WebProNews

Tag: John Boehner

  • Rachel Maddow Explains What Could Happen In Speaker Debacle

    Rachel Maddow had a laugh or two at Republicans in Congress, who can’t seem to get their act together.

    John Boehner announced that he is retiring from his position as speaker of the house last month, leaving a vacant position that no one wants to fill.

    After his assumed replacement, Kevin McCarthy, backed out of the race and those being lobbied for the position, like Paul Ryan and Trey Gowdy, explicitly said they will not do it, all hell broke lose.

    Now, Republicans are scrambling to find a replacement for John Boehner and the turmoil that has plagued the fractured party is coming home to roost.

    On Rachel Maddow‘s MSNBC show on Thursday, she explained a few options that might occur if Republicans can’t find a new speaker to replace John Boehner.

    Rachel Maddow described option number one, saying, “Someone could become viable. The Republicans could reach deep into their souls and find a Kumbaya center they didn’t know they had … and therefore find someone from Congress who could get 218 votes.”

    They are working on that, but in the mean time, there’s option number two to think about.

    Rachel Maddow said option number two is, “They could find somebody to do it who could get 218 votes, who is not a Republican member of the House. Technically, that is legal. It doesn’t have to be a member of Congress to be speaker, so it could just be anyone in the world.”

    Rachel Maddow listed Nancy Reagan, “that guy from Duck Dynasty” and a Chik-fil-A sandwich as possible selections for option number two.

    As for option number three, Rachel Maddow said, “There could just be no speaker. That would mean no votes, no convening, no offices, no nothing. Nobody can do business, and Congress just closes.”

    And for option number four, which will not be a great option for John Boehner or those in Congress who cheered his departure, Rachel Maddow said, “Which brings us to option four — which is honestly the most likely thing to happen — which is John Boehner is not allowed to quit.”

    That would make a few people angry!

    What do you think about Rachel Maddow’s list of possible outcomes for this speaker debacle? What do you think is most likely to happen?

  • Boehner Resigns: Did He Just Make Government Shutdown More Certain?

    Boehner resigns and surprises the country this week as the battle over spending that could shut down the government looms just around the corner.

    Why John Boehner resigned remains unclear but easily guessed, and a replacement for that unenviable job must now be found.

    House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy is somewhat next in line, and was endorsed by Boehner himself shortly after announcing his resignation.

    He said, “I am not going to be here to vote on the next Speaker. But, that’s up to the next members. But, having said that, I think that Kevin McCarthy would make an excellent Speaker.”

    However, speculation is building that he could be challenged by the likes of Representatives Steve Scalise of Louisiana, Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state and Tom Price of Georgia.

    My mission every day is to fight for a smaller, less costly, and more accountable government. Over the last five years, our majority has advanced conservative reforms that will help our children and their children. I am proud of what we have accomplished. The first job of any Speaker is to protect the institution that we all love. It was my plan to only serve as Speaker until the end of last year, but I stayed on to provide continuity to the Republican conference and the House. It is my view, however, that prolonged leadership turmoil would do irreparable damage to the institution. Therefore, I will resign the Speakership and my seat in Congress on October 30. Today, my heart is full with gratitude to the people of Ohio's Eighth District, my colleagues, and this great country that has given me – the son of a bar owner from Cincinnati – the chance to serve.

    A photo posted by Speaker John Boehner (@speakerboehner) on

    In addition to the talk of succession is debate about how John Boehner’s departure will affect the battle over spending that could lead to the second government shutdown in two years.

    Congress and President Obama have been trying to hammer out a short-term extension of funding authority to keep the government operating beyond midnight Wednesday, but so far efforts have been unsuccessful.

    Now it looks even more unlikely that a newcomer to John Boehner’s vacated position could negotiate between those who are staunchly opposed to any budget that includes funding for Planned Parenthood and those who feel that other domestic programs included in the current proposed budget desperately need to be funded.

    Bill Hoagland, a former Republican Senate budget adviser, did not seem jealous of the poor person who will become Speaker of the House.

    He said, “For the next Speaker, he’s going to have a huge, huge problem. With the debt limit, with the expiring continuing resolution, with tax extenders, the highway bill – you almost understand why Boehner said to hell with it, I’m out of here.”

    He added, “How that next Speaker makes a silk purse out of a sow’s ear come December is going to be extremely difficult.”

    What do you think will happen in the next few days? Do you think whoever takes over for John Boehner will be able to make a budget deal happen or do you think we are facing another government shutdown?

  • John Boehner Hate, Hate, Hates on Obama’s Free College Plan with Taylor Swift GIFs

    The staff of fiscal conservative John Boehner has taken the time to explain why you should be against President Obama’s recently announced plan to provide free community college to some Americans.

    Knowing that that only way to reach the kids these days is either adderall or Taylor Swift, Boehner’s comms office has smartly decided to go with the latter. Fresh today on the official .gov site for Speaker of the House John Boehner – 12 Taylor Swift GIFs for you.

    Here’s what the post has to say:

    Last week, President Obama announced his latest idea to provide “free” community college to millions of Americans. It sounded exciting at first…

    But then, we got to thinking … Free?! Is he using magic money? Nothing is free. So we did a little math. Turns out…when President Obama said “free” what he meant was “60 Billion dollars over 10 years.” Not even all the Taylor Swift album sales in the world would cover that bill.

    Still, 60 billion dollars is a lot of money…you can’t just shake it off. And the president knows full well there’s no blank space in the taxpayers’ checkbook. Does that mean he intends to try to pay for his “free” plan with a tax increase on millions of Americans? Or does it mean he wants to pile up more debt on the very young people this idea is supposed to help?

    Even then: college STILL wouldn’t be free – there are all kinds of other fees and costs – not unlike all the higher costs we’re seeing in this tough economy. Wait, wouldn’t it be better if we just worked together to lower costs for folks across the board and improve our children’s education?

    Looks like an apology is in order, Mr. President…

    We’re not mad. We’re just disappointed.

    Except that’s not it. Interspersed between the message are, in fact, 12 Taylor Swift GIFs. Like this one:

    Not since the great Mitch MoConnell memeing of 2013 have we seen such skillful deployment of internet. Congrats guys.

  • Obama Impeachment: Paul Ryan Says No

    Sarah Palin fired the first volley. The half-term Alaska governor took to the pages of Breitbart to insist that impeachment proceedings begin against President Obama. Her reasoning behind the move?

    “Because of Obama’s purposeful dereliction of duty an untold number of illegal immigrants will kick off their shoes and come on in, competing against Americans for our jobs and limited public services. There is no end in sight as our president prioritizes parties over doing the job he was hired by voters to do. Securing our borders is obviously fundamental here; it goes without saying that it is his job.”

    A few other GOP candidates and voices hopped on the bandwagon with Palin soon thereafter. But the Grand Old Party as a whole is having none of it. In fact, they seem to be a bit perturbed that some of their number are running forward with the argument.

    Speaker John Boehner has said that he has no interest in pursuing impeachment against the president. In fact, Boehner has tried to quiet the talk by saying that it was not even a Republican idea, ignoring the fact that Palin is on record as starting the idea. Since Democrats have had loads of success lately fundraising on the back of the threat of impeachment, Boehner has said that the whole thing was a Democrat “scam.”

    Now Paul Ryan is following Boehner’s lead. But Ryan is going even further to distance the party from the actions of the few.

    “I see this as sort of a ridiculous gambit by the president and his political team to try and change the narrative, raise money, and turn out their base for an upcoming election that they feel is not going to go their way… [The Republicans’ differences with the White House do] not rise to the high crime and misdemeanor level.”

    In all honesty, the Democrats and the White House have used the threat of impeachment to change the narrative, raise money, and turn out their base. The problem is, the impeachment gambit has verifiably Republican origins.

    But the most interesting part of Ryan’s comment is the second half. Sarah Palin has been saint that more Americans would be screaming for impeachment if they only understood what “impeachable offenses” were. Paul Ryan does know.

    Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states that “The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

    As Ryan pointed out, that is not what is going on with Obama.

    The idea of impeachment is red meat to any political party. It riled up Republicans when Clinton was in office. There were rumblings about it when Bush was in. And now here we are. But without a basis for it, why would someone like Sarah Palin leave the comfy confines of her Facebook echo chamber and venture out to Breitbart to throw down her challenge? Palin even faced off against members of her own party when she said that Americans “should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment.” What gives?

    Well, she did launch a so-called “online television network” soon thereafter. That isn’t going over well, either. It costs $9.95 a month and is a glorified blog with videos posts. But Palin made a smart move to get her name back in the search engines before the launch.

    Image via YouTube

  • Obama Impeachment a Dem “Scam,” Says Boehner

    Obama Impeachment a Dem “Scam,” Says Boehner

    A couple of weeks back, we reported on Sarah Palin’s calling for the impeachment of President Obama. Palin was particularly perturbed over Obama’s “purposeful dereliction of duty an untold number of illegal immigrants will kick off their shoes and come on in, competing against Americans for our jobs and limited public services.”

    Other conservatives weighed in on Palin’s call to action, some of whom are more on the front lines of the left-right battle for power in Washington. Palin told her acolytes that those on the right who would not join her in her impeachment crusade deserved to be voted out.

    “It’s time to impeach; and on behalf of American workers and legal immigrants of all backgrounds, we should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment. The many impeachable offenses of Barack Obama can no longer be ignored. If after all this he’s not impeachable, then no one is.”

    As it turns out, the impeachment brigade is working, but not for Republicans. Democrats are having a field day raising campaign funds ahead of the midterm elections using the impeachment chatter. In a four-day period, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee raised $2.1 million by sending out emails that mentioned the impeachment chatter.

    The impeachment call to action has no traction, but worse, it is putting Republican candidates up against growing war chests of their Dem opponents.

    Cue John Boehner, who decided that the best way to handle this kerfluffle was to act like it was someone else’s idea entirely. So Boehner is putting word on the street that impeachment was not even a Republican idea; it was a “scam” started by the Democrats as a way to demonize Republicans and make money for their candidates.

    Boehner has had to distance himself from this impeachment talk before. He had to explicitly state that the lawsuit he wants to bring against President Obama “is not about impeachment … This is about his faithfully executing the laws of our country,”

    Image via YouTube

  • Nancy Pelosi Disses Boehner on Immigration?

    Like her or not, as House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi probably has a decent pulse of what is going on in Congress. If she says something is a lost cause, that probably means it stands little chance of breathing air again anytime soon in the vacuum that can be the United States Legislative branch.

    And so it is that, when Pelosi recently visited a Border Patrol facility in Brownsville, Texas recently, that reporters hung on her every word regarding comprehensive immigration reform.

    “A few days ago I would have been more optimistic about comprehensive immigration reform,” Pelosi said. “I thought that we had been finding a way because we have been very patient and respectful of [House Speaker John Boehner] trying to do it one way or another.”

    “I don’t think he gives us much reason to be hopeful now, but we never give up. There’s still the month of July,” she added.

    Pelosi’s comments were poignant considering where she spoke them. The facility that she was visiting houses unaccompanied children that have managed to come across the U.S. border. Usually people who cross the border and are caught can be turned back quickly. However, only if they are from a country that shares a border with the U.S. If, like many of these children, they are from Central America, the process is longer.

    Because these are children, the law specifies that they must be transferred to the custody of the Health and Human Services department within 72 hours of their arrest.

    “The fact is these are children, children and families,” Pelosi said. “We have a moral responsibility to address this in a dignified way.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Chuck Schumer Has Creative Immigration Idea

    Last week, John Boehner pretty much shut down any talk in the House of immigration reform until Obama earns the trust of his fellow Republicans.

    Boehner released his own immigration overhaul principles only a couple of weeks ago, on Jan. 30 during a House GOP retreat, which laid out a pathway to legal American status for undocumented immigrants.

    However, that plan was forced down by an outcry from conservative members of the House, according to The Fiscal Times.

