Eideard

Here’s where Congress’ principled motivation came from

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill on Thursday to ban insider trading by members of Congress and to impose new ethics requirements on lawmakers and federal agency officials. Doesn’t that look meaningful? Look further for the reality.

The 417-to-2 vote came less than three weeks after President Obama demanded such action in his State of the Union address. The Senate approved a similar bill by a vote of 96 to 3 on Feb. 2, but the lopsided votes concealed deep disagreements over the details of the legislation.

The swift response and the debate in both chambers showed lawmakers defensive and anxious about the low esteem in which Congress is held. The public approval rating of Congress has sunk below 15 percent…

Democrats said that House Republican leaders had weakened the Senate-passed bill by stripping out a provision that would, for the first time, regulate firms that collect “political intelligence” for hedge funds, mutual funds and other investors. Under the Senate bill, such firms would have to register and report their activities, as lobbyists do.

In place of this requirement, the House version of the bill calls for a study…blah, blah, blah.

Representative Louise M. Slaughter, Democrat of New York, who has been pushing ethics legislation since 2006, said that House Republican leaders apparently “could not stomach pressure from the political intelligence community, which is unregulated and unseen and operates in the dark…”

In the Senate, the bill — the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or Stock Act — was written by members of both parties. In the House, it was revised by Republican leaders, without consulting Democrats, and it was considered on the House floor in a way that precluded amendments…

Please, don’t expect too much bona fide work on ethics from a Congress dedicated to achieving little or nothing. Given the lack of concern for the life and economics of ordinary citizens by our elected elite – I wouldn’t expect much more than the odd sound bite’s worth of useful lawmaking to spill from the Congressional maw.

Even this halfway useful bill resulted from media pressure. Congress members who have been introducing such legislation for years have gotten nowhere. Only election year publicity on a couple of TV shows lit a fire under political butts.

New U.S. Internet traffic rules cleared a hurdle on Thursday, surviving an attempt by the Senate to block them from taking effect later in the month. President Barack Obama’s fellow Democrats in the Senate blocked a Republican-backed resolution to disapprove of the Federal Communications Commission’s rules on “net neutrality.” The vote was 52-46 against the resolution.

Adopted by a divided FCC last December, the rules forbid broadband providers from blocking legal content while leaving flexibility for providers to manage their networks.

The rules still face a court challenge. Lawsuits by Verizon Communications Inc and others have been consolidated before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The Senate resolution was championed by Kay Bailey Hutchinson, the top Republican on the Senate Commerce Committee, and had 42 co-sponsors, all Republican. A similar measure passed the Republican-led House of Representatives in April…

The FCC’s rules allow consumers and entrepreneurs to utilize the Internet “without having to ask permission from their broadband provider,” Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said on Wednesday.

Backers of net neutrality say big providers could otherwise use their gatekeeper role to discriminate against competitors.

Republicans continue to frame their crap attempts to restrict public access to the Web. Requiring communications to be ruled by backwards corporations like Verizon and AT&T, offering the same old ideology, lies that try to credit freedom, jobs and the American Way of Life as dependent on corporate control.

They wish it were so. And there is only a small margin of conscience keeping them at bay.

Obama speaking at fire station in Virginia
Daylife/Getty Images used by permission

Maybe as early as Thursday night, the Senate will take its first vote on one bite-size piece of President Obama’s jobs bill, a $35 billion measure to fund the hiring of 400,000 teachers and a smaller number of cops and firefighters. It will fail. As usual not a single Republican will vote for it, and since a majority in the Senate is now not 51 but 60 because the Republicans filibuster nearly everything, it will fall well short of passage…

The basic facts are these. The public supports this bill. Senate Democratic sources say that of all the individual pieces of the larger jobs bill, this one polled the best by far. Better than payroll tax cuts. That’s why they decided to go with it first. The funding mechanism is also highly popular. It is a 0.5 percent (don’t miss that decimal point!) surtax on dollars earned above $1 million—so, for example, a person whose salary is $1.2 million would pay the extra 0.5 percent only on those dollars above $1 million, for a whopping tax increase of $1,000. I have not seen polling on this specific amount of tax, but surveys constantly show that the generic “millionaire’s tax” wins broad support. Just yesterday, National Journal put it at 68 percent, including 90 percent of Democrats and 71 percent of independents…

In an earlier time, in normal times, when legislators used to behave the way legislators are supposed to behave, the minority’s leaders would have brought the price tag down, made the majority and the White House agree to something they wanted—peeling back one of those EPA regulations the Republicans hate—and we’d have had a deal…the minority would have actually paid a bit of attention to those polls showing the American people backed this.

Of course, Republicans can’t say that they’ll oppose Obama on everything, but they don’t have to. People get it. It seeps out of them, like oil from a polluted stream.

It’s difficult to attempt politeness describing what passes for Republican ideology, nowadays. I frequently discuss politics [and economics, technology, education] with one of my kinfolk who is a former Republican. That is, a former member of the Republican Party. After 50 years of commitment to traditional American conservatism – the whole range from environmental conservation to fiscal soundness with a healthy taste of what Bush and Cheney would have characterized as isolationism – he left that party. He doesn’t ask me to be polite – as long as I recognize the difference between conservatism and populist hypocrites. That’s good enough for me.

