Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Saturday, January 17, 2026
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 1015)
Opinion

“It’s not true that life is one damn thing after another — it’s one damn thing over and over.”

— Edna St. Vincent Millay

WASHINGTON — Liberals’ love of recycling extends to their ideas, one of which illustrates the miniaturization of Barack Obama’s presidency. He fervently favors a minor measure that would have mostly small, mostly injurious effects on a small number of people. Nevertheless, raising the minimum hourly wage for the 23rd time since 1938, from today’s $7.25 to $10.10, is a nifty idea, if:

If government is good at setting prices. Government — subsidizer of Solyndra, operator of the ethanol program, creator of HealthCare.gov — uses minimum wage laws to set the price for the labor of workers who are apt to add only small value to the economy.

If you think government should prevent two consenting parties — an employer and a worker — from agreeing to an hourly wage that government disapproves.

If you think today’s 7 percent unemployment rate is too low. (It would be 10.9 percent if the workforce participation rate were as high as it was when Obama was first inaugurated; since then, millions of discouraged workers have stopped searching for jobs.) Because less than 3 percent of the workforce earns the minimum wage, increasing it will not greatly increase unemployment. Still, raising the price of low-productivity workers will somewhat reduce demand for them.

If you reject that last sentence. If you do, name other goods or services for which you think demand is inelastic when their prices increase.

If you think teenage (16-19) unemployment (20.8 percent), and especially African-American teenage unemployment (35.8 percent), is too low. Approximately 24 percent of minimum wage workers are teenagers.

If you think government policy should encourage automation of the ordering and preparation of food to replace workers in the restaurant industry, which employs 43.8 percent of minimum wage workers.

If you think it is irrelevant that most minimum wage earners are not poor. Most minimum wage workers are not heads of households. More than half are students or other young, usually part-time workers in families whose average income is $53,000 a year, which is $2,000 more than the average household income.

If you do not care that there are more poor people whose poverty derives from being unemployed than from poor wages. True, some of the working poor earn so little they are eligible for welfare. But an increase in the minimum wage will cause some of these to become unemployed and on welfare.

If you do not mind a minimum wage increase having a regressive cost-benefit distribution. It would jeopardize marginal workers to benefit organized labor, which supports a higher minimum in the hope that this will raise the general wage floor, thereby strengthening unions’ negotiating positions.

If you think it is irrelevant that nearly two-thirds of minimum wage workers get a raise in their first year.

If you think a higher minimum wage, rather than a strengthened Earned Income Tax Credit, is the most efficient way to give money to the working poor.

If you think tweaking the minimum wage is a serious promotion of equality by an administration during which 95 percent of real income growth has accrued to the top 1 percent.

If you think forcing employers to spend X dollars more than necessary to employ labor for entry-level jobs will stimulate the economy. If you believe this, you must think the workers receiving the extra dollars will put the money to more stimulative uses than their employers would have. If so, why not a minimum wage of $50.50 rather than the $10.10? Because this might discourage hiring? What makes you sure you know the threshold where job destruction begins?

If you think the high school dropout rate is too low. In 1994, Congress decreed that by 2000 the graduation rate would be “at least” 90 percent. In 2010 it was 78.2 percent. Increasing the minimum wage would increase the incentive to leave school early. One scholarly study concluded that in states where students may leave school before 18, increases in the minimum wage caused teenage school enrollment to decline.

If the milk of human kindness flows by the quart in your veins, so you should also want to raise the minimum street charity: Take moral grandstanding oblivious of consequences to a new level by requiring anyone who gives money to panhandlers to give a minimum of $10. Beggars may not benefit, but you will admire yourself.

George Will’s email address is [email protected].

Raising the minimum wage is a recycled,

Policy, Polls, US

President Obama was joined by First Lady Michelle Obama at the White House to mark the 1-year anniversary of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. But a year after the shooting, both experts and public say Obama should focus more on mental health issues like the states have done, not stricter gun control laws.

Public opinion, though the polls vary, stands firmly on the side of mental health reforms the states have adopted, and not stricter gun control laws pushed by the Obama administration.

According to a Gallup survey released on September 20, 2013, the number of Americans who blame the mental health system “a great deal” was at 48 percent, while 32 percent blame it “a fair amount,” or 80 percent in total.

In fact, those who say they at least blame a fair amount on drug use outnumbered those who blamed guns. Similarly, a Rasmussen poll from September 20, nearly 1 year after the school shootings in Newtown, more Americans than ever said they believe reforming mental health issues was the best way to prevent such mass murders.

