Democrats embrace economic populism
Mike Gousha says changing tax policy to address income inequality is an idea picking up steam among Democrats.
By: WISN 12 News
Read more:
Democrats embrace economic populism - Video
What #39;s The Deal Neil? - Democrats Scared Of "Recovery" - Cavuto
What Do You Say If You Can #39;t Use The Word "Recovery" What #39;s The Deal Neil? - Democrats Scared Of "Recovery" - Cavuto =======================================...
By: Mass Tea Party
Read more here:
What's The Deal Neil? - Democrats Scared Of "Recovery" - Cavuto - Video
Mike Allen: Democrats Say GOP Has 60% Chance Of Winning Senate
Mike Allen: Democrats Say GOP Has 60% Chance Of Winning Senate (April 30, 2014)
By: GOPICYMI
The rest is here:
Mike Allen: Democrats Say GOP Has 60% Chance Of Winning Senate - Video
FILE: March 8, 2012: Sen. Charles Schumer gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington.AP
Senate Democrats will vote this year on a constitutional amendment that would overturn two Supreme Court rulings on campaign contributions and expenditures, limiting the ability of federal candidates to raise and spend money.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Wednesday that the Senate would schedule a vote on the constitutional amendment proposed by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M. The measure also would also limit the ability of super PACs to impact elections.
The Supreme Court is trying to take this country back to the days of the robber barons, allowing dark money to flood our elections, Schumer, who chairs the Senate Rules Committee, said at a hearing on campaign finance reform.
Recent Supreme Court rulings have permitted individuals and corporations to write unlimited checks to independent political committees, while other groups can accept cash and disclose the donors' identities months or years later, if ever.
Udall's amendment would not dictate specific policies or regulations, but would allow Congress to pass campaign finance reform legislation that "withstands constitutional challenges," Schumer's office said in a news release.
Changes to the Constitution are difficult and the vote was more political than practical. The vote, however, would force Republicans to either defend unlimited money in campaigns or put them in the awkward position of condemning their allies.
Free and fair elections are a founding principle of our democracy, but the Supreme Court's rulings have ensured that they are now for sale to the highest bidder," Udall said. "It's now crystal clear that we need a constitutional amendment to restore integrity in our election system."
Wednesday's Senate Rules Committee hearing was the first since the Supreme Court's ruling that lifted limits on how much total money individual donors can give to candidates. The court left in place a limit on how much individual candidates can take from each donor, but the justices cleared the way for donors to give the maximum amount to every candidate on the grounds that restrictions limit free speech rights.
Campaign donations pay for ads, of course. But that money also pays for polling, operatives' salaries and offices the nuts and bolts of a campaign operation that aren't necessarily speech.
Read more:
Senate Democrats to vote on campaign finance constitutional amendment
By Siobhan Hughes and Amy Harder
A kind of chain-reaction politics is playing out in the Senate on the Keystone XL pipeline.
Some energy-state Democrats, especially Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, are pushing for a Senate vote on the pipeline, which would bring oil from Canada to Gulf Coast refineries.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has indicated in the last couple of days that hes open to a vote. But in agreeing to one, hes in the difficult position of having to decide whether to make it a binding measure that would somehow force the Obama administrations hand, or just a resolution of support for the pipeline.
The former would, in turn, put additional pressure on the Obama administration already caught between environmentalists who oppose the pipeline and some labor groups who back the project because of the jobs it would create. The latter wouldnt satisfy people like Landrieu.
The maneuvering has been playing out over the last few days, as Keystone has come up as a potential player in horse-trading on various pieces of legislation in the Senate. One possibility is to allow for a vote on a measure related to the oil pipeline as part of a deal in which Republicans would agree to a separate vote on an energy-efficiency bill from Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.) and Rob Portman (R., Ohio).
Whether to even schedule a vote has created a challenge for Senate Democratic leaders. If they avoiding one, theyd play into the hands of Republicans, who argue that if Democrats were serious about helping wage earners, they would authorize construction of the pipeline and the jobs it would create. By scheduling a vote, they boost lawmakers like Ms. Landrieu, who is in a tough re-election battle, but risk splitting their party, which is divided between oil-state Democrats on one side and environmental-leaning Democrats on the other.
And if they lose, Ms. Landrieus opponents could question her assertions on the campaign trail that shes in a position to get things done for the industry, meaning the person it was designed to help most could end up paying a price in the end.
In the meantime, Obama administration officials say the best approach is to let the State Departments review of the pipeline play out.
See the original post:
Democrats Face Difficult Calculation on Keystone Vote