Watching the effete prancing in the worst political minuet played to patriot tunes since George Wallace tried to lead the White Citizens Councils into Congress and the White House – how could anyone who hasn’t lost his mind defend these deliberate attempts to sabotage the American economy, the American people?

UPDATE: Democrats Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mark Pryor of Arkansas voted against the administration proposal last night, as did independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. No Republican supported the measure.

Three especially worthless politicians + the predictable in-your-pants vote for the wealthiest 1% of America.

Regal hypocrites proud of being boring and backwards
Daylife/AP Photo used by permission

John Kerry says the Senate is prepared to vote on a nuclear arms treaty with Russia.

“We are certainly prepared to move for a vote,” he said on the Senate floor. “I want to emphasize that there are no amendments from colleagues on the Democratic side. We are prepared to vote on this treaty … We will take any amendment at any time…”

The treaty would resume mutual inspections of U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals while limiting both nations to 1,550 warheads and 700 launchers each…

Some Senate Republicans have opposed bringing the measure up with so little time left in the lame-duck session. Opening debate on the measure was stalled Thursday night when the chamber moved on to other issues.

Senate Democrats were trying to make progress on considering the treaty despite a Republican threat to block any legislation brought up before the Senate acts on a measure authorizing continued government spending. On Wednesday, senators voted 66-32 to take up the treaty.

The treaty cleared the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in September and has been endorsed by leading Republican figures, including former President George H.W. Bush and Lugar of Indiana.

RTFA. Trudge through the Byzantine logic employed by useless pimps for the lobbyist class that rules Congress.

Hypocrites, liars, demagogues of the worst sort, the U.S. Senate is the ultimate modern example of institutionalized corruption.

The Democratic-led House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill to repeal a ban against gays serving openly in the U.S. military.

On a largely party-line vote of 250-175, the House sent the legislation supported by President Barack Obama to the Senate, where the prospects for approval are uncertain.

The vote came just a week after Senate Republicans blocked a similar measure to end the policy — known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — as part of an annual defense bill.

Senate backers now say they have the needed 60 votes in the 100-member chamber to clear such a hurdle and pass the new stand-alone measure before lawmakers wrap up their work for the year. “We are very confident that there are at least 60 votes,” a Senate aide said.

“We’ll see,” said a Republican aide. “They said they thought they could get 60 last time…”

A Republican admission of unity in bigotry. How’d that slip in?

If Congress doesn’t repeal the policy, the issue may be decided by the courts, where the ban has been challenged.

Obama, along with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, want to do away with the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, but favor a congressional rather than a court-imposed remedy.

Men and women of good will have always had a problem with official bigots opposing a move towards equal opportunities for Americans. It doesn’t become less disgusting when padded by deceit and flip-flopping excuses by hypocrites like John McCain.

Democracy was allowed to function in the House of Representatives. Since that scarce political commodity is not given a chance in the Senate, folks will have to wait and see if the majority supporting civil rights are allowed an opportunity to vote.

Secretary Gates answering questions on the flight back from Afghanistan
Daylife/AP Photo used by permission

Failing to repeal the law prohibiting openly gay and lesbian people from serving in the military leaves the services vulnerable to the possibility the courts will order an immediate and likely chaotic end to the policy, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters Friday.

Gates, speaking aboard an aircraft as he traveled in the Middle East, said that “my greatest worry will be that we are at the mercy of the courts and all of the lack of predictability that that entails.”

The Senate on Thursday rejected a Democratic bid to open debate on a defense authorization bill that includes a repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. The House has already passed the repeal measure, but with time running out in the current lame-duck session of Congress, Democrats were uncertain they could overcome Republican opposition and approve the proposal.

Democrats were pushing for action now because the new Congress in January brings a Republican-controlled House and a diminished Democratic majority in the Senate, which will make repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” more difficult.

On Friday, about 100 people gathered near the U.S. Capitol to urge legislators to pass the repeal. One of them, retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Dennis Laich, said Republican opponents of the repeal measure were “absent without leave” in their legislative responsibility, while the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network called for the Senate to put off its holiday recess until “the task is finished.”

Gay rights advocacy groups, including those comprising military personnel, immediately condemned the Senate vote.

“Today leaders of both parties let down the U.S. military and the American people,” said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign.

And it’s only going to get worse, folks.

Civil rights, education, support for small business, healthcare, regulatory reform of Wall Street? Republicans and Blue Dog Dems will have lobbyists, nutballs and bigots sitting on their laps every day in the next Congress.

It is hard to believe, as the holidays approach yet again amid economic hard times, but Congress looks as if it may let federal unemployment benefits lapse for the fourth time this year.

Lame duck lawmakers will have only one day when they return to work on Monday to renew the expiring benefits. If they don’t, two million people will be cut off in December alone. This lack of regard for working Americans is shocking. Last summer, benefits were blocked for 51 days, as senators in both parties focused on preserving tax breaks for wealthy money managers and other affluent constituents.

This time, tax cuts for the rich are bound to drive and distort the debate again. Republicans and Democrats will almost certainly link the renewal of jobless benefits to an extension of the high-end Bush-era tax cuts. That would be a travesty. There is no good argument for letting jobless benefits expire, or for extending those cuts…

Nor do jobless benefits bust the budget. Just the opposite. They do not add to dangerous long-term deficits because the spending is temporary. And because they support spending and jobs, they contribute powerfully to the economic growth that is vital for a healthy budget. Extending the Bush high-end tax cuts would be budget busting, because they are likely to endure, adding $700 billion to the deficit over 10 years. Tax cuts for the rich provide virtually no economic stimulus, because affluent people tend to save their bounty…

President Obama should pound the table for a clean, yearlong extension of unemployment benefits, and should excoriate phony deficit hawks — in both parties — who say that jobless benefits are too costly, even as they pass vastly more expensive tax cuts for the rich.

As we move into the next 2-year cycle of corruption, lies and deception that defines our Congress, the lack of bi-partisanship between cowards and crooks, political hacks governed by the golden rule of “what must I now do to get re-elected” – we all get to witness how little these thugs care for working people. Especially the unemployed.

Take the time to Google your way through congress.org and other sites that track the day-by-day record of America’s only native criminal class. Remember who the crucial offenders are in your own neck of the prairie. Call ‘em out on their failures and faux accomplishments.

Black farmers remind Congress for the umpteenth time to fund the settlement
Daylife/AP Photo used by permission

The U.S. Senate approved a $1.15 billion measure Friday to fund a settlement initially reached between the Agriculture Department and minority farmers more than a decade ago.

The 1997 Pigford v. Glickman case against the U.S. Agriculture Department was settled out of court 11 years ago. Under a federal judge’s terms dating to 1999, qualified farmers could receive $50,000 each to settle claims of racial bias.

“This is much long overdue justice for black farmers,” said John Boyd, founder and president of the National Black Farmers Association…

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack called the settlements “a major milestone in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s efforts to turn the page on a sad chapter.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, also said the vote gives “long-suffering Americans … the closure that they deserve. The agreement that we reached shows what can happen when Democrats and Republicans come together to do the right thing,” he said.

Of course, Democrats and Republicans “came together” to support racist practices against non-white farmers for only a bit more than a century.

The measure will now have to be approved by the lame duck House before moving to Obama’s desk to be signed into law.

We hope so, anyway. Certainly there wouldn’t be much hope of achieving justice against bigotry when Republican control of the House arrives in the next Congress.

As the recall of tainted eggs grew to more than a half-billion late last week, three federal agencies were involved in the response, yet it was not clear which one was in the best position to lead.

On August 13, the Food and Drug Administration posted on its website a press release from Wright County Egg, one of the nation’s largest egg producer, that millions of eggs were being voluntarily recalled because of possible Salmonella contamination. In the days that followed, FDA inspectors were reportedly dispatched to Wright County Egg facilities.

“Because USDA is responsible for egg safety at processing plants, it is troubling that FDA is the lead agency in this investigation even though it has never inspected the Wright County Egg facility,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), a leading Congressional food safety advocate. “Instead of reinforcing each other’s work, the current food safety system of split jurisdiction appears to have resulted in a disjointed inspection process.”

So, when did the USDA do any inspections?

Read the rest of this entry »

Daylife/Getty Images used by permission

Solicitor General Elena Kagan was easily confirmed today as the next associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, completing the 50-year-old native New Yorker’s climb to the peak of the American legal profession.

The 63-37 vote was more than enough to blunt any possibility of a last-minute Republican delay or filibuster. Opposition during three days of Senate floor debate was relatively subdued…

Her brisk confirmation was a political victory for President Barack Obama — who placed Justice Sonia Sotomayor on the high court last year — and for Senate Democrats…

Democrats argued that Kagan possesses the intelligence and professional background necessary to be a force on the high court. They said they hope she will help counter what many on the left contend are excessively conservative court rulings that defy the will of Congress while hurting individual workers and voters…

Conservative opposition to Kagan failed to resonate this election year, a stark contrast to the heated Supreme Court confirmation battles of John Roberts and Samuel Alito in 2005. Television and radio ads from advocacy groups were few, and serious grassroots outrage never materialized.

Kagan was born in Manhattan in 1960, one of three children of a lawyer father and schoolteacher mother. She graduated from Harvard Law School and served in a prestigious Supreme Court clerkship with the late Justice Thurgood Marshall.

Among the cases she will confront in her first term beginning in October will be disputes over protests at military funerals, state bans on violent video games, and the death penalty. High-profile appeals that may reach the court in the next couple of years include Arizona’s sweeping immigration reform law and California’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Republicans will continue to count on the conservative majority on the Supreme Court to play their lapdog role in opposition to any progressive advances in American law.