Tag: House of Representatives

shutdown aftermath, etc.

Vote for Democracy #49

(Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash)

I’ve been struggling with health stuff again and unable to organize my thoughts well enough to tackle a post on the overwhelming state of affairs in the US but will make an attempt.

There was not really a path for the record-breaking government shutdown to have a good outcome, so it didn’t. The Trump administration cruelly shut off food assistance, even though there were funds available to continue. It did, however, highlight the truly terrible statistic that 1 in 8 people here struggle to get enough to eat. The vast majority of these are children, elders, disabled people, or employed adults. Many employers do not pay wages that are sufficient to cover the basic cost of living, so workers and their dependents need government assistance and/or charity to have enough food. This also means that, even after a lifetime of employment, many retirees don’t have enough income to survive and were never able to save enough to have a cushion for their retirement years. It’s a sign of how warped our society has become that so many are hungry in the richest country in the world. At least in the agreement to reopen the government through January 20, funding was secured for food benefits through September 30.

Meanwhile, it is unclear if the health insurance subsidies for Affordable Care Act marketplace plans will be extended. As people are trying to sign up for 2026 plans, the rates from the insurance companies have risen sharply without the subsidies in place, sometimes doubling, tripling, or worse, which will leave millions uninsured. This, in turn, will drive up insurance rates even higher, as hospitals and doctors will raise prices for people with insurance to try to stay afloat. More rural hospitals, which are already strained, may be forced to close. It’s disgusting that our country does not treat health care as a basic right, denying care to anyone without good insurance and/or mounds of cash.

There has been a lot of talk about who bears “blame” for the shutdown. To my mind, the fault lies with the Repbulicans in both the legislative and executive branches. The budget process should work through the Congressional committees to have the appropriation bills passed and in place for October 1, when the new fiscal year begins. Instead, Repbulicans insisted on ramming through their own proposals rather than negotiating with Democrats and Independents to craft appropriation bills that could pass under regular order. Even when Democrats tried to make proposals, Congressional Republican leaders and the President refused to negotiate. The Speaker of the House went so far as to not even call the House into sessions for weeks, time that should have been spent crafting budget bills so that they didn’t have to rely on short-term continuing resolutions to keep the government open.

Another major problem is that the Trump administration has not been executing laws that Congress has passed. How can Congressional Democrats and the general public trust that the Trump administration will spend the money that Congress allocates when they shamefully cancelled life-saving funds for USAID and other agencies and programs, even ignoring court orders?

There is a Constitutional way to deal with this, impeachment of the president and other members of the executive branch by the House and conviction by the Senate, but the current Congressional Repbulicans won’t take action against Trump, even when he is illegally usurping powers granted to Congress, not the President. Unfortunately, this traps the country in this hurtful, dysfunctional state until, at least, the next election.

It is possible that the Republicans could lost the majority in the House even before the midterm elections next November. If more Repbulicans resign, as Marjorie Taylor Greene plans to do in January, and seats are left open for a time period or if Democrats flip some of those seats, the Repbulicans could lose their majority and a new Speaker would be elected. A Democratic majority could launch investigations and might be able to find enough Repbulican senators to pass bipartisan legislation to better serve the country.

Meanwhile, concerned citizens will continue to protest, boycott, and raise their voices to call for their rights, liberty, and values to prevail, in line with our Constitution and laws. We have sunk so low in the functioning of our national government that it will be a long, hard slog to recover, but we will try. It will be difficult for other countries to ever trust us again, given the immense harm that Trump has perpetrated on the world. All the more reason to get to work now.

failure of leadership

The search for a new Republican House speaker was long, fraught, and ugly – and resulted in the election of Mike Johnson of Louisiana who apparently does not have the mindset, skills, and experience to effectively govern.

Given that his own Republican conference is fractious and has only a slim majority, he should follow the lead of the Republicans in the Senate and work with the Democrats to craft legislation that can garner the votes of both a majority of Democrats and Republicans. Passing bills with only Republican support in the House isn’t going to do any good when they will not be taken up in the Senate and, even if they were, wouldn’t get the president’s signature. Legislation needs to be in line with the budget agreement already passed in the spring. Bills also need to be “clean,” meaning that they shouldn’t have unrelated amendments tacked on, such as federal abortion restrictions.

