Brink
-
Posts
2,916 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
92
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Brink
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Evening Notebook for April 2, 2013
SAMANTHA ROSCOE: Good evening, and welcome to Evening Notebook. I am Samantha Roscoe.
The Senate, at least publicly, seems to be deadlocked tonight on the debt ceiling. The cloture motion on the Democrats’ Debt Limit Suspension Act of 2013 failed yesterday in a 55-45 vote.
Cloture votes, since they end debate on legislation and immediately begin a final vote, require 60 Senators to be in favor. With a Democratic majority of 55 in the Senate, Republican support is required for any legislation to advance.
The Senate still has roughly seven weeks to increase the debt ceiling before the Department of Treasury exhausts all "extraordinary measures" to keep the United States from entering default. There is also the option of suspending the debt ceiling, but sources tell us that U.S. law ((AB policy/announcement)) would only allow that to be a temporary measure.
Tonight, in an effort to be as concise as we can on a complicated topic, we will simply explain the differences and similarities between the Democratic and Republican proposals. Our friends over at the Beltway Journal have already walked you through the arguments, and there will be seemingly more to come in the next several weeks that we will also bring you.
Democrats have introduced the Debt Limit Suspension Act of 2013. This legislation was sponsored (or introduced) by DNC Chairwoman and Senator Annaleigh Ashton (D-Iowa).
The Debt Limit Suspension Act simply suspends the debt ceiling until September 30, 2015. Nothing more, nothing less.
Republicans have introduced the Fiscal Responsibility and Debt Ceiling Increase Act of 2013. The listed sponsor here is Senate Minority Whip Katherine Abbott (R-Texas), but it was noted she also introduced it on behalf of President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona).
The Fiscal Responsibility and Debt Ceiling Increase Act of 2013 would increase the debt ceiling to $21.2 trillion through September 30, 2016. Seemingly, that would mean that if the debt ceiling is reached before that date, the new debt ceiling deadline could come before then.
However, Republicans would seek to avoid that by calling for reductions in spending over the next few fiscal years.
ROSCOE: It should be noted that both of these are starting proposals for both sides. It is highly improbable either proposal will pass the U.S. Senate on its own.
This will likely end up in some agreement between both Republicans and Democrats. President Diaz has already invited Congressional leadership to the White House to negotiate. More will likely come of that in the next few weeks.
It should be noted that a temporary stop gap measure is likely to be needed as Senate precedence requires at least three weeks for a proposal to be considered between it being docketed by the Senate Majority Leader, and a cloture as well as final vote.
There is only one other potential avenue, but it has yet to be used this congressional session and would still require some time. This excludes any amendments or procedural tactics that take one or two Senators to pull off. Either of which would certainly stall the bill for a week or more longer.
When we return, Senator Caroline Baudin, Democrat of New York will join us. Stay tuned in!----------------------
ROSCOE: Welcome back to Evening Notebook, now joining us is Senator Caroline Baudin (D-New York). Thanks for joining us this evening, Senator!
CAROLINE BAUDIN: It's lovely to be here. Thank you, Samantha.
ROSCOE: Senator Baudin, I’d like to start tonight with the Senate’s tabling of the nomination of Bobby Jindal to be Secretary of Health and Human Services last week.
You were one of the most staunch opponenets of his nomination and there has been a lot of supposition as to why you and other Democrats opposed the nomination. Senator Caroline Umbridge-Hill (R-New Hampshire) said it was about Obamacare, the White House has believed that it’s about the reinstatement of the Mexico City Policy due to the timing, and former Governor Sarah Palin (R-Alaska) has suggested there was no reason at all. Set the record straight for us, Senator. Why did you and other Democrats oppose the nomination?
BAUDIN: Democrats are of course a big-tent party, and there are numerous issues we have with Governor Jindal's nomination. His tenure so far in Louisiana has made him in not only my eyes, but in many of my colleagues, to be an irresponsible pick for the Department of Health and Human Services. His opposition to the Affordable Care Act, which the Supreme Court upheld last year as the law of the land was certainly a big factor for me and many Democrats. Governor Jindal was rejected because of what he has done, and what he hasn't while Governor of Louisiana. Any accusations that this was an act of political retribution or even of spite is simply ridiculous in my mind.
ROSCOE: If the President's replacement nominee also was opposed to the Affordable Care Act, would that also be a factor towards you decision on if to vote for them or not?
BAUDIN: It would certainly have to be a factor. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is part of the Executive Branch, which our Constitution tasks with the enforcement of our laws. What happens when the Executive turns a blind eye? You lose the integrity of the governing process. That being said, it cannot be the only factor. I would have to take a close look at the past decisions of the nominee. At the end of the day, we want a working Department of Health and Human Services, but we want at its helm a leader with a proven track record as well. Americans deserve no less.
ROSCOE: You said that the Affordable Care Act was certainly a big factor. Were there others? Certainly a big factor in rejecting Jindal, that is
BAUDIN: There were, Samantha. Notably an overall poor record prioritizing healthcare while Governor of Louisiana. His tenure as Governor oversaw significant cuts in healthcare funding and essential services, largely depriving vulnerable communities from receiving much needed care. 25% of the budget for the Louisiana State University healthcare system cut under his tenure. That's a startling number just by itself. The hospitals across the state of Louisiana under this system have been severely affected, and shows clearly that the Governor's priorities are not building up healthcare accessibility, but instead prioritizing other things. That's not a good look for leading the Department of Health and Human Services.
ROSCOE: Let’s discuss your United States 2013 Gun Violence Prevention Act. What made you decide to introduce it in the Senate?
BAUDIN: I think we need to take action on gun violence in this country, Samantha. Thoughts and prayers are not enough. I stood in New York City last August and promised my constituents that this would be something I act on, and so that's exactly what I did when the new session started.
ROSCOE: NINC has reported on the fact that sources within your party said that before you introduced the bill, you took it to the Senate Democratic Caucus as a whole and certain provisions were removed such as a reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban. Why were those provisions removed and why not introduce that separately if you felt like the rest of the bill had a greater chance of being docketed?
BAUDIN: As Senators, we all walk a line between representing our constituents and understanding the political reality we face. The issue is so important that we need to introduce what can be passed. Senate Democrats want to govern, and as such we need to work together in the Senate and the House. This has also been our approach to the Debt Ceiling negotiations before President Diaz and Senate Republicans blocked input from Democratic leadership. My approach to Gun Violence Prevention is in that same spirit. Governance is what the American people want, not the obstruction we are seeing from Senate Republicans and the White House.
ROSCOE: We'll return to the debt ceiling conversation in a moment. In the legislation, the three week waiting period and universal background check mandated on the sale of a firearm includes a notable exception.
ROSCOE: What made you decide to include this exception? Particularly the other person provision
BAUDIN: We wanted to insure broad support for the provision, and we were told by many in the Senate that this was a necessary exception. Once again, we are interested in governance and every aspect of this legislation was designed to gather bipartisan support, and help the American people prevent further violence in any way we can.
ROSCOE: Senator, the Pakistani Supreme Court ordered the dissolution of the country’s national assembly this week with a snap election to be held within 40 days. Do you believe their Supreme Court made the right move and do recent developments out of Pakistan concern you?
BAUDIN: I hesitate to comment on another nation's sovereign process, particularly since we hold relations with Pakistan where we have been a leading investor for several years. Further the information we are receiving daily is not as large a picture as the White House can access. Based on what I know however, I would say that the judicial process in Pakistan is running its course. That's what it means to have separation of powers, and that's also what it means to be a democracy. This is good to see, especially as Pakistan is a relatively new democracy.
ROSCOE: Senator, as our time comes to a close in this interview, I’d like to return to the debt ceiling conversation as this show started with tonight. You referred to input from Democratic leadership being blocked by the White House and Senate Republicans on this issue. I assume you can’t speak for your leadership, so instead I will ask you for any thoughts you have had on this issue so far?
BAUDIN: I appreciate you saying that, Samantha. I certainly can't speak for the leadership, but I can speak of them. Senator Starnes and the rest of the leadership have led the way on being proactive in their willingness to work with Senate Republicans and the White House. We introduced a suspension of the Debt Ceiling precisely for this kind of bipartisan discussion. The White House and Senate Republicans not only snubbed us, but both House conferences as well. I talked about facing reality, and this is it. Republicans need us just as we need them. We're still at the table. It's time for President Diaz to come back. America needs all of us.
ROSCOE: I know you can't speak for your leadership, but based on your comments about still being at the table, is it your understanding that negotiations between leadership on both sides have been paused?
I guess in a clearer way, what is your understanding on the status of negotiations? A couple of weeks ago, the President sent an invitation to leadership on both sides of the aisle.
BAUDIN: I think there's a lot of talking going all around, but I think only some of us are listening, too. It's not the President, and it's not the Senate Minority.
But yes, formal talks are still underway.
ROSCOE: I see. Well, we are almost out of time, so we will have to leave that there. Finally, in the spirit of recent tweets by Washington politicians, I'd like to ask you Senator, what are you glad to see right now? It can be anything political or non-political, it can even be the Baltimore Ravens winning the Super Bowl, even though I doubt you are glad to see that haha.
BAUDIN: My daughter and I absolutely love Bruno Mars, and we've seen him in concert. I'm very excited to listen to his new hit.
ROSCOE: Well, I hope you and your daughter both enjoy it! Thank you for coming on, Senator!
BAUDIN: Thanks for having me!
ROSCOE: As always, if you are out and about living your life ((or LOA)) and need to catch up on the latest news, you can go to https://bit.ly/NINC_com. All of the latest news is there for you at your disposal at any time, including a transcript from this broadcast within 24 hours of air. Thank you for all for joining us tonight, on behalf of NINC, I am Samantha Roscoe bidding you a good night.
-
2
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live White House Responds to Tabling of Jindal Nomination
Additional reaction from across Washington, D.C. is rolling in as well
by Garrett TalleyNINC has now received comment from the White House relating to today’s tabling by the U.S. Senate of the nomination of Governor Bobby Jindal (R-Louisiana) to be Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). Jindal was nominated by President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona).
The Senate’s move has essentially killed Jindal’s nomination, as it would take one of several surprising actions for Jindal to be re-considered.
The White House expressed deep disappointment in its statement to NINC.
“We are deeply disappointed in the Senate Majority’s display of obstructive partisanship as they reject Governor Jindal,” the White House said. “Governor Jindal is an honorable man who has served across the healthcare field throughout his career as well as the elected executive of Louisiana, during which he tackled lagging healthcare outcomes with great fervor and knowledge of the field.”
The White House also brought up the fact that Jindal was elected as the first minority governor of the state of Louisiana. There have been scant mentions of this fact up until now during this debate.
“Governor Jindal is the first Indian-American to serve as Governor and the only elected minority Governor of Louisiana,” the White House said. “He is a face of progress, merit, and unity, an example of the American Dream. Not since the administration of George H.W. Bush has a nominee been rejected, and in that case, it was because of some very alarming and controversial investigations and allegations regarding the nominee’s behavior. Governor Jindal has no such flaws and is obviously qualified, but the Senate chose to reject him over simple, cynical political games, denying the American people stable long-term leadership in the HHS.”
The White House is referring to the Senate's 53-47 denial of President George H.W. Bush (R-Texas)'s Secretary of Defense nominee, Senator John Tower (R-Texas). This is the most recent example of a nominee being denied by the Senate rather than being withdrawn. His denial was in relation to possible conflicts of interest and accusations in Tower's personal life.
Senator Patrick Mulligan (R-Illinois) also sent a statement to NINC about the tabling of the nomination.
"The outright rejection of Bobby Jindal's nomination for HHS is rabid partisanship of the highest degree,” Mulligan said. “Democrats have consistently claimed that Republicans did nothing but obstruct throughout the last four years under Obama and yet the Jindal nomination is the first to be outright denied since George Bush Sr. The public smearing of a trailblazing public servant who embodies the American experience by the left, with no pushback by moderates within their party, is a damn shame. I expected better of my colleagues."
Senator Caroline Baudin (D-New York) responded to Mulligan and Senate Minority Whip Katherine Abbott (R-Texas)’s tweets on the matter by asking where Senate Republicans were during debate of the nomination.
“Where was Senate GOP when Jindal nomination had the Senate floor? Governance is done by those who show up,” Baudin tweeted.
Before the vote to table began, only Senators Baudin, Grace Porter (D-Pennsylvania), and Catherine Valois (D-Massachusetts) had made comments on the Senate floor relating to the nomination. Senator Caroline Umbridge-Hill (R-New Hampshire) commented after the motion to table had begun being voted on.
Mulligan responded to Baudin’s tweet by suggesting that Republicans potentially feel like they had not had enough time to debate the nomination.
“Governance also involves providing ample time for all opinions to be expressed,” Mulligan tweeted. “If the rabid historic partisanship the country just watched is 'governance' then god help us.”
It remains to be seen how the path forward looks from here. Diaz will likely have to appoint a replacement nominee, unless Republicans believe they could successfully push through a motion to suspend and pass the nomination through the Senate. Those votes require 66 votes, which based on the results of the vote to table seems unlikely.
-
2
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live BREAKING: Senate Kills Bobby Jindal Nomination
55-45 vote to table ends consideration on nomination
by Garrett TalleyIn an outcome that wasn’t entirely clear at the outset, the Senate has decided to table the nomination of Bobby Jindal to be Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) in a 55-45 vote.
The vote along party lines essentially kills the nomination, as it would take either a motion to suspend the rules to bring the nomination back to the floor or Senate Majority Leader John Starnes (D-Virginia) putting it back on the Senate calendar. It is unlikely there would be enough support to do either.
In recent weeks, opposition has grown to the nomination by prominent Senate Democrats. One of those strongly in opposition has been Senator Caroline Baudin (D-New York).
“During Governor Jindal's tenure, public health seemed to take a backseat as he pursued policies that compromised the health and safety of citizens, particularly those with limited resources," Baudin told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. “There is no guarantee based on his record that he will prioritize the health and well-being of all Americans or continue to implement policies that disproportionately impact the most vulnerable communities in our country.”
No members of Democratic leadership had backed the effort at that time. During the vote, Senate Majority Whip Clint Dickens (D-Minnesota) voted in favor of tabling the nomination. NINC Political Analyst Rosanne Huffman believes this was the death knell for the nomination.
“If Democratic leadership had not voted, that could have provided a chance for the nomination to be brought back,” Huffman said. “While Starnes did not vote, the vote of Dickens now makes it very hard for either Republicans to have the votes to force the nomination back onto the floor or Leader Starnes to bring it back without fierce internal opposition. I do believe it is dead.”
Senator Caroline Umbridge-Hill (R-New Hampshire) made a last ditch pitch of support for the nomination in the final hours of the vote, but it ultimately did not stop the final result.
“There have been many mischaracterizations of who he is and what he stands for,” Umbridge-Hill said. “Governor Jindal began his life working in the healthcare field after graduating from Brown University with a Biology and Public Policy degree. He has been a champion of health and social care for all Americans throughout his years as a public servant.”
Barring any surprises, it is very likely President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona) will now have to go back to the drawing board and select a new nominee to be Secretary of Health and Human Services. NINC has reached out to the White House for comment, but has not heard back as of the publishing of this article.
Historically speaking, it is not uncommon for a new President to have to go to a second choice for a member of his cabinet. Several recent Presidents have had to do it multiple times.
For example, President Barack Obama (D-Illinois) selected former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-South Dakota) for the very same HHS post in 2009, before having to withdraw over $140,000 in unpaid taxes.
President George W. Bush (R-Texas) had to withdraw the nomination of Linda Chavez (R-New Mexico) to be Secretary of Labor after it was learned she had given money to an undocumented immigrant living in her home.
President Bill Clinton (D-Arkansas) withdrew the nomination of Zoë Baird (D-New York) to be Attorney General after the Nannygate affair. The Nannygate affair was similar to the Chavez incident in that she also had an undocumented immigrant in her home. The immigrant was working as a chauffeur and nanny while Baird did not pay Social Security taxes for them.
President George H.W. Bush (R-Texas) is the most recent President to have a cabinet nominee denied by the Senate. Senator John Tower (R-Texas) was nominated to be Secretary of Defense, before being denied by the chamber in a 53-47 vote in relation to possible conflicts of interest and Tower's personal life. This is the most recent one that was related, in part, due to a candidate’s qualifications for the post.
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Senate Considers “Corporate Tax Fairness” Legislation
Minority Whip Abbott argues it would not provide for tax fairness
by Cory BuchananThe Senate is currently considering, among other legislation, the Corporate Tax Fairness Act. The Corporate Tax Fairness Act was introduced by Senator Mollie Berryhill (D-Colorado) and brought up for consideration by Senate Majority Leader John Starnes (D-Virginia).
The Corporate Tax Fairness Act sets new rules on controlled foreign corporations.
Controlled foreign corporations are businesses that are registered in and do business in foreign countries, but the controlling owners are U.S. citizens. Currently, federal tax law requires that stockholders in these corporations are required to include their pro-rata share of subpart F income from these corporations into their gross income.
Subpart F income is defined as the sum of insurance income; the foreign base company income; a certain amount of income which is then multiplied by the international boycott factor; the sum of the amounts of any illegal bribes, kickbacks, or other payments; and the income of such corporations derived from any foreign country during which section 901(j) applies to such foreign country. It should be noted that the illegal bribes, kickbacks, or other payments are only illegal if the payor is a U.S. citizen per the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977.
The Berryhill legislation would remove the section 901(j) provision from the legislation, making all income derived from any foreign country part of a person’s pro rata share of subpart F income that would be defined as gross income for taxpaying purposes. This would create other impacts on the controlled foreign corporations themselves. It would not be allowed to be deferred.
Section 3 of the Corporate Tax Fairness Act would create rules for large integrated oil companies which have dual capacity taxpayers. Those rules would deny the foreign tax credit to those companies.
A large integrated oil company is defined as an oil company who has gross receipts exceeding $1 billion in a year and production averaging 500,000 barrels of crude oil worldwide each day.
A dual capacity taxpayer is defined as a person who “is subject to a levy of such country or possession, and.. receives (or will receive) directly or indirectly a specific economic benefit (as determined in accordance with regulations) from such country or possession.”
These rules would not apply for certain oil companies if they run contrary to the provisions of any existing treaty.
Section 4 makes a wording amendment to the limitation on credit for the foreign tax credit. The legislation’s Plain English Summary says this would limit the offset of the foreign tax credit to income that is subject to U.S. tax. Berryhill has stated that this would "end a quirk of the tax system that permits US corporations to artificially inflate or accelerate foreign tax credits." The legislation’s amendment to the relevant section of the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26) and the current section of the Internal Revenue Code are below.
Section 5 would seek to treat foreign corporations managed and controlled in the United States as domestic corporations for income tax purposes.
Corporations that are not regularly traded on an established securities market and have/are expected to have gross assets of less than $50 million would be allowed to receive a waiver from the Secretary of Treasury exempting them from section 5.
Berryhill, while debating the bill on the Senate Floor, argues the legislation will hold U.S. companies accountable to paying U.S. taxes.
“Corporations and the wealthy have been avoiding approximately $100 billion in taxes annually by shifting profits and income to offshore tax havens,” Berryhill said. “One small building in the Cayman Islands currently claims to be the headquarters of 18,000 global businesses. The Corporate Tax Fairness Act will stop corporations from claiming to be foreign entities by establishing a mere post office box in a tax haven country. It ensures that companies primarily located in the US pay taxes as the US companies they really are.”
She also pitched the legislation as a deficit reduction measure. President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona) recently said that he would not support a debt ceiling increase without deficit reduction.
Senate Minority Whip Katherine Abbott (R-Texas) opposes all but Section 5 of the legislation.
“Unlike its name, this bill will create unfair tax treatment for businesses that do business in the United States,” Abbott said. “Our great country is the world's capital for businesses from around the world and here at home. This bill will slowly inch us toward an economic environment equal to that of European countries like the UK where businesses tend to not go, but rather, they leave. That would spell disaster for our country and for millions of hardworking Americans who rely on these jobs in order to provide for their families.”
Abbott has motioned to remove sections 3 and 4 from the legislation. That amendment is currently awaiting a second before it can be voted on.
The Congressional Budget Office is likely to conduct a review of legislation, per their policy of reviewing bills that could affect the deficit. At a time where the White House has expressed a desire for deficit reduction, this bill may garner a lot of debate by Senators in the coming weeks.
-
2
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Prominent Democratic Senator Clarifies Stance on Jindal
Casanova-Davis Jr’s press office: “[Jindal] is grossly unqualified to serve in this role"
by Garrett Talley
Senator Justin Casanova-Davis, Jr (D-Florida) has clarified his stance to NINC on the nomination of Governor Bobby Jindal (R-Louisiana) to be Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).
In NINC’s previous article, it was suggested that Casanova-Davis, Jr was in support of all of the President’s cabinet nominees. However, Casanova-Davis, Jr’s office has since clarified that the support was only for the nominees currently being considered at that time, which did not include Jindal. NINC apologizes for any error. The previous article on the subject has been updated to reflect this.
“After speaking with the President's nominees on the Senate floor at the moment and evaluating their records,” Casanova-Davis, Jr said. “I have decided that I will vote in support of the President's nominees despite some concerns.”
Casanova-Davis, Jr’s press office told NINC he would in fact, be opposing the Jindal nomination based on his concerns of Jindal having a poor record on healthcare during his service as Governor.
“Senator Casanova-Davis Jr. is grossly concerned about the nomination of Governor Jindal to become Secretary of Health and Human Services,” his press office told NINC. “With many issues being laid out by fellow Senators already. If you closely evaluate his record, you will see, in the Senator’s opinion, a pretty devastating and poor record regarding health care in his home state. Health outcomes in his state are some of the lowest in the country… Senator Casanova-Davis Jr. will be voting in opposition to Governor Jindal’s nomination, as he believes his record indicates that he is grossly unqualified to serve in this role.”
President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona) continues to stand by his nominee, posting on Twitter soon after NINC’s previous reporting was published.
“I stand by Governor Jindal as an excellent and qualified man to lead the Department of Health and Human Services,” Diaz tweeted. “Aside from his time as Governor, his record speaks to his experience and capability. He has previously served as the secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals and as principal adviser to the Secretary of HHS. Governor Jindal is a capable leader and good man, and a trailblazer. The Senate should confirm him.”
RNC Chairwoman and Senator Jennifer Cole (R-Texas) joined the President in his support on Twitter.“Experience matters, especially in health,” Cole tweeted. “Bobby Jindal is the embodiment of expertise and dedication. Proud to support him for HHS Secretary.”
The clarification by Casanova-Davis, Jr puts further strain on the likelihood of Jindal’s nomination reaching the required 60 votes to pass cloture in the Senate. However, without Democratic leadership backing the opposition effort as of now, it may still be possible for the nomination to succeed.
Jindal’s nomination has been given floor time in the Senate, no prominent Senators have yet to speak in support or opposition of it there. That is expected to change in the coming days.
-
1
-
1
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Opposition Grows to Bobby Jindal Nomination
Nomination will soon face a floor debate by full Senate
by Garrett Talley
More Democrats have joined Senator Mollie Berryhill (D-Colorado) in opposition to the nomination of Governor Bobby Jindal (R-Louisiana) to be Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). This comes after Berryhill announced her opposition in light of President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona)’s reinstatement of the Mexico City Policy.
Senators Caroline Baudin (D-New York), Grace Porter (D-Pennsylvania) and Catherine Valois (D-Massachusetts) have all recently announced opposition to the nomination.
“The Governor's record includes a gross negligence towards healthcare for rural and underserved communities and vulnerable populations,” Valois said. “State-run hospitals were repeatedly closed, leading to limited access to healthcare for thousands across Louisiana. His policies on healthcare issues were financially driven as opposed to quality driven, leading to a decline in healthcare quality across Louisiana during his tenure as Governor.”
Valois is seemingly referring to the closure and then privatization of Southeast Louisiana Hospital. Southeast Louisiana Hospital closed in late 2012 after Jindal promised that hospital would provide services for patients of New Orleans Adolescent Hospital when it was closed by his administration in 2009. Both hospitals specialized in mental health care.
Jindal has called for “right-sizing” Louisiana’s public health system by privatizing patient services. It has also been suggested by state officials that “right-sizing” would save the state money.
Valois also said she would oppose the nomination due to Jindal’s record relating to teen pregnancies in Louisiana.
“Jindal's record also includes limiting access to contraceptives,” Valois said. “From 1988 to 2005, Louisiana's teen pregnancy rate had declined; however, under the leadership of Jindal, it saw the highest increase of any state in America.”
Senator Douglas Butcher (R-Utah), responded to Valois by suggesting her views on Jindal were simply "conspiratorial" on the issue of contraceptives. He also announced his support for the nomination.
“I’m noticing Democrats are gearing up to block this nomination because of some rather conspiratorial views on Governor Jindal’s stand on contraceptives,” Butcher said. “It was just this past December that Bobby Jindal was proposing over-the-counter sales of contraceptives… I would hope Senators Valois and Porter would look at Governor Jindal’s record and public stand on contraceptives instead of regurgitating talking points that have no connection to reality but connect to the worst kind of identity politics and pandering. To oppose Governor Jindal on that issue is just absurd and I will be voting to confirm his nomination.”
Baudin urged President Diaz to find a “new and more qualified nominee.”
“Governor Jindal, the President’s nominee to lead this Department does not reflect the commitment to this role that the American people deserve,” Baudin said. “As governor of Louisiana, Governor Jindal's policies have been marked by a lack of emphasis on healthcare funding, and a failure to prioritize initiatives aimed at tackling the increasing challenges of healthcare accessibility and essential care for vulnerable populations. His decisions disproportionately affected low-income individuals and jeopardized the health and safety of countless Americans.”
However, not all Democrats are not necessarily against the Jindal nomination. Senator Justin Casanova-Davis, Jr (D-Florida) announced he would be supporting the nominations of Senator James Talent (R-Missouri) to be Secretary of Defense and Governor Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) to be Secretary of Treasury, regardless of policy stances he may disagree with them on. At the time of the writing of this article, he had not made any public stance on the Jindal nomination.
“As long as a candidate is not grossly unqualified, I will generally vote in support of the President's cabinet nominees, whether that President is a Republican or a Democrat,” Casanova-Davis, Jr said. “After speaking with the President's nominees on the Senate floor at the moment and evaluating their records, I have decided that I will vote in support of the President's nominees despite some concerns. I think some of my colleagues have highlighted questionable policy decisions that merit reflection and would most definitely keep me from nominating some of these nominees, but the President believes they will help his administration, so I will not stand in the way of that.”
President Diaz has seemingly stuck to standing by Jindal’s nomination with no further statement since NINC asked the White House about Berryhill’s opposition to the nomination in light of the Mexico City Policy reinstatement.
“We still expect Governor Jindal to be confirmed,” Press Secretary Elias Cornell said. “President Diaz campaigned on reinstating the [Mexico City] policy, so opposing every HHS nominee he puts forward until the end of the administration is just silly because it isn't going anywhere. Governor Jindal is an upstanding, qualified man with plenty of experience. We expect the Senate to vote on his merits and qualifications, not to engage in tit-for-tat petty fights.”
The nomination is sure to face its biggest test as Senate Majority Leader John Starnes (D-Virginia) has placed the nomination on the Senate’s docket. This means it will soon be considered by the full Senate and will have to reach 60 votes before debate can be closed and the nomination moved to a final vote.
UPDATE: Senator Casanova-Davis, Jr's office has informed NINC that his attributed quote was simply related to the nominations of Senator James Talent (R-Missouri) to be Secretary of Defense and Governor Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) to be Secretary of Treasury. The above article has been updated to reflect this. The updated paragraph is italicized.
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Evening Notebook for February 22, 2013
SAMANTHA ROSCOE: Welcome to Evening Notebook. I am Samantha Roscoe.
Tonight, we are covering the Financial Accountability and Institutional Reform Resolution, otherwise known as the FAIR resolution.
The resolution, introduced by Senator Clint Dickens (D-Minnesota), would ask President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona) to appoint a special counsel to investigate allegations of impropriety by financial institutions or individuals during the Great Recession of 2008.
The findings of the resolution outline the misconduct allegations that Senator Dickens appearingly is wanting to look into.
ROSCOE: Periodic reports would be submitted to Congress as well as a final report. Dickens would also like the special counsel to have the same powers as any other special counsel.
After the resolution passed cloture, Senator Dickens spoke to the press about it.
Senator Clint Dickens (D-Minnesota):
"Wall Street is about to be put on notice… There can be no more pussyfooting around or ducking the consequences of the Great Recession for those responsible for the collapse.”
ROSCOE: Of course, people who know parliamentary procedure would tell you that a Senate resolution has no legal power. It essentially just expresses the opinion of however many Senators vote to approve it. Congress is also currently prohibited from appointing special counsels.
Senator Douglas Butcher (R-Utah) started the debate in the Senate by asking it to be the opinion of the Senate that the special counsel also look into the actions of the Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation.
Those are also known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, respectively. Both of those corporations are government-sponsored entities that were created by Congress in 1938 and 1970. However, neither are truly considered government backed funding wise. They just receive many many governmental benefits. The perception that they are has made them very valuable.
Senate Minority Leader Richard Baker (R-Florida) supported the amendment. Dickens then asked if Baker and Butcher would support the resolution if the amendment was attached. Baker and Butcher both agreed.
Senate Minority Whip Katherine Abbott (R-Texas) delivered a scathing floor speech of the resolution, calling it free market interference by Democrats and calling it a declaration of war on business.
Senate Minority Whip Katherine Abbott (R-Texas):
“This resolution, in its simplest form, is a declaration of war on business.”ROSCOE: Final passage of the resolution by the Senate is currently being voted on. The vote almost appears to be a tossup as of now with aye, nay, or present votes each from members of both parties.
Senate influencers are split on the resolution, with Baker voting aye, Abbott voting nay, and Senator Emre Underboard (R-Alaska) voting present. Democratic Senators appear to be less split, but still split nonetheless with Dickens voting aye and Senator Winifred Zimmermann (D-Illinois) leading a contingent of Democrats in voting present.
We will be right back with Senators Abbott and Dickens joining Evening Notebook.
ROSCOE: Welcome back to Evening Notebook, and we welcome in Senate Minority Whip Katherine Abbott (R-Texas) and Senator Clint Dickens (D-Minnesota). Thank you both for joining us tonight.
CLINT DICKENS: The pleasure is all mine, Samantha. Senator, you look lovely tonight. Great to see you.KATHERINE ABBOTT: Thank you for having me. Good seeing you Clint.
ROSCOE: Before we discuss the Financial Accountability and Institutional Reform Resolution, I would like to ask you both for your reaction to the suspected drug cartel violence this week in Cameron Park, Texas. Obviously, this is in your home state, Senator Abbott, but I feel like this will soon become an issue in the national spotlight, not just in Texas.
ABBOTT: Thank you Samantha because its a very important topic for sure. What the community of Cameron Park witnessed is tragic. This wasn't just violence against one community but against all communities where illegal immigration has spilled over and bore its bad fruits. This violence will continue to spill over our southern border and onto our streets and our communities if we don't take the necessary and immediate steps to solve the border crisis that is beginning to seep onto our streets and destroy the safety of my fellow Texans and Americans everywhere. Where there is unsolved illegal immigration and increased Cartel activity, danger, corruption, and death follows. Mexico isn't sending their best; rather, they are sending their most dangerous. The fact that the Cartel is active in the United States says a lot about the deficiencies in our border security, and the longer we continue to be ineffective and inefficient in that area, the worse our streets will become. This isn't about politics, nor is it about race. This is about fulfilling our oath to provide for the proper defense of our fellow Texan; our fellow American. Congress must now do what is necessary and what is right to keep America safe, and you bet I will do everything in my power to keep Texas safe. Now's not the time for words but for action. Let us act now and protect and defend our sovereignty, our families, our neighbors, our communities, and our fellow Americans.
DICKENS: Border security and immigration impacts all of us. And anyone who tries to marginalize this to just a Texas thing does not get the issue. There are good people in Senator Abbott's homestate who deserve our help and action from Washington. And Senator Abbott is right, this is not about race or politics. This is about common sense.
Here's a novel thought that may go against everyone of Senator Abbott's instincts, but makes complete sense to anyone serious about tackling this issue. We can secure the border and pass a just answer to the issue of undocumented immigrants. You don't need more than two brain cells to realize this.
The common sense solution is straightforward: Deport criminals, support law abiding families with a pathway to citizenship, and then toss every last cartel member into prison. We can tell the difference between a law abiding, earnest person who wants their shot at the American dream versus some freak with face tattoos and a Sinola branding on his chest. Let's not complicate this: secure the border and pass fair and just immigration reform. f
ABBOTT: At least we have a starting point on the issue, but we must go further on the point of securing our border and that's by boosting resources for our immigration law enforcement, tackling the drug issue. We have drugs pouring into our country by the pound and that's contributing to the death of thousands, if not millions, of Americans every year. We must get serious on the issue and I hope you can work with us Dick to solve this issue.
ROSCOE: Would it be safe to say you are both willing to join the President in this fight he has challenged members of Congress to?ABBOTT: The President is right and I am more than willing to jump onboard this fight. The border crisis is a big issue in Texas and my fellow Texans are on the frontlines everyday. Washington D.C. must join them there and fight for them and fight to protect them.
DICKENS: My colleagues and I are absolutely willing to engage with the President. But it has to be in good faith. Because let's be real here: The last time we tried a right wing border plan, Arizona troopers were pulling over and handcuffing every last commuter who dared play mariachi music on the stereo. If what the President and Senator Abbott are envisioning is a national version of Arizona SB 1070, the border won't be any more secure and our communities will be a helluva lot less safe.
You want to stop crime? You want to prevent the spread of drugsr? Great. Let's pass a border plan that keeps families together, empowers law abiding individuals to become U.S. citizens, and focuses law enforcement's energies on rounding up actual criminals in the cartels. If the President and Republicans willing to work on a plan centered around these goals, there is no reason we can't get something great done for the American people.
ROSCOE: Alright, let's go ahead and discuss what the main topic of tonight is, the Financial Accountability and Institutional Reform resolution, also known as FAIR.
As viewers have been able to see so far, this debate will be free form. I am simply here to facilitate and ask guiding questions along the way.
Senator Dickens, why is it important for the President to appoint a special counsel into the events of the Great Recession now?
DICKENS: Because no one is above the law. We saw trillions of dollars of savings, investments, and hard work wiped out because of blatant lying and manipulation by Wall Street. And to clean up the mess, the American people had to fork over more than $700 billion to rescue the very institutions responsible for said collapse. These aren't just numbers on a sheet. These are names and faces of people I know and call my friends and neighbors back home. People who lost their homes or their retirement funds because some scumbag on Madison Avenue couldn't stand not having a third yacht. It is wrong, it is corrupt, and it is against everything we stand for as Americans to block a criminal investigation into what we all know to be true: people lied and everyone else but them paid the consequences. We cannot afford to let the biggest economic injustice of our time go without a response.
ABBOTT: I agree with Clint on some of what he said. It was wrong that millions of Americans lost their savings, their homes, and their investments. Trust me, I've seen the impact in my very own state. However, it wasn't primarily due to the actions of Wall Street, but mere government policy which interfered in the free market and caused the crash we saw back in 2008.
The issue with the resolution isn't in the goal it seeks, but rather in the additional resources it will require to investigate as well as the precedent it will set that when government forces businesses to do something, they will turn around and blame the same companies it forced to do its bidding, even with the threat of arrest and more.
We must address, however, what I think is a big issue with appointing a Special Counsel, and that is the additional resources that will be used, all funded by tax dollars, to participate in a war on American businesses, jobs, and people.
DICKENS: Senator, you’re right. Government could and should have done more to prevent what happened. But just because a cop wasn’t walking his beat right does not mean you let the murderer go free. Free markets should not mean freedom from consequences. And just because government did not do its job before does not mean we now throw in the towel and give up taking any action.
ABBOTT: But if the cop forces that person to commit murder and then turn around and arrest him, do you think that's fair too? That's essentially what you're proposing.
DICKENS: And let's also be clear, you're right that government absolutely let criminals get away with murder. And that is why a Special Counsel is more essential than ever. Get someone outside of the political structure in charge of the investigation. Put someone at the helm who does not go golfing with John Thain on Tuesdays and then Senator Abbott on Wednesdays. Empower someone with honor and integrity to go after the scumbags in bureaucracy and on Wall Street. But one thing we cannot do is allow law and order to end at the intersection of Wall Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. Equal justice, Let justice be done, though the heavens may fall or thy yachts be impounded.
ROSCOE: Senator Dickens, are you suggesting that Senator Abbott may have a bias on this issue?
DICKENS: Look, I don't believe Senator Abbott is corrupt. I know her to be personally upstanding. I just know that she does not have to paid off to parrot the talking points of the very PR firms representing the clients responsible for the Great Recession. 'It's not our fault that we crashed the economy, even though we did. You didn't stop us. It's your fault really' is what they're trying to sell the American people on. Cut the baloney. The people who did this are culpable and should face their day in courts. Lord knows they can afford a few lawyers with those fat CEO bonuses they gave themselves. If Senator Abbott and Republicans truly believe in law and order and standing up for the little guy, appoint a Special Counsel so we can get an independent investigation into what went on.
ABBOTT: Samantha, I think the issue here isn't whether there's bias, but a lack of understanding and the lack of fact. Senator Clint is not out seeking justice for the little guy, no, he is out to disrupt the progress that has already been made. Our justice system is currently working on this issue and interference from a Special Counsel would disrupt the progress that's been made.
Fine work is being done right now, why disrupt that now?
ROSCOE: I assume this is why Senator Abbott, you recently tweeted that the resolution constitutes an “attack on the judiciary”?
ABBOTT: It is a direct attack on the justice system that is working to protect the little guy right now. Progress has been made. Progress must continue to be made uninterrupted. Clint's push for a Special Counsel is in direct defiance to the progress made.
DICKENS: Hang on a moment. What progress? Name one Wall Street executive who has spent one day in court. Go ahead. I'll wait. Heck, we've already been waiting for more than four years. A couple more minutes won't hurt.
Let me be clear, If the judiciary needs a kick in the backside to shake the corporate cash out of its pockets, hand me my cleats and shin guards. I don't give a rats' backside about who in robes or with a gavel is offended. Justice is a responsibility for all of us.
ABBOTT: Senator, it started with Obama! In 2009, Obama formed the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force that was chaired by Eric Holder and brought together 20 federal agencies, 94 U.S. Attorney's offices, state and local partners, and other law enforcement, investigatory, and regulatory bodies to accomplish what FAIR sets out to do, but under a Special Counsel. The task force is prosecuting illegal behavior. The appointment of a special prosecutor is unnecessary because the justice system is working and might interfere with the actions of the task force which brings together federal and state resources.
Do you believe the FFETF isn't working? By the way, terrible acronymn.
DICKENS: Senator, God bless Barack Obama, but he isn't the president anymore. And as great as he was, he is not above criticism. And neither should bankers and Wall Street execs be above the law.
You keep saying the justice system is working. I'm not the smartest man in the world. But I can think of 2.3 million reasons why it isn't. That's the number of homeowners who lost everything because they were lied to by the banks, mortgage lenders, and credit rating agencies. I can think of another 745 billion reasons why our legal system is not working. That's the total cost of the TARP bank bailouts to save the bankers responsible for the crash. And finally, I can think of another 16 trillion reasons why we need a special counsel. That's the total amount of net worth lost by American households from 2007 to 2009. A quarter of whom lost at least 75% of their net worth completely.
If losing $16 trillion means an effective legal system, God help us when the scales of justice begin malfunctioning.
ABBOTT: Since the FFETF was formed, the Justice Department has filed more than 10,000 financial fraud cases against nearly 15,000 defendants including more than 2,700 mortgage fraud defendants. Tell me how it isn't working again?
A Special Counsel would only hinder the work of what our justice system is doing right now to avenge the American people. Right now, you are against the American people plain and simple and it's unfortunate that your fake sense of justice is getting the best of you right now.
DICKENS: We got single mothers with two jobs getting prosecuted for messing up a tax form. Struggling parents get thrown in the can if they so much as misrepresent their earnings on a filing. But now we're supposed to pop champagne when a bank exec faces only civil action for a multi trillion dollar fraud? Give me a break, Senator. This whole debate is just more proof we need a Special Counsel. Get the politics out of the process. Justice first, no more delay.
ROSCOE: Senators, I'd like to ask a basic question of you all. We have passed around a lot of blame tonight. In three sentences or less, who is to blame for the Great Recession? And who should be being investigated for their potential actions?
DICKENS: Follow the money trail going from Wall Street to Pennsylvania Avenue and back. I don't care who in a Versace suit is inconvenienced by an FBI search. Put a Special Counsel in charge and you'll get your answer Sam.
ABBOTT: Democrat politicians are responsible for the 2008 housing market crash that set off a tsunami that wiped out our economy. Democrats like President Bill Clinton and then HUD Secretary, and now Governor, Andrew Cuomo started this mess with their mismanagement of the economy and the housing market. TO make matters worse, Obama was barely any help with his additional regulations that slowed the recovery from that recession.
ROSCOE: Senator Dickens, do you believe that economic stability and market confidence could erode with the passage of this resolution as Senator Abbott has suggested?
DICKENS: The wise man built his house on the rock while the foolish man built his house on the shifting sand. You cannot restore the American dream on a foundation of lies and corruption. You cannot establish a free market when there's freedom from consequences. And you cannot stand for law and order while those with power and wealth get away with the most egregious scam in American history. No more lies. Either stand for American values and an economy rooted in truth, or go back to church and reread Matthew 7.
ABBOTT: I agree with that logic. You can't restore the American dream on the foundation of lies and corruption, so let's set the record straight. The 2008 housing market crash was began, not in the early 2000's, but in the 90's under President Bill Clinton. Clinton signed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, which I voted against by the way, that required the two government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie and Freddie, to make 30% of their mortgage purchases affordable housing loans. It sounds good out loud, but the main issue I had when I voted against the bill was that when a bunch of politicians begin to interfere in the private sector, whether that be healthcare, retail, infrastructure, or in this case, housing, they begin to get greedy over the positive results coming from it.
I made that argument and guess what, I was damn right. After that, Bill Clinton's HUD, under the leadership of HUD Secretary and now-New York Governor, Andrew Cuomo, continued to raise the quota from 30% to 40% in 1996, 42% in 1997, and 50% in 2000, which Fannie and Freddie met those goals every single year without a miss by doing deals at a risk and at prices that would not have normally been done.
In turn, CRA lending went from $8 billion in 1991 to $4.5 trillion in 2007, and by 2008, half of all outstanding mortgages in America were high-risk loans. Not only did Bill Clinton and Andrew Cuomo furthered the crisis, but they also made kickbacks to brokers that fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans legal. So, while Democrats are currently calling for an investigation into Wall Street, they are doing so to cover up the fact that their policies of interference in the free market led to the crash in 2008.
DICKENS: Senator, I agreed to the Butcher Amendment to investigate Fannie and Freddie. You're beating a dead horse. Now, since we're on the topic of the 1990s, let me ask you a few questions.
Will you agree, here and now, to undo the Clinton and GOP Congress' repeal of Glass-Steagall?
Will you agree to undo the Commodity Futures and Modernization Act that let mortage bonds and commodities go unregulated?
ABBOTT: I'm not beating a dead horse because the problem doesn't just lie there. It lies within the government itself. The problem is the government. Government interference caused the crash. Government interference caused millions of Americans to lose their homes. Government interference caused the 16 trillion problems Americans are facing right now.
DICKENS: Because I already agreed to hold Fannie and Freddie accountable. Now will you agree to hold the donor class and corporate goons accountable?
ABBOTT: Fannie and Freddie were enabled by Democrat politicians like Clinton and Cuomo. Your party's economic policies crashed our economy and the American people were left injured by it.
DICKENS: Senator Abbott, I don't care if it's Uncle Sam or Aunt Jemima cutting your checks. Public or private sector, big business or big government, I want scumbags prosecuted and their victims to get justice. Pure and simple.
ABBOTT: Would you then, support the Special Counsel investigating, and potentially charging, both Clinton and Cuomo for leading the cause of the crash?
Especially the kickbacks to brokers that Cuomo made legal?
Would you also consider deregulating the agencies that were supposed to oversee the mortgage market and all of the lending, all of which failed to do any oversight from the 90s onward?
DICKENS: If it's against the law, I don't care who it is. You're acting like this is political, Senator. You keep saying 'Democrats! Democrats! Democrats!'
This is exactly why we need a Special Counsel. Because politicians like you keep obfuscating and playing partisan games to avoid actually holding culprits accountable. A Special Counsel is the only answer to this problem. And it's time for Attorney General Garcia to appoint a Special Counsel now.
ABBOTT: We have the FFETF Clint. Its working.
DICKENS: By 'we', you mean the Hamptons Yacht Club right?
ABBOTT: I mean we the people. You really don't have faith in an agency your party created to avenge the American people do you? You don't trust your leadership and so now we must appoint a Special Counsel. Understood.
DICKENS: Well, why would you have faith in the FFETF, Senator? You keep saying over and over again that Democrats caused this crisis. You keep saying Democrats are guilty of the crash. So why do you keep trusting them, the people who established this agency, to investigate? You're tripping over your own shoelaces here.
Look, I don't care if you got an R or a D next to your name. And neither should the legal system. A Special Counsel cuts through all this hypocritical PR talking points and gets straight the center of the issue. The deficit of justice. No exceptions to the rule of law. Hold people accountable.
ABBOTT: Ah, you've been in Washington too long. You sound too much like the special interests. The FFETF is bipartisan in nature. Just an fyi.
ROSCOE: Senators, I'm afraid we must stop here. Aunt Jemima has to pay some of our bills now. I hope the American people have been enlightened by where both of you stand here. Thank you both for joining us tonight!
DICKENS: Samantha, the pleasure is all mine. And Senator, drinks are on me in the Senate lounge later tonight.
ABBOTT: Thank you for having me Samantha and I hope next time there will be Aunt Jemima pancakes waiting for me. Good seeing Clint.
-
2
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live President Diaz Reinstates Mexico City Policy
Prominent Democrat announces opposition to Jindal nomination in response
by Garrett TalleyIn one of his first executive orders, President Tommy Diaz (R-Arizona), has reinstated the so-called Mexico City Policy. The Mexico City Policy is a U.S. government policy that requires non-governmental organizations (NGOs) not to provide or counsel people about abortion services. Under the policy, if an organization does provide or counsel people on abortion services, they do not receive federal family planning funds from the U.S. government. Critics refer to the policy as the Global Gag Rule.
Traditionally, this policy has served as a political hot potato. During Democratic administrations, the policy is rescinded. During Republican administrations, the policy is in full force.
“Under my administration, the conscience and values of the American people will not be ignored,” Diaz posted on Twitter after he signed the executive order.
Diaz, however, aims to go further than his Republican predecessors have in their versions of the policy. Diaz’s executive order would also implement a plan to “extend the requirements of the reinstated Memorandum to global health assistance furnished by all departments or agencies.”
Democrats spearheaded by Senator Mollie Beryhill (D-Colorado) have come out in opposition to the reinstatement.
“It's disappointing that [President] Diaz has immediately returned to the callous politicization of women's health care through reinstation the Global Gag Rule,” Berryhill told CNN. “Disappointing but not surprising, because it's what we've come to expect of Republican administrations and their contempt for science. What is genuinely shocking, though, is his EO's proposed expansion of the Global Gag Rule to all US global health assistance."
In her interview, Berryhill also announced the introduction of the Global Health, Empowerment and Rights Act. The Global Health, Empowerment and Rights Act would codify into federal law that NGOs cannot be disqualified from receiving funds from the U.S. government if they provide, using non-federal funds, medical services if the medical services are legal in both the U.S. and the country they are being provided in. This would include abortion, the crux of the Mexico City policy.
Berryhill announced she would also be opposing the nomination of Governor Bobby Jindal (R-Louisiana) to be Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) in light of the reinstatement.
The White House responded to Berryhill’s opposition to Jindal when asked by NINC during the first press briefing of the Diaz administration.
“We still expect Governor Jindal to be confirmed,” White House Press Secretary Elias Cornell said. “President Diaz campaigned on reinstating the [Mexico City] policy, so opposing every HHS nominee he puts forward until the end of the administration is just silly because it isn't going anywhere. Governor Jindal is an upstanding, qualified man with plenty of experience. We expect the Senate to vote on his merits and qualifications, not to engage in tit-for-tat petty fights."
Senator Douglas Butcher (R-Utah) has been unapologetic in his support of the reinstatement.
“Those who are opposing the reinstatement of this policy are saying it will prohibit the promotion of health for women in these countries,” Butcher said on the Glenn Beck Show. “The ban is on public funding. If they can find alternate forms of revenue, they can still go to as many countries as they want and promote a culture of death.”
NINC Political Analyst Rosanne Huffman is watching to see if this will become a widespread issue among Democrats or if it will mostly be a Berryhill vs. the White House battle. For now, it appears to be the latter.
-
1
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live 113th Congress: Legislative Roundup
Six additional pieces of legislation to watch as 113th Congress continues
by Cory BuchananNINC has compiled more legislation to watch from the opening month of the new congressional session. Once again, legislation featured is in the order of introduction, not necessarily importance or likelihood of consideration by the full Senate.
Smithsonian American Latino Museum Act
The Smithsonian American Latino Museum Act, introduced by Senator Patrick Mulligan (R-Illinois), would establish the Smithsonian American Latino Museum within the Smithsonian system of museums in Washington, D.C. The new museum would also get an underground annex facility specifically for its use.
The new museum would go in the Arts and Industries Building on the complex. The building has been in disrepair and closed to the public since 2004. The building was added to the America's Most Endangered Places list in 2006. The America's Most Endangered Places list outlines historical buildings that are in need of refurbishment.
At a Latino community outreach event in the Chicago metropolitan area, Mulligan emphasized the need to recognize the contributions of Latinos in America.
"I am proud to champion the Smithsonian American Latino Museum Act because its past time we acknowledge the contributions Latino Americans have made to this nation for over a century,” Mulligan said. “... Simply put, to me at least, the establishment of a American Latino Museum within the Smithsonian Institution is a no-brainer and one that I remain hopeful will clear the legislative hurdles necessary to get on the desk of the President."
NINC Political Analyst Rosanne Huffman considers this a very agreeable piece of legislation, as many of Mulligan’s are seeming to be in the 113th Congress so far, and she would not be surprised to see it make it to the floor right when the Senate needs some bipartisanship to bring Senators together.
Puerto Rico Status Act
The Puerto Rico Status Act, introduced by Senator Jeffery Murphy (D-Indiana), would set a vote for November 5, 2023 by Puerto Rico’s citizens on the status of the U.S. territory. The options of Puertorriqueños in this vote would be independence, sovereignty in free association with the U.S., or statehood. The legislation also lays out how the vote would be administered and what would happen in the event each option wins the vote.
Murphy called the legislation a “critical step” in making sure Puertorriqueños are respected by the U.S. government.
"The Puerto Rico Status Act represents an opportunity for Puerto Ricans to determine their destiny and chart the course for their political future,” Murphy said. “This is a critical step towards addressing a longstanding issue and ensuring that the voices of the people of Puerto Rico are heard and respected."
When asked about it, NINC Political Analyst Rosanne Huffman said that if the bill makes it to the floor, the date of the vote by Puertorriqueños would likely be moved up in the amendment process.
Embassy Protection and Resilience Act
The Embassy Protection and Resilience Act (EPRA), introduced by RNC Chairwoman and Senator Jennifer Cole (R-Texas), would allow the United States Department of State to allocate an unlimited amount of emergency funds to embassies that are considered to be in “hardship posts”. These funds would be intended to increase embassy security and provide for other operational needs of an embassy as needed.
Hardship posts are consistently updated by the Department of State. Individuals who are stationed in these locations are granted a "hardship differential," which consists of a salary increase ranging from 10% to 30%, comparable to hazard pay in various industries. The most recent listing of these posts is located here.
The legislation would also authorize the President, at the request of the Secretary of State, to send more Marine Embassy Guards to hardship posts. Finally, Congress would receive a report six months after the legislation is fully approved about the effectiveness of the emergency funds and more.
Cole said in a press statement that she introduced the legislation in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya.
“The heartbreaking events in Benghazi served as a stark reminder of the perils our embassy staff confront regularly,” Cole said. “With EPRA, we aim to fortify our embassies, especially those in high-risk regions, with the vital resources to protect American lives."
The White House also came out in support of the legislation, which makes the legislation one of few to have received a stamp of approval from the White House so far this year.
Working Student Act of 2013
The Working Student Act of 2013, introduced by Senator Jerrod King (D-New York), would increase the income protection allowance for independent college students who are receiving federal financial aid, such as pell grants and federal loans. The income protection allowance excludes a certain amount of a student’s income depending on their circumstances from factoring into how much the federal government expects them to be able to pay for college. This increase would fully take effect by the 2015-2016 academic year, for which the Free Application for Federal Student Aid is expected to be released on January 1, 2015.
Per the United States Department of Education, a student is considered independent for federal financial aid purposes for the 2015-2016 academic year if any of the following are true of the student.
- the student was born before January 1, 1992
- is married as of the date he/she applies
- will be a graduate or professional student when the award year starts
- is currently serving on active duty for purposes other than training
- is a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces
- has dependents other than a spouse
- was an orphan, foster child, or ward/dependent of the court at any time since the age of 13
- is an emancipated minor or in legal guardianship or was when he/she reached the age of majority in his/her state, or
- was determined at any time since July 1, 2014, to be an unaccompanied youth who was homeless or self-supporting and at risk of being homeless.
King, while speaking to reporters, said that increasing the income protection allowance for independent students can help students academically by helping them stress less about finances.
“This bill, by increasing protection allowances for these students, can help alleviate some of the financial pressures they may face and allow them to better focus on their education,” King said. “This can ultimately lead to better academic performance and career opportunities. Additionally, the increased allowances can help working students better provide for their families and dependents, creating a more stable and supportive environment for everyone involved."
United States 2013 Gun Violence Prevention Act
The United States 2013 Gun Violence Prevention Act, introduced by Senator Caroline Baudin (D-New York) and Acting Senate Majority Leader James Terrus (D-California), would provide for universal background checks for all gun purchases; a three-week waiting period on the sale of firearms except in cases of family members transferring firearms or in the event the seller has known the buyer for at least one year; a restriction on firearm ownership for those who who have been subject to a protective order relating to domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking; so-called red flag provisions that allow the United States Marshals Service to execute an order to remove firearms from a person via court order; and ending the prohibition on Centers for Disease Control studies looking into gun violence.
Baudin and Terrus introduced the legislation, after consultation with members of the Democratic caucus, in response to last year’s Empire State Building mass shooting.
“It is our moral obligation," Baudin said, "to create a society where individuals can live without fear of becoming victims of gun violence. Federal action is crucial to ensure this never happens again."
NINC has learned, via sources familiar with those consultations with members of the Democratic caucus, that Baudin originally wanted more out of the legislation.
“Mrs. Baudin's legislation was reflective of blue state politics, Senator Terrus and her worked with more conservative members of the caucus to pare it down and make it appealing to conservatives,” the source said.
NINC received a copy of the original draft, which included provisions such as an assault weapons ban and mandatory reporting of lost or stolen firearms.
NINC Political Analyst Rosanne Huffman expressed surprise that Baudin worked so closely with those conservative members and didn’t introduce the legislation with the original provisions or in a separate piece of legislation.
-
3
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Amidst Chaotic Debate, Senate Considers Minimum Wage Increase
Senate Minority Leader: “I feel like I am debating with a hamster.”
by Samantha RoscoeDemocrats, led by Acting Senate Majority Leader James Terrus (D-California), are starting off their first Senate docket of the 113th Congress with a proposal that would seek to increase the minimum wage.
Terrus’s proposal would increase the federal minimum wage to $8 per hour, as of the beginning of 2014. It would also increase it annually for future years in perpetuity “to account for inflation according to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers”. This would be the first federal minimum wage increase since July 24, 2009.
“By increasing the minimum wage, we can ensure that everyone can get a chance to support themselves whether if it is a doctor in a hospital to a McDonald’s worker who was a convicted felon after turning their life around; to a Janitor who has Schizophrenia,” said Senator and co-sponsor of the legislation Jerrold King (D-New York) after leaving the Senate floor earlier this week.
This legislation would also increase the federal minimum wage for tipped workers by 25 cents per year until that number reaches 50% of the minimum wage, after which the amount will always stay at 50% of the federal minimum wage. In 1966, the Federal Labor Standards Act set the federal minimum wage for tipped workers at $2.13 per hour. This is where it has remained since.
Senator Winifred Zimmermann (D-Illinois) started the debate by introducing an amendment increasing the minimum wage to $9 as of the beginning of 2014. The amendment would also end the increases outlined in the original proposal. Zimmermann implied her opposition to future increases after the beginning of the next year was due to concern over small businesses.
“While I share the goal of improving the lives of our workers and ensuring they receive fair compensation, we must also recognize the importance of preserving our small businesses and the vital role they play in our communities,” Zimmermann said. “Let us seek a balanced and collaborative solution that uplifts both workers and small business owners, rather than rushing into a policy that could have unintended and detrimental consequences for our local economies. Nonetheless, we still must address the financial position in which American workers have been placed. They still need help.”
After Zimmermann’s amendment was seconded by Senator Patrick Mulligan (R-Illinois), another was introduced by Senator Justin Casanova-Davis, Jr (D-Florida). That amendment would increase the federal minimum wage to $9 as of the beginning of 2015 and $10 as of the beginning of 2017. That proposal would also provide for no automatic future increases.
“I rise in support of this legislation to increase the minimum wage,” Casanova-Davis, Jr said. “As well as the [Zimmermann] amendment… which is a common sense amendment that does not increase discretionary spending but will be of benefit to small businesses that participate in the SBIC program. While I do believe that there may be some opposition to indexing the minimum wage to inflation, I do hope that we can come together for a larger increase over a more phased-in period. Thus, I rise to offer an amendment to the [Zimmermann] amendment.”
Senate Minority Leader Richard Baker suggested he would support the Casanova-Davis, Jr amendment but that it would require negotiations to take place to provide for small business tax relief.
“But, my agreement to this increase will make it necessary for our parties to have a serious negotiation regarding my proposal for small business tax relief,” Baker said. “As the Bible says, ‘Let us reason together.’”
Baker proposed a Pass Through Business Tax Deduction which would allow the owners of sole proprietorships, s-corporations, partnerships, and LLCs that are considered pass through entities to “claim up to a 20% deduction on their share of the business's income, up to $150,000 per individual return or $300,000 per joint return.” The deduction would sunset in 2016.
Senator Terrus, as the author of the original legislation, accepted the Zimmermann amendment as friendly. However, accepting an amendment as friendly requires unanimous consent. Senator Julius Sterling (D-Michigan) objected and introduced a different minimum wage proposal.
The Sterling amendment would increase the federal minimum wage to $8 as of the beginning of 2014 (same as Terrus’s original proposal), $9 as of the beginning of 2015, $10.50 as of the beginning of 2016, $12 as of the beginning of 2017, $13.50 as of the beginning of 2018, and $15 as of the beginning of 2020. On top of that, the Sterling amendment would leave the future increases based on inflation from the original proposal remaining.
The Sterling amendment would also create a new Midtier Business Wage Offset Tax Deduction. That tax deduction would be “equal to 35% of the total increased labor costs incurred due to the minimum wage hike.” Businesses would need to have an annual revenue of less than $20 million to qualify for the deduction. The deduction would automatically sunset in 15 years.
Finally, amendment wise, Mulligan introduced an amendment to “increase from $225 million to $350 million the maximum amount of outstanding leverage to be made available by the Small Business Administration to two or more commonly controlled small business investment companies not under capital impairment.”
A misunderstanding also took place during floor debate between King and Baker when King thought that Baker was implying that King had concerns about small businesses. As stated earlier in this article, Zimmermann was the one who had concerns about small businesses.
“Nowhere in my statement did I say that [a] minimum wage [increase] hurts small businesses,” King said. “I stated that, opponents such as yourself state that. I stated, let the record show, that there is little to no impact on small businesses if we raise the wage. I would say get the cotton out of your ears Senator and listen correctly.”Baker responded by clarifying that he was referring to the comments from Senator Zimmerman before expressing his exasperation.
“I did not refer to the Senator from New York in my own comments,” Baker said. “I referred to the Democrat Senator from Illinois. Honestly, I feel like I am debating with a hamster.”
Senator Caroline Baudin (D-New York) then responded to that by stating where she thinks Baker should go if he feels like he is debating with hamsters.
“If the good Gentleman the Senator from Florida believes he is debating with hamsters he ought to relocate himself to the local pet store,” Baudin said.The Baker, Mulligan, and Zimmermann amendments are now all being voted on by the Senate. The Mulligan amendment is the one that is looking sure to pass as of now, while the Baker and Zimmermann amendments are up in the air. Since both the Casanova-Davis, Jr and Sterling amendments conflict with the Zimmermann amendment, those will be considered after the vote finishes on Zimmermann's.
President Pro Tempore Cortland Carrington (D-West Virginia) then reminded Senators to stay civil with one another and that hamsters are not allowed on the Senate floor.
-
3
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live 113th Congress: Legislative Preview
Seven pieces of legislation to watch as 113th Congress commences
by Cory Buchanan
As the 113th Congress begins, NINC has compiled seven pieces of legislation to watch for potential action on the Senate floor this session. These are in the order of introduction, not in any order of importance or likelihood they will be considered.
Financial Accountability and Institutional Reform (FAIR) Resolution
The FAIR Resolution, introduced by Senator Clint Dickens (D-Minnesota), requests the Attorney General appoint a Special Counsel to investigate the Great Recession of 2008. If appointed, Dickens’s request is that the special counsel specifically investigate “allegations of misconduct by financial institutions or individuals”. The special counsel would also be responsible for submitting “periodic” reports to Congress as well as a final report that would provide any findings and future recommendations.
“We all saw what happened [during the Great Recession], Dickens said. “And to leave this national disgrace unresolved would be a massive and corrupt miscarriage of justice. This matter warrants a concerted, tough, and independent investigation of every allegation of deception, fraud, and all other forms of potential criminality in connection to said crisis."
The resolution has been co-sponsored by six other prominent Democratic senators, including President Pro Tempore Cortland Carrington (D-West Virginia). Meanwhile, Senator Douglas Butcher (R-Utah) has issued a press release warning Democrats that they may not like the results of an investigation. Due to the nature of its status as Senate Resolution, there is no mandate on the Attorney General to appoint a special counsel if it passes.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Since the writing of this article, this resolution has been docketed for consideration in the Senate by Acting Senate Majority Leader Jim Terrus (D-California).
National Silver Alert Act of 2013
The National Silver Alert Act of 2013, introduced by Senator Patrick Mulligan (R-Illinois), would establish a National Silver Alert communications network within the Department of Justice subject to available monies. This network would provide assistance to regional and local efforts to find missing seniors. Where possible, the Silver Alert network would be akin to and operate in coordination with the AMBER Alert communications network. The AMBER Alert network is geared towards finding missing children.
Additionally, a Silver Alert coordinator would be designated by the Attorney General to encourage states to build Silver Alert “units” that would connect to the communications network. Criteria would be established by that coordinator as to whether a situation requires a Silver Alert. However, those criteria would not be mandatory for all states to adopt. Each state would still be able to set its own, separate criteria. Reports would also be sent to Congress yearly on the progress of the program.
Criminal Infanticide Act of 2013
The Criminal Infanticide Act of 2013, introduced by Senator Douglas Butcher (R-Utah) would expand the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002. That legislation, which was passed via unanimous consent in Congress and signed by President George W. Bush (R-Texas), protects infants born at any stage of development by providing them full legal rights. That legislation did not set penalties for doctors. Butcher’s legislation would make “terminating a survivor of abortion” equal to second degree murder under federal law.
“My bill will finally add a criminal definition that would make the extermination of a living child outside the womb under the pretense of abortion into a crime defined as second degree murder,” Butcher said. “We are not talking about overturning Roe vs. Wade. We are talking about providing the appropriate penalties for one of the most heinous and barbaric acts imaginable. I hope that same sense of bipartisan support that passed BAIPA can once again speak to common sense.”
So far, bipartisan support has not arrived for Butcher’s legislation as no prominent co-sponsors have yet to step forward to support it.
Protect America Act
The Protect America Act, introduced by Senator Justin Casanova-Davis, Jr (D-Florida), would direct the President to expand the provisions of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 by denying visas for any foreign representative to the United Nations who has engaged in terrorist activity against the United States or its allies and “may pose a threat to United States national security interests”. The Foreign Relations Authorization Act already directs the President to deny visas for those who have participated in espionage activities and who may pose a threat.
Additionally, the waiver provisions of the original legislation remain, which allow the President to waive the denial of a visa if the President finds that a waiver is in the interest of national security. If that situation comes to fruition, the President would also notify Congress.
Military Reserve Jobs Act
The Military Reserve Jobs Act, introduced by Senator Jeffery Murphy (D-Indiana), would establish a tiered hiring preference for federal civil service jobs for National Guard members and reservists.
Rewarding Achievement and Incentivizing Successful Employees (RAISE) Act
The RAISE Act, introduced by Senator and Minority Leader Richard Baker (R-Florida), would amend the National Labor Relations Act to permit employers involved in a collective bargaining agreement to increase pay to specific employees under that same collective bargaining agreement without negotiating it with the employee's union.
Supporting Americans Abroad Act
The Supporting Americans Abroad Act, introduced by Senator Emre Underboard (R-Alaska), would allow for limited postal services for Americans abroad, some tax changes, and a program that would potentially charge nothing for repatriation in the event of an emergency.
Specifically, the provisions of the proposed legislation would allow envelope sized mail to be sent from a United States embassy or consulate for a fee ranging from $8 to $45, to be set by the embassy or consulate it is being sent from. Additionally, citizens who are abroad for more than 10 months consecutively would not be subject to U.S. income tax. Finally, the Secretary of State would be able to make a free repatriation program available, at the Secretary’s discretion, for U.S. citizens who are “endangered” in the country they are currently in. All operations to perform the program would be up to the embassy or caretaker embassy of the country the citizen is in.
-
1
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live 113th Congress: Congressional Preview
Seniority Rankings of Most Prominent Senators coming into 113th Congress
by NINC
At the request of our viewers, below are the Seniority Rankings of the most prominent U.S. Senators entering the 113th Congress. ((OOC: most prominent obviously means signed in ones, just didn't know another way to put it where I could eliminated everyone else))
Current Rank Senator Party State Seniority Date Other Factors 1 Sen. Jerrod King Democrat New York January 3, 1983 2 Sen. Lance Arceneaux Democrat Louisiana January 3, 1987 3 Sen. Caroline Umbridge-Hill Republican New Hampshire January 3, 1993 Former House member (2 years) 4 Sen. James Terrus Democrat California January 3, 1993 5 Sen. Caroline Baudin Democrat New York January 3, 1999 6 Sen. Katherine Abbott Republican Texas January 3, 2003 Former House member (12 years) 7 Sen. Rodney Harris Republican Georgia January 3, 2003 Former House member (2 years) 8 Sen. Catherine O'Meara Republican Maine January 3, 2003 9 Sen. Clint Dickens Democrat Minnesota January 3, 2007 Former House member (6 years) 10 Sen. Dylan Macmillan Republican Arizona January 3, 2007 Former House member (4 years) 11 Sen. Tabitha Kinsey Democrat New Jersey January 3, 2007 12 Sen. Winifred Zimmermann Democrat Illinois January 3, 2009 Former House member (6 years) 13 Sen. Molly Berryhill Democrat Colorado January 3, 2009 Former House member (4 years) 14 Sen. John Starnes Democrat Virginia January 3, 2009 Former governor (4 years) 15 Sen. Annaleigh Ashton Democrat Iowa April 12, 2010 16 Sen. Cortland Carrington Democrat West Virginia July 16, 2010 17 Sen. Richard Baker Republican Florida January 3, 2011 Former House member (4 years) 18 Sen. Patrick Mulligan Republican Illinois January 3, 2011 19 Sen. Justin Casanova-Davis, Jr Democrat Florida January 3, 2013 Former House member (6 years) 20 Sen. Jeffery Murphy Democrat Indiana January 3, 2013 Former House member (4 years) 21 Sen. Jennifer Cole Republican Texas January 3, 2013 Texas 2nd in population (2010) 22 Sen. Grace Porter Democrat Pennsylvania January 3, 2013 Pennsylvania 6th in population (2010) 23 Sen. Douglas Butcher Republican Utah January 3, 2013 Utah 34th in population (2010) 24 Sen. Emre Underboard Republican Alaska January 3, 2013 Alaska 47th in population (2010) -
1
-
-
home u.s. world politics congress live Senate Minority Leader Rollins Puts Hold on BRIDGE Act
Senate Minority Leader David Rollins (R-Nebraska) has threatened to filibuster the BRIDGE Act for several reasons, while has has to-date received unanimous bipartisan opposition from his colleagues to the hold.
MORE NEWS
Bipartisan Group of Senators Introduce Immigration Reform Proposal | STORY
House to Consider Minimum Wage Increase Legislation | STORY
President Nominates Replacement for Jindal | STORY
March and April's Roundup of New Legislation Introduced in the Senate | ROUNDUP
Party Loyalty Rankings: Q1 2013 | RANKINGS
Evening Notebook: April 2, 2013 - Baudin | WATCH
White House Responds to Tabling of Jindal Nomination | STORY
BREAKING: Senate Kills Bobby Jindal Nomination | STORY
Senate Considers “Corporate Tax Fairness” Legislation | STORY
Casanova-Davis Jr tells NINC he will oppose Jindal nomination | STORY
Opposition Grows to Bobby Jindal Nomination | STORY
Evening Notebook: February 22, 2013 - Abbott, Dickens | WATCH
President Diaz Reinstates Mexico City Policy | STORY
January's Roundup of New Legislation Introduced in the Senate | ROUNDUP
Senate Considers Minimum Wage Increase | STORY
113th Congress Legislative Preview | PREVIEW
113th Congress Seniority Rankings | RANKINGS
-
1
-
-
Name of Media Organization: National Independent News Company
Type of Player Media: Primarily online (ninc.com), but will use NINC television network at times (on Discord, with transcripts posted on forum)
Name of Primary Characters within organization (owner, reporter):
Owner: Chris Brink
Lead Anchor/Reporter: Samantha Roscoe
Anchor/Political Correspondent: Murphy Johnson
Anchor/ Congressional Correspondent: Cory Buchanan
White House Correspondent: Garrett Talley
Foreign Affairs Correspondent: Neil Ichord
General Assignment Correspondent: Bobby Smith
Political Analyst: Rosanne Huffman
-
2 hours ago, Grace Porter said:
Name: Grace Marie (nee Williams) Porter
Gender: Female
DOB: July 8, 1965
Age: 48
Avatar: Kristi Noem
Seat: Pennsylvania Class I
Party: Democrat (New Democrat)
Religion: Roman Catholic
Sexuality: Straight, Married, 4 Children
Education: Public University
Family History: Working Class
Career: State Political Staffer, Federal Political Staffer, State Row Office,
Total Points: 51
Biography
Born on July 8, 1965, in the diverse neighborhood of North Philadelphia, Grace Porter was raised in a modest three-bedroom rowhome by her parents, James and Sarah Williams, and four siblings. Her parents, both factory workers, instilled in their children the values of hard work, community service and the belief that anyone could achieve greatness through perseverance.
Growing up in North Philadelphia, a neighborhood that faced its fair share of challenges, Grace was deeply influenced by the issues facing her community. Her passion for social justice and politics was ignited during high school when she volunteered with several local community organizations that focused on improving living conditions and increased opportunities for residents. During her senior year at Strawberry Mansion High School, Grace was elected president of her class.
Following graduation, Grace attended Temple University where she pursued a degree in Political Science. She juggled several part time jobs to graduate on time and without loans. She graduated in 1987 at the top of her class.
Grace’s career began as a legislative intern with State Senator Chaka Fattah. She quickly proved herself and obtained a fulltime position on staff within just a few months. When Senator Fattah was elected to congress in 1995, Grace became his deputy chief of staff. In January 2003, newly elected Governor Ed Rendell named Grace Deputy Secretary of the Commonwealth. After Bob Casey, Jr. was elected to the US Senate in 2006, Ed Rendell nominated Grace to finish his term as Pennsylvania Treasurer. She ran for, and won, her own term as Treasurer in 2008.
In a surprising announcement during the summer of 2011, US Senator Bob Casey, Jr. announced he would be retiring, triggering an open race for his senate seat. In September 2011, Grace announced she would be running for US Senate.
In a crowded and hard-fought primary, Grace came in first out of five candidates with 35% of the vote. She faced businessman Tom Smith in the general election. On November 6, 2012, Grace Porter won the US Senate race with 51.3% and 2.8 million votes becoming Pennsylvania’s first female senator.
Welcome to the new reset!!!
-
1
-
-
Name of Media Organization: National Independent News Company
Type of Player Media: Primarily online (ninc.com), but will use NINC television network at times (on Discord, with transcripts posted on forum)
Name of Primary Characters within organization (owner, reporter):
Owner: Chris Brink
Lead Anchor/Reporter: Samantha Roscoe
Anchor/Political Correspondent: Murphy Johnson
Anchor/ Congressional Correspondent: Cory Buchanan
White House Correspondent: Garrett Talley
Foreign Affairs Correspondent: Neil Ichord
General Assignment Correspondent: Bobby Smith
Political Analyst: Rosanne Huffman
-
1
-
1
-
-
I’m going to express what’s been said on the Discord, while I’m intrigued by 2026 and want to know more. Can we get more creative than 2009/2010?? At least more options maybe, a lot of us really don’t want to play ANOTHER economic scenario.
-
-
3 hours ago, Terrus said:
Mister President,
I strongly support the principle behind this legislation, but I must express some concern about its limitation to to persons that occupied a residence in the United States. I worry this could be construed to deny this deduction to members of the armed services -- and others in overseas service -- who in my view should not be foreclosed from investing in an emergency account. I'd also suggest that those engaging in charitable activities, such as members of the clergy, should not be foreclosed from taking this deduction merely because they spent the year abroad.
I therefore move to amend subsection (c) of the Section 224 created by Section 2 to read as follows:
Mister President,
If the motion for cloture fails, I second this amendment by the gentleman from California.
I yield.
-
Excited to see this!!
-
Broodlenk speaks with constituents about situation in Yemen while touring local ethnic restaurants in the Chicago area
Senator Jean Broodlenk Expresses Deep Concern Over Latest Developments in Yemen
Washington, DC — March 17, 2023
Senator Jean Broodlenk (D-IL) today expressed profound concern over the latest developments in Yemen while touring local restaurants owned by her diverse constituents in the Chicago area. The situation in Yemen has taken a perilous turn with the assassination of President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, posing grave implications for the ongoing civil war and regional stability.
The unexpected and strategic elimination of President Hadi, amidst a fierce conflict between Hadi loyalists and Houthi forces, has added a layer of complexity to an already dire humanitarian crisis in Yemen. The Senator acknowledges the challenges faced by the Yemeni people under these circumstances.
"This is quite a blow to the people of Yemen," Senator Broodlenk said, "Whether you are on the side of the Houthi or the Hadi government, this makes this growing powder keg even more dangerous for the innocent civilians that will inevitably be caught in the crossfire."
Furthermore, the intensifying Saudi-led coalition's offensive in Yemen has raised international concerns. Reports of civilian casualties and allegations of "terror strikes" against Yemeni cities and villages are deeply troubling. Senator Broodlenk underscores the importance of making note of a country's human rights record when deciding who the United States should be allied with.
"Republicans decried when the President decided to cut ties from Saudi Arabia," Broodlenk said. "This is one of many reasons that we had to cut ties from them though. It wasn't a perfect choice, but what choice in the Middle East is? I highly doubt we are going to hear from Republicans on this though, we didn't last time after Saudi Arabia was called out for committing human rights violations. They only cared once there was a political argument to stick on the President."
The upcoming United Nations Security Council vote on China's resolution, which calls for the immediate withdrawal of all Saudi forces from Yemen, a no-fly zone over Yemen, and the deployment of a U.N. peacekeeping force, is of paramount importance. Senator Broodlenk supports this resolution.
As the Yemen crisis unfolds, Senator Broodlenk will closely monitor developments and advocate for a solution that safeguards human rights and advances peace in the region.
For media inquiries, please contact:
Office of Senator Jean Broodlenk
Discord: kansaswx
Email: press@broodlenk.senate.gov
Website: www.broodlenk.senate.gov-
1
-
-
Name: Jean Broodlenk (D-IL)
Media/Outlet: Heartland Politics Podcast (NPR)
Reason: Workers Aren't Getting Enough Act of 2023
- I am happy to see that Speaker Pelosi has decided to docket the WAGE Act. This legislation will in part extend the so-called blue collar bonus while making sure we are being smart about it fiscally. Republicans' original proposal on this topic was to increase spending by $600 billion with the offset being ambiguous money that we aren't even sure will be there now or in the future. While neither party has been great on spending, I can't believe the party more known for fiscal responsibility would go for something that may or may not even be able to be paid for.
- I expect to see this bill garner a lot of attention in the House, I hope it stays mostly intact. I support a three year extension of the blue collar bonus unlike Republicans calling for a permanent extension. This extension sounds like a good idea politically, but the jury is still out on whether it truly is going to work into the future or not. There hasn't been just a ton of economic data to help us figure that out yet.
- Based on their last Senate Docket, I am quite worried that the Republican agenda these days is to do things that sound good politically, but don't actually do anything, or worse, do harm to our country. I am very happy the House is considering more pragmatic proposals that will have an impact on the American people.
- As prices increase, it is well past time we increase the minimum wage for workers in this country. I think my colleagues in the Senate would agree with me that a lot has changed in our country and that things have gotten more expensive since 2009, the year of the last increase. Yet we keep the minimum wage at the same number? That is unacceptable.
-
Broodlenk speaks with local media about Executive Order #5
Senator Jean Broodlenk Commends President's Executive Order Advancing Law Enforcement Reform
Washington, DC — March 7, 2023
Senator Jean Broodlenk (D-IL) expresses her strong support for President Paul Nassakis's executive order on enhancing public trust in law enforcement, particularly the sections addressing officer wellness, accountability, and transparency. This executive order represents a significant step towards ensuring that law enforcement agencies across the country prioritize the safety, well-being, and accountability of their officers as well as ensuring that measures are taken so that Illinoisans who rightfully skeptical of law enforcement can begin to trust them again.
"I commend President Nassakis for taking bold action to address critical issues within our law enforcement agencies," Senator Broodlenk told local media members. "The executive order's focus on officer wellness, including support for ones going through mental health and substance use disorders, is long overdue. Law enforcement officers face immense stress and trauma in the line of duty, and we must ensure they have access to the resources and support they need. I think everyone can agree an officer who is struggling with drugs or mental health cannot properly serve the people they are sworn to protect."
Senator Broodlenk also lauds the establishment of a National Law Enforcement Accountability Database, which will document instances of law enforcement officer misconduct, commendations, and awards.
"Transparency and accountability are essential in building trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve,” added Senator Broodlenk. “The Accountability Database will help track misconduct and ensure that officers who engage in wrongful conduct are held accountable."
Furthermore, the executive order seeks to limit the use of chokeholds and carotid restraints, and provide anti-bias training and guidance.
Broodlenk is also responding to Republican criticisms that the executive order “goes after” law enforcement.
"Respectfully, addressing issues within law enforcement doesn't equate to undermining our officers,” Broodlenk said. “It's about enhancing their well-being, accountability, and building stronger community trust. We can support both our police and the imperative for reform. When 48% of Americans struggle to trust law enforcement, this cannot an 'either-or' situation."
Senator Broodlenk emphasizes that these reforms are crucial to addressing systemic issues within law enforcement and ensuring justice, equity, and safety for all Illinoisans as well as Americans. She looks forward to working alongside the administration to support the implementation of these important reforms.
For media inquiries, please contact:
Office of Senator Jean Broodlenk
Discord: kansaswx
Email: press@broodlenk.senate.gov
Website: www.broodlenk.senate.gov-
1
-
-
National Independent News Company (NINC)
in The Airwaves
Posted
Quarter 1, 2013 Party Loyalty Rankings
Six senators have 100% loyalty to the majority of prominent members of their party
by NINC
Below are the Party Loyalty Rankings for Q1 2013. Party loyalty rankings are calculated for prominent United States senators only. Party loyalty rankings are calculated by taking the number of votes a senator voted with the majority of the other prominent members of their party and dividing it by the total number of votes they made over the course of the quarter.
Four votes are required over the course of the quarter to receive a ranking. One senator ((who was signed in)) did not receive a ranking due to not having the required amount.
On the cloture vote for the Financial Accountability and Institutional Reform (FAIR) Resolution, Republicans were split between Aye and Present. However, since Senate Majority Leader Richard Baker (R-Florida) has since taken a step back in prominence ((signed out)), Present will be considered the majority on that vote.