Tag Archives: Mitch McConnell

national news

With ‘friends’ like these …

Donald John Trump Sr. needs all the friends he can find on Capitol Hill.

Why, then, does the president of the United States insist on waging rhetorical war with the leader of the U.S. Senate’s Republican majority? Why is he picking a fight with Mitch McConnell, a master Senate parliamentarian and a guy known as one who can move legislation?

That’s what Trump is doing.

I’m going to put my money on McConnell getting the better of this battle of wits.

McConnell was mildly critical of the president for setting “excessive expectations” for his legislative agenda. Trump then fired back — via Twitter, of course! — this message: “Senator Mitch McConnell said I had ‘excessive expectations,’ but I don’t think so. After 7 years of hearing Repeal & Replace, why not done?”

You see, this is another demonstration of what the president fails to acknowledge. He is the leader of the Republican Party. He’s the head of the executive branch of government. He owns the GOP’s failure to enact an Affordable Care Act replacement bill as much as the congressional Republican leadership.

Except that he refuses to take ownership on that failure. Or any failure, for that matter.

This deteriorating relationship is going to bring great harm to the president’s ability to enact any kind of legislative agenda. The more he fights with members of his own party, the weaker he appears across the land.

Democrats, meanwhile, should follow the time-honored credo of refusing to butt in when principals of the other party are fighting so openly.

What’s more, if the special counsel’s investigation into that “Russia thing” gets any hotter, and it produces actionable results, the president is going to seriously need friends on his side of the aisle. This intra-Republican squabbling isn’t going to help him.

This might be where I should say: Awww, cry me a river.

political news

Yep, Mitch, it’s time to ‘move on’

Mitch McConnell sounds like a man who has cried “Uncle!” in his long-running effort to toss out a law that is linked to a man he once vowed he would make a “one-term president.”

The U.S. Senate majority leader didn’t succeed in limiting former President Obama to a single term; nor did he succeed in repealing his signature piece of domestic legislation, the Affordable Care Act.

It’s time to “move on,” he said this week after the latest — and most dramatic — failure to repeal the ACA.

Yes, Mr. Leader, it is time. Sure, you now have a chance to tinker with the ACA, to improve it. The Senate’s top Republican can work with Democrats — for a change! — in finding some common ground.

But the task of legislating, which McConnell knows as well as any one in the Senate, involves lots of complicated things. It involves building and rebuilding relationships with your colleagues from the “other party.” It means you have to deal with myriad crises that crop up around the world without a moment’s notice; and brother, we have a lot of ’em, right, Mitch?

It also means that the leader also has constituents back home in Kentucky who need matters dealt with that concern only them and only their state. I am going to presume that McConnell has a Senate staff that is tasked with tending to those needs on his behalf.

The Battle of the Affordable Care Act is over, Mitch. You lost. The other side held together.

The Senate can fix what’s wrong with the ACA, keep its name, and deal forthrightly with a heaping plate of issues that need its attention.

Oh, yes. We also have that “Russia Thing” that needs our attention.

national news, political news

OK, Mitch … time to get to work — with Democrats!

Mitch McConnell isn’t going to take any advice from me, given that he likely won’t even know I’m offering it.

I’ll go to bat anyway. Here’s my advice to the U.S. Senate majority leader, who has just witnessed the collapse of the Republican-authored overhaul of the nation’s health care system.

If I were Mitch, I’d get on the phone in the next day or two. Pick up the phone, Mitch, and place a call to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

McConnell would do well to say something like this:

“Hello, Chuck? This is Mitch. OK, pal. You win. You won this fight. You held your Democratic caucus together to fend off our effort to repeal Obamacare and replace it with something we crafted all on our own. I get that we didn’t do what we should have done at the beginning, which is seek Democrats’ advice and counsel on how to replace the Affordable Care Act.

“But look, Chuck. I know how this system is supposed to work. I’ve been around the Senate a long time, as you have and I understand fully that cooperation and compromise aren’t four-letter words. Except that I’ve got that damn TEA Party wing of my caucus that keeps giving me the dickens whenever I talk to you folks.

“Hell, man, Lyndon Johnson worked the Senate like a craftsman; he played senators like fiddles. He got things done when he ran the Senate.

“So, here’s my idea. Let’s all sit down together. I want to toss out the ACA. You support it in principle. But surely you have problems with it. Those damn premiums are too high. Insurers are bailing out in some states. Patients can’t always get the docs they want to treat them.

“Why don’t we put our heads together to fix the Affordable Care Act. We can call it whatever we wish. I tried to get it tossed. It’s still the law of the land. It’s going to remain the law of the land possibly until hell freezes over. But I’m willing to work with you to fix what you and I both know — along with members of our respective caucuses — that the ACA isn’t perfect. Far from it. It needs fixing.

“Are you in?”

Chuck Schumer, having heard all of this, likely would answer:

“Welcome aboard, Mitch.”

medical news, national news, political news

Stop telling the lie about ACA ‘failure,’ Mr. Leader

I am not going to label U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell a liar, even though he’s just told another whopper about the Affordable Care Act.

He has called it a “failure.” He now plans to ask his Senate colleagues to repeal it and then seek to pass a replacement for it separately to smooth the “transition” from one health insurance plan to another.

“Regretfully, it is now apparent that the effort to repeal and immediately replace the failure of Obamacare will not be successful,” McConnell said.

Good bleeping luck with that, Mr. Leader.

The ACA is not failing. It is stabilizing, according to medical and insurance studies. Millions more American have health insurance coverage now than they did before the ACA was enacted in 2010.

Still, Republicans in Congress want to wipe out Barack Obama’s signature domestic legislation. It doesn’t matter now whether they can have a replacement bill in place. They want the ACA gone.

McConnell’s new strategy came to light after two more Senate Republicans, Mike Lee of Utah and Jerry Moran of Kansas, signaled their opposition to the GOP monstrosity that came forward just before the Fourth of July recess. Senators went home and got a bellyful from their constituents about how much they hate the GOP plan. Moreover, an increasing number of Americans are on board with the ACA; they don’t want it trifled with.

Not one to listen to reason, Leader McConnell is going to try to get the Senate to toss the ACA into the crapper and then hope the Senate and the House of Representatives can cobble together a replacement.

Forgive me for repeating myself: Why not summon Democrats to the table, too, to work out a bipartisan repair of what you think is so terrible about the Affordable Care Act?

medical news

Work with Dems to fix ACA? Wow, what a concept!

Am I hearing things or did I actually hear U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell say he might be willing to work with Senate Democrats to improve the Affordable Care Act?

Yep, I think I heard the Kentucky Republican say such a thing.

What a friggin’ concept, Mr. Majority Leader. Who’da thunk it?

Senate Republicans cannot muster enough votes among themselves to repeal the ACA and replace it with the abomination they cobbled together. Donald J. Trump called the House of Representatives’ version of ACA replacement the greatest thing since pockets on shirts, then the president called it “mean.” He wanted the Senate GOP to come up with a bill with “heart.”

It didn’t. The Congressional Budget Office — that non-partisan agency — issued its “score” on the Senate bill and found out that 22 million Americans would lose their health insurance over the next decade. That’s pretty mean, too, right? Yes.

GOP moderates hate the Senate bill, as do GOP conservatives, although for different reasons. Senate Republicans can afford to lose only two of their votes; at last count, about 10 or 12 of them dislike the bill that’s on the table.

What’s the alternative? McConnell is signaling that the ACA might stand, but that his Republican caucus can work with Democrats to tweak and tinker with what they dislike about the ACA.

My memory now reminds me that President Barack Obama said on numerous occasions during his time in office something like this: I have no deep pride of authorship of the ACA. If Republicans can find a way to improve it, to make it better, then I’m all in!

Didn’t the former president say something like that? Yes, I believe he did.

So, here we are. After all the futile votes to repeal the ACA in the GOP-controlled Congress, all the declarations that the ACA was ruining the lives of Americans and that it is failing, the Republicans in both congressional chambers cannot agree on a plan to replace it.

So, let’s fix what’s wrong with it.

Time to get busy, ladies and gents.

medical news, political news

Who’s telling the truth, GOP or Democratic Senate leader?

I am certain today that I heard two diametrically opposed statements come from the mouths of the U.S. Senate’s top partisan leaders.

The Senate was going to vote this week on a plan to replace the Affordable Care Act; then Senate Republicans said “no.” There won’t be a vote just yet. They balked because they don’t have the votes to approve it. They might not get the votes, either.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican, said categorically that Democrats “aren’t interested” in working with Republicans to craft a new health care insurance bill.

There. We have that statement.

Less than an hour later, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the New York Democrat, told reporters that Democrats “want to work” with Republicans.

OK. Who’s telling the truth? McConnell said Democrats aren’t interested. Schumer said the exact opposite.

I guess it depends on the partisan bias of those who heard the statements. McConnell said it in front of fellow Republicans; Schumer made his declaration in front of fellow Democrats.

I tend to believe Schumer. I would be my hope that Democrats would be willing to huddle with their GOP “friends” in the hope of finding some common ground with regard to what McConnell called a “complicated” piece of legislation.

The Senate will take up this matter after the Fourth of July recess.

As Lyndon Johnson would say, “Let us reason together.”

medical news, national news, political news

CBO verdict is in: health care bill is ‘mean’

The Congressional Budget Office doesn’t use language such as “mean” to assess its analysis of legislation, but that’s what one can surmise of its latest analysis of a key Senate bill.

The CBO today turned in its “score” of the Senate Republican-passed health care legislation and it has told us:

* 22 million more Americans are going to be uninsured.

* The budget deficit will be cut more than $300 billion over the next decade, but that’s because of cuts in Medicaid spending for those Americans with financial need.

* There will be lower premiums, but there also will be less coverage.

It’s still a “mean” overhaul

Donald J. Trump said he wanted a less “mean” health care insurance plan than what the House of Representatives approved. The CBO score suggests that the Senate version of health care overhaul doesn’t make the grade.

Is the GOP plan in trouble? That depends on who’s doing the talking. Since this blog gives me a voice to speak out, I’ll suggest that Senate Republicans on the fence or leaning against the overhaul well might be inclined to vote “no” on this new plan if it comes to a vote later this week.

The president promised he wouldn’t touch Medicaid, that Americans who rely on Medicaid will continue to rely on it once he repealed and replaced the Affordable Care Act with something else.

It looks to me as though this promise won’t be kept.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has his work cut out for him as he looks for the votes to approve this bill.

legal news

Merrick Garland at FBI? Holy cow, man!

What in the name of political contrition might be happening in Washington, D.C.?

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch “The Obstructionist” McConnell has just endorsed someone for FBI director that he fought tooth and nail to keep off the U.S. Supreme Court.

That would be U.S. District Judge Merrick Garland, whom then-President Barack Obama nominated for the high court in 2016, only to be rebuffed when McConnell refused to let Garland have so much as a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The FBI has a vacancy at the top, thanks to Donald John Trump’s firing of Director James Comey. Now we hear that Garland might be considered for the job. And with McConnell’s blessing to boot!

Is McConnell trying to make nice with someone he stiffed?

According to The Hill: “I think if he picks someone with a deep background in law enforcement, who has no history of political involvement, a genuine expert — and the reason I mention Garland is he’s an example of that — it will serve him well, serve the country well and lead to a more bipartisan approach,” McConnell said.

Sounds like a good choice for the Supreme Court, too, don’t you think?

Whatever. The notion that Merrick Garland would be considered for the FBI director’s job is nearly as shocking as Comey’s firing by Trump. Still, as McConnell noted, Garland does have prosecutorial experience, given that he led the federal government’s case against the late Timothy McVeigh, the monster who blew up the Murrah Federal Courthouse in Oklahoma City in April 1995.

Do I think Garland would be a good pick to lead the FBI? I understand that he happens to be a straight arrow, a Boy Scout, a guy with an impeccable judicial reputation. It seems to me those traits would serve him well as head of the nation’s top federal law enforcement agency.

I am just wondering, though: Does he want the job?

If he does, and the president nominates him, then I believe hell will have frozen over and that the sun will rise the next day above the western horizon.

legal news

‘Shining moment’ carries baggage for McConnell

The Hill posted a story online with the headline “McConnell’s shining moment.”

The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, is shining because the body he runs has confirmed Neil Gorsuch to a spot on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Pardon my anger, but the leader isn’t shining. He stands as a scoundrel, a thief who stole the seat from another judge who should have been confirmed in 2016.

McConnell is boasting that the most “consequential” decision he has made was his decision to block Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, from testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The consequence would be to block a vote on the Senate floor.

Hours after Justice Antonin Scalia died in early 2016, McConnell made clear his intention to prevent President Obama from filling the spot on the court. Some have praised McConnell for blocking the president. I choose to condemn him.

Politics takes over

Gorsuch’s confirmation today was totally expected. The Senate voted 55-44 to approve his confirmation. He earned his court seat on the basis of a rule change that McConnell orchestrated in which the Senate abandoned its 60-vote rule to end a filibuster. I get that the majority leader was within his rights to change the rule.

What happened in 2016, though, is the much more egregious transgression. McConnell played raw politics with Obama’s nominee. The U.S. Constitution gives the president the power to fill federal judgeships. Barack Obama fulfilled his duty. The Senate also has the right to reject a nominee.

The Senate, though, should have heard from Garland. It should have weighed this man’s credentials. It should have considered his qualifications. It should have received a recommendation from the Judiciary Committee.

And it should have cast an up-down vote on whether to confirm the president’s nominee.

Thanks to the majority leader’s obstruction, none of that was allowed to occur.

And to think that Mitch McConnell has the stones to accuse Democrats of playing politics with Supreme Court picks.  This man, McConnell, has set the standard for politicizing the highest court in America.

Gorsuch’s confirmation isn’t a “shining moment.” It is permanently soiled by political poison.

International news

‘Uh, no,’ majority leader says to wall-payment idea

“Uh, no.”

Two words, four letters altogether. That’s all it seemed to take for U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to put the kibosh on Donald Trump’s notion of getting another nation to pay for his “great, great wall” across our southern border.

Is that the end of it? Probably not.

McConnell’s terse response was to a question about whether Mexico would pay for the wall Trump wants to build. Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto has insisted vocally, categorically and with maximum emphasis that Mexico wouldn’t spend a peso to build the wall.

Here’s how NBCNews.com reported the senator’s response: “‘Do you believe that Mexico will pay for it [the border wall]?,’ Politico Playbook’s Jake Sherman asked. McConnell, R-Ky., flatly responded, ‘Uh, no.’

“McConnell said he believes that there are certain areas along the border that don’t need a border wall to secure the area.

“The border wall, which is estimated will cost $21.6 billion dollars to build, has spurred a lot of controversy in the United States and Mexico.”

A lot of controversy? Do you think?

The president of the United States might think he can get another sovereign country to do his bidding. Except that the term “sovereign” explains precisely why he cannot.

Imagine for just a moment the Canadians demanding the same thing of this country should a tide of “illegal immigrants” decide to flee the United States for points north.

Is that a preposterous notion? Hmmm. Not … entirely.