    “The American people, including many of my members, don’t trust that the reform that we’re talking about will be implemented as it was intended to be.”

    He then cited Obama’s promises of sweeping “executive actions” that have delayed or completely changed the face of the Affordable Care Act as proof that the President can’t be trusted to fully enact the laws that are passed.

    Well, Sen. Chuck Schumer may have come up with a creative solution to get the House talking again. On NBC’s “Meet the Press”, Schumer suggested that the House and Senate work together to come up with a plan that doesn’t take effect until Obama is out of office in 2017, which would give some assurance to wary Republicans that the law would actually be enforced.

    He said of Obama, “Now I think that the rap against him — that he won’t enforce the law — is false. He’s deported more people than any other president, but you could actually have the law start in 2017 without doing much violence to it.”

    If the plan doesn’t become effective until 2017, then the administration would have time to focus on getting out those who are here illegally and have committed crimes or would otherwise not qualify for legalization, and also allow more focus on new immigrants trying to cross borders illegally.

    However, Boehner’s spokesman, Michael Steel ran down Schumer’s proposal. He called it “entirely impractical” and said that the plan “would totally eliminate the president’s incentive to enforce immigration law for the remainder of his term.”

    Not everyone is so quick to slap down Schumer’s plan, though. Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman said, “I think some Republicans would be interested in that, if we put in place the enforcement measures so that it would work. In other words, be sure the border is secure, be sure that you have a workforce enforcement program that works.”

    Portman, himself, voted against the Senate “Gang of Eight” legislation after failing to secure changes to the bill that would have given a huge boost to workplace verification provisions.

    The White House? They are sitting, waiting, watching.

    “We’ve laid out our principles and we are now stepping back to see what, if anything, the House puts forward,” a White House official said, according to Politico.

    Matt House, a spokesman for Schumer said, “They’ve already established they don’t trust the president to enforce the law on immigration, but he’s going to be the president through 2016 whether we pass a law or not. If they believe in immigration reform, why not get things moving for 2017?”

    Image via wikimedia commons

  • John Boehner Fed Up With Conservative Base

    On Thursday, Republican House Speaker John Boehner attacked the conservative base for their indiscriminate opposition to the latest bipartisan budget deal, saying they had lost their credibility. According to Huff Post, conservative groups such as The Club for Growth, Heritage Action for America, FreedomWorks opposed the bill immediately after it was released. In fact, some did so even before it was released.

    “This budget agreement takes giant steps in the right direction,” Boehner said. “But when groups come out and criticize something they’ve never seen, you begin to wonder just how credible those actions are.”

    Boehner accused the conservative groups of “using the Americans people.” In particular, Boehner accused the groups of pushing the Republican party into a dubious plan to shut down Obamacare. “Frankly I think they’re misleading their followers. I think they’re pushing our members in places where they don’t want to be. And frankly, I just think that they’ve lost all credibility.” he said. Boehner was also not amused when one group that was behind the plan admitted that they knew it would never work. “Are you kidding me?” Boehner yelled.

    Boehner showed signs of frustration on Wednesday when some groups opposed the budget even before the details were out. “Yesterday when the criticism was coming, frankly I thought it was my job and my obligation to stand up for conservatives here in the Congress who want more deficit reduction, stand up for the work that Chairman Ryan did,” Boehner said.

    The proposed budget, if passed, would set funding levels for the next two years. Over the course of those two years, the budget would increase federal government spending by $63 billion. The deal was brokered by House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan together with Senate Budget Committee Chair Patty Murray. The deal would help increase savings and avoid future congressional fights over money. It is for this reason that Boehner says he doesn’t understand why anyone can oppose such a deal. “That’s exactly what this bill does, and why Conservatives wouldn’t vote for this or criticize the bill is beyond any recognition I could come up with.”

    (image via YouTube)

  • Roger Daltrey, of The Who, Performs at US Capitol

    This Wednesday, Congressional leaders such as John Boehner, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, and Harry Reid convened at the Capitol Building in order to conduct business of the utmost importance – dedicating a statue to Winston Churchill.

    In 2011, to mark the 70th anniversary of Churchill’s address to Congress in December of 1941 (after the bombing of Pearl Harbor), John Boehner passed a resolution to add a bust of “The British Bulldog” to the Capitol Building. The bust was donated by the Churchill Center.

    Churchill was such an amazing figure in history that it wouldn’t be enough to simply give him a bust placed in the nation’s capitol; In order to really make the occasion special, John Boehner thought it fitting to invite Roger Daltrey to perform at the dedication ceremony – you know, the lead singer of Tho Who.

    Why did Boehner choose Daltrey to pay tribute to Churchill? Perhaps because they are both British royalty…. Or more likely because John Boehner is a fanboy. Whatever the reason, the appearance of Daltrey was enough to allow Democrats and Republicans to drop their feuds and become bipartisan, for once.

    During the ceremony, Boehner also expressed his intense crush on Winston Churchill. According to NPR, Boehner appeared to stifle back tears as he spoke on the importance of Churchill to the United States: “Growing up, he read our books. He revered Lincoln. He knew better than most Americans the trials of the Civil War. He even wrote in our magazines on everything from hospitality to food to our engines. You could say that he saw in America the very exceptionalism that we see today.”

    Following his opening remarks for the ceremony, Boehner introduced Roger Daltrey to the crowd to play two songs. The first was Ben E. King’s, “Stand By Me,” a song Daltrey chose to represent the special relationship between the United States and Great Britain. The second was The Who’s hit, “Won’t Get Fooled Again,” a choice which Daltrey stated, “…was very pertinent to the occasion. Isn’t it pretty obvious?”

    While Daltrey may think his choice of songs was quite obvious, the purpose of the ceremony seems a bit perplexing. This year marks no significant anniversary of Churchill’s interactions with the United States, nor have any specific developments happened to strengthen the ties between Great Britain the United States. Not only that, but it would seem as if Congressional members and Secretary of State John Kerry would have more pressing issues to attend to than the dedication of a bust. Then again, maybe this private concert by one member of The Who was the spark needed to create a bipartisan legislature. After all, according to Senator Pat Leahy (D – Vt.), “It doesn’t get any better… I love that song but hearing it live in here — nothing could top that.”

