores that some of their own policies helped get us where we are today."
From there he recited the three decade history of the current debt most of which is the result of GOP policies.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)When it comes to earmarks, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is accusing House Republicans of wanting to have their cake and eat it too.
House Republicans, she told reporters earlier this week, have added numerous line items for special projects into the defense-authorization bill, and thus, are violating their own self-imposed earmark moratorium.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Just a few months removed from last year's midterm elections, the wave that swept Republicans to an epic victory has already receded, as they now trail Democrats in a generic election ballot, according to the latest TPM Poll Average.
Last year, Republicans held a huge edge in generic ballot surveys as voters turned against the party in power, Democrats. But since taking over control of the House of Representatives back in January, that big lead has quickly evaporated, giving Democrats an edge they haven't had in the TPM Poll Average in about a year and a half, since November 2009.
The poll that tipped the scales came this week from CNN. In that survey of adults nationwide, Democrats emerged with a 50% to 46% edge over Republicans. As a result, the TPM Poll Average shifted just enough to give Democrats a tiny lead, 42.4% to 42.2%.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)House progressives are trying to draw attention to language Republicans have included in an annual must-pass defense bill, which they say will dramatically expand Presidential power in the war on terrorism. The pushback comes just over a week after U.S. forces killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and reignites one of the most controversial disputes the country's faced over the past decade. At stake is the question of whether Congress will allow the war on terrorism to continue indefinitely, or let it slowly dissipate as the years since September 11, 2001 pass.
The origin of the language in the defense bill dates back to March, when President Obama signed an executive order -- derided by some of his closest allies -- that effectively formalized an indefinite detention system at Guantanamo.
In response, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) and his colleagues unveiled legislation intended to codify the intent of that executive order, and update the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force -- the legal underpinning off the war on terrorism.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will force Republicans to vote on the House GOP budget, Medicare privatization and all. That's a shrewd move no matter the result -- either a lot of Republicans vote for it, and then own it politically, or it splits the party and validates the view that supporting the plan is an extreme position.
But it's also the Senate, and that means the minority can swing right back at the Democrats.
"While Sen. Reid may think that's a clever move, how is he going to explain to his members that they have to vote on the President's budget, or any of the House Democrat budgets that they can't possible support," notes a Senate Republican aide. "The President's budget alone would split the hell out of his conference. We've seen this movie before when he held a vote on H.R. 1 [the House Republican spending bill] and a vote on the Dem alternative -- it backfired because the House bill got MORE votes than the Senate Dem bill. I can't imagine very many of the Senate Dems could defend the President's budget."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)If Democrats proposed to turn Medicare into a system that only provided free veterinary services to seniors, would Republicans be lying to say Dems wanted to "end Medicare," without including the caveat "as we know it"?
Of course not. But that's more or less the charge PolitiFact is leveling at Democrats over a new DCCC ad (below) which flatly charges Republicans with proposing to "end Medicare." The House GOP budget, which passed with all but two GOP votes over unanimous Democratic opposition, would over time replace the single-payer, government-run Medicare program with a different system that subsidizes private insurance plans for beneficiaries. Those subsidies would work like vouchers -- they would increase in value year-on-year at a much slower pace than the rate of the rise of health care costs, thus leaving seniors exposed to increasing costs as time goes on.
Republicans call this new health insurance system "Medicare." But it's a completely different program from today's Medicare. PolitiFact doesn't see it that way.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)At a fundraiser in San Francisco Wednesday evening, President Obama took direct, and unusually blunt, aim at a faction in the U.S. Congress that played a major role in upending his plan to pass sweeping clean energy and climate change legislation.
"There are climate change deniers in Congress and when the economy gets tough, sometimes environmental issues drop from people's radar screens," Obama told about 200 guests at the Pacific Heights residence of internet billionaire Marc Benioff, according to an official transcript. "But I don't think there's any doubt that unless we are able to move forward in a serious way on clean energy that we're putting our children and our grandchildren at risk. So that's not yet done."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A powerful union is lobbying Democratic and Republican congressional negotiators to make sure they don't curtail worker rights when they finalize new FAA legislation.
