Mediaboss Marketing

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was stopped from speaking on the Senate floor about Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions on Feb. 7. "I am surprised that the words of Coretta Scott King are not suitable for debate in the United States Senate," Warren said. (Reuters)

Senate Republicans passed a party-line rebuke Tuesday night of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) for a speech opposing attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions, striking down her words for impugning the Alabama senators character.

In an extraordinarily rare move, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) interrupted Warrens speech in a near-empty chamber, as debate on Sessionss nomination heads toward a Wednesday evening vote, and said that she had breached Senate rules by reading past statements against Sessions from figures such as the late senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and the late Coretta Scott King.

The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama, McConnell said, then setting up a series of roll-call votes on Warrens conduct.

[Read the letter Coretta Scott King wrote opposing Sessionss 1986 federal nomination]

It was the latest clash in the increasingly hostile debate over confirming President Trumps Cabinet, during which Democrats have accused Republicans of trying to force through nominees without proper vetting. Democrats, unable to stop the confirmations that require simple majorities, have countered by using extreme delay tactics that have dragged out the process longer than any in history for a new presidents Cabinet.

The Democratic moves, including boycotting committee room votes on nominees last week and a round-the-clock debate Monday night before Tuesdays confirmation of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, reached a boiling point during the debate over Sessions which Democrats continued overnight.

In setting up the votes to rebuke Warren, McConnell specifically cited portions of a letter that King, the widow of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., wrote to the Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to Sessionss 1986 nomination to be a federal judge.

[Trumps pick for attorney general is shadowed by race and history]

Mr. Sessions has used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens, King wrote, referencing controversial prosecutions at the time that Sessions servedas the U.S. attorney for Alabama. Earlier, Warren read from the 1986 statement of Kennedy, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee who led the opposition then against Sessions, including the Massachusetts Democrats concluding line: He is, I believe, a disgrace to the Justice Department and he should withdraw his nomination and resign his position.

The Senate voted, 49 to 43, strictly on party lines, to uphold the ruling that Warren violated Rule 19 of the Senate that says senators are not allowed to directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator. Pursuant to that rule, Warren was ordered to sit down and forbidden from speaking during the remainder of the debate on the nomination of Sessions.

I am surprised that the words of Coretta Scott King are not suitable for debate in the United States Senate, Warren said after McConnells motion.

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), a freshman who was presiding over the Senate at the time, issued a warning to Warren at that point, singling out Kennedys disgrace comment, and 25 minutes later McConnell came to the floor and set in motion the battle, citing the comments in the King letter as crossing the line.

Warrens speech ended with a simple admonition from Daines: The senator will take her seat.

McConnell later defended his decision.

Sen. Warren was giving a lengthy speech. She had appeared to violate the rule. She was warned. She was given an explanation, he said. Nevertheless, she persisted.

[The silencing of Elizabeth Warren and an old Senate rule prompted by a fistfight]

Overnight into early Wednesday, other Democratic senators continued speaking out against Sessions on the Senate floor and Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) read parts of Kings 10-page letter but not the excerpts Warren had read aloud.

Other Democrats, including Kamala Harris (Calif.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), had come to Warrens defense by trying to have Kings entire letter placed into the Senate record or to allow Warren to continue participating. But Republican senators objected.

Warren, a liberal firebrand with a devoted national following whom some activists want to run for president in 2020, quickly took to social media and the airwaves to attack McConnell and Republicans for shutting down her speech.

Banned from reading Kings letter on the Senate floor, Warren instead went to a nearby room and read it aloud on Facebook Live.

After Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) struck down Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-Mass.) attempt to read a letter from Coretta Scott King on the floor of the Senate during the debate on attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions, Warren read the letter outside the doors of the Senate and streamed it live. (Facebook/Sen. Elizabeth Warren)

In a brief telephone interview with MSNBCs The Rachel Maddow Show, a program watched loyally by many Warren devotees, she explained that Ive been red-carded on Sen. Sessions, Im out of the game of the Senate floor. I dont get to speak at all.

Public reaction intensified online. RedBubble.com, an online clothing website for independent designers, began selling a She Persisted T-shirt or sweatshirt seizing on McConnells admonition of Warren. Democrats began using #LetLizSpeak on Twitter and posted copies of Kings letter on Facebook to draw more attention to Warrens speech.

Read more:

ACLU: Delay Sessions confirmation vote until Muslim ban is stopped

Fact Checker:Does Sen. Jeff Sessions have a strong record on civil rights enforcement?

Trumps hard-line actions have an intellectual godfather: Jeff Sessions

Read the original post:
Republicans vote to rebuke Elizabeth Warren, saying she impugned Sessions's character - Washington Post

New York Times

Republicans Have Lost the Plot on Their Obamacare Repeal New York Times President Trump and Republican lawmakers have never been able to explain how they would improve on the Affordable Care Act, which they've promised to quickly repeal and replace with something better. Now, it's increasingly evident that they have no ... Republicans Have An Obamacare 'Replacement' ProblemTPM How Republicans Can Save Themselves From Their Obamacare TrapNew Republic How Republicans Might 'Repair' Obamacare Before Repealing ItThe Atlantic The Hill -CNN -Fox News all 541 news articles »

Visit link:
Republicans Have Lost the Plot on Their Obamacare Repeal - New York Times

New York Times

'A Conservative Climate Solution': Republican Group Calls for Carbon Tax New York Times A group of Republican elder statesmen is calling for a tax on carbon emissions to fight climate change. The group, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, with former Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former ... Prominent Republicans Push to Tax Carbon, Cut RegulationsBloomberg Republican elders float carbon tax, plan White House lobbying campaignCNN Republican statesmen propose replacing Obama's climate plans with a carbon taxWashington Post all 22 news articles »

Continue reading here:
'A Conservative Climate Solution': Republican Group Calls for Carbon Tax - New York Times

President Donald Trump wants to rebuild the nations roads and bridges, boost military spending, slash taxes and build a great wall. But Republicans on Capitol Hill have one question for him: How the heck will we pay for all of this?

GOP lawmakers are fretting that Trumps spending requests, due out in a month or so, will blow a gaping hole in the federal budget ballooning the debt and undermining the partys doctrine of fiscal discipline.

Story Continued Below

Trump has signaled hes serious about a $1 trillion infrastructure plan, as he promised on the campaign trail. He also wants Republicans to approve extra spending this spring to build a wall along the U.S. southern border and beef up the military the combined price tag of which could reach $50 billion, insiders say. And thats to say nothing of tax cuts, which the presidents team has suggested need not necessarily be paid for.

Trump, meanwhile, has made clear he has little interest in tackling the biggest drivers of the national debt: entitlements. Republicans have been yearning to overhaul Medicare and Social Security for decades.

Even without Trumps pricey wish list, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the $19.9 trillion debt will grow by a further $9.4 trillion over the next decade if nothing changes.

I dont think you can do infrastructure, raise defense spending, do a tax cut, keep Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security just as they are, and balance the budget. Its just not possible, said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a senior member of the House Budget Committee. Sooner or later, theyre going to come to grips with it because the numbers force you to.

Trumps staunchest allies in Congress counter that the president deserves some leeway to get something tangible done on jobs.

If there is a temporary increase in the deficit to get our economy growing, I think my fellow Republican members are willing to look at the long game, said Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), a Trump loyalist. A growing economy and growing our way to success and financial stability is what we want to see.

The contrasting views foreshadow a clash between adherents to Trumps big-spending populism and classic small-government conservatives. Republican lawmakers have to choose between embracing Trumps expensive agenda or pushing back and risking his wrath.

Hill GOP insiders on both sides of the Capitol told Politico the fiscal 2018 budget will easily be one of the toughest votes Congress takes this year. Thats especially true in the House, where the conference for years has rallied around budgets that balance in 10 years the gold standard for whether a fiscal blueprint is conservative enough. Now, many Republicans worry they wont get there because of Trumps unorthodox views on spending.

It was already going to be a herculean task in making the numbers work over a 10-year time frame; when you begin to add in transportation, walls, tax cuts, it becomes an impossible task, said Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.). Were at the cusp of moving in the wrong direction. Its a problem.

Meanwhile, some Republicans on the House Budget Committee are floating the idea of changing the standard of success for a budget. Budget vice chairman Todd Rokita (R-Ind.) has been speaking to members about ditching the 10-year-balance metric for one that focuses on a debt-to-GDP ratio. Supporters of the idea say it would paint a more accurate measure of the nations long-term fiscal situation anyway, as savings from entitlement reforms arent often realized until the second decade and beyond not in the 10-year budget window.

The challenge to balance is going to be more difficult than ever. Thats all I have to say, Rokita said outside the House floor last week when asked about his proposed standard.

Spokesman William Allison said in a statement that Budget Chairwoman Diane Black (R-Tenn.) is committed to working towards a balanced budget.

The White House in the next two months will send Congress two major requests for money: a military spending bill that would take effect immediately upon passage, and a budget for next fiscal year. The latter will be a particularly tough lift because it traditionally includes a projection of government spending and debt over the next few decades.

Republicans are crossing their fingers that any requests for new spending will be offset with cuts. If not, the House Budget Committee will have to craft legislation to raise spending caps that have been in place for years. That could face stiff opposition from conservatives.

We would have several people opposed to lifting the caps, said Freedom Caucus Member Ral Labrador (R-Idaho). I am a fiscal conservative, and the biggest issue were facing in America right now is our debt. As Republicans, we better be consistent on this or were going to lose our base.