There are crucial pieces of legislation that need to pass soon. One is for funding for Israel and Ukraine, for border security, and for humanitarian and disaster relief, both at home and abroad. Another is a continuing resolution to keep the government funded until the final appropriations bills are adopted. The current resolution expires on November 17, so this needs to happen very soon to avoid a government shutdown. The Farm Bill, which covers a five-year period and is up for renewal now, needs to be enacted; besides framing bills, it also includes important nutrition programs. It would be nice if actual appropriations bills were passed – the Senate committees have passed these bills but the full Senate can’t vote on them until the House has acted – but an omnibus bill that folds all the budgetary bills together is also a possibility.

It’s possible that if Speaker Johnson does put bipartisan bills on the floor, a disgruntled House Republican will force a vote to vacate the chair, meaning to remove the Speaker, but the vote won’t succeed if the rest of the conference sticks together.

The Republicans have an opportunity to show that they are able to govern in a responsible way, fulfilling the promises made in the Preamble of our Constitution. Any member who instead chooses obstructionism should not be re-elected in 2024. We send our representatives to Washington to govern, not whine.

Photo credit: Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash

Another new Speaker

Not that there is ever a good time for the United States House of Representatives to be without a Speaker – and thus unable to consider any legislation – but now seems like a particularly unfortunate time to be in that situation, with no House-passed budget bills that could clear the Senate; ongoing wars in Ukraine, Israel, and elsewhere; and important work needed domestically and internationally around climate action and disaster relief.

The two leading candidates for Speaker, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, probably don’t have the votes to be elected by the majority Republican conference because they are too far to the right to work with the Senate to get legislation through both chambers.

I think the more moderate Republicans should look among their ranks for a nominee for Speaker who can work with Democrats to craft bipartisan legislation that can pass the House and the Democratic-majority Senate. The Senate has managed to pass all twelve fiscal year 2024 appropriation bills out of committee with large bipartisan majorities, which are in line with the spring debt ceiling legislation. If a new Speaker were to put these bills on the House floor, they could pass with Democratic and Republican votes from members who actually want to govern, as opposed to the Freedom Caucus and other similarly inclined Republican House members who seem intent on just not having a functioning government at all. (The Constitution stipulates that government funding bills must originate in the House, so the Senate can’t pass their version of the bills until the House acts.)

I believe that this Republican nominee should not be someone, though, who voted against certifying the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election after the mob had attacked the Capitol and sent members fleeing for their safety.

My hope is that, if a reasonable candidate comes forward and speaks with the Democratic leadership, the House Democrats will supply enough votes to elect a Speaker quickly so that needed legislation can be put in place, showing our citizens and the international community that our democracy can function in a civil way for the common good. If the new Speaker keeps their promise to preside in a bipartisan way, following the lead of the Senate, they would be insulated from threats by the far right Republicans to “vacate the Chair,” i.e. throw the Speaker out of their job as we just witnessed for the first time with the ousting of Kevin McCarthy.

House Republicans, it’s time for you to step up and put our country first. You were elected to govern, not obstruct. The Senators and President Biden have shown that bipartisanship is still possible.

Follow their lead.

Photo credit: Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash

Really?

I try to follow governmental/political news in the US and often write about it here, but, there has been such an avalanche of stories lately that I have been too overwhelmed to write about it. Yesterday, though, was such an odd conglomeration of things that I thought I’d try to post about it.

Speaker McCarthy and his slim majority in the House of Representatives seem incapable of actual governance, even after resolving the debt ceiling crisis. Instead of working on budget bills that put that legislation into practice, the majority-Republican committees are drafting proposals that make cuts in human needs programs that were slated to stay flat. They are also having a lot of investigations, even when they can’t produce evidence to support their allegations. They don’t seem interested in actually governing for the good of the people.