A conference committee composed of a bipartisan group of senators and congressmen will soon sort out differences between two different versions of the bill. But the House bill contains a provision that would make it much more difficult for airline and rail workers to form unions. More on that provision here -- it would reinstate old rules that count abstentions as "no" votes in union elections, thus stacking the deck against pro-union workers.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans have controlled the House of Representatives for just over 100 days. In that time, they've worked with Democrats to prevent a government shutdown, and worked alone to pass a budget. They've put the big entitlements on the table, and proposed slowly phasing out one of them -- Medicare -- altogether. In so doing, they've fundamentally shifted the center of the debate on Capitol Hill significantly to the right.
Along the way some individuals have enjoyed the limelight, others have suffered embarrassments, and yet more have just gone along for the ride. But in the end it's not about the personalities -- John Boehner, Harry Reid, or even Barack Obama. It's about the very things that have born the brunt of the impact of the new direction in Washington. Here are our top five winners and losers at the 100 day milestone.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans were caught with their pants down Friday when Democrats pulled a fast one on the House floor. In the lead up to a vote on their controversial budget, Republicans nearly zapped it and replaced it with an even more conservative 10-year vision for the country -- the right-wing Republican Study Committee's budget alternative.
To recap, Democrats took a flyer.
They waited until the last minute, and then voted "present" on the RSC plan. That put the question of whether to swap out Paul Ryan's plan for the RSC's in GOP hands. At the last moment, Republicans realized that a majority of their party had voted for the farther-reaching budget and had to whip votes backwards to prevent it from passing accidentally. It was quite a scene.
But what exactly were they voting on? What does a majority of the House Republican caucus secretly want to do that the budget they ultimately passed doesn't accomplish?
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)What was supposed to be a routine vote in the House -- to knock down an amendment authored by conservative Republicans -- turned into pandemonium on the House floor Friday, as Democrats tried to jam the plan through, and hang it around the GOP's necks.
The vote was on the Republican Study Committee's alternative budget -- a radical plan that annihilates the social contract in America by putting the GOP budget on steroids. Deeper tax cuts for the wealthy, more severe entitlement rollbacks.
Normally something like that would fail by a large bipartisan margin in either the House or the Senate. Conservative Republicans would vote for it, but it would be defeated by a coalition of Democrats and more moderate Republicans. But today that formula didn't hold. In an attempt to highlight deep divides in the Republican caucus. Dems switched their votes -- from "no" to "present."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)With the help of 81 Democrats,the House passed legislation Thursday to fund the government through September and avoid a government shutdown. Fifty-nine Republicans defected from GOP leadership, leaving Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) woefully short of the necessary majority to pass the bill without Democratic help. The final vote was 260-167.
The fact that Boehner needed nearly 40 Democratic votes to pass the resolution and avoid a government shutdown was a stunning blow to his leadership, especially after he shut House Democrats out of budget negotiations and just a few days ago dismissed the need to secure any Democratic votes.
The GOP defections came after news reports revealed that the legislation will only cut $350 million in immediate spending -- not the $38 billion that had been advertised. Indeed, the defections may have been worse if Republican leaders hadn't enlisted the help of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of George W. Bush's budget office, to explain the massive discrepancy to skeptical members Thursday morning. Holtz-Eakin ran through his presentation again Thursday afternoon on a conference call with bloggers.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A CBO analysis of the spending cut compromise Democrats and Republicans reached last week that may have avoided a government shutdown has turned into a public relations nightmare for House Speaker John Boehner.
As advertised, when the House and Senate pass the spending bill this afternoon, domestic discretionary appropriations will fall $38 billion from levels set at the beginning of the year. But because some of the cuts will be realized over years, and because some of the savings are culled from left-over money in existing accounts, the bill will only reduce direct spending by about $350 million.
Politico's David Rogers was the first to crunch the numbers, which we've since confirmed. When viewed from this perspective, Boehner appears to have gotten a raw deal, and the White House looks pretty savvy. Conservatives activists and House members were caught off guard, and angry, and now Boehner's making the rounds to calm everyone's nerves and convince members once again that he got the best possible deal.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Americans have almost nothing nice to say about the budget negotiations that narrowly averted a government shutdown, but that doesn't mean they have nothing to say at all.
In a Pew poll released Tuesday, just 3% of adult Americans nationwide used positive terms to describe the budget negotiations, while 69% described the negotiations negatively. Additionally, 16% used neutral terms to express their feelings about the budget wrangling that nearly resulted in a government shutdown last week.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
