Image 01 Image 03

US House Tag

On Tuesday, former Florida governor Charlie Crist will announce his next foray into politics---a run for Congress. Officially, Crist has not indicated specifically what this announcement will address; Kevin Cate, who served as an advisor to Crist's failed 2014 bid for governor, has only said that Crist is set to make a "major announcement"---but Crist tipped everyone off on his plans earlier in the year. Via Politico:
Crist, a Democrat, has already said he would run for the St. Petersburg-based 13th Congressional District, which was made favorable for a Democratic candidate as the result of a legal challenge to the state’s current congressional lines. The district almost certain to be approved by the Florida Supreme Court was won by president Obama by 54 percent, and is widely considered a safe pickup for Democrats.

Today, top-level Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin sat down for a closed-door hearing with Trey Gowdy's (R-SC) Benghazi Committee. Her testimony is just a warm-up act, though---next Thursday, Clinton herself will testify before the panel in a public hearing. (Be prepared for fireworks---covered right here at Legal Insurrection.) The Clinton campaign---on which Huma is a senior advisor---said they are "unclear" as to why the committee wishes to question their latest witness. This next series of hearings is important for Gowdy and the committee; ever since House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) dropped his massive Benghazi gaffe late last month, the Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton, have been on a mission to shut the committee down. They claim that McCarthy's gaffe proves that Gowdy and other Republicans set the committee up as a shell operation, and that their real purpose is to attack and ruin Clinton's chances at the presidency. Gowdy has had to fire back at a barrage of accusations not only from the Clinton camp, but from Democrats and even members of his own party that Huma's testimony, and the overall mission of the committee, is not politically motivated.

I think it's safe to say that, as of right now, the situation in the House of Representatives is officially through the looking glass. John Boehner's pending resignation threw the conference for a loop; when Kevin McCarthy announced he would not run for Speaker, things unraveled. The caucus is in chaos, and without a presumptive leader, we're wading in a sea of speculation about who should---or is even competent to---take the gavel. Jason Chaffetz's surprise bid for Speaker caused a buzz amongst conservatives---but also drew fire from fellow Republicans who claim that the young lawmaker hasn't proved his conservative bona fides. From The Hill:
Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.) on Friday had harsh words for his successor to lead the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (Utah), as the two Republicans eye the Speaker's gavel.

Today, the House Homeland Security Committee released a "Terror Threat Snapchat" detailing the growing threat of Islamic terrorism against targets both in the United States and abroad. So far this year, officials have identified 61 total ISIS attack plots against western targets. This represents a 2x increase in attack plots since 2014. 17 of those plots focused on the United States, and authorities have arrested 55 people this year in ISIS-specific attack cases alone. “Islamist extremist groups are consolidating their control over crucial terrain and seizing the initiative to expand their global footprint," said committee Chairman Michael McCaul in a statement accompanying the report. "Destabilizing aggressors, from the Putin regime in Russia to the world’s leading state sponsor of terror in Iran, are filling the void of American withdrawal to disastrous effect. This global surge in radicalism and instability has directly contributed to the elevated threat level here at home. We need decisive American leadership that starts with shoring up our defenses and advancing a credible strategy to stop the threats at the source.” Key takeaways (as per the Committee's report) include:

BREAKING: a politician said a stupid thing on TV last night. By now, you've probably seen breathless coverage of House Majority Leader and presumed future Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-CA) comments propping up the Select Committee on Benghazi as an example of House Republicans' efforts to fight for conservative principles. He appeared in an interview with Sean Hannity last night, and after 4 minutes of back-and-forth, fumbled a damaging talking point:

This past week proved contentious for Republicans in Congress. Allies returned to the dark side, Democrats sided with a mortal enemy, and a split in the caucus over how to best handle the disastrous Iran nuclear deal boiled over into a very public battle. Amid the power struggle, the Republicans in the House came out ahead---at least as far as Obamacare is concerned. On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that House Republicans have standing to sue the Obama Administration over the Administration's handling of the Obamacare rollout. The House sued Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew of both spending unappropriated money to implement the new policies, and effectively amending the employer mandate without the approval of Congress. The court ruled that the House has standing to pursue its claims relating to appropriations, but not those related to Lew's implementation of the statute. More via Reuters:
Collyer did not rule on the merits of the claims, only on the administration's motion to dismiss the lawsuit on the issue of standing, a requirement in U.S. law whereby plaintiffs have to show they have been directly harmed.

It started yesterday, when conservative Republicans in the House expressed strong disagreement with the GOP leadership over whether to proceed with the vote of disapproval on the Iran deal. The conservative wing aimed to force Obama to first live up to the terms of Corker-Menendez and disclose the still-secret side deals with Iran that (which are an enormously important part of the big picture.) They claimed that the clock on the Congressional review period would not start until Obama complied, and thus the disapproval vote should be delayed. The movement had the support of Ted Cruz in the Senate, and many conservatives in the House (Roskam of Illinois; Pompeo of Kansas and the rest of the House Freedom Caucus). The House doesn't have a cloture or filibuster rule, so it is much easier to bring something to a vote there over minority Democratic opposition than it is in the Senate. Later, it was leaked that Boehner had given in to House conservatives on this issue, agreeing to postpone the vote and substituting a series of votes on three other resolutions in the House:

Today I attended the much-anticipated Cruz-Trump Iran deal protest on Capitol Hill. It was a scorcher---97 degrees when I finally surrendered to an air conditioned cab---but the rally boasted an impressive turnout. The crowd, for the most part, was focused on protesting not only the specific Iranian nuclear deal, but the path down which Obama's foreign policy has taken us. 100% of the attendees I talked to see the deal as one more foolish, stupid, naive move by the Obama Administration. For most, opposition was apolitical; I spoke to many people who were grateful for the protest votes of Chuck Schumer and other Democrats, even if those announcements came too little and too late to give the White House pause. These signs were floating around everywhere, and for the most part sum up the mood in the crowd: death to america iran rally sign

For what is being called the first time ever, those closest to Speaker of the House John Boehner are expressing serious concerns about Boehner's future in the chamber's top spot. John Boehner has been challenged before; back in January, Texas firebrand Louie Gohmert put his name in the hat for the top spot; two dozen members of the caucus turned their backs on Boehner, but as has happened before, the opposition wasn't nearly widespread enough to oust him from power. Then, at the end of July, North Carolina Mark Meadows filed a "motion to vacate the chair" in what he said was an effort to get Republicans talking about the sharp divide between leadership and a small group of conservatives. Right-leaning advocacy organizations again took up the charge, encouraging followers to contact their representatives to demand change. And now, we have this---a Politico exclusive featuring both on- and off-the-record comments expressing doubts about Boehner's ability to lead the caucus. Via Politico:
“That’s a personal decision he has to make. I don’t know why he would want to, personally,” said Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.), when asked whether Boehner would run again. "But I do think that he feels, in his heart of hearts, he feels like he’s doing what’s best for this country — regardless of what the political consequences are. That says something about somebody."

Today US Secretary of State John Kerry sat alongside Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz for a brutal afternoon of questioning before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the nuclear agreement arranged between the P5+1 and Iran in Vienna earlier this month. Throughout the hearing, Kerry attempted to stand firm on his previous assertions that the deal Congress will be voting on in September is "all or nothing;" republican committee members, however, voiced skepticism about whether or not a "deal" with Iran was even possible. From the Houston Chronicle, via the AP:
"If Congress does not support the deal, we would see this deal die — with no other options," Kerry told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday as he testified for the second time in a week, part of the Obama administration's all-out campaign to sell the accord. ... "Iran has cheated on every agreement they've signed," said Rep. Ed Royce, the panel's chairman. With Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew waiting to testify, he asked if Tehran "has earned the right to be trusted" given its history.

Yesterday the House voted 218-208 to approve the "fast-track" Trade Promotion Authority bill. 28 Democrats sided with pro-trade Republicans, sending the measure on to the Senate. The House took a previous vote on TPA last week, and passed the measure; however, the bill was paired with the TAA, the Trade Adjustment Assistance measure Democrats insist is crucial to protecting American workers from jobs moving overseas. TAA failed to pass, which stalled both TPA and TAA in the House. Yesterday's vote, however, sets up a new series of challenges for Senate leadership if they want to send TPA to the White House. Pro-TPA members of Congress still have a long way to go to approve the "fast track" procedure. TPA is off to the Senate, but TAA remains in limbo:
If the two move separately, Republicans and the White House will have to convince Senate Democrats to back fast-track on the promise that TAA will move forward at a later time. The president spoke with a group of Senate Democrats on Wednesday at the White House, and talks continued in the Senate on Thursday on a way to give the president trade promotion authority, also known as fast-track.

Contrary to what the headlines are telling you, there's more going on in Congress than the debate over "fast track" free trade agreements. At the end of last month, the Obama Administration worked via the EPA to drastically expand the power federal regulators have over private property owners. The new "Waters of the United States" ("WOTUS") rule (re-dubbed the "Clean Water Rule") was decried as a power grab by both industry moguls and conservative members of Congress, who believe the changes stand to kill jobs and raise the cost of doing business, especially for those working in the agricultural industries. Republican Congressman Bob Gibbs (OH-7) is leading the charge in the House to overturn the WOTUS rule. The Regulatory Integrity Protection Act passed out of the House in mid-May with bipartisan support (237 republicans and 24 democrats voted for the measure) and if enacted, would force the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers to overhaul the new rules to specifically identify waters covered and not covered under EPA regulations. The Act would put an emphasis on local control and individual property rights, which Gibbs says should be a key concern for anyone who stands to be affected by and increased EPA presence.

The debate surrounding congressional approval of "fast track" trade authority has officially taken a swan dive through the looking glass. Obama wants it. House republicans want it. Democrats, for the most part, are ready to vote "no"---their union backers are making them more nervous than the White House ever could---even if it prevents their president from advancing more legacy-building legislation. More from the AP (emphasis mine):
Obama himself, who's been unusually personally engaged on a bill that could amount to the biggest achievement of his second term, paid a surprise visit to the annual congressional baseball game Thursday night for some 11th hour persuading. Obama arrived as Democratic and Republican lawmakers faced off at Nationals Park and was greeted with chants of "TPA! TPA!" from the GOP side — the acronym for the Trade Promotion Authority fast track bill. He brought beer and visited with lawmakers on both sides. Earlier, in a closed meeting in the Capitol, top White House officials implored Democrats not to deny Obama the trade authority. Such a vote, they said, would block needed trade expansion for the nation and sink a major priority of the Democratic president.
It really happened---I was there to see it: obama flake annotated

Today the Senate voted 67-32 to pass the USA-FREEDOM Act, a piece of surveillance (read: privacy!) reform legislation meant to extend key provisions of the PATRIOT Act, which expired Sunday night. The USA-FA passed the House with supermajority, bipartisan support, but found a more hostile crowd waiting when it arrived in the Senate chamber. Rand Paul opposed it, and on Sunday night (the same night the PATRIOT Act expired) blocked a vote that most certainly would have ended with the Act's approval. Senate leadership opposed an immediate clean passage of the Act, but for different reasons entirely---they wanted the opportunity to amend and return to the House, a tactic that was met with opposition in both chambers. From earlier today:
One amendment would extend the timeframe for transferring data collection responsibilities from the NSA to the phone companies, allowing 12 months for that handover rather than six, as the House bill stipulates. Another would force phone companies to give Congress six months' advance notice if they change the procedures they use to collect and retain data. A third would allow the Director of National Intelligence to sign off on any procedural changes by the phone companies before they go into effect. "The House's bill is not holy writ. It's not something we have to accept in its entirety without any changes...and I think where the policy debae should go would be toe embrace these amendments," explained Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, during a floor speech on Tuesday. "We sure need to know that the new system would actually work. Doesn't that just make sense?"

An unlikely alliance between a top Democrat, and a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, has cast a trip line in front of the House's "running start" on the appropriations process. Last night, House Republicans delayed a vote on the first spending bill of the new session. The bill would have provided the funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs and military construction projects, and is usually the easiest appropriation to pass. A series of amendments from Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) and Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), however, threatened to derail an agreement made by House and Senate negotiators to reconcile both chambers' spending plans prior to a vote. The amendments address a budgetary loophole involving the sequester (remember that whole thing?) and the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) fund. Mulvaney's amendment seeks to block the Pentagon from using $532 billion from the OCO to fund overseas military construction projects at bases in Italy, Poland, Bahrain, Niger, Djibouti and Oman. Note: the OCO is not subject to the sequester caps passed in 2011. The budget the House was poised to pass would have appropriated $90 billion dollars from the OCO fund to the Pentagon; because that $90 billion comes from the OCO, it's not subject to the sequester, either, even though the appropriations bill slapped another label on it.

Earlier today, the Speaker's office released a light, approachable (we'll talk about this later), "Happy Spring" video from the Man himself, showing John Boehner purchasing and installing a new blade on his push mower. Watch it here:
He may be the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, but he still irons his own shirts, washes his own dishes, and yes…cuts his own grass. But a well-kept yard requires well-kept tools, so in the video, Speaker Boehner preps his push mower for the springtime.
Flawlessly executed "man of the people" spot? NAY. Soon after the video was released, the internet noticed something...horrifying. Behold:

Fact: the Secret Service's reputation is circling the drain. Between fence jumpers, shots fired, and agents driving through active bomb investigations, House committee have been working overtime in an attempt to put out a dumpster fire that has been raging for years. As for the Secret Service, they seem to be less concerned with fixing their image, and making sure their critics keep their mouths shut as scandals unfold. The Washington Post is reporting that oversight committee staffers have asked the White House to investigate claims that officials at the Secret Service have been circulating documents showing that Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) was once rejected for a job as a Secret Service agent. The matter has been referred to DHS for a thorough review---but the fact that we're talking about it right now may be the end goal of whomever chose to release the information. The Daily Beast spoke to Chaffetz about his application, trying to figure out if the Congressman's investigations are grudge-fueled: