Tag Archives: House GOP

Uncategorized

IRS controversy lives on … and on

The Internal Revenue Service controversy hasn’t yet blown up into a full-scale scandal, no matter how hard the right wing tries to make it so.

Now the talking heads and pols on the right are clamoring for a special counsel to investigate the matter. Recall, now, that it began with revelations that the IRS was vetting conservative political action groups’ requests for tax-exempt status. It does the same thing for liberal groups, too, but the conservative chattering class got all wound up over it and have raised a stink ever since.

Now there’s been further revelations about two years worth of emails that went missing from IRS honcho Lois Lerner’s computer. What the heck happened to them?

Republicans, not surprisingly, are trying to tie the IRS matter to the White House, even though no evidence has been uncovered that the IRS was doing anything under White House orders. They want to implicate the president — naturally! — for all this. So far they’ve come up empty.

A special prosecutor might be a good idea if Congress could limit the scope of his or her probe. The last notable special prosecutor hired was one Kenneth Starr, who was brought in to investigate the Whitewater real estate dealings involving President and Mrs. Clinton. Starr, though, went rogue and discovered the president had engaged in a tawdry relationship with a young White House intern.

The House of Reps impeached him because he lied to a federal grand jury about that relationship; the Senate acquitted the president at trial.

Is a special prosecutor needed in this case? I believe the GOP-led House of Representatives has looked thoroughly into this matter and has found zero evidence of White House complicity in anything involving the IRS.

That, of course, will not end the clamor.

Uncategorized

Immigration takes center stage

Kevin McCarthy’s election as the new majority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives puts the Republican majority in the House in a quandary.

It’s because of the congressional district McCarthy represents.

McCarthy comes from the Bakersfield, Calif., area. It’s a bit like the Texas Panhandle in this sense: They pump oil there, cultivate a lot of farmland, the wind blows a lot and its residents are fairly conservative. One more thing: the region has a large and growing Hispanic population.

And that is why Majority Leader McCarthy is facing a bit of a test as he tries to manage one key issue: immigration reform.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/inside-the-house-gop-leadership-shake-up-108103.html?hp=l7

The tea party wing of the lawmakers he leads in the House don’t favor the kind of comprehensive reform that many Democrats and Republicans want. It’s the kind of reform that former leader Eric Cantor has supported — and which might have cost him his House seat in that stunning GOP primary upset in Virginia earlier this month.

McCarthy, though, doesn’t work for the tea party wing of his party in the House. He works for the folks back home. His congressional district is about 36 percent Hispanic. My hunch is that many of them have relatives who are non-citizens living in the United States. They want their immigrant kin to be able to enjoy the fruits of citizenship.

They vote and, thus, could apply pressure to Leader McCarthy as he seeks to manage the unwieldy wing of his fractious Republican congressional caucus.

So, the new leader well might be asking himself: For whom do I work?

He knows the answer, and it isn’t the Republican Party zealots in Washington, D.C.

Uncategorized

Cantor shows flashes of grace

I awoke this morning awaiting the Sunday news talk shows and figured one of the guests would be U.S. House Majority Leader (for the time being) Eric Cantor, R-Va.

What I didn’t quite anticipate was the grace that Cantor demonstrated as he answered Question No. 1 from all the talk show hosts who interviewed him: How in the world did you manage to lose that Republican Party congressional primary race this past week to someone no one believed had a chance?

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/2014-virginia-primary-eric-cantor-campaign-107815.html?hp=t3_3

I’ll stipulate up front that I am no fan of Cantor. I long have considered him to be a classic obstructionist who seemed more in love with the sound of his voice than he was in the doing the job he was sent to do, which is legislate on behalf of his congressional district and, yes, the rest of the country.

He lost this past Tuesday to a Randolph-Macon College economics professor, Dave Brat, who pounded Cantor mercilessly over immigration reform. Brat opposes it; Cantor supported some version of it. Brat also bloodied Cantor badly over the lawmaker’s seeming indifference to the cares and concerns of his constituents.

Thus, Brat beat Cantor in a turnout of something like 13 percent of Republicans in the 7th Congressional District of Virginia.

I didn’t hear Cantor utter a single harsh word about his opponent today. He didn’t gripe about being mischaracterized. Nor did I hear him accuse Brat of lying about his record.

Instead, I watched him take his lumps like a man and vow to stay engaged in the political process in the future, but as someone acting on the sidelines.

There’s something gratifying about watching someone demonstrate how to be a gracious loser.

Uncategorized

Take care of the home folks

1 Comment

Memo to congressional incumbents all across this great land: You’d better pay careful attention to the people you represent in Washington, D.C.

That might be the most significant takeaway from U.S. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s stunning, Earth-shaking defeat this week in his race for Congress from Virginia’s 7th Congressional District.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2014/06/cantors-defeat-is-all-about-frustration-with-washingtons-old-ways.html/

I still haven’t grasped fully what happened back in Virginia this week, when political novice David Brat smoked Cantor by 11 percentage points in a low-turnout Republican primary election.

Still, I keep reading from those close to the situation that Cantor had become too much a Man of Washington and less of a Man of the People Back Home. Perhaps they grew tired of him standing in front of those banks of microphones among House GOP leaders. Maybe they didn’t think it mattered to them that their guy was part of the GOP caucus elite in the House and that he was in line to become the next speaker of the House when John Boehner decided he’d had enough fun.

OK, now pay attention here, House Armed Services Committee Chairman-to-be Mac Thornberry.

You’re going to win re-election this November from the 13th Congressional District of Texas. You’re also likely to become chairman of a powerful House committee when the next Congress convenes in January.

This is just me talking, Mac, but you’d better start scheduling a lot of town hall meetings and photo ops back home in your district well in advance of the next congressional election, which occurs in 2016.

If Eric Cantor — one of the House’s more conservative members — can get outflanked on the right by a novice, then it can happen to anyone, it seems to me.

It well might be that in this political climate, no member of Congress — no matter how powerful and media savvy they are — is immune from the kind of political earthquake that swallowed Eric Cantor whole.

Yep, that means you, too, Rep. Thornberry.

Uncategorized

Don't boycott Benghazi probe, Leader Pelosi

1 Comment

If I were in Nancy Pelosi’s shoes, I would take part in the special investigation of the Benghazi matter along with Republicans.

Pelosi, the leader of the U.S. House Democrats, might be considering a boycott of the hearings called by Speaker John Boehner. Big mistake, Mme. Leader.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/205715-boehner-stacks-benghazi-panel-with-lawyers

Boehner has selected a back-bencher, Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., to chair the select committee. Six other GOP members have joined the panel. As of this moment, no Democrats have been named.

The committee is going to conduct yet another hearing into what happened Sept. 11, 2012 at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, where a firefight resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens.

There have been calls by Republicans in Congress that the State Department, led by Hillary Rodham Clinton, stonewalled the cause of the uprising. They’re suggesting some kind of cover-up. House committees already have looked at this matter. They’ve come up with, well, next to nothing to hang on then-Secretary Clinton, other than a botched response immediately after the event.

I don’t know what the select panel will find out, but its work ought to include Democrats.

There’s been some talk that Democrats might sit this one out, letting Republicans have their way. However, that’s not what their constituents sent them to Washington to do. They sent them there to participate in government activities.

This investigation, if it’s going to be as Boehner has billed it — a search for the truth and not a political witch hunt — should include those who will counter the intense grilling that will come from the GOP members. Democrats should ask their own difficult questions as well and the panel then should craft a bipartisan report that produces constructive recommendations for protecting our foreign service personnel against future attacks.

Boycotting these hearings would be counter-productive at almost any level possible.

Take part, Minority Leader Pelosi.

Uncategorized

Dingell the Dinosaur calling it quits

John Dingell is a congressional dinosaur and even might admit it himself.

The longest-serving member of Congress is leaving office at the end of this year and he doesn’t sound like someone who’s going to miss the place it has become.

Instead, he seems to be missing the place it used to be.

Dingell, a Michigan Democrat, is now 87 and has seen lots of change over many decades of service. He has led powerful House of Representatives committees and has put his name on key legislation. He worked to enact laws with the help of Republicans — and it’s that bipartisanship that appears to have taken leave of Capitol Hill.

Dingell expressed understandable frustration with the new climate in an interview with USA Today.

“We’ve accomplished very little,” Dingell said of recent Congresses. “We’ve been engaged in all manner of small, spiteful fights. We have failed to carry out our responsibilities in addressing the big issues the day.”

The culprit? It’s the tea party wing of the “other” party, the Republicans who share power with Democrats on Capitol Hill, according to Dingell.

“A lot of these new ones,” he said of his junior colleagues, “have no awareness … of the need to work together, no awareness of the need for members to be friends off the congressional campus, no need they see in their lives to be responsible in terms of building trust and relationships to let us work together.”

Dingell is far from being alone in wishing for the good old days. But, indeed, it’s the “good old days” that have become the target of the tea party members’ own anger and frustration.

Have they made Congress a better place to serve the people who sent them there? John Dingell doesn’t believe so.

The old curmudgeon is glad to be leaving and will leave the partisan bickering to others.

Uncategorized

Grimm faces grim future

Normally, the indictment of a formerly obscure member of Congress from New York wouldn’t cause much of a ripple out here in Flyover Country. Honest.

Michael Grimm, a Republican, isn’t just any obscure lawmaker. He’s one who was overheard and watched via YouTube threatening to throw a reporter “off the (bleeping) balcony” of the U.S. Capitol Building Rotunda for asking him a question about the allegation that has resulted in the indictment.

To his credit, Grimm did apologize to the reporter and the two of them reportedly shared a meal later.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/25/rep-michael-grimm-faces-an-indictment-democrats-were-already-eyeing-his-seat/

A grand jury has indicted Grimm — apparently in secret — over campaign law violations. He has denied any wrongdoing, naturally. His spokesman said he’ll be vindicated when all the facts come out.

This is a pretty big deal, politically.

Grimm already is facing a stout challenge in his congressional district, which includes Staten Island and part of Brooklyn. An indictment gives fodder to his foes to use against him and it could cost him — and the Republicans — a seat that analysts considered to be “leaning Republican.”

The GOP hopes to expand its numbers in the House and it hopes to gain control of the Senate. Indictments of incumbents don’t sit well with voters. That this incumbent is a Republican could turn a red seat blue in a heart beat.

I’d bet real money now that Rep. Grimm is wishing he could return to obscurity.

However, this is the price he must pay for having a big mouth and a hot temper.

Uncategorized

Boehner showing other side

I’m beginning to think more kindly of U.S. House Speaker John Boehner.

The Ohio Republican has taken to criticizing members of his own party, particularly the more stubborn among them who refuse to move legislation forward for a number of reasons that might have little to do with the merits of whatever they’re considering.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/raul-labrador-john-boehner-immigration-106033.html?ml=po_r

Boehner recently mocked House Republicans for refusing to vote on immigration reform. He did so in a kind of a playful way, which reportedly did sit well with many GOP lawmakers.

Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, was one of them not amused by the speaker’s tone. “I was disappointed with Speaker Boehner’s comments, and I think they will make it harder – not easier – to pass immigration reform,” Labrador said. “The vast majority of House Republicans are pro-immigration reform, and we have been working hard to achieve it.”

Boehner’s remarks were couched in a kind of silly tone in which he said of GOP members of Congress, “Ohhhh, this is too hard.”

Boehner, as near as I can tell, is one of those dreaded “establishment Republicans” who thinks government actually can do some good for Americans. He wants to move immigration reform forward but he’s been fighting tooth and nail with the tea party wing of his House caucus who just won’t budge. Some chatter in Washington is suggesting that Boehner may be growing so weary of the constant intra-party battle that he might surrender the speakership at the end of the year. Others say he’s committed to leading the House if members will allow it.

Whatever happens, the speaker is showing another — and I believe more likable — side of himself in this ongoing fight with the tea party wing of Congress.

Uncategorized

Boehner: glutton for punishment

Word now is that U.S. House Speaker John Boehner is going to seek the speakership once again … if the Republicans gain control of the Senate and strengthen their control of the House.

Is this guy a glutton for punishment or what?

Members: Boehner will stay on

I had heard from someone close to the speaker some months ago that he’d had it up to here with the tea party wing of his party. Boehner, who hails from the so-called “establishment wing” of the GOP, has been fighting with the insurgents within his GOP caucus. He’s expressed growing frustration with their intransigence that, according to those who know him, goes against the speaker’s instincts to compromise when the opportunity presents itself.

Now comes word that he’s all in for the next Congress particularly if Republicans win control of the Senate and perhaps strengthen their grip on the reins of power in the House.

But will any of that make life easier for Boehner, who’ll have to carry the water for the tea party that could be emboldened even more in their efforts to stymie legislation?

I’m thinking not.

Which is why I’m also thinking that he just might call it a career after he’s re-elected from his Ohio congressional district.

This little back story just turn into a major act.

Uncategorized

Debt ceiling battle getting serious

The Affordable Care Act takes effect soon, which won’t end the fight to end it.

Before we get back to that old fight, another old battle — a much more critical one — is being waged in Washington, D.C. It’s about the debt ceiling. Failure to increase it by Oct. 17 could send the nation into default on its obligations. Does anyone really and truly understand the cataclysm that will occur if we fail to pay our bills?

Congress has the authority to increase the amount of money the federal government can borrow to, um, pay its bills and meet its financial obligations. The Republican majority in the House of Representatives, though, is attaching a laundry list of demands on any bill to increase the debt ceiling. The list includes items that have nothing to do with the debt ceiling. They include approval of the Keystone pipeline project and federal tort reform.

President Obama says he won’t negotiate over the “full faith and credit of the United States of America.” He contends — correctly in my view — that the GOP-led House is “blackmailing” the president over the nation’s financial obligations.

President Reagan went through this as well. He scolded Republicans who ran the Senate for threatening the nation’s economic well-being by blocking efforts to increase the debt ceiling. GOP Senate leaders relented and listened to the Gipper.

This time around, House GOP leaders are telling a Democratic president to stick it in his ear.

I am not going to accept the notion that Reagan’s approving the debt ceiling 18 times during his presidency was more acceptable then because the national debt was so much smaller than it is today. The consequences of failing to act are just as grave now as they were during President Reagan’s tenure.

The major difference between then and now — as I see it — is that one major party has been hijacked by individuals who see themselves as institutional reformers. I see them as attempting to destroy the very government they took an oath to serve.