The survey found that 54 percent of American adults think more to treat mental health issues will have the most benefit to reduce the number of mass shootings, which was up 6 points from 48 percent measured by Rasmussen in mid-December of last year following the Newtown shooting, with just 23 percent saying stricter gun control laws will do the most, down from 27 percent a year ago.

Even 12 percent said they prefer limits on violent movies and video games over gun control, with 11 percent claiming they are not sure. A  CNN poll found the highest level of opposition to any new gun control measures since CNN started asking in 1989, which was mimicked by Gallup and examined overall in a recent PPD article.

Renowned psychiatrist, Dr. Keith Ablow, agreed with the American people blaming the state of our mental system, not President Obama and the Democrats who favor more gun control, particularly New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who has spent millions of dollars on ads to convince Americans otherwise.

“I wish that I could say that the year since Adam Lanza’s horrific acts has been one during which gun control advocates have realized their anti-gun agenda misses the point,” Ablow says. “Firearms aren’t the responsible variable in mass killings; untreated or poorly treated mental illness is.“

Reacting to public opinion, no doubt, following his failed push for stricter gun control laws, the Obama administration recently threw a token gesture at the problem. The White House announced $100 million for mental health programs, which came on the same day Vice President Biden met with the families of victims from the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown.

Dr. Ablow characterized the announcement as “an important gesture,” and while many were quick to give the Obama administration accolades over the announcement, they failed to ask a single question: What does $100 million buy in mental health care across the country?

The answer: Nothing, at all. We can answer this question only because the states, despite headwinds from a federal government seemingly bent on restricting the Second Amendment, have been throwing money at reform proposals far before Obama ever began pandering to victims’ families.

Texas, by itself, is committing more than double the federal government under the Obama proposal, increasing its mental health funding by $259 million, which is the largest increase in Texas State history.

“It was a huge investment for Texas,” Clark, with Mental Health America of Texas, said. “Historically, the state has been very low in per capita funding for mental health. There are a lot of different programs the money is going toward but one of the most important is that it will eliminate waiting lists for someone who has a mental illness to go in and get help.”

According to the State Mental Health Agency’s latest research which tracked total dollar and per capita expenditures in fiscal year 2010, Texas was at the time one of the lowest-funded states in terms of per capita funding, coming out to $38.99 per person. Idaho was the lowest with $57.4 million, or $36.64 per person.

Texas also increased the salaries for psychiatric nurses, approved a $1.6 million public awareness campaign and set aside $4 million for a veteran’s mental health program.

The White House says $50 million of the $100 million will be trusted to the Department of Health and Human Services, which is the same incompetent department responsible for the ObamaCare website debacle. The money will supposedly go to help community health centers hire more mental health professionals and provide additional services. The remaining money will be used by the Agriculture Department to improve mental health facilities in rural areas.

“It is a step in the right direction, but so much more needs to be done,” Lynn Lasky Clark, CEO of Mental Health America of Texas, told FoxNews.com.

As is the case with all top-down, government centered solutions, resources will most assuredly be arbitrarily and insufficiently divided, rendering the initiative an ineffective waste of money. John Grohol, founder and CEO of Psych Central, wrote in an online posting Thursday, “once you divide that amount by the approximately 750 community mental health centers in the country, it comes out to just $67,000 per center.”

“That’s one additional mental health professional per center — if that professional were a psychologist or such; maybe 2 if they were master’s level or less,” Grohol wrote.

Dr. Keith Ablow sees the same fundamental mental health care challenges stating, “We continue to cram the level of expertise available to psychiatric patients down further and further — often out of the reach of M.D.s, with those in need only being seen, for all intents and purposes, case workers or nurses.”

Unfortunately, Obama has already exacerbated the fundamental problem with ObamaCare, because hospitals and insurers will force doctors further from direct patient care in order to save money.

Under the new health care law, the amount of psychiatric patients that these non-M.D. health care professionals will be attempting to triage and treat will increase dramatically, “without any new strategy to keep them safe and the public safe,” Ablow said, adding that “the most ominous cases may well slip through even bigger cracks.”

The implementation of ObamaCare “will likely shift the distribution of financing sources for behavioral health care, as the expansion of private insurance and Medicaid coverage will lead these sources to account for a larger share of spending,” according to a report by the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.

