Posts Tagged ‘US Congress’
Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, sources in both parties said.
The talks — which involve Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Obama administration and other top lawmakers — are extraordinarily sensitive, with both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides. Discussions have stretched out for months, sources said.
Read more by JOHN BRESNAHAN and JAKE SHERMAN at Politico.com
If they exempt themselves, will this be a legitimate government.
An attempt to ban US bosses from asking employees to hand over their Facebook login details has been blocked by Congress.
A last minute alteration to the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) that would have prevented employers demanding that prospective employees disclose social media passwords as a condition of employment was voted down in the house of representatives.
Read more by Steve Nolan at Daily Mail
In the states, Republicans are governing successfully. At the think tanks, conservatives are arguing intelligently. Around the country, activists are organizing energetically. All well and good. And important. But not enough.
Because in Washington we have a president and an administration, aided and abetted by a Democratic Senate, whose efforts over the next four years, if unchecked, could overwhelm the good deeds of Republican governors, the astute arguments of conservative policy experts, and the hard work of grassroots activists.
That’s why resistance in Washington today has to be central to the agenda for a conservative future tomorrow. . .
Read more by William Kristol at WeeklyStandard.com
This morning I heard Rand Paul, the Junior Senator from Kentucky, deliver an angry message to his colleagues. The subject was their failure to obey their own rules. He mentioned their failure to pass a budget in nearly four years. But his outrage was really triggered when he received a six hundred page bill to be voted on later that day. It contained some last minute provisions that nobody but Harry Reid is aware of—to the extent that Harry is aware of anything but his own vast ego and lust for power.
–SNIP– Our progressive rulers have been violating their Oaths so thoroughly that it is hard to understand how they can look in the mirror without blushing. Ask yourself a question. If you hired an attorney to help you understand a contract and relied on her advice that you can sign it, how would you feel if it transpired that she never even read the contract first? That would be cause for disbarment for failure to follow the ethical imperatives of the legal profession.
How much more must a failure of our elected Congressmen to even vote for a piece of legislation be a violation of their Oaths of Office, if they have not bothered to read it? If it is really necessary to have such long bills that not all of them can read these bills, then those who do not read, or who do not thoroughly understand it, it should vote Nay or abstain. Otherwise, how can they know they are bearing allegiance to the Constitution? The President gets to take one last look before signing it. The poor President had better be a speed reader.
Read more by Mike Razar at americanthinker.com
When did we decide that we wanted a law that could make unlocking your smartphone a criminal offense? The answer is that we never really decided.
This is now the law of the land:
BY DECREE OF THE LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS
IT SHALL HENCEFORCE BE ORDERED THAT AMERICANS SHALL NOT UNLOCK THEIR OWN SMARTPHONES.
PENALTY: In some situations, first time offenders may be fined up to $500,000, imprisoned for five years, or both. For repeat offenders, the maximum penalty increases to a fine of $1,000,000, imprisonment for up to ten years, or both.*
That’s right, starting this weekend it is illegal to unlock new phones to make them available on other carriers.
Read more by Derek Khanna at theatlantic.com
–SNIP– So we arrive at what may well be the single most important question to ask in America today.
Given that the current President of the United States seems determined to bypass the House’s appropriation authority and spend gigantic sums on whatever programs he wants or enforcing whatever Executive Orders he issues, is there an enforcement mechanism for his violating the power of the purse clauses in the Constitution?
The answer is yes. There is a federal law that specifically codifies the power of the purse clauses, and provides specific punishment for their violation by any “officer or employee of the United States government.”
Read more by Jack Wheeler at ToThePointNews.com
As I prepare to retire from Congress I’d like to suggest a few New Year’s resolutions for my colleagues to consider. For the sake of liberty, peace and prosperity I certainly hope more members of Congress consider the strict libertarian-constitutional approach to government in 2013.
In just a few days, Congress will solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. They should read Article 1 Section 8 and the Bill of Rights before taking such a serious oath. Most legislation violates key provisions of the Constitution in very basic ways, and if members can’t bring themselves to say “no” in the face of pressure from the special interests, they have broken trust with their constituents and violated their oath. Congress does not exist to serve the special interests. It exists to protect the rule of law.
Read more by Cong. Ron Paul (R-TX) at RonPaul.com
On this day in 1865, the 13th Amendment — abolishing slavery — became part of the Constitution — when ratified by three-quarters of the states.
Despite protests from the Democrats, the Republican Party made banning slavery part of its national platform in 1864. Senator Lyman Trumbull (R-IL) wrote the final version of the text, combining the proposed wordings of several other Republican congressmen.
All Republicans in Congress voted for the 13th Amendment, while nearly all Democrats voted against it. So strongly did President Abraham Lincoln (R-IL) support the 13th Amendment, he signed the document, though presidential approval is not part of the amendment process.
Yes, outlawing slavery was a Republican achievement.
From Grand Old Partisan
One of the earliest fears about tax-favored savings accounts like IRAs and 401(k) plans was that when this pool of savings grew large enough Congress would not be able to resist tapping it to help solve the nation’s debt problems. We’re about to find out if those fears—persistent for decades—have been justified.
Everything including the sacred mortgage deduction is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with the fiscal cliff, a year-end avalanche of scheduled spending cuts and tax increases. With a combined $10 trillion sitting in IRAs and 401(k) plans, retirement accounts make a juicy target. Some of this money has never been taxed, and under current law never will be.
Read more by Dan Kadlec at Time.com
WARNING: This is the liberal position. You have been warned.
TRANSCRIPT OF THE VIDEO:
“We’re going to be gifted with a health care plan we are forced to purchase, and fined if we don’t, which purportedly covers at least 10 million new people without adding a single new doctor, but…….
- provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,
- written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it,
- passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it, and
- signed by a President who smokes,
- with funding administered by a Treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes,
- for which we will be taxed for 4 years before any benefits take effect
- by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare,
- all to be overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese, and financed by a country that’s broke.
So what the **** could possibly go wrong?”
“Isn’t it great to live in a society where the penalty for lying to a congressman can be up to 30 years in jail, but the penalty for a congressman lying to you is another two years in office.”
from Peter Schmuck, a Baltimore sports writer