    Image via YouTube

  • President Rejects House Proposal, Talks Break Down

    “It’s now up to the Senate Republicans to stand up,” said Representative Raúl R. Labrador of Idaho after House Republicans left today’s meeting on the fiscal crisis in the Capitol. Angry Republicans reported that Obama has rejected yet another offer to ease the stalemate over raising the Debt Ceiling, opening the government, and other urgent issues.

    Representative John Carter of Texas showed his dismay as he described Mr. Obama as “acting like a royal president.” He added, “He’s still ‘my way or the highway’”.

    Unfortunately, the House is not scheduled to meet again until Monday, and House Republicans insist they are pretty much out of options.

    The New York Times reports that negotiations have broken down between House Republicans and Obama on finding a solution to the impending Debt Ceiling crunch.

    Attention now turns to the Senate. Republicans have spent the past several days trying to garner Democratic support for a proposal that they hope could reopen the government and extend the debt-ceiling through the end of January.

    House Republicans remain reluctant to accept any proposal that comes out of the Democratic-controlled Senate, even if it has substantial Republican support. However, Mr. Boehner now has to be concerned about whether he will be forced to put any Senate-offering on the House floor for a vote.

    “The problem here is that we don’t have a functioning majority,” said Representative Devin Nunes, a California Republican. “After three weeks of this, they’re still not figuring it out. I don’t know what it takes.”

    The President is unwilling to compromise on any proposal that would suggest limiting his Affordable Care Act. The proposal presented last week by the House called for increasing the Treasury Department’s authority to borrow money through Nov. 22, but only if Mr. Obama agreed to more expansive talks about overhauling the budget. No dice.

    Representative Aaron Schock, Republican in Illinois, speaking of the detriment this meeting imparted to an already tense relationship, called the development “a total breakdown in trust.”

    “You don’t tell the speaker, the majority leader, the majority whip ‘we’re going to negotiate’, then they come and tell our entire conference ‘we’re going to negotiate’ and then 24 hours later, you recant,” he said.

    House Republicans remain skeptical that any Senate plan could gain support in the House. Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky said the Republicans remain “very united” and were unlikely to cede any ground as long as Mr. Obama continues to treat the standoff as “still a game.”

    Global financial markets could be thrown into turmoil if Congress does not agree to raise the debt ceiling by Thursday, but there is a lot of water to tread for that to happen. Unfortunately for America, this is not a government that is particularly keen on compromise right now.

    Image via wikimedia commons

  • Temper Tantrum Ad Slamming Boehner Set to Air on Sunday

    The pressures of the government shutdown has had its effects on a number of government officials on edge all week. With all of the tension shrouded around the shutdown, the House Majority PAC felt some kind of way and decided to take matters into their own hands. While the approach is rather direct as far as allegations are concerned, the visual is rather comedic.

    The democratically amassed House Majority PAC has produced a short narrative advertisement taking shots at House Speaker John Boehner. The ad features a baby crying as a comparison to Boehner’s attitude and perspective toward the health care reform. The baby whines while saying, “Speaker John Boehner didn’t get his way on shutting down health care reform. So, he’s shut down the government and hurt the economy.”

    The advertisement is scheduled to air during the Patriots-Bengals football game on Sunday. That particular game happens to be in Boehner’s district which is why the 39-second attack ad targets the location. The target market includes the rural and suburban residential areas in the proximity of Cincinnati.

    http://youtu.be/kKmdRZnjm2k

    Andy Stone, communications director of the House Majority PAC, issued a statement in support of the advertisement. “Speaker Boehner didn’t get his way and so, like a child, he threw a Tea Party-inspired temper tantrum and shut down the federal government. The American people are sick and tired of the intransigence and manufactured crises that have become all too common from Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans. Speaker Boehner should stop playing politics, end the nonsense and finally focus on the real-life consequences his government shutdown has caused Americans.”

    The group also took to Twitter to slam Boehner.

    The House Majority PAC also issued a press release stating their intentions to begin campaigning for the 2014 elections. The group has already put plans in motion for the 2014 elections with a six-figure ad campaign in the early stages. The campaign will focus on targeting the districts of nine Republican members: Gary Miller (Calif.), Mike Coffman (Colo.), Rodney Davis (Ill.), Mike Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Michael Grimm (N.Y.), Joe Heck (Nev.), Dave Joyce (Ohio), John Kline (Minn.) and Steve Southerland (Fla.).

     

    Image via House Majority PAC

  • Senate Votes Against Fourth House Plan

    Senate Votes Against Fourth House Plan

    In a completely non-startling move, the Senate voted against a fourth plan put forth by the House to defund Obamacare in order to stop the government shutdown.

    The deadline to actually avoid the shutdown came at midnight last night. When America woke up this morning, it realized that Congress was still plagued by ineptitude, and the government had indeed shutdown.

    Despite failing to convince the Senate to defund the Affordable Care Act (An act that became law in 2010.) 3 previous times, House Republicans believed that a fourth effort would be successful if they only included a negotiating committee to reach a compromise with the healthcare law.

    The Senate voted 54-46 against approving the House bill, straight down party lines. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stated that the Senate was willing to talk negotiations with the bill, but not “with a gun to our head.”

    In even more fantastically antagonistic rhetoric, Reid said that today was “a good day for anarchists” in the House of Representatives, and that “Speaker Boehner and his band of Tea Party radicals, they have done the unthinkable. They have shut down the federal government. For us, that’s hard to comprehend as being good. For them, they like it.”

    Many Democratic leaders, such as Senator Dick Durbin (D – Il.) have voiced the opinion that they would be willing to talk numbers regarding the ACA and compromise on certain aspects, but that they would not vote to defund the law. The main issue on which Democrats are willing to negotiate is a tax on medical devices, something that could save $30 billion in lost revenue over 10 years.

