Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

US Senate Tag

Posted by Amy Miller on February 05, 2015 4 Comments
Obstruction from the left? Must be a day ending in -y. For the third time in a row, Senate Democrats have blocked floor debate on a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security after February 27. The problem? The piece of legislation Republicans are trying to pass contains provisions blocking Obama's 2012 and 2014 amnesty plans from being implemented. Senate Republicans have pushed multiple times for a vote on the controversial House bill, highlighting their commitment both to keeping DHS funded, and preventing executive amnesty from becoming reality. Via CNN:
One reason for the multiple votes is so Senate GOP leaders can showcase for House Republicans that despite their efforts to pass the House bill, it can't get enough Democratic votes to pass in the Senate as long as it carries the immigration provisions. That might force House Republicans to rethink their position on immigration and decide to take that fight up later. "Part of coming to a solution is going to be showing that we're doing our best to fight for the House position," said Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Senate Republican told reporters on Wednesday after the second vote. It remains unclear how House and Senate Republican leaders will reach a solution that can meet the differing political needs of each chamber. Multiple House Republican members told CNN the focus now is to increase the pressure on the Senate to figure out a way to pass the measure.
Important point: Reid's caucus didn't just vote against this bill---they blocked it from even coming to the floor to be discussed. When it comes to immigration, Democrats don't want to talk about it unless they can guarantee a winning message they can splash across the top of their fundraising e-mails. This makes sense, considering former immigration officials have now come out to blast the amnesty plans as a death sentence for agencies tasked with making sure things run smoothly. Who wouldn't want to force the focus on a radical Republican agenda, as opposed to the impending implosion of progressive immigration policy? This isn't just about getting a vote on a bill; it's about making any progress at all on funding DHS, and rolling back Obama's executive amnesty:

Posted by Amy Miller on February 03, 2015 8 Comments
Democrats threw up a roadblock today when they filibustered a GOP bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security while neutering years' worth of Obama Administration policies favoring deportation amnesty. As I said earlier today, GOP leadership had to have known this was coming. The Dems have been apoplectic over Republican challenges to executive amnesty ever since they lost the majority, so a challenge to this aggressive change in policy is no surprise. What is surprising is how one of the Senate's most aggressive members addressed the possibility that the House bill would fail to make it to a vote. Via National Review:
Senator Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Senator Susan Collins (R., Maine) argued during a Senate GOP lunch that if Democrats filibuster the Department of Homeland Security funding bill — which blocks implementation of Obama’s 2012 deferred action program and his November 2014 “adult amnesty” — Republicans should respond by blocking only the 2014 orders. The thinking, according to a GOP senator who was in the lunch, is that Senate Democrats will have a harder time staying unified for a filibuster if Republicans have a narrower focus. “What I have said for months now is the central focus of Republicans should be stopping President Obama’s unconstitutional amnesty,” Cruz tells National Review Online when asked to confirm the details of his case. “That’s what Republican candidates promised the voters in November and that’s the promise we need to fulfill.”
That's...new. And huge. Back in January, Senator Cruz released a glowing statement, praising the House bill and its amnesty defunding provisions, saying that it was up to the Senate "to take up the House bill, preserving those key provisions, and send it to the President..." What happened?

Posted by Amy Miller on February 03, 2015 17 Comments
Senate Democrats didn't learn much from their stunning defeat in the midterms, did they? This afternoon, Reid and Durbin led their caucus on an obstructionist crusade to shut down progress on a necessary Homeland Security funding bill; Democrats managed to prevent the bill from reaching the floor for debate, which means that GOP leadership is going to have to circle back on a new attempt to keep the department funded while blocking Obama's 2012 and 2014 plans to grant deportation amnesty. From the Washington Times:
GOP leaders, who have said they will not let the department run out of money, will now have to come up with a Plan B to try to overcome the objections of Democrats, who are trying to defend President Obama’s 2012 and 2014 deportation amnesties. “The only way to finish a bill is to start a bill, and today they voted to refuse to start that process,” said Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican. Democrats, though, countered that they won’t debate any bill that tries to undo Mr. Obama’s amnesties, saying the focus should be on giving money to the department, not an effort to try to overturn the president. “They’re mad at President Obama because they want to deport Dreamers,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.
GOP leadership had to have seen this coming from a mile away. During today's media roundup, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) lashed out irrationally against the Republican plans to fund Homeland Security while blocking President Obama's executive immigration actions:

Posted by Amy Miller on January 30, 2015 6 Comments
Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) appeared on Fox News this week to take the White House to task over its weak stance regarding evidence that one of the five former Gitmo detainees released in exchange for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has been in contact with Taliban operatives.
But Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., in an interview with Fox News, raised concerns that the five freed fighters might indeed be planning to return to the battlefield in the coming months, particularly after strict monitoring in Qatar is over. "What happens then?" Ayotte asked. "Never mind that they're already attempting to re-engage and obviously making communications to do so." She said: "I think this was a bad deal." The senator pushed anew for legislation she has crafted that would suspend transfers of detainees assessed to be high- or medium-risk.
Watch:

Posted by Amy Miller on January 28, 2015 3 Comments
Modern-day slavery. When I lived in Texas, I learned more about the horror and despair of human trafficking than I ever thought there was to know. It's the fastest growing business of organized crime, and especially in places along the border, it shows. It took me a long time to truly understand that, in (then) 2012, there were still people in this country whose trade involved the exchange of money for human flesh. The U.S. House of Representatives is taking advantage of this week's Super Bowl hype to tackle the problem head-on. Right now, human traffickers are shipping in their young victims to take advantage of the influx of tourists into Phoenix, Arizona---and while the police can help combat the rampant exploitation, they don't have the manpower or resources to reverse the tide. The House has launched a sweeping initiative to fight the horrors of human trafficking, and they're starting with a dozen bills and a big messaging push aimed at helping people understand how dangerous the situation has become for 20 million people worldwide: From the House Republican Caucus:

Posted by Amy Miller on January 09, 2015 7 Comments
Yesterday, Senate Republicans attempted a procedural fast-track on the bipartisan Keystone XL jobs and infrastructure bill. The goal, according to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), was to immediately begin processing amendments to the controversial bill with the end goal of getting it to the President as soon as possible. McConnell asked for unanimous consent to proceed with consideration of the bill, noting that amendments would be accepted from both sides of the aisle. The problem? Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) objected. Instead of being able to move forward immediately, Leader McConnell was forced to file cloture on the motion to proceed with the bill; this means that unless Senator Whitehouse drops his objection, the next vote on the bill will have to wait until 5:30 on Monday. What a petty start to the 114th Congress. In prepared remarks from earlier this week, Harry Reid insisted that, “[t]he mistakes of the past, the gratuitous obstruction and wanton filibustering will not be a hallmark of the Democratic minority in the 114th Congress.” (Apparently, we're meant to have forgotten the hundreds of bills and amendments that suffered and died in the hands of then-Majority Leader Reid.)

Posted by Leslie Eastman on January 07, 2015 28 Comments
When it was confirmed that the Republicans would be taking over the US Senate after November's historic election many of us, fueled by a potent combination of conservative activism and Obama administration incompetence, were expecting big things. One of the items on the "Wish List" was tax reform. As the old adage goes: Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it. Even before formally taking charge of the US Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Senator John Thune (R-SD) weighed the option of solving our infrastructure problems with...a tax hike!  When FNC's Chris Wallace queried Thune about raising gas taxes, his response was astonishing.
The incoming Republican leader of the Senate Transportation Committee said Sunday an increase is up for consideration, as “we have to look at all the options.” “I don’t think we take anything off the table at this point,” John Thune said on “Fox News Sunday.” Prices at the pump are at the lowest point in years — the nationwide average has tumbled more than a dollar in the last year, reaching $2.20 on Monday. That’s given drivers significant relief at the same time as the federal highway fund continues to face huge shortages. Thune said the fund is looking at “about a $100 billion shortfall.”
The full segment is here, and the pertinent exchange starts at 9:50. Translation for those who don't speak politicoese: He would "prefer" not to do it does not mean he "absolutely won't" do it.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 06, 2015 42 Comments
Last night Charles Krauthammer took the outgoing Congressional leadership to task over their legacy of obstructionism. Watch: Via the Daily Caller (emphasis mine):
”It sounds like Schumer is saying that, for the first time in living memory, we’re going to have amendments introduced in the U.S. Senate, which is a remarkable constitutional achievement and it’s because Harry Reid is gone. The grown-ups are now in control of the Congress. This idea that we should be using American oil in America is so idiotic, it’s almost unworthy of talking about. So what we’re going to do is we’re going to use the Canadian oil and if we export it, which we will because we have a surplus, we’re going to substitute gallon by gallon American oil, it makes no sense at all.” “Look, I think what’s really important here is that Republicans are going to have a chance to show how retroactively for the last six years everything has stopped in the Senate. Democrats stopped it, Harry Reid stopped it and they effectively acted as a shield to make Obama look as if he wasn’t the one stopping stuff. Well now he’s going to be exposed because he’s going to have to exercise the veto. Schumer and the others could prevent a few of the bills from landing on the president’s desk with these ridiculous amendments on Keystone, for example. But I think it will expose them. But the days of hiding under Harry Reid’s desk are over.”
This is important, and it's not a point that should be ignored by conservatives. Starting today, we'll be holding accountable not just a newly-minted leadership, but a President who now finds himself in the minority after six comfortable years of playing pen-and-phone politics.

Posted by Amy Miller on January 04, 2015 4 Comments
Last time the Keystone XL Pipeline showed up on our radar, it was when embattled former Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu (D-efeated) attempted to use her support of the authorization bill to boost her spiraling poll numbers. That vote died at the hands of a single Democrat vote held hostage by former Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Landrieu lost the election, and Republicans left Washington ready to bide their time and pass Keystone with their incoming thin-but-comfortable majority. This time around, though, Republicans aren't just working to move a bill that by all accounts should pass the Senate without a second thought. On Thursday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a vote on legislation approving the pipeline; the bill is expected to move out of committee without much trouble, but this time around, Senate leadership is aiming not only for 60 votes, but for enough support to override a future Presidential veto. The first few weeks of the new Congress won't focus exclusively on energy, but instead on a series of issues Republicans are confident they can move through Congress and send to the President's desk. From Politico:
The goal, quite simply, is to begin passing bills that will clear both the House and the Senate and end up on President Barack Obama’s desk. Almost all of the bills Republicans will put on the floor passed the House last Congress, when Democrats held the majority in the Senate. The agenda was described by leadership aides who were not authorized to discuss the plan on the record.

Posted by Amy Miller on December 17, 2014 16 Comments
Senate Republicans are going to use their newfound majority advantage to tackle Keystone XL first thing come January, sending a message to Democrats and Washington at large that they're dealing with a different breed of leadership. Majority Leader-elect Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Majority Whip-elect John Cornyn (R-TX) don't have an easy job ahead of them; even in the wake of Dems' midterm cycle defeats, many conservatives are still making their concerns heard about the leadership's commitment to taking on big government, as opposed to just rolling with the punches. But for Mitch McConnell, who has struggled to pass conservative legislation during Harry Reid's time in the Majority, this move seems to be about more than just getting a bill passed---it's about fundamentally changing the way both sides participate in the deliberative process. From Politico:
“I hope that senators on both sides will offer energy-related amendments, but there will be no effort to micromanage the amendment process,” McConnell told reporters. “And we’ll move forward and hopefully be able to pass a very important job-creating bill early in the session.” Among potential energy amendments that senators could seek to attach to the Keystone bill are proposals to slow or stop EPA’s emissions rules for power plants and plans to fast-track liquefied natural gas exports. McConnell added: “The notion that building another pipeline is somehow threatening to the environment is belied by the fact that we already have 19 pipelines, I’m told by Lisa Murkowski, that either cross the Mexican border or the Canadian border. Multiple studies showing over and over again no measurable harm to the environment. People want jobs, and this project will create high-wage jobs for our people and it certainly does enjoy a lot of bipartisan support. You saw that on the vote that was held a couple weeks ago.”
An open amendment debate? This is new territory for the Senate, which under Reid's control served as little more than a killing field for even bipartisan amendments.

Posted by Amy Miller on December 15, 2014 14 Comments
Today, the Senate released committee assignments for the 114th Congress, and revealed just how big of a difference having a majority can hold. Republicans are set to gain as many as three seats on the powerful Judiciary, Finance, and Environment and Public Works Committees, which means Republicans will have an early upper hand on issues that affect appointments, confirmations, and immigration. Senators new to the game have received placements that play to their strengths. Louisiana victor Bill Cassidy will continue his focus on resource development on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee; meanwhile, Iowa's Joni Ernst will be able to flex her rural background on the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee. Politico has the breakdown on how the rest of the committees will be affected:
The following Senate panels will gain two Republican seats: Agriculture, Appropriations, Armed Services, Banking, Budget, Commerce, Energy, Foreign Relations, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Indian Affairs, Joint Economic, Rules and Administration, Small Business, Select Committee on Aging and Veterans’ Affairs. The Intelligence Committee picks up one GOP seat, while the split on the Ethics Committee remains the same. Republican leadership awarded four incoming Senate freshman with plum spots on the powerful Appropriations Committee: Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, James Lankford of Oklahoma and Steve Daines of Montana. And the Budget Committee’s two new Republicans — Perdue and Bob Corker of Tennessee — will also have the additional task of choosing who their new chairman will be: Mike Enzi of Wyoming or Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the current ranking member.
According to the Senate Republican Communications Center, The assignments are subject to ratification by the Republican Conference as well as the full Senate. New Committee Chairs will be selected by a vote of the members of each respective panel and then ratified by the Republican Conference. Here's the full list of assignments:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 14, 2014 10 Comments
Watching the maneuvering to rush through CRomnibus 2014, a massive bill few have read, reminds me of how Senate Democrats pushed through Obamacare legislation on December 24, 2009. That Senate bill became the foundation of the Obamcare eventually enacted, because Senate Dems lost their filibuster proof majority when Scott Brown was elected in January 2010. The House Dems were forced to swallow the Senate bill, with only minor "reconciliation" changes. I wrote just before passage, Dems Break It, They Own It:
Equally important was the fact that the Democratic bills, regardless of which version one picks, were monumental disasters waiting to happen, as I have written about almost 200 times in the past several months. I have analyzed, among other things, the unprecedented and possibly unconstitutional individual mandate, the use of the IRS as health care enforcer, the expansion of government bureaucracies, the increase in job-killing taxes, and a host of other fundamental flaws in Democratic proposals. For Republicans to sign onto this manmade disaster would be to betray our traditions, our constitutional form of government, and individual liberties.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 13, 2014 8 Comments
The Senate passed the CRomnibus bill 56-40, and also defeated a Ted Cruz constitutional point of order based on Obama's amnesty executive action, with significant numbers of Republican Senators sided with Obama. Here's how it went down:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 13, 2014 14 Comments
The differing treatment of Ted Cruz and Elizabeth Warren pretty much sums up the state of implicit media bias. Compare these two headlines from The Hill regarding Warren's attempt to cajole the House into defeating the CRomnibus, with Ted Cruz's similar effort in the Senate. Warren made "her mark" and raised her presidential prospects: The Hill Elizabeth Warren Makes Her Mark
Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s crusade against the $1.1 trillion spending bill backed by the White House firmly establishes the Massachusetts populist as a powerful player in Washington. The freshman Democrat took on President Obama and her party’s leadership, and appeared to inspire an uprising in the House.... Peter Ubertaccio, a political science professor at Stonehill College in Massachusetts, who follows Warren’s career, said that this week, Warren demonstrated a better feel for the sentiments of her party than her leadership. “If she’s able to succeed in the Senate at the expense of her own leadership team — the team that she’s on — it will have the practical impact of moving the center of power away from folks like Schumer and toward her,” he said. “That’s pretty significant for a freshman senator that’s been brought into the leadership. It could also reverberate in the 2016 presidential race, which liberal Democrats are dying for Warren to enter as a rival to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
As for Cruz, according to the same author of the Warren post he's just the same old obstructionist firebrand he's always been:

Posted by Amy Miller on December 12, 2014 4 Comments
Update: The Senate has managed to muster the majority vote needed to pass the NDAA. Votes are still flowing in. (Bill eventually passed 89-11.) --- You can watch the debate and final vote here, via C-SPAN. The Senate has been in session since 10 this morning, debating a $585 billion defense authorization. The National Defense Authorization Act, when passed, will authorize spending by the Pentagon into 2015, and includes a controversial lands use portion that would create new national parks and expedite the permit process for oil and gas drilling. Interestingly enough, most of the chatter about the NDAA has revolved not around defense spending itself, but around the unrelated, deficit-neutral land use provisions. From The Hill:
“The NDAA for fiscal year 2015 is a legislative hodgepodge that includes those straightforward, noncontroversial items that almost all of us support, but also numerous other provisions that are unrelated to national defense,” Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) said. “Most egregiously, the drafters secretly added 68 unrelated bills pertaining to the use of federal lands.” ... As the House prepares to leave town Thursday night, the bill's authors made it clear it that this bill was the only chance to pass an NDAA authorization by the end of the year. “We have to pass this bill,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said ahead of the vote. “The House is going to go home and there are no ways to make any changes.” Senators on both sides of the aisle defended the lands use portion, saying the Congressional Budget Office reported it would be deficit neutral. It designates new national parks and wilderness areas and expedites the permit process for oil and gas drilling, among other things. “That is why the package of lands bills in the National Defense Authorization Act is vitally important to America.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said. “This compromise is the chance for the Senate to get something done.”

Posted by Amy Miller on December 11, 2014 38 Comments
UPDATE: The House passed the massive spending bill. Looks like Senate short term vote tonight and vote tomorrow on bill: You know what comes next:
Accessibility by WAH