Tag Archives: US House

national news

Get ready for plenty of congressional push back

I am willing to concede that I would feel differently if we had a president I supported, someone whose policy I endorsed. That’s not the case with Donald J. Trump.

Having made that declaration, I look forward to the president getting some much-needed push back from half of the legislative branch of the federal government.

The U.S. House of Representatives will flip from Republican to Democratic control in a couple of days. Nancy Pelosi will become the next speaker of the House. Democrats will ascend to committee chairmanships. They, not the GOP, will control the legislative flow. Democrats’ voices will be heard more clearly and plainly than Republicans’ voices on Capitol Hill.

What does this mean for the president? It means he will be unable to dictate to the House which bills to introduce. It means he faces the likelihood of subpoenas being issued for his key aides, perhaps Cabinet officials — maybe even a member or two of his immediately family. They’ll be summoned to testify before House committees on a whole array of issues that have bedeviled the Trump administration since it took office nearly two years ago.

I refer, of course, to “The Russia Thing.”

The House’s first order of business will be to push the Trump administration and their Senate colleagues — who still are run by the GOP — to find a way out of this ridiculous stalemate, the one that has shut down part of the government. Too many families, roughly 800,000 or so of them, have been deprived of income during the Christmas holiday. Just as importantly, too many families have been denied access to key government services to which they entitled.

Donald Trump entered the political world after living in an environment where he called the shots. He didn’t have that luxury even when he and his fellow Republicans controlled the entire federal government.

He really won’t have it now that Democrats take control of the House of Representatives.

The president is entering a new — and for him, uncharted — world when the next Congress takes its oath office.

So are the rest of us. Thank goodness.

national news

Wishing the POTUS . . . luck in the new year

The new year is at hand. 2019 promises to be a doozy. Where it all goes remains anyone’s guess.

Of course I refer to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the president of the United States. Mueller reportedly is getting ready to wrap it up and will present his findings to Congress and, hopefully, to the public.

No one knows what’s in the guts of his report. I do have this sense that it is going to present commentators, bloggers, pundits, editorial writers, columnists and just plain folks on all sides plenty of grist.

Whether it clears Trump of any misdeeds regarding his campaign and the Russians who interfered with our election or whether it implicates the president directly of wrong doing, the fecal matters is going to hit the fan.

Democrats are going to take the gavel in the U.S. House of Representatives later this week. Republicans will retain control of the U.S. Senate. Donald Trump will keep his fingers tightly on his Twitter buttons.

Most eyes will focus on how the Democrats respond to regaining control of one legislative chamber. Will they unleash the hounds on Trump? Will they churn out more subpoenas than we can count? Will they launch impeachment proceedings the moment Mueller’s report goes public? Will they even wait for Mueller’s report?

I would not want to be Donald Trump at this moment, not that I ever wanted to be Trump ever at any time!

The new year is going to present him with untold and unprecedented challenges. A guy who spent his entire adult life seeking to be master of his own destiny now finds himself at the mercy of others. Congress will be calling a lot of the shots now, once Robert Mueller finishes his examination and hands over his findings.

My feelings about the president are well-known to readers of this blog. I won’t waste my energy wishing him well.

I am left merely to wish him “luck” as he enters the new year along with the rest of us. It looks as though we’re headed for a rockin’ and rollin’ ride.

 

national news, political news

Why, indeed, is she ‘the thing’?

I have to agree with lame-duck Democratic U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, who wonders about the meteoric rise to super-political stardom of a young member of Congress — who hasn’t even taken office yet!

The object of McCaskill’s curiosity is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 29-year-old self-described socialist from New York. McCaskill told CNN, “I’m a little confused why she’s the thing.” Ocasio-Cortez took umbrage at being called “the thing.” Well, she ought to settle down and get ready to take on some major challenges while representing the 14th Congressional District of New York.

McCaskill also referred to Ocasio-Cortez as some sort of “shiny object.” And yes . . . the rookie congresswoman took offense at that, too.

McCaskill, who lost her bid for re-election this past month, was speaking metaphorically. The Missouri lawmaker has been known for having a bit of a tart tongue during her years in the Senate. I am quite sure she didn’t intend to denigrate Ocasio-Cortez when describing her.

As for her “confusion” over the representative-elect’s rapid rise, I have to say I harbor some inherent suspicion of politicians who have this way of hogging the spotlight. They become media favorites — and then feed off of that favoritism for the sake of grabbing headlines and elevating their profiles. I can think of several such pols: Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas comes to mind; the guy who almost beat him this year, Democrat Beto O’Rourke does, too.

I fear that Rep.-elect Ocasio-Cortez is going to assume a dubious distinction as she takes her seat a few days from now among the 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives. She will become the punch line in a gag that talks about the “most dangerous place in Washington is the space between a TV camera and . . . ”

Well, you get the idea.

I hope Ocasio-Cortez  does a good job representing her constituents. I only would caution the young woman to think of them first as she learns to navigate her way around Capitol Hill.

national news

Trump politicizes suffering of fed employees

1 Comment

What in the name of human decency — which he doesn’t possess — is Donald J. Trump trying to assert with this latest idiotic declaration?

He said this week that “most federal employees are Democrats” and said they are those who are most concerned about the partial shutdown of the federal government. They have been furloughed, not getting paid, which I guess in Trump’s mind means that congressional Democrats are more liable to support those workers because of their party affiliation. Is that what he means?

The president’s idiocy prompts a couple of questions.

What difference does it make which party they identify with? Why does it matter whether they’re mostly Democrat, mostly Republican, mostly socialist, communist or Whig?

Is the president trying, therefore, to lay all the blame on Democrats as a way to deflect the criticism that is coming directly at him and those in his political party?

Let’s recall briefly an element that preceded this shutdown.

Senators voted 100 to zero to approve a spending bill that did not contain money for The Wall. They sent the bill to the House of Representatives, where House leaders agreed in principle to send the measure to the president’s desk. Then the president got a snootful from right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh and right-wing gadfly Ann Coulter. Then Trump changed his mind and told GOP lawmakers that he wouldn’t sign the bill after all.

Now this goofball is fabricating some phony scenario that suggests that “most federal employees are Democrats.”

I have to ask: To what end does he intend to take this ridiculous assertion?

national news

Government shutdown: it’s on Trump

Here is where we stand with this partial shutdown of the federal government.

Donald Trump and some right wingers in Congress want to erect a wall along our southern border. The rest of Congress won’t give them the money to build that wall, which Trump pledged would be paid by Mexico.

The government has shuttered some agencies. All’s quiet in many federal agencies, along with Capitol Hill.

Meanwhile, Democrats and some reasonable Republicans are blaming Trump for this monumental government cluster-flip.

But as Politico reports, Trump is OK with that.

I want to stipulate something that I believe is the reason behind this shutdown: It’s all about whether to build the wall; it has nothing to do with the overall scheme of “border security.”

Democrats want to secure the border as much as those rigid Republicans. They just don’t to erect a wall. They keep saying they support border security in the form of implementing and augmenting existing technology. Thus, they are willing to appropriate a sum of money that pays for those techniques.

That’s not good enough to suit Trump, members of that far right coalition called the Freedom Caucus and a handful of Fox News commentators and right-wing radio talkers. Indeed, it was the radio blowhards who got to Trump and persuaded him to renege on the pledge he made to Senate Republicans to sign the bill they approved.

That, my friends, is the sign of a mealy-mouthed weak leader. Yet the president pretends to be a strongman when in reality he is a tool, a puppet being manipulated by the right-wing element of his political base.

This shutdown might last a while. Or, it might end if senators and House members can come up with a compromise that everyone — including Donald Trump — can endorse.

This is an unacceptable state of play in Washington, D.C.

Donald Trump pledged to take control of government, to “drain the swamp,” to “unite” a nation torn by political division, to make the “best deals ever seen.” He is an abject failure.

He told congressional leaders in the Oval Office he would be proud to take ownership of a government shutdown. He’s got one now. Trump seems proud, all right. He also is acting like an ignoramus.

Despicable.

national news, political news

Beto v. Bernie: Let the battle begin

A fascinating struggle is emerging within the Democratic Party between an old warhorse and a rising young political stallion.

It’s the Beto-Bernie brouhaha. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont — who’s actually an independent who caucuses with Senate Democrats — is trying to fend off the surge of support being shown for Beto O’Rourke, the West Texas congressman who came within a whisker of knocking off Sen. Ted Cruz in the 2018 midterm election.

Let me be candid: I am not feeling the “Bern.” Sen. Sanders fought hard for the 2016 Democratic nomination, but fell short. He preached a one-page sermon: too few people have too much wealth and he wants to take some of that wealth away from the rich folks; he calls it “income inequality.”

O’Rourke’s message is good bit more comprehensive. He speaks to an array of progressive issues: immigration reform, education reform, environmental protection, and yes, income inequality.

I’m not convinced either man should run for president in 2020, but if given a choice, I’m going to roll with Beto.

Sanders is trying to undercut Beto’s surge.

As NBC News reports: The main line of attack against O’Rourke is that he isn’t progressive enough — that he’s been too close to Republicans in Congress, too close to corporate donors and not willing enough to use his star power to help fellow Democrats — and it is being pushed almost exclusively by Sanders supporters online and in print.

That is precisely another point that frustrates me about Sanders. He is unwilling to reach across the aisle. O’Rourke, who has served three terms in the House from El Paso, has shown an occasional willingness to work with Republicans rather than fight them every step of the way. We need more, not less, of that kind of governance in Washington.

Nevertheless, the intraparty struggle is likely to be just one of many to occur among Democrats as they struggle for position to battle the Republican Party’s nominee in 2020.

I was going to assert that Donald Trump would be that person. However, given all that has happened in the past two weeks or so . . . I am not quite as certain that the president be the one to take the GOP fight forward.

national news

Paul Ryan: big-time letdown

I had high hopes for Paul Ryan when he was dragged kicking and screaming into the speakership of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Wisconsin Republican reportedly didn’t want to become the Man of the House when John Boehner resigned his speakership and left public office in 2015. Ryan had to be talked into it.

He took the job. I was hopeful that this policy wonk, a serious young man who knows the ins and outs of public policy would be able to manage the House effectively and work to enact meaningful legislation. I had hoped he could work effectively with the Democratic minority in the House chamber.

Then I had hope that after Donald Trump was elected president in 2016 that he could resist some of the new president’s more bizarre impulses.

Well, he didn’t deliver the goods. He didn’t work well with the other party. He certainly didn’t resist the president. He became a Trump Man. Not a Republican Party Man. But a Trump Man. He became the president’s enabler.

Ryan ran on the 2012 GOP ticket for vice president. He and Mitt Romney lost that election to President Obama and Vice President Biden. He went back to the House, resumed his post as Budget Committee chairman. Then fate — and Speaker Boehner’s frustration with the TEA Party wing of his party — delivered him to the House’s highest post.

If only he could have shown a bit of spine as the Republican In Name Only president proceeded to hijack a great political party. There were faint signs of spine-stiffening, such as when he would offer mild criticism of some crazy Trump utterances.

But then he would roll over as Trump pushed through the House a tax cut that over time will benefit only the wealthiest of Americans.

Speaker Ryan gave a farewell speech today, bidding goodbye to the House where he served for two decades. He lamented the “broken politics” that afflicts the House. Uh, hello, Mr. Speaker? You helped break it.

I, of course, live far away from Janesville, Wis., from where Ryan hails. However, given that he managed the legislative body that approves legislation that affects all Americans, I have a significant stake in the job he did.

Thus, I shall declare that I won’t miss Paul Ryan.

national news

Democracy at its messiest best

The great British statesman Winston Churchill had it right when he described representative democracy as an inefficient, clumsy and messy form government, but better than any other form that had devised.

We’re witnessing it in its messiest form right now.

Congress and the president are locking horns over spending for a wall along our southern border. Donald Trump wants money to pay for the wall, although he initially promised he would make Mexico pay for it. That won’t happen.

Failure to pay for the wall would result in a partial shutdown of the government at midnight Friday. Merry Christmas, to thousands of federal employees who will not be paid for the time they are being forced to take away from work.

I am just one of those Americans who doesn’t quite understand why we reach this precipice every few months. Why in the world must we subject ourselves to this kind of melodrama? Why do Congress and the White House fail continually to provide long-term budgets that allow them to avoid this kind of brinksmanship?

The president has his constituency. Each member of Congress — 435 House members and 100 senators — answers to his or her own constituencies. They fight. They wrangle. They haggle. They argue. They threaten each other. They toss insults. And all the while the government that is supposed to serve all Americans is being kicked around like some kind of cow chip.

We don’t need to build a wall to secure our southern border. The president doesn’t seem to get that. He wants the wall because he made some idiotic campaign promise. Congressional Democrats want to secure the border through other means.

At last report, the White House indicates that Trump is backing away from the wall. The impasse remains.

Churchill was right about representative democracy. So help me, though, it doesn’t need to be this messy.

legal news

GOP facing a familiar set of impeachable standards

If it comes down to an impeachment of Donald J. Trump, many of the congressional Republicans who are defending him now will have to face down their former selves.

One of them is U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who in 1998 led the House impeachment team that brought charges against President Bill Clinton.

It was a time when then-Rep. Graham said that the House didn’t need to have a high crime and misdemeanor to determine whether a president had debased his high office. He made the case that President Clinton had debased and disgraced the office through his affair with a young White House intern.

It turned out that the GOP found a crime on which to impeach the president: perjury. Clinton spoke falsely to a grand jury about that relationship. House GOP members said that you just can’t allow a president to break the law.

If we now fast-forward to the present day we have another president who might have broken the law. He might have authorized illegal payments to two women to keep them quiet about sexual encounters he had with them.

Graham and other Republicans have reset the bar. It’s much higher now than it was when they had a Democratic president in their crosshairs.

However, even the president’s own lawyer — Rudolph Giuliani — says that Trump likely broke the law with the payments. Is that an impeachable offense? Will Republicans who once impeached a Democratic president for arguably an equal crime be able to do the same with a president from their own political party?

This is where we might be able to see what wires certain members of the House of Representatives.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We need to see the final report from special counsel Robert Mueller. Trump keeps insisting that Mueller doesn’t have anything. We’ll just have to see about that.

national news

The Trump Story has turned into a stampede

I have sought to refrain myself from getting swept away by all the developments associated with the Donald Trump Story. It’s true but I won’t beg you to believe it.

The more I see and hear, the more I read and the more I try to understand it all, I am now of the opinion that this story has turned into a stampede that well could trample the president and those closest to him.

Three former top aides and friends — Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort — are facing prison time. They’re convicted felons. They are working, or have worked, in conjunction with the special counsel, Robert Mueller, who is investigating that Russian collusion matter.

Mueller is acquiring a mountain of evidence from all two of those men; the third, Manafort, has been caught lying to Mueller’s team.

Then we’re hearing reports of a leading tabloid newspaper burying stories about Trump’s relationships with at least two women to help him win the 2016 president election. We are hearing of allegedly illegal payments to those women. There might be campaign finance violations.

Meanwhile, the president cannot find a new White House chief of staff. He cannot fill key secondary positions within his staff. There are reports about his alleged “concern” about impeachment by the House of Representatives that in January flips from GOP to Democratic control.

I had hoped this story could wind down. That Mueller would finish his probe, tie a bow around it and present it to the public for our review, our analysis and our judgment.

Jiminy crickets, man. It’s getting more complicated, more complex, more controversial by the hour.

Donald John Trump is in trouble.