Traditionally, financing behavioral health services has been the responsibility of state and local governments. But over time, with a dramatic acceleration under the Obama administration, the role of the federal government has increased. As usual, the federal government has decided to try to throw money at a problem in order to cover the fact they have, in large measure, created the problem in the first place.

Despite Biden’s comments Tuesday that the White House has “made it a priority to do everything we can to make it easier to access mental health services,” the Obama administration has done little to help advance the Excellence in Mental Health Act sponsored by Michigan Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow, which would direct more resources to the mental health system.

The bill has been tabled in Congress, but because it does nothing to restrict the Second Amendment, it is of no use to the Obama administration and gun control allies.

Mayor Bloomberg just donated $250 million to the Bloomberg School of Public Health for 40 new academic positions, which will deal with gun control issues. The 40 new roles with add to the 8 people already doing such work at the school.

President Obama met with 23 foundations in January where they agreed to shift their focus from health care reform to gun control issues, or in other words, “if you like your gun you can keep your gun.”

In June, the federal government’s National Research Council issued a new report supporting Obama’s push for federal funding of research on gun issues. “The lopsidedness of the report is just a sign of things to come,” wrote John Lott regarding the research to be funded by the Obama administration.

The newly adopted liberal strategy includes sneaking in fees and taxes for purchasing guns, which according to gun policy expert John Lott will reduce gun ownership, “particularly for the very people who need them the most, the most likely victims of crime, the poor in high-crime urban neighborhoods.”

While it is obvious that the issue of gun control isn’t going to stop being a scapegoat for liberals any time soon, at least the states have moved in the direction of mental health reforms favored by the experts and the public.

According to the NAMI report, 36 states and the District of Columbia increased funding for mental health services following the Newtown shooting. And according to the Treatment Advocacy Center, close to a dozen states either passed or strengthened laws that could allow more people to receive court-ordered treatment for symptoms of severe mental illness.

D.C. led the nation for the most spent per capita at $217 million or $360.57 per capita, followed by Maine at $459.7 million or $346.92 per capita and Alaska at $214 million or $310.01 per capita.

On the 1-year anniversary of the Newtown

News, Politics, Polls

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker proposed directing federal subsidies to Wisconsin’s poor and uninsured and allowing them to purchase coverage directly from the insurer, avoiding the online “exchange” created by ObamaCare, or the “Unaffordable” Care Act.

Walker’s idea is rapidly gaining support in the bitterly divided Wisconsin statehouse, which once took center stage on a bitter partisan battle over necessary budget reforms. Thus far, 6 Democrats have crossed party lines and backed Walker’s ObamaCare proposal in the assembly, sending it off to the Wisconsin Senate with large majority support.

There is one hang up, however. Walker’s ObamaCare deprive proposal would still need the Obama administration to approve it before it can go into effect.

“If they don’t approve this, this is ultimately exposing that this isn’t really about access and this isn’t about affordability,” says Walker. “It’s about government playing a heavier hand in these kinds of decisions.”

Walker’s ObamaCare proposal flies in the face of President Obama’s and Democrats’ claim that Republicans but don’t offer solutions on health care. In reality, until the failed rollout of ObamaCare, the media simply refused to cover conservative alternatives to ObamaCare.

“They sure haven’t presented an alternative.  If you ask many of the opponents of this law what exactly they’d do differently, their answer seems to be, well, let’s go back to the way things used to be,” the President said in a White House speech December 3.

But many Republican politicians have offered other proposals, including Rep. Tom Price of Georgia and Rep. Paul Ryan, also of Wisconsin.

The Republican plans are generally consumer driven, says Ed Haislmaier of The Heritage Group, a conservative think tank.

“The patient makes choices,” says Haislmaier, unlike a government-centered solution that puts a bureaucrat between Americans and their doctors.

Supporters of the president’s plan say conservative counter-proposals lack the reach of the so-called “Affordable” Care Act, which has proven to be quite unaffordable to the vast majority of Americans.

“I’ve yet to hear a Republican alternative which covers nearly as many uninsured or even half as many uninsured,” says economist Jonathan Gruber. “Or offers evidence-based solutions to the health care cost crisis.”

ObamaCare remains deeply unpopular due to a variety of facts, including a slew of broken promises and un-affordability. It will be a political quagmire for the president and members of his party who are up for reelection if they are seen as blocking any proposal to improve on the fatally flawed law, particularly considering the Democratic mantra has relied upon Republicans supposedly not offering up solutions.