    Despite the fact that Obamacare is not directly tied to federal funding, many radical Republicans and Tea Party members insists that its defunding is the key to creating a sustainable US budget. Republican Representative Todd Rokita, of Indiana, even went as far as to say that the Affordable Care Act is the “is the most insidious law known to man,” without stating why, of course.

    Because of the lack of political responsibility in DC, 800,000 government employees will be furloughed, hundreds of government institutions will be closed, and the United States could lose around $55 billion if the issue isn’t resolved in 3-4 weeks.

    While the rhetoric of Harry Reid is great in its incendiary nature (Here is another one: “Albert Einstein said when defining insanity as follows, quote, ‘Doing the same thing over and over again and thinking you’re going to get a different result. Einstein was a genius, but it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the proof is watching the House Republicans, because they’ve lost their minds.”), the rhetoric of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell is just as interesting.

    Boehner stated “How can we give waivers and breaks to all the big union guys out there? How do we give breaks to all the big businesses out there, and yet stick our constituents with a bill they don’t want and a bill they can’t afford?” Except for the fact that the Affordable Care Act was passed as a law in 2010, meaning that a majority of Congress voted in favor of the law, and despite the fact that no proof has been given as to the fact that constituents cannot afford it, seeing as the bill has yet to be implemented (and the fact that it is designed to save Americans money over the long-run).

    Mitch McConnell’s words of wisdom are just as ignorant, stating that “They’ve now said they won’t even agree to sit down and work out our differences. They won’t even talk about it. They literally just voted against working out a compromise.” What McConnell fails to recognize is that there is nothing to compromise about – As Obama himself has stated, via his Twitter account, “The Affordable Care Act is moving forward. You can’t shut it down.”

    The President is exactly right. Regardless of whether or not the government is shutdown, the Affordable Care Act is slated to take effect in 2014. Applications to apply for the program opened today. The Republicans are not going to make progress attempting to stop a law that has already been voted and agreed upon, and has been deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court. Instead, they should focus their efforts on defunding some other inane government expenditure. Perhaps some portion of the monstrous Defense budget…? Just a suggestion.

    Image via Twitter

  • Wall Street Ends 5 Day Skid; Stocks are Up

    The stock market saw a surprise surge last Wednesday after the Federal Reserve announced that it would continue its bond-buying program. That up-swing did not last long, though; The stocks dipped drastically on Thursday, and Wall Street has seen a losing-streak the previous 5 days.

    There was positive news for Wall Street today, however. The Dow Jones, S&P, and Nasdaq all showed positive gains for the day, with increases of 0.41%, 0.18%, and 0.61% respectively.

    Along with the reviving stocks, the US economy also saw a reviving job market with unemployment reports coming back positive – Initial claims dropped 5,000 to 305,000, with the four-week average of new claims dropping 7,000 to 308,000. These numbers make jobless claims the lowest they have been in 6 years.

    Part of the surge has been caused by two new companies that were recently added to the Dow – Nike, and Visa. Visa was up 1.3%, while Nike closed with gains of 4.1%.

    Investors link the 5 day losing-streak to the fiasco that is currently happening in Washington concerning the looming government shutdown. Part of today’s surge, however, may be due to the air of compromise or negotiation that has rumored to have occurred in D.C. Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, ranking minority member of the Senate Budget Committee, said that there will be no government shutdown or default. Meanwhile, John Boehner urged the Republicans to be flexible to options that will allow the government to continue to function.

    While the stock market showed signs of improvement today, the closing figures were not spectacular. This has led many, such as Ron Florance, deputy chief investment officer for Wells Fargo Private Bank, to conclude that the Federal Reserve was right in continuing its bond-buying program: “It’s fair to say that the Fed got it right by delaying (cuts to the stimulus). Growth is uninteresting and subdued.”

    Phil Orlando, chief equity market strategist at Federated Investors in New York, believes that this market growth shows, however, that the Federal Reserve will be able to cut back it’s program soon: “If today’s number was a good number, that means when we see the job report on October 4, that number ought to be pretty strong. That’s going to give us another clue as to the underlying strength of the labor market, which was one of the reasons the Federal Reserve chose not to commence the taper.”

    Still, others are worried that the recent rise in stocks is the result of temporary fixes: “Worryingly, it looks like even this relatively modest growth is only being achieved by firms cutting prices,” stated Chris Williamson, the chief economist at Markit.

    Whatever the reason, higher prices in the stock market and lower unemployment rates can only be views as positive for the US. With its credit-rating on the line due to the debt-ceiling crisis and potential default, any inducement for foreign investors to enter into the American market is a good thing.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Government Shutdown: Its Marco Rubio vs Rand Paul

    With their eyes on 2016 GOP presidential nomination, Republican Senators Marco Rubio and Rand Paul are staking out carefully crafted positions on the looming government shutdown in an effort to defund Obamacare.

    From the outset it appears that Rand Paul is more strategic and better prepared in his approach towards the much reviled healthcare law within the Tea Party and Republican electorate.

    While acknowledging that overturning Obama’s career defining achievement is next to impossible, so long as Democrats control the Senate and the White House, Senator Paul appeared optimistic today that the law will be revised to remove some of the “bad” parts, including the individual mandate and the IRS tax penalties for refusing to obey government edicts.

    On the other side, Paul’s tea-party colleagues Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have made common cause with GOP establishment pick, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, to shut down the federal government in an effort to defund Obamacare.

    Although Rubio ratcheted down the rhetoric a few notches by issuing a press release this past weekend in favor of continued government funding, he comes across as confused and vacillating, lacking in leadership qualities that demand firmness and vision.

    Whichever way the political wind is blowing, there Rubio seems to tip-toe. One day Rubio is cheer-leading Obama’s efforts to bomb Syria. The next, he is condemning him when he sees the firestorm of public outcry in opposition to another Trillion dollar war.

    Even the far-left, which harbors an atavistic hatred for Paul, has begun to notice who is winning the battle for leadership within the Republican Party. And it definitely isn’t Rubio.

    Paul’s “speak softly” rhetoric, but “big stick” voting, bi-partisan lobbying, and filibuster record, is winning more fans on social media networks than ever.

    Even the establishment henchman and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell has taken notice. McConnell is making sure he gets plenty of face time rubbing shoulders with Paul every week to soothe the anxieties of Tea-Party.

    “I think it’s a dumb idea to shut down the government…I am in favor of the House, which Republicans control, using their leverage and every possible means to make the bill less bad,” said Paul, in response to CNN’s John King’s question on federal government shutdown. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EbDlNUTHAo

    In sharp contrast, by using harsh, belligerent rhetoric against President Obama, Senator Rubio is increasingly painting himself as a mean-spirited person, who is obsessed with juvenile “he said, she said” back and forth, but accomplishes little in the realm of fruitful action towards safeguarding GOP voters’ interests.

    Regardless of how this week’s events transpire, the high stakes game between Rand Paul and Marco Rubio will continue deep into the 2016 GOP Presidential primaries. However, at least for now, its advantage Paul.

    [image from Youtube]

  • Healthcare Law: Republicans Threaten to Shut Down Gov if Obamacare Isn’t Defunded

    Healthcare Law: Republicans Threaten to Shut Down Gov if Obamacare Isn’t Defunded

    After the fiscal cliff crisis talks in late 2012 to early 2013, another budget crisis is the last thing anyone wants to hear about as we near the end of 2013. Unfortunately, House representatives are talking of a partial government shutdown (again) that could happen in less than two weeks. This possible shutdown depends on one thing: stopping the new healthcare law, Obamacare.

    House Republicans signed legislation on Friday that pulls funding from the healthcare law in order to keep the government funded from October 1 to December 15. This is yet another attempt by House Republicans to halt Obamacare. The House vote on the legislation was 230-189 in favor of keeping the government afloat as long as the healthcare funding is stripped. While the bill had majority support in the House, it is expected to be shot down in the Senate.

    “In case there’s any shred of doubt in the minds of our House counterparts, I want to be absolutely crystal clear: Any bill that defunds Obamacare is dead, dead. It’s a waste of time,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said. However, Republican Senator Mike Lee says otherwise: “We have support in the Senate. All forty-five Republicans in the Senate in March voted to defund Obamacare. We’ll keep those and add a forty-sixth, Jeff Chiesa…I hope that a few Senate Democrats…will consider joining us. This is what the American people asked us to do.”

    President Obama has also said that he will not consider any proposals to amend or remove funding from the healthcare reform law. “We’re hearing that a certain faction of Republicans, in the House of Representatives in particular, are arguing for government shutdown or even a default for the United States of America…if they don’t get 100 percent of what they want,” Obama said.

    After Obama said he wouldn’t negotiate on healthcare law, Speaker John Boehner released a video on Thursday bashing Obama for being unwilling to negotiate with Republicans on the healthcare law while being willing to work with Russians regarding Syria:

    Obama further said that House Republicans aren’t concerned about the people, but are instead obsessed with messing with him. “They’re not focused on you,” Obama said at a Ford plant in Liberty, Missouri. “They’re focused on politics. They’re focused on how to mess with me.”

    A lot of people are critical of Republicans for continuing to pursue pulling funding from Obamacare. Discuss your opinions on the healthcare law issues below.

    Image via YouTube

  • Government Shutdown Imminent, For Once

    Government Shutdown Imminent, For Once

    Since Obama’s presidency began, there have been threats about a government shutdown. Fighting a two-front war and continuing to pay for ever-increasing Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security programs have been the main culprits. Over the years, however, Democrats and Republicans have been able to resolve their differences in just enough time to avoid the shutdown.

    Things don’t look so great this time, though. By September 30, the government will hit its debt limit of $16.7 trillion dollars, meaning that it will have no more money to both pay its operations costs and its debts to other countries. While the term “shutdown” sounds big and scary, the event isn’t unprecedented. A government shutdown happened every year of Carter’s presidency, 6 times under Reagan, and the biggest shutdown occurred under Clinton in 1995-96.

    So, what exactly does it mean when experts say that the government will “shutdown”? Essentially, it means that the government will have to stop federal funding of certain programs, and will have to either lay-off or furlough its workers. But don’t worry – the federal government only eliminates those programs and workers that it deems “non-essential” for the operation or security of the nation – the military will still be paid, Congress will continue to operate, mail will still be delivered, police officers will still patrol the streets, courts will continue to operate, and Social Security benefits will still be paid. However, thousands of government workers will have to go on furlough (leave without pay – this is traditionally repaid whenever the government starts to operate once again), meaning that governmental operations will become less efficient. If you apply for Social Security, your claim could be delayed? Applying for a passport or VISA to travel to a foreign country? Expect that trip to come at a later date due to a delay in processing.

    There is a bigger implication, however. “If the federal government actually were to default on its debt obligations, the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is in question and it can have devastating effects on Treasury’s ability to borrow and on the stability of financial markets in general,” stated Keith Hennessey, former director of the National Economic Council. This means that the value of the American dollar would plummet internationally, leading to hyperinflation and the cost of goods drastically increasing in a very short period of time.

    Why can’t the Republicans and Democrats come to terms this time – the Affordable Care Act, more pejoratively known as Obamacare. The Republicans have taken a hard-nosed stance and have essentially said that if the Affordable Care Act is not repealed, then they will not agree to raise the debt ceiling and a government shutdown will result. On the other-hand, Obama’s press security has said that the government is not willing to accept a delay or repeal in the ACA in order to avoid a government shutdown.

    Republicans in Congress seem to believe that if the government shuts down, the American people will blame President Obama for his willingness to cooperate on the ACA issue. However, history shows that the Republicans will come out looking the fool. In the 1995-96 government shutdown, the Newt Gingrich-led Republicans pulled the same tactic Republicans are pulling today – they believed that if they held onto their morals and values staunchly enough, no matter the outcome, that the American people would flock to their side and catapult Republicans to office across the nation. That’s almost the exact opposite of what occurred.

    Instead of championing the stubbornness of the Republicans, the American people decided to re-elect Bill Clinton in a landslide vote. Voters decided that the actions of the GOP proved that they were not competent enough to run the government, and continued to place their faith behind Clinton (this was ultimately the end of Newt Gingrich). When the government was able to resume operations, Clinton was essentially able to get anything he wanted; all of the support was in his corner.

    So, how worried should the American people be? Chris Krueger, an analyst for Guggenheim Partners, a global financial services firm, believes that “Government Shutdown Odds Increase to 40% … We are raising our odds of a government shutdown in 14 days to 40% from a 1 in 3 probability. We are basing the 60% odds that there will not be a government shutdown on blind faith because there is little to no evidence to suggest that the House, Senate, and White House can agree to a stopgap measure in time.”

    But please, whatever you do, don’t decide that this is a good time to reenact the Panic of 1837. Unemployment is already bad enough, and America definitely isn’t ready for another Andrew Jackson.

    Image via Facebook

  • Obamacare at Risk of Being Defunded by Republicans

    The new agenda for House Republicans is drawing national attention, after they are pushing legislation introduced Wednesday in an attempt to defund Obamacare. Using the upcoming budget deadline, John Boehner, R-Ohio, is one that is leading this effort, taking one more stab to do away with President Barack Obama’s health care reform law.

    “We’re going to continue to do everything we can to repeal the president’s failed healthcare law,” Boehner told reporters on Capitol Hill. He stated the House will pass a resolution “that locks the sequester savings in and defunds Obamacare.”

    This agenda is to appease conservatives who vowed to force a government shutdown unless Obamacare was defunded, but is destined to die in the Democratic Senate. This feud to fund the government between House Republicans, Senate Democrats and Obama has the potential for a government shut down, with the September 30 deadline approaching.

    “There should be no conversation about shutting the government down,” Boehner said. “That’s not the goal here.”

    House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Wednesday that Republicans would move to delay Obamacare for a year, which is a seemingly simple offer, to negotiate for a raising the debt limit in order to avoid government shut down at the end of September.
    “In the coming week we will unveil a plan to extend our nation’s ability to borrow, while delaying Obamacare and protecting working, middle-class families from its horrific effects,” Cantor said.

    Despite more than 40 attempts to vote to repeal the 2010 law, Republicans are live up to their vows to “repeal and replace” the existing law, using any means necessary.

    “You have never seen in the history of the United States the debt ceiling or the threat of not raising the debt ceiling being used to extort a president or a governing party,” Obama told the group of business leaders. He said such a precedent would “fundamentally change how American government functions.”

  • John Boehner backs Obama for Military Action in Syria

    Despite many constituents strongly disagreeing, John Boehner has verbally backed Obama after he called for American military action in Syria after learning Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, possible use of chemical weapons in the country’s civil war.

    “I’m going to support the president’s call for action. I believe my colleagues should support this call for action,” Boehner said. “We have enemies around the world that need to understand that we’re not going to tolerate this type of behavior.”

    “The use of these weapons has to be responded to and only the United States has the capability and capacity to stop Assad and to warn others around the world that this type of behavior is not going to be tolerated,” said Boehner after meeting with Obama. “I appreciate the president reaching out to me and my colleagues in the Congress over the last couple of weeks. I also appreciate the president asking the Congress to support him in this action. This is something that the United States as a country needs to do. I’m going to support the president’s call for action. I believe my colleagues should support this call for action. We have enemies around the world that need to understand that we’re not going to tolerate this type of behavior.[emphasis me] We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up whether it is necessary.”

    Other conservatives, among others, are urging support for military action including Nancy Pelosi and Eric Cantor.

    Pelosi sent a letter to her colleagues Tuesday urging support for military action saying, “It is in our national interest to respond to the Syrian government’s unspeakable use of chemical weapons.”

    President Barack Obama was confident that Congress would pass a resolution. Obama said, “So long as we are accomplishing what needs to be accomplished, which is to send a clear message to Assad, to degrade his capabilities to use chemical weapons, not just now but also in the future.”

    After congress returns from summer recess next week, the house and senate will be expected to vote on whether or not they will also be in agreement with Boehner, Pelosi and Cantor, in their task to seek approval of the military action.

    Main Article Image Courtesy: Wikimedia Commons

  • Student Loan Deal Signed by Pres. Obama

    This past Friday, President Barack Obama signed the Higher Education Act into law, an act that the AP reports restored lower interest rates. The President also pledged to continue lowering the costs of a college education.

    “Feels good signing bills. I haven’t done this in a while,” President Obama said, praising both Democrats and Republicans from the Oval Office. The President was thrilled that the dueling parties could agree on what he felt was a prudent plan of action to tackle the student loan crisis.

    House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) described the meeting as “a good day… with the stroke of a pen, we’ve now officially taken the politics out of student loans… By linking interest rates to markets, this law — part of the Republican jobs plan — means students will see lower rates and won’t have to worry about Washington suddenly making it harder to pay for their education.”

    The new legislation attaches student loan interest rates to the financial markets, permitting the government to borrow money more cheaply, and allowing economic improvement to take place without government borrowing placing an added burden on the students.

    The AP also reports that interest rates will not rise above 9.5 percent for grad students, 8.25 percent for undergrads, and 10.5 percent for parents; such rates would not even be applicable for at least another ten years, however.

    Twitter has rejoiced at the occasion:

    The Higher Education Act will directly affect 18 million loans affecting about $106 billion in student loan debt, and the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the bill would even have a small impact on our national deficit, even if it is only a paltry $715 million over the next 10 years.

  • Will The House Be Convinced That An Online Sales Tax Bill Hurts Small Businesses?

    The Marketplace Fairness Act – a bill that forces online businesses to collect sales tax from all 50 states – is fairly controversial. Some fear that it will put an undue burden on small businesses. It’s a legitimate concern, but opponents may not have to worry as the bill is about to face its toughest hurdle yet – the House of Representatives.

    Do you think the Marketplace Fairness Act will pass the House? Does it have a chance of being signed into law? Let us know in the comments.

    On Monday evening, the Senate voted in favor of the Marketplace Fairness Act by quite a wide margin (69-27). The bill enjoyed bi-partisan support and the National Retail Federation applauded its passing with a statement saying that it expects the bill to pass in the House as well:

    “This bill and its companion in the House will level the playing field for all retailers – both online and off – while safeguarding states’ rights. And the bill does it all without raising taxes, new government mandates or adding to the deficit. NRF and our broad cross-section of members will work closely with our bipartisan sponsors in the House, Reps. Womack and Speier, and Chairman Goodlatte to ensure that efairness is debated honestly and on its merits. When brought to a vote, we believe the House will pass the bill and it will be signed into law.”

    Despite the NRF’s enthusiasm, the Marketplace Fairness Act will probably not get the same treatment in the House as it did in the Senate. For starters, the Senate completely bypassed the committee process thus ensuring that the bill was approved with its original text. Most would say that was a mistake, and the House fully intends to correct that mistake by putting its version of the bill through the House Judiciary Committee.

    This is where things get tricky. The House Judiciary Committee chairman is Robert Goodlatte, a representative of Virginia and one of the few Republicans in the House that has voted in favor of tax increases. Despite his willingness to raises taxes, Goodlatte may be opposed to the Marketplace Fairness Act if it isn’t simplified enough. He said just as much in an email to The Roanoke Star:

    “I do not believe legislation like the Marketplace Fairness Act is sufficiently simplified yet. While it attempts to make tax collection simpler, it still has a long way to go. There is still not uniformity on definitions and tax rates, so businesses would still be forced to wade through potentially hundreds of tax rates and a host of different tax codes and definitions. There is also concern that despite disclaimers the bill could open the door for states to tax or even regulate beyond their borders. I am open to considering legislation concerning this topic but these issues, along with others, would certainly have to be addressed.”

    Goodlatte shares the concern that many others in and outside the House share about an online sales tax bill. Many think it may go too far. It also doesn’t do anything to help simplify tax collection for these online businesses as they would have to submit themselves to whatever inane sales tax code each state employs.

    Still, Goodlatte may let the House’s online sales tax bill through his committee. It could be just a little or very different from the bill the Senate passed, but it would still face some stiff opposition before hittting the House floor for a vote.

    That stiff opposition is the large number of organizations and businesses that have come out swinging against the bill. For starters, the Financial Services Roundtable has said that it will oppose the bill as long as the bill’s wording is vague enough to allow a tax on financial services transactions:

    “A transaction tax on financial services products will hurt retail investors, retired Americans, and small businesses, effectively making it more expensive for them to invest and plan for the long-term. Without hearings, these implications and others will not be properly addressed.”

    What is arguably the most influential outside voice in the House on tax issues – Americans for Tax Reform – has also come out swinging against the bill. The group says its main concern is making small online businesses collect sales tax for other states, but it says the bill has a number of other problems as well:

  • Threatens Privacy – Business and state revenue boards with a track record of losing private information will have more chances to do so.
  • Slippery Slope – Opens the door for further government intervention in the internet and for states to reach across their borders for other taxes.
  • Too Confusing – Small businesses would be forced to accommodate over 9,000 highly variable state and local tax codes and be required to settle disputes with out of state revenue boards in out of state courts.
  • Discourages Tax Competition – Rather than competing to lower taxes and attract businesses, states will compete to raise taxes on residents of other states
  • Expands State Tax Authority – State Governments will be able to tax across their borders despite clear legal and judicial precedentarguing otherwise

    • Do you agree with the arguments against the online sales tax bill? Or do you think it’s still a good idea? Let us know in the comments.

    If all of the above fails to move the House against the bill, there may be one final obstacle standing in its way – House Speaker John Boehner. He holds considerable power within the House, and he has already said that he opposed the bill. Speaking on Bloomberg Television, he said that the bill would make “it much more difficult for online retailers to be able to comply” with state sales tax regulations. He also said that the bill would put “a big burden on some very small businesses.”

    The Senate passed the Marketplace Fairness Act with little debate, but it’s looking like we’re going to get plenty of heated arguments in the House. The opposition is fired up, and there’s plenty of powerful congressmen opposed to the bill. It may not be enough to stop the bill in its tracks, but we’re at least going to get some interesting debate on the Internet and online taxation out of it.

    Will the Marketplace Fairness Act survive in its current form? Or will the House spruce it up to make it more palpable to online businesses? Let us know in the comments.

  • John Boehner Comes Out Against Online Sales Tax Bill

    The Marketplace Fairness Act – a bill that would require online businesses to collect sales tax for every state – made it through the Senate this week. Now it has to make its way through the House where many expect it to face some heavy resistance. House Speaker John Boehner may just be part of that resistance.

    The Hill reports that Boehner, in an interview with Bloomberg Television, came out against the Marketplace Fairness Act saying it would put “a big burden on some very small businesses.” That burden, he says, is requiring small businesses to comply with 50 different sales tax codes.

    Of course, the big question here is whether or not he would vote yes if the bill were to come up for a vote. He said “probably not,” but that’s by no means an outright rejection of the bill. It’s more like a rejection of the bill in its current state. That will undoubtedly change, however, as the Marketplace Fairness Act will have to make its way through the House Judiciary Committee where Chairman Bob Goodlatte has indicated he will address his concerns with the bill.

    Boehner and Goodlatte are hardly the only opposition the bill faces in the House going forward. Many in and outside the House have voiced displeasure with the bill in its current state. Groups like Americans for Tax Reform have come out strongly against the bill saying that it would not only burden small businesses, but it would also tax financial transactions. They fear that it will ultimately become more expensive for people to invest thus nulling any advantages the bill has for retail stores.

    With all this in mind, it’s important to remember that the Marketplace Fairness Act may never even be brought up for debate. The House is pretty busy at the moment so it’s hard to say when, or if, the bill will be brought up.

    We’ll be sure to bring you all the updates if it does reach the House floor for debate. There’s bound to be some interesting arguments from both sides.