US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1588

In a disparity that crystalizes the Republican Party's struggle with immigration reform, its official English-language response to President Obama's State of the Union address did not mention the issue -- but its Spanish-language response did.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) didn't mention immigration once during her official Republican response, which was aired nationally Tuesday night. A pledge that the GOP would "work to correct executive overreach" was as close as she came.

But Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL), who delivered the Spanish-language GOP response, did bring it up. Democratic opposition research firm American Bridge pointed out the discrepancy in an email to reporters.

"We should also work through the appropriate channels to create permanent solutions for our immigration system," Curbelo said, as translated by American Bridge. A Google translation of Univision's report on Curbelo's remarks largely corroborated the translation.

Politico's Seung Min Kim reported that Curbelo wanted to incorporate immigration into his speech and ran it by Republican leadership.

On January 21 2015 12:32 ticklishmusic wrote:
Is there a reason they're putting Ernst up? I get she's a woman, soldier, etc. but is there any other reason?

On January 21 2015 13:38 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
I'm curious how Dems plan on building a bunch of roads with out evil oil-derived asphalt or CO2 producing concrete

On January 21 2015 15:25 Sub40APM wrote:

Pulverized bones of Republicans recycled by the Fema camps, I hope.

On January 21 2015 12:32 ticklishmusic wrote:
Is there a reason they're putting Ernst up? I get she's a woman, soldier, etc. but is there any other reason?

On January 21 2015 12:18 xDaunt wrote:

Bush dealt with more than his share of partisan horseshit during his two terms. He never dedicated an entire state of the union speech to attacking democrats.

On January 21 2015 15:41 Slaughter wrote:
Republican politicians are mostly a bunch of old men.

On January 21 2015 16:16 IgnE wrote:


I like the arrogant professorial Obama. I want more zingers and fewer snorefests.

Rand is always somewhat refreshing. I want to believe that in private he's a reasonable person. Audit the pentagon. Term limits on Congress. Fuck the NSA.

On January 21 2015 19:26 Introvert wrote:
First one in several years I didn't bother to watch, looks like I made the right choice! I'll come here for my "Republicans should compromise" lines while acting as snotty as possible. If this was noteworthy for its arrogance, I can only imagine how much worse it was than usual...

Top Republicans are exploring ways of escaping their political jam on immigration, with steps that could avoid a funding cutoff for the Department of Homeland Security while letting conservatives vent their anger at President Barack Obama.

Among the possible Plan B’s: Republicans could pass a new bill to beef up security at the U.S.-Mexico border. They could sue to overturn Obama’s unilateral protections for millions of undocumented immigrants. Or they could pass yet another short-term DHS funding measure, giving the GOP more time to approve a strategy. Either way, Republican leaders hope to reach a deal that would allow Homeland Security funding to continue past Feb. 27, without making it appear to their right flank that they are caving to the White House.

All these options would soften the hard line the House drew last week, when it passed a DHS spending bill that would roll back Obama administration moves on immigration dating back to 2011.

A number of Republicans, led by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, want the GOP to take the most aggressive action possible, starting with the House bill. But Senate Republicans lack the votes to overcome a Democratic filibuster or an expected veto of the House plan — so the party’s top lawmakers hope to quickly settle on a fallback strategy.

How Republicans resolve the fight will help answer a lingering question for their new congressional majority: Will they use their new power to go toe-to-toe with the White House or pick and choose their political battles even if that risks riling up their right flank?

The battle highlights what will probably be a continuing challenge for GOP leaders — how to showcase their new strength despite lacking control of the White House and the votes to break a filibuster. Newly empowered conservatives are warning Republicans not to acquiesce to Obama by passing a “clean” funding bill that’s silent on immigration.

On January 21 2015 22:29 farvacola wrote:
Rand will never pass muster with the Republican leadership.

On January 22 2015 04:15 Danglars wrote:

The Republican leadership is having harder and harder times getting their own candidates to win primaries, much less general elections. How embarrassing to have your own house majority leader fall to a no-name. As already mentioned, the leaders are trying to bring rebel tea party types into the moderate fold by degrees. The promise is to have powerful friends when more voters realize Obamacare won't be repealed and executive amnesty will remain largely intact this congressional term. How much the new tea party stars can reform party business as usual is anybody's guess.

A case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday could significantly narrow the scope of the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prevents landlords, real estate agents, developers, banks and others from discriminating against any protected class of people when it comes to housing.

The court is taking up a challenge to how that law has been interpreted for the last four decades. If the court rules as many civil rights and housing advocates fear it will, the decision could make it much harder for anyone — individuals, organizations or governments — to win housing discrimination cases. That could radically alter how housing, especially government-subsidized affordable housing, is built and could weaken the government’s ability to challenge big banks’ lending practices.

“This could potentially upend the central protection against residential segregation,” said J.P. Schnapper-Casteras, a special counsel for appellate and Supreme Court advocacy at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “It’s a bedrock part of civil rights law.”

The court’s decision comes down to how the Fair Housing Act is interpreted. In 1974 the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development won a court case that allowed the agency to interpret discrimination by its impact and not just its intent. The idea was that modern discrimination isn’t as obvious as the discrimination practiced by lenders and landlords prior to the civil rights movement but is nonetheless ever-present in coded language and policies that favor certain groups of people over others.

The case was brought by the Inclusive Communities Project, a nonprofit group in Dallas. The project helps house low-income renters with Section 8 vouchers in affluent communities as part of its mission to create a more racially integrated city. The group sued the state in 2008, saying Texas intentionally provided most subsidies to developers building low-income housing in poor, mostly minority communities. Two lower courts have agreed with the Inclusive Communities Project, and 11 federal appeals courts have made similar decisions in favor of the disparate-impact interpretation of the law in the last few decades, but Texas decided to take the case to the Supreme Court anyway.

“In Dallas there’s a history of discrimination in voting, housing, employment, in every facet of life,” said Elizabeth Julian, the president of the Inclusive Communities Project. “The outcomes of historical discrimination have never been really removed. The question of whether someone has evil in their heart — it’s not really relevant.”

The office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton did not respond to a request for comment for this story, but the state and others have argued that the law places too high a burden on housing providers.

The problem, according to housing rights activists, is that today nearly all discrimination is not so obvious, and therefore most fair housing cases rely on the disparate-impact interpretation.

The Supreme Court could take away the ability to make such a challenge. If the court does, anyone suing under the Fair Housing Act would have to prove that the intent of a landlord, bank or real estate agent was discriminatory, not just the outcome.

(Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department is about to close the investigation into the shooting death of an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri, and clear the white police officer involved of any civil rights charges, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

The newspaper quoted law enforcement officials as saying that federal prosecutors had begun work on a legal memo recommending no civil rights charges against the officer, Darren Wilson, after an FBI investigation found no evidence to support charges against him.

The Justice Department declined comment.

American farmers may soon be allowed to freely grow fields of food, oil and fiber-producing plants whose leaves superficially resemble marijuana.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who introduced the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2015 on Wednesday afternoon with 46 original co-sponsors, believes Congress may lift the decades-old ban on growing industrial hemp this year.

“The sense of the House is moving in our direction,” he says. “People understand this is not marijuana.”

Industrial hemp plants are related to marijuana, but contain much lower concentrations of the euphoria-producing compound THC. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, however, does not distinguish between types of cannabis plants and therefore puts growing hemp off-limits.

Despite Congress' reputation for inertia, there’s reason to believe Massie’s optimism about the bipartisan effort is well-founded.

Congress recently included two pro-hemp measures in larger bills. A provision in the farm bill that President Barack Obama signed in February allowed states to roll out hemp-growing pilot projects.

The House then approved two amendments protecting those projects from the Drug Enforcement Administration after the agency impounded hemp seeds bound for the Kentucky Department of Agriculture. One of the measures was included in a spending bill that became law in December.

The large spending bill also disallows the Department of Justice from going after state-authorized medical marijuana programs, a huge win for drug policy reformers that also offers hope to hemp advocates.

And in yet another positive sign, newly minted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is cosponsoring companion legislation to Massie’s bill.

McConnell, who was influential in pushing the farm bill provision, joined fellow Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican, and Oregon Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, in introducing the bill earlier this month.