Governor Scott Walker has now done just that, as other Republicans have done, only the governor’s ObamaCare “fix” has received national attention.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker proposed a reprieve

Religion, US

The cross at the Mount Soledad Veterans Memoria in La Jolla, Calif., has been declared an unconstitutional entanglement of government and religion by a liberal, activist judge.

The Mount Soledad Cross in California is an unconstitutional religious display on government land and must come down, a liberal federal judge in San Diego ruled late Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Larry Burns ordered the cross, which honors Korean War veterans, must be removed within 90 days — a decision Burns knew could result in the case being sent back to the U.S. Supreme Court. Burns immediately stayed his order pending an expected appeal.

The lawsuit, which was first filed in 2006 by the American Civil Liberties Union, was brought forth on behalf of the Jewish Veterans of the United States of American and several other Southern California residents.

“We support the government paying tribute to those who served bravely in our country’s armed forces,” the ACLU’s Daniel Mach, said in a statement to the San Diego Union-Tribune newspaper. “But we should honor all of our heroes under one flag, not just one particular religious symbol.”

Bruce Bailey, who is the President of the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, expressed disappointment in the ruling.

“It is unfortunate that the Ninth Circuit left the judge no choice but to order the tearing down of the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial Cross,” Bailey said.  “However, we are grateful for the judge’s stay that gives us an opportunity to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court.”

Hiram Sasser, director of litigation for Liberty Institute, said in a statement to Fox News that they will continue to “fight for this memorial and the selfless sacrifice and service of all the millions of veterans it represents; it is the least we can do for those who gave so much to us all.”

The ruling, which came down the week before Christmas, will no doubt add to the War on Christmas narrative, and flies in the face of the will of the American people. Survey after survey has shown that the vast majority of Americans say that more religion in society will have a positive impact, and think that liberal justices are out of line, being overly aggressive in their made up interpretation of a “separation of church and state.”

The Mount Soledad Cross, a Korean War

Opinion

WASHINGTON — In explaining the disastrous rollout of ObamaCare, President Obama told Chris Matthews he had discovered that “we have these big agencies, some of which are outdated, some of which are not designed properly.”

An interesting discovery to make after having consigned the vast universe of American medicine, one-sixth of the U.S. economy, to the tender mercies of the agency bureaucrats at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Internal Revenue Service.

Most people become aware of the hopeless inefficiency of sclerotic government by, oh, 17 at the department of motor vehicles. Obama’s late discovery is especially remarkable considering that he built his entire political philosophy on the rock of Big Government, on the fervent belief in the state as the very engine of collective action and the ultimate source of national greatness. (Indeed, of individual success as well, as in “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”)

This blinding revelation of the ponderous incompetence of bureaucratic government came just a few weeks after Obama confessed that “what we’re also discovering is that insurance is complicated to buy.” Another light bulb goes off, this one three years after passing a law designed to force millions of Americans to shop for new health plans via the maze of untried, untested, insecure, unreliable online “exchanges.”

This discovery joins a long list that includes Obama’s rueful admission that there really are no shovel-ready jobs. That one came after having passed his monstrous $830 billion stimulus on the argument that the weakened economy would be “jump-started” by a massive infusion of shovel-ready jobs. Now known to be fictional.

Barack Obama is not just late to discover the most elementary workings of government. With alarming regularity, he professes obliviousness to the workings of his own government. He claims, for example, to have known nothing about the IRS targeting scandal, the AP phone records scandal, the NSA tapping of Angela Merkel. And had not a clue that the centerpiece of his signature legislative achievement — the online Obamacare “exchange,” three years in the making — would fail catastrophically upon launch. Or that Obamacare would cause millions of Americans to lose their private health plans.

Hence the odd spectacle of a president expressing surprise and disappointment in the federal government — as if he’s not the one running it. Hence the repeated no-one-is-more-upset-than-me posture upon deploring the nonfunctioning website, the IRS outrage, the AP intrusions and any number of scandals from which Obama tries to create safe distance by posing as an observer. He gives the impression of a man on a West Wing tour trying out the desk in the Oval Office, only to be told that he is president of the United States.

The paradox of this presidency is that this most passive bystander president is at the same time the most ideologically ambitious in decades. The sweep and scope of his health care legislation alone are unprecedented. He’s spent billions of tax money attempting to create, by fiat and ex nihilo, a new green economy. His (failed) cap-and-trade bill would have given him regulatory control of the energy economy. He wants universal preschool and has just announced his unwavering commitment to slaying the dragon of economic inequality, which, like the poor, has always been with us.