For example, yesterday they held a hearing with John Durham, who led a four-year investigation centered on the origin of the Federal Bureau of Investigations’ inquiry into possible ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia. You may recall that the investigation headed by Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 election resulted in multiple indictments and plea deals, including Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, Konstantin Kilimnik, and over two dozen Russians, including military intelligence officers and companies and employees related to a Russian troll farm that hacked into the campaign- and election-related computers in the US. While not charging him as a sitting president, the Mueller report also detailed instances of potential obstruction of justice by Trump. By contrast, the Durham investigation only resulted in one minor plea deal and two acquittals at trial, hardly the revelation of a “deep-state conspiracy” that some Republicans had suspected.

Curiously, during the hearing, Durham seemed ignorant of much of the Mueller report and contemporaneous news accounts from the 2016 election cycle. He did, however, praise Mueller as “a patriot” and state unequivocally that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election. A number of the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee, which has invited Durham to testify, seemed frustrated that he wasn’t engaging in their more conspiratorial ideas.

Then, in a bizarre counterpoint, the House Republicans voted to censure Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) because of his work on investigating Trump, including the issue of Russian election interference. (A similar measure which had included a possible $16 million fine in addition to censure had failed last week.) Six Republicans, including five on the House Ethics Committee voted present; all other Republicans voted for censure while all Democrats voted against. Rep. Schiff, who was then chair of the Intelligence Committee and became one of the impeachment managers in the first Trump impeachment, appears to have been censured for fulfilling his Congressional duties. It’s expected that this is a first salvo in what may be a long siege of Republican efforts to impeach members of the Biden administration, including the President himself. It doesn’t seem, though, that the Republicans have evidence of actual wrongdoing that would warrant impeachments. They have been doing a lot of investigating of allegations but don’t have the actual evidence needed to prove their case.

Meanwhile, last night, Special Counsel Jack Smith turned over mounds of evidence, including grand jury testimony, to Donald Trump’s lawyers in the documents case that is being litigated in the Southern District of Florida. This is part of a process called discovery, in which the prosecutors give the defendant’s lawyers the information underlying their case, including any possibly exculpatory evidence. The indictment in the case is quite detailed but it seems that many Congressional Republicans have yet to read it. It’s sad that they seem convinced by conspiracy theories while ignoring actual evidence and that they spread this malady to voters.

It makes me very nervous for the future of our democracy, both short-term and long-term.

Discharge Petition

I am calling on my Congressional Representative, Marc Molinaro of New York’s 19th district, to sign the discharge petition to bring a clean debt ceiling raise to the House floor and to vote in favor of it there. I urge him to encourage his Republican colleagues to join him in this, which honors the 14th Amendment of the Constitution they have sworn to uphold.

After that is accomplished, all members of Congress should work on budget bills that prioritize human needs, such as programs for affordable housing, nutrition, and health care. These programs should be expanded, not cut, with additional revenue raised through making sure the wealthiest individuals and corporations pay a fairer share in taxes.

Please join me in this effort by contacting your own House member and sharing your opinions about the debt ceiling and about your budget priorities for the coming fiscal year.

the debt ceiling

Today, the United States reached its debt ceiling, which is the maximum amount of debt that it is allowed to have under current legislation. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen can borrow money from pension funds and such to keep up with debt payments and government obligations until June but the responsible thing would be for Congress to immediately either raise the debt ceiling or suspend it. (The most responsible thing would be to eliminate the debt ceiling but no one is even discussing that.)

Like many other governments and corporations, the United States raises some of the money it uses for its operations through issuing bonds. Perhaps you are familiar with the US Savings Bonds program or with Treasury Bills, often called T-bills. The purchasers of these financial instruments are basically loaning money to the government, which then pays it back with interest on the maturity date. While some of these are held by individuals, the vast majority are held by large financial institutions, like banks and mutual funds, or by foreign governments. The United States dollar is considered the world’s reserve currency because of its stability and the reliability of the US government.

If Congress does not pass an increase in or suspension of the debt limit, the US government would default on its bonds, which could cause a steep downturn in both the stock and bond markets, a severe recession, higher unemployment, rising interest rates on loans, and higher prices. The impact would be global because many US government financial instruments are held in or by other countries. It would also cause some countries to mistrust that the United States will keep its word in other areas.

The US government also would not be able to pay its workers or to fully pay Social Security, veterans’ benefits, nutrition programs, and all the other programs that the federal government provides. This would be a huge hardship to many of their constituents, so why would Congress hesitate to raise the debt ceiling?

Politics.

Apparently, one of the things Kevin McCarthy promised in order to get enough “yes” and “present” votes to win the Speakership was that he would not pass a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling. Instead, McCarthy promised that the debt ceiling increase bill would mandate spending cuts, including to programs that are earned benefits, like Social Security.

This doesn’t make sense. The debt ceiling issue has to do with paying the bills for spending that has already been authorized by Congress. The time for debate about cutting the total amount of government spending is when debating appropriation bills for the next budget year.

Furthermore, the Fourteenth Amendment, Section Four to the US Constitution states, “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” It seems that the House Republicans are trying to question the validity of public debt by threatening to default on it.

It’s also telling that Republicans passed debt limit increases without making a fuss three times during Donald Trump’s presidency when the budget deficits were higher than they are now under President Biden. Part of the reason deficits were higher was that the Republicans passed large tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals and corporations, thus reducing revenue. At the same time, they cut the budget of the Internal Revenue Service so that it was more difficult to audit and catch high-income tax cheats.

It’s hypocritical for the Republicans to be complaining about the size of the national debt now, because it increased so quickly during the four years of the Trump presidency. 25% of the total national debt is attributable to the Trump years.

If the Republicans were serious about balancing the budget and beginning to pay down the national debt, they would be looking at ensuring the wealthy are paying their fair share in taxes. Current law, with lots of loopholes for the wealthy, often has the very rich paying a lower percentage of their income in taxes than their average employee does. Yet, one of the first pieces of legislation the Republicans in the House passed was to rescind that increased funding to the IRS to upgrade their systems and audit more high-income earners. This bill would result in lower tax revenue as tax cheats would have a lower chance of being discovered and forced to pay what they owe. Fortunately, the Senate will not take up this House bill so it has no chance of becoming law.

I have already written to my member of Congress, Republican Marc Molinaro (NY-19), to ask him to join with Democrats and the reasonable Republicans in the House to pass a clean debt ceiling increase or suspension. If Speaker McCarthy won’t put the bill on the floor, they may need to file a discharge petition to get the bill put up for a vote.

Unfortunately, that process takes several weeks, so they had better start now. Secretary Yellen will enlist whatever shuffling of resources are allowed while they do it, but the clock is ticking and folks – and the financial markets – will be worried.

Of course, it would be faster and easier if McCarthy put the good of the country first and introduced a clean bill today. It would also show that the House Republicans want to cooperate in the governance of the country to “promote the general welfare,” as the Preamble to the Constitution states.

Given that they have thus far not shown this inclination, I won’t hold my breath.
*****
Join us for Linda’s Just Jot It January! Find out more here: https://lindaghill.com/2023/01/19/daily-prompt-jusjojan-the-19th-2023/

One-Liner Wednesday: Speaker-less

Yesterday, for the first time in a hundred years, the United States House of Representatives failed to choose a Speaker on the first day of the new Congress, when Kevin McCarthy failed to get a majority of votes on three attempts, despite the fact that his Republican party holds a slim majority.

This update to my post from yesterday is brought to you by Linda’s One-Liner Wednesdays and Just Jot It January. Join us! Details here: https://lindaghill.com/2023/01/04/one-liner-wednesday-jusjojan-the-4th-2023-courage/

New York voting

Georgia has already passed laws restricting voting access. Texas, Florida, and a raft of other states are considering similar bills.

When voting rights advocates complain, officials say that they aren’t really tightening access to the ballot. They are making their laws more like New York’s and New York is a liberal state, so the measures they are taking must be okay.

One major problem: New York, where I have lived most of my adult life, is way behind the vast majority of states when it comes to making registering and voting fair, accessible, and convenient.

While we do have voter registration and address change available through the Department of Motor Vehicles, the wait time between registering and actually being able to vote is long. This also applies to changes in party registration, which affects access to primaries, which are closed. (A closed primary means that only those who have previously registered with that party are allowed to vote. When I was growing up in Massachusetts, political independents could request a ballot for any party they wished on voting day, fill it out, hand it in, and then have their name removed from the party list, going back to their independent status.) I would love to have same-day registration as some states do. A voter can then cast a provisional ballot which will be counted as soon as eligibility is verified.

Many states have long had no-excuse absentee voting or extensive vote by mail options. New York has not. Absentee ballots were restricted to those who would be out of town on election day and those who were physically unable to get to the polls. In 2020, people were allowed to check the box for illness/disability for fear of contracting COVID, so the basic structure of absentee voting is still intact. One useful option we do have is that one can file as having a permanent illness/disability and an absentee ballot will automatically be mailed to you for every future election. This has been very helpful to my parents and my friends who are elders.

2020 was the first presidential election in New York State with early in-person voting at centralized locations. Previously, the only way to vote in person before election day was to go to the county Board of Elections office, request a ballot, fill it out, and turn it back in. The early voting period was October 24-November 1, with election day being November third. In our county, the lines were long. We waited about three hours in line to vote; our county lengthened the hours available after a few days to cut the waiting times. As it turned out, we could have waited to vote on election day as our planned trip to visit family in the UK was cancelled the day before we were to leave, so we were in town on Nov. 3rd. Many states have much more extensive early voting periods, beginning several weeks before election day.

One thing that New York had been good about was having long hours on election day. Polls were open from 6 AM through 9 PM. Anyone who was in line by 9 PM could remain to vote, no matter what time that actually occurred.

New York has also been very slow with counting votes. Absentee votes couldn’t be counted for at least a week after election day. In some cases, the waiting period was closer to two weeks. While the presidential outcome was clear, some races were not officially certified for weeks after the election. The most severe was our Congressional district, which resulted in our representative not being sworn in until February 11th.

New York is continuing to pass legislation to make voting more accessible. Meanwhile, these other states that are claiming to be “keeping up with liberal New York” are in reality making vote more burdensome for their citizens. They are also adding ridiculous things like making it a crime to give food or water to people waiting in line to vote.

So remember, the next time you hear some politician crow about making their voting system more like New York’s, it is probably not a good thing.

The various shenanigans that are going on with states restricting voting access points out the necessity for action at the federal level. I am hoping that the For the People Act (H.R.1/S.1) and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act will be passed by Congress for President Biden to sign into law. Taken together, these would ensure equal access to the ballot for all citizens, no matter where they live. It would be even better if the bill to make Washington DC a state is adopted so that the 700,000 people that live there finally have votes in Congress.

Every citizen deserves representation and an equal opportunity to vote!

filibuster update

Here at Top of JC’s Mind, I sometimes – and more frequently in recent years – wade into the political waters of the US. Last October, I mentioned the Senate filibuster and my hopes that is would be reformed, tangentially in this post and fleshed out a bit in the comments.

Remarkably, these early weeks of the Biden administration have given rise to a lot of public discussion of the filibuster and how this arcane Senate rule might be reformed or eliminated so that legislation can pass the Senate by majority vote rather than needing 60 of 100 senators to end debate and proceed to a vote. This is called “invoking cloture.”

For decades, filibusters and cloture votes were rare. Maddeningly, filibusters were used to attempt to derail legislation on civil rights, voting rights, labor rights, and anti-lynching. (Republican Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell has tried to argue that the filibuster was not used as a racist tool, but this twitter thread from Kevin Kruse proves him wrong with a long, but not exhaustive, list of past racially-motivated filibusters.)

During the Obama presidency, McConnell and the Republicans frequently used the filibuster to slow or prevent approving appointments and to keep legislation from reaching the floor for a vote. This was possible because all a senator needed to do was to say they wanted to filibuster and it would take sixty votes to end it, which, with all the Republicans sticking together, meant that there were never enough votes to invoke cloture and proceed to a vote. This led to a rule change that appointments were not subject to the filibuster, though other kinds of legislation still were.

One of the reforms to the process currently being discussed is to require that a senator wanting to filibuster must stay on the Senate floor and speak on the bill being debated. This revives the practice that was in place until 1975, although senators then weren’t required to speak on the bill and could read from the phone book or cookbooks or talk about totally unrelated topics.

There is also a proposal to change the cloture vote. Rather than needing sixty votes to end the debate, which puts the burden on the majority, the new rule would be that 40 or 41 senators would need to vote to continue the debate. This preserves the ability of the minority to put forth their arguments on something they feel strongly about but requires them to put forth effort to do so.

The hope is that these two reforms would break the stranglehold on bills that became so stark during the Obama administration. It might also engender more bipartisan bills actually making it to the Senate floor for a vote. (Mitch McConnell famously once filibustered his own bill when it became clear that President Obama would sign the bill into law. McConnell valued gridlock over governing.)

Or, given that it is just a Senate rule and not a law, the filibuster could be eliminated. Many think this would be the simplest path, but a few Democratic senators are vehemently opposed to ending it totally, although the impetus for reform is definitely gaining momentum.

While I had hoped that, under President Biden who was a long-time senator, some of the more moderate Republicans would want to vote for common-sense and popular bills such as the American Rescue Plan, we have yet to see that happen. The American Rescue Plan, despite its popularity with the public and its many provisions that benefit people in their states, garnered no votes from Republicans in Congress; it passed with a simple majority in the Senate due to special budgetary rules that prevented a filibuster.

There are now some popular and much-needed bills that have passed the House that will become test cases on whether or not bipartisan support is possible or whether it will take filibuster reform or elimination to get them on the floor for a vote. The For the People Act (H.R. 1/S. 1) addresses voting rights, campaign finance reform, government ethics, gerrymandering, and election security. Further voting rights issues are addressed in the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which would help to restore provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act which the Supreme Court struck down in 2013, on the grounds that these racial provisions were now obsolete. Sadly, we have seen evidence that they are not, as efforts are now underway in 43 states to restrict voting access to certain groups of people, including by making it harder for people of color to vote or by making it more difficult for students or elders to register and vote by mail.

There are two House-passed gun safety bills, one on universal background checks and one extending the time the FBI has to vet purchasers to ten days instead of the current three. Both of these measures have broad public support, including among Republicans and gunowners. An increase in the federal minimum wage is very popular with the public, as are bills to re-build our infrastructure, increase our production of goods and green energy to create sustainable jobs, and to increase taxes on the very wealthy.

If bills like these pass the House and appear on the Senate floor, what will the Republicans do? Will they vote yes in accord with their constituents? Will they filibuster to stop a vote from occurring? If they do decide to filibuster, they risk the Democrats reforming the filibuster, voting that certain kinds of bills such as voting rights are not subject to it, or eliminating it all together.

Fingers crossed that whatever scenario unfolds, these laws will be enacted for the common good. We have been waiting for Congress to actually participate in governing in the way the Constitution sets before them.

fears realized

Like me, many people feared the president’s reaction to the impeachment trial vote to leave him in office.

We were not wrong to be apprehensive.

The president has removed numerous people from their posts because they dared to do their duty and tell the truth. I can barely believe that he dismissed the Director of National Intelligence because a member of his staff briefed the House Intelligence committee on Russian interference with the 2020 election. These briefings are required, not optional.

Worse, the president is denying that Russia is interfering in this election and that they interfered in the 2016 election. The 2016 election interference is well-documented and resulted in indictments of over a dozen Russian GRU officers. The conclusion on Russian meddling in 2016 is supported by all the US intelligence agencies, the Democratic-led House Intelligence committee, the Republican-led Senate Intelligence committee, the first volume of the Mueller report, and the Mueller grand jury that handed down the indictments. We ought to have been preparing since 2016 to better secure our campaigning and election security, but the denial by the administration has kept Congress from passing needed legislation.

It’s terrifying.

The new acting Director of National Intelligence has no intelligence experience and is keeping his current job as ambassador to Germany. Meanwhile, the president has assigned his former bodyman to clear out appointees in various departments and agencies who he feels are not sufficiently loyal to him.

Civil servants and elected officials do not swear an oath to obey the president. They swear to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

Of all people, the Attorney General should know this, but he has been undermining the work of his own department.

There are many people of good will and good morals who are trying very hard to ensure that the election is fair and that our government returns to respecting the rule of law and human rights. I hope we succeed, but, until it happens, I will be very afraid.