Outside conservative groups would also revolt if Republicans did away with the spending limits. Tim Phillips, who leads the Koch brothers-backed Americans for Prosperity, said discretionary spending has grown far too rapidly. We have to put a hard cap on growth, and if Republicans are going to be true to their rhetoric, they will agree to a hard cap on spending.

Trump also wants to slash taxes, which could reduce the amount of annual cash flowing to the Treasury. Republicans are concerned because they have few specifics on what kind of tax plan Trump wants and some administration officials have floated the idea of not paying for tax reductions. House Speaker Paul Ryans tax plan would be revenue-neutral, or not add to the deficit, but no one knows for sure what the final deal negotiated by Trump and congressional Republicans will look like.

Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, a lobbyist who worked closely with Trumps transition team, said many of his corporate clients are lining up to oppose one of the biggest pay-fors put forward by Ryan: a new tax on imports, which the speaker estimates would generate $1 trillion.

The border adjustment tax is giving my clients serious heartburn. A lot of American companies, the poultry industry, the automobile industry, many others are worried about that, Lott said.

Republicans expect their leaders to argue that any spending, whether through appropriations or tax cuts, would ultimately pay for themselves by growing the economy by record amounts. Still, theyre not sure if that will get them to a balanced budget.

Rep. Charlie Dent: I certainly hope that we dont try to reconcile these increase expenditures on the backs of the discretionary programs." | AP Photo

Its possible some Republicans will seek to offset new spending with cuts to discretionary spending programs like the National Endowment for the Arts or agriculture programs something that worries many House Appropriations members like Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) .

I certainly hope that we dont try to reconcile these increase expenditures on the backs of the discretionary programs, he said.

Appropriators generally believe there is not enough fat to cut from discretionary programs to finance the level of new spending Trump is talking about. Most Republicans would rather turn to entitlement programs to find savings, but Trump has made clear he has no interest in going there.

Republicans are banking on outgoing Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), a fiscal hard-liner tapped by Trump to lead the Office of Management and Budget, to sell the president on the merits of entitlement reform.

I do know Mick Mulvaney knows the reality behind the numbers, Cole said. But Mick doesnt get to make the final call, thats the president. Its going to be fascinating.

Read the original here:
Hill Republicans quake at Trump's budget-busting wish list - Politico

Republicans would make it easier to steal an election by killing the Election Assistance Commission.

Early voters use electronic ballot-casting machines at the Franklin County Board of Elections, Monday, on November 7, 2016, in Columbus, Ohio. (AP Photo / John Minchillo)

In a little-noticed 6-3 vote today, the House Administration Committee voted along party lines to eliminate the Election Assistance Commission, which helps states run elections and is the only federal agency charged with making sure voting machines cant be hacked. The EAC was created after the disastrous 2000 election in Florida as part of the Help America Vote Act to rectify problems like butterfly ballots and hanging chads. (Republicans have tried to kill the agency for years.)The Committee also voted to eliminate the public-financing system for presidential elections dating back to the 1970s.

It is my firm belief that the EAC has outlived its usefulness and purpose, said Committee chair Gregg Harper (R-MS), explaining why his bill transfersthe EACs authority to the Federal Election Commission.

The stakes are higher now than ever. Get The Nation in your inbox.

Thirty-eight pro-democracy groups, including the NAACP and Common Cause, denounced the vote. The EAC is the only federal agency which has as its central mission the improvement of election administration, and it undertakes essential activities that no other institution is equipped to address, says the Brennan Center for Justice.

This move is particularly worrisome given reports that suspected Russian hackers attempted to access voter-registration systems in more than 20 states during the 2016 election. Moreover, the Presidential Commission on Election Administration set up by President Obama in 2014 outlined an impending crisis in voting technology and the Brennan Center found that 42 states used voting machines in 2016 that were at least a decade-old and at risk of failing. The EAC was the agency tasked with making sure these voting systems were both modernized and secure.

The EAC is not a perfect agency. It lacked a quorum of members from 2010 to 2014 and was paralyzed by inaction. Then, last year, its executive director unilaterally approved controversial proof-of-citizenship laws in Kansas, Georgia, and Alabama, which the federal courts subsequently blocked.

But given the threats to American democracy at this moment, the EAC needs to be strengthened, not replaced.

Its particularly ironic that the Trump administration is preparing to launch a massive investigation into nonexistent voter fraud based on the lie that millions voted illegally while House Republicans are shutting down the agency that is supposed to make sure Americas elections are secure.Its more proof of how the GOPs real agenda is to make it harder to vote.

See the rest here:
House Republicans Just Voted to Eliminate the Only Federal Agency That Makes Sure Voting Machines Can't Be Hacked - The Nation.