Obama’s discovery that government bureaucracies don’t do things very well creates a breathtaking disconnect between his transformative ambitions and his detachment from the job itself. How does his Olympian vision coexist with the lassitude of his actual governance, a passivity that verges on absenteeism?

What bridges that gap is rhetoric. Barack Obama is a master rhetorician. It’s allowed him to move crowds, rise inexorably and twice win the most glittering prize of all. Rhetoric has changed his reality. For Obama, it can change the country’s. Hope and change, after all, is a rhetorical device. Of the kind Obama has always imagined can move mountains.

That’s why his reaction to the ObamaCare website’s crash-on-takeoff is so telling. His remedy? A cross-country campaign-style speaking tour. As if rhetoric could repeal that reality.

Managing, governing, negotiating, cajoling, crafting legislation, forging compromise. For these — this stuff of governance — Obama has shown little aptitude and even less interest. Perhaps, as Valerie Jarrett has suggested, he is simply too easily bored to invest his greatness in such mundanity.

“I don’t write code,” said Obama in reaction to the website crash. Nor is he expected to. He is, however, expected to run an administration that can.

Charles Krauthammer’s email address is [email protected].

What bridges that gap between the reality

News, Politics

The Obama administration on Thursday unilaterally delayed another ObamaCare deadline, pushing back the date to make first payments for coverage under the law. Rather than holding to the December 23 deadline, insurers will be forced to accept premium payments through the law’s stated deadline for people who are seeking coverage starting on January 1.

In a conference call with reporters, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said insurers have to accept premiums even beyond December 31, and that the Obama administration was “strongly encouraging” them to retroactively cover consumers that submit late payments.

However, though the Obama administration has asked insurers to treat out-of-network providers as in-network, and refilling prescriptions covered under previous plans through January, it may not be the case. Under the law, the cost of care will not be paid until coverage is settled, potentially leaving scores of Americans on the hook to front the cost of health care services until they are reimbursed.

Also, instead of holding to the deadline to sign up, the administration on Thursday formalized its announcement that consumers have until December 23, rather than December 15 for healthcare coverage that goes into effect January 1.

(Visit ObamaCare Facts HQ)

Thursday’s announcement is the latest in a wave of lawless, unilateral delays that the Obama administration has implemented to buy Democrats, the law and the president time after the disastrous rollout of HealthCare.gov.

In addition to delaying the premium payments deadline, the administration has delayed by one week the sign-up date for coverage beginning January 1, pushed back by six weeks the sign-up date for those seeking coverage by April 1, and delayed the second-year enrollment period until after the 2014 elections.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) office said the administration is sowing “confusion and chaos” with the changes.

“It’s clear the administration knows ObamaCare’s problems are only going to get worse, and patients will be the ones who suffer,” said Cantor spokesman Rory Cooper. “What’s not clear is whether they understand the confusion and chaos they continue to cause.”

(Visit ObamaCare Approval Rating Polls)

Health and Human Services policy director Chiquita Brooks-Lasure said on the call that the Obama administration was hoping and confident that many insurers would adopt those suggestions.

The Obama administration has been under pressure from embattled Democratic lawmakers who are concerned about reelection, such as Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), to guarantee that those who sign-up for coverage have the health insurance they think they already purchased by January 1.

The Obama administration for the first time on Thursday actually praised a so-called “special enrollment period” for those who have had technical difficulties with the flawed website, which still cannot guarantee the safety of private user information. Brooks-Lasure said it was not a new initiative, but the administration hasn’t actively pushed the program, because the website was not capable of hosting users, which in many ways, it still isn’t.

Insurers have not been receiving accurate user information concerning policies, and private user data. The more people signing up, the worse of a situation it would have been for the Obama administration and insurers. A recent PPD study outlined a cost of over $1 billion for the broken website, which was known to be problematic far before the launch date and before the government shutdown, when Democrats said they refused to negotiate over the law.

(Visit ObamaCare Costs HQ)

White House press secretary Jay Carney, for example, has been pressed about whether the administration can guarantee coverage to ObamaCare enrollees, but has yet to mention the special enrollment period.

Federal officials are encouraging consumers to call their insurance providers to confirm their enrollments.

The delay of the premium payments deadline will also affect the monthly enrollment data the administration releases.

Health and Human Services said this week that about 260,000 people picked out private health plans under ObamaCare in November, bringing the total number of enrollments to about 365,000. But private White House emails cautioned officials not to trust in those numbers, because they include those who haven’t even made a payment yet.

Republicans have challenged Sebelius to break down the enrollment numbers to show how many people have paid for their coverage.

Sebelius had pledged that Health and Human Services would provide a breakdown between those who have paid and those who have selected a plan before the end of the year. However, the release of that data seems conveniently unlikely with the new December 31 deadline.

Another ObamaCare broken promise.

The Obama administration on Thursday unilaterally delayed

News, Politics

The U.S. House passed a two-year bipartisan budget deal late Thursday that would avert another government shutdown. The bill now goes to the Senate, which is expected to vote on the measure next week, and has a relatively clear path to the president’s desk.

The bill pass by a vote of 332-94 (Roll Call Below) without honoring the Hastert rule, which was not surprising considering comments made by Speaker Boehner over the last two days. The Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH), criticized conservative groups who he claimed was using the American people for their own ends.

Today Boehner said that one must “wonder about the credibility of these groups,” when they oppose a bill that they “never even read.” House Republican leadership has made clear that avoiding another shutdown, and compromising on areas that there is common ground between Democrats, is more important than budget battles.

“Frankly, I think they’re misleading their followers,” Boehner said at a press conference. “I think they’re pushing our members into places where they don’t want to be. And frankly, I just think that they’ve lost all credibility.”

The attacks from Boehner is a new posture taken by the House Speaker, who typically attempts to juggle an insurgent member coalition with pragmatic Republicans, who are seen as soft on big government.

“You know, one of them, they pushed us into the fight to defund ObamaCare and shut down the government,” he said.

FreedomWorks, among the groups that oppose the current budget bill, shot back at the House speaker again on Thursday.

“Speaker Boehner may not care about what fiscally conservative groups do, but grassroots Americans still care about what he’s doing in Washington,” FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe said in a statement. “When it comes to ‘credibility,’ actions speak louder than words. And right now, it looks like the Speaker is leading the charge for spending increases and recruiting Democrat votes in the House to help get it done.”

(Read More: Poll: Latest Budget Deal News Not What Americans Want To Hear)

Though the measure is expected to pass the Senate, some senators have expressed opinions of the deal that are more in line with Kibbe.

Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who is the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, said that “much of the spending increase in this deal has been justified by increased fees and new revenue. In other words, it’s a fee increase to fuel a spending increase, rather than reducing deficits.”

[ooyala code=”xoNzdoaTqjQpaIVx6j5ACo0qAlR1drL_” player_id=”undefined”]

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 640
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H J RES 59      RECORDED VOTE      12-Dec-2013      6:25 PM
QUESTION:  On Motion to Recede and Concur in the Senate Amendment with Amendment
BILL TITLE: Making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes

AYES NOES PRES NV
REPUBLICAN 169 62 1
DEMOCRATIC 163 32 6
INDEPENDENT
TOTALS 332 94   7


—- AYES    332 —
 

Aderholt
Amodei
Andrews
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Boehner
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brooks (IN)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cárdenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Clark (MA)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Rodney
DeGette
Delaney
DelBene
Denham
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Edwards
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson		 Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutiérrez
Hahn
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Horsford
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Luján, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Matheson
Matsui
McAllister
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Noem
Nolan
Nunes
Nunnelee
O’Rourke
Owens
Palazzo
Pascrell		 Pastor (AZ)
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Polis
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waxman
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)

—- NOES    94 —
 

Amash
Bachmann
Barton
Bass
Bentivolio
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Chabot
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (NY)
Coffman
Conyers
Cotton
Crawford
Daines
DeFazio
DeLauro
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellison
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Fudge
Gardner
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert		 Gosar
Gowdy
Grijalva
Hall
Hanabusa
Harris
Heck (NV)
Holding
Holt
Hoyer
Huelskamp
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Labrador
Lee (CA)
Levin
Long
Lummis
Marchant
Massie
McClintock
McIntyre
McKinley
Meadows
Mullin
Mulvaney
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Nugent		 Olson
Pallone
Pearce
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Richmond
Rohrabacher
Salmon
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schrader
Schweikert
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Stockman
Thompson (MS)
Velázquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup

—- NOT VOTING    7 —
 

Bishop (GA)
Brown (FL)
Castro (TX)		 Davis, Danny
McCarthy (NY)
Radel		 Rush

House passed a two-year bipartisan budget deal

News, World

FILE – In this Aug. 14, 2012 file photo provided by China’s Xinhua News Agency, Jang Song Thaek, North Korea’s vice chairman of the powerful National Defense Commission, attends the third meeting on developing the economic zones in North Korea, in Beijing. North Korean state media say Kim Jong Un’s uncle has been executed, calling the leader’s former mentor “worse than a dog.” The announcement on Thursday evening, Dec. 12, 2013, comes days after Pyongyang announced that Jang Song Thaek had been removed from all his posts because of allegations of corruption, drug use, gambling, womanizing and generally leading a “dissolute and depraved life.”(AP Photo/Xinhua, Li Xin, File) NO SALES

The latest North Korea execution came Thursday as the uncle of leader Kim Jong Un, was declared a traitor who tried to overthrow the state and put to death.

The news of the North Korea execution came only days after Pyongyang broadcasted through state-run media that Jang Song Thaek, who has long been considered the country’s second in power — had already been removed from all his positions of authority amid allegations of corruption, drug use, gambling, womanizing and leading a “dissolute and depraved life.”

State-run news agency KCNA said a tribunal investigated Jang’s crimes, including “attempting to overthrow the state by all sorts of intrigues and despicable methods with a wild ambition to grab the supreme power of our party and state.”

The investigation produced a report that concluded Jang was “a traitor to the nation” and professionally declared he was “worse than a dog.”

White House spokesman Patrick Ventrell said that there was no reason to doubt the report of Jang’s death and if true, it illustrated North Korea’s “extreme brutality.”

“While we cannot independently verify this development, we have no reason to doubt the official KCNA report that Jang Song Thaek has been executed,” Ventrell said. “If confirmed, this is another example of the extreme brutality of the North Korean regime. We are following developments in North Korea closely and consulting with our allies and partners in the region.”

Jang was seen as helping Kim Jong Un consolidate power after the death of his father, Kim Jong Il, two years ago.

Experts see North Korea’s personnel reshuffle as a sign of Kim Jong Un’s growing confidence, however, mounting fear in Seoul that the removal of such an important part of the North’s government — the predominant supporter of Chinese-style economic reforms — could spell dangerous instability, lead to a miscalculation, or an attack on the South.

Tensions between the two nations remain high on the Korean Peninsula following belligerent threats in March and April by Kim Jong Un’s government against Washington, Seoul and Tokyo, including threats of missile launches with nuclear capabilities and warnings that North Korea will again commence nuclear bomb fuel production.

Jang was married to Kim Jong Un’s aunt, Kim Kyong Hui, the younger sister of Kim Jong Il. State-run media previously “reported” that Jang was “abusing his power,” being “engrossed in irregularities and corruption,” and taking drugs and squandering money at casinos while undergoing medical treatment in a foreign country.

The latest North Korea execution came Thursday

News, Politics

Senate Republicans on Wednesday launched an around-the-clock talkathon over some Obama nominees in the wake of a new, Democratic-driven rules change last month that weakened the GOP’s ability to block nominations.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) threatened to hold the Senate in session throughout the night until the Senate dealt with all the Obama nominees. Though the Demcorats threw out constitutional precedent when they went nuclear, eliminating the filibuster on Obama nominees, Republicans retain the power to use up all procedural time, including post-cloture debate time on nominees.

If Republicans refuse to give up their allotted debate time, the Senate could be in session continuously into Saturday, and perhaps even longer.

“If we have to work through Christmas, we’re going to do that,” Reid said, echoing what has come to be one of his mantras each holiday season.

Once the Senate takes up the Obama nominees, no other business can be brought to the Senate floor until they are resolved, which includes the budget deal or the defense bill.

Harry Reid expected the Republicans to completely capitulate and go quietly into the night, making it seem as if it would be ridiculous to debate in the chamber once referred to as the “most deliberative body in the world.” Under Harry Reid and Democratic control, sadly that is no longer the case.

“The Republicans are wanting to waste more of this body’s time, this country’s time,” Reid said from the Senate floor as Senate aides carted in Listerine, fruit, chocolate and mints for what appeared to be a long night ahead. “We are here … looking at each other, doing basically nothing as we have done for vast amounts of time because of the Republicans’ obstructionism.”

For minority Republicans, the talkathon was less about the group of Obama nominees and more so a statement against Reid’s move to limit or remove filibusters for judicial nominees and appointments.

“The Senate was designed to protect absolutely minority rights,” Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said. “This isn’t about obstructionism. This is about `You limited our rights.”‘

Forcing the “tyranny of the majority,” in November the Democrats — in an unprecedented move — reduced the number of votes needed to end filibusters and procedural delays, from 60 to a simple majority for most nominations.

Because of that anti-constitutional power grab, Democrats forced through two top Obama nominees to Senate confirmation on Tuesday: a lawyer, Patricia Millett, who was placed to an unneeded vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC), to head the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

“All of us know what this is about,” said Senator Mike Johanns (R-NE). “This is about control of this body.”

Just after 1 a.m. EST Thursday, the Senate confirmed Pillard 51-44. Procedural and confirmation votes followed and will continue on the other Obama nominees, which will run into Saturday unless Republicans quit the talkathon. There would be more next week, slated to be the Senate’s final session for the year.

If Reid has his way, that won’t necessarily occur, he said.

“If we have to work the weekend before Christmas, we’re going to do that,” he said. “If we have to work Monday before Christmas, we’re going to do that.”

Angry Republicans were unmoved and ominously implied they would continue to use Senate rules to slow action on nominations into the midterm election year.

“Assuming we take the Senate in 2014, I think it will end in January 2015,” Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said of Republicans’ delays.

Until this week, there were four judges on the D.C. Circuit appointed by Democratic presidents, four appointed by Republicans and three vacancies.

The court is a significant vehicle for moving the country to the left, because it rules on White House and other federal agency-imposed regulations, which should otherwise be deliberated upon in the Congress. The president, Reid, and the Democrats are using the nuclear option to pay back political favors and ram through new laws, an effort to regulate in place of legislate.

Senate approval of Millett — and,  soon, Pillard and U.S. District Judge Robert Wilkins to fill the open seats — will be a major victory for Obama because it will tilt that panel of judges heavily in his direction.

Democrats also want to confirm Janet Yellen to head the Federal Reserve and Jeh Johnson to lead the Homeland Security Department by the end of next week.

Senate Republicans on Wednesday launched an around-the-clock

Policy

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee are at odds with one another over the Democratic nomination of Alejandro Mayorkas. He is to be the second in command with the title of Deputy Secretary of the Homeland Security.

Democratic senators are brushing off the allegations that said nominee has urged government employees to decide more quickly in approving the applications from foreign investors in a Las Vegas casino and disregarding the concerns that surround the $11.5 million investment.

Meanwhile, the Republican party are concerned of the allegations and wanted to see the results of a thorough investigation surrounding the source of such an investment before voting in Mayorkas.

Reports of emails from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services workers show that agency director Alejandro Mayorkas, questioned lower-level decisions to withhold expedited processing for at least 23 applications filed by Chinese and Thai citizens. The very ones that are attempting to invest the questionable $11.5 million into the casino project under the federal EB-5 investor visa program.

In a Jan. 25 email, Mayorkas told agency officials that the Commerce Department had already concluded “the expedite criteria have been met” regarding the casino project.

Mayorkas denies ever influencing any USCIS decisions and he stated, “I have never, ever in my career exercised undue influence to influence the outcome of a case,” during a confirmation hearing last month. “I have never based my decisions on who brings a case but rather on the facts and the law.”

The Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid reached out to Mayorkas to help speed along visas for foreign investors of a politically connected casino hotel in Las Vegas.

Senator Tom Coburn (R-Ok) on the Senate panel, stated that the vote was “virtually without precedent.” Coburn tried to persuade lawmakers to wait until “all the facts” are available.

Coburn is not comfortable with voting hastily, he said, “If we confirm Mr. Mayorkas under a cloud, we haven’t helped him, we haven’t helped the Department of Homeland Security.”

“I’m deeply disappointed,” Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) said after the vote.

The Democratic Party defend their nominee, implying that his name is simply being dragged through the mud, and brushing off the allegations as nonsense.

Senator Mary Landrieu said, “It is discouraging to see someone with such an extraordinary record of service being held up for no apparent reason.”

Furthermore, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday voted 9-0 advancing his nomination to the full Senate, yet, every single Republican voted “present.”

The nominee currently heads U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. A role, that Mayorkas has come under criticism for his handling of the EB-5 program, allowing foreign investors that have at least a half-million dollars in a U.S. project to seek a special visa.

The Times said the decision to overturn a prior, normally non-appealable visa decision ultimately benefited several companies whose executives have been heavy Democratic donors.

Coburn, citing the ongoing IG investigation into the program itself, noted the accusations are merely “allegations,” but said they could raise questions about Mayorkas’ “fitness for public service.”

 

 

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe