US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2439

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional leaders are throwing their collective weight behind a hard-won, two-year bipartisan budget plan aimed at heading off a looming government debt crisis and forestalling a government shutdown in December.

The pact, which would take these volatile issues off the table until after the 2016 presidential election, emerged in behind-the-scenes negotiations late Monday on Capitol Hill. It-would give both the Pentagon and domestic agencies $80 billion in debt relief in exchange for cuts elsewhere in the budget.

The deal represents one last accommodation between President Barack Obama and departing House Speaker John Boehner, but whether it succeeds depends in great measure on the reception it gets from restive House Republicans, including the arch-conservatives who forced the Ohio Republican out.


"This is again just the umpteenth time that you have this big, huge deal that'll last for two years and we were told nothing about it and in fact even today, were not given the details," said Rep. John Fleming, R-La. "And were probably going to have to vote on it in less than 48 hours." A vote could come as early as Wednesday in the House.

The measure was to be discussed further at a GOP meeting Tuesday morning. Boehner hoped to get it passed before Rep. Paul Ryan's election as his successor, expected Thursday

Boehner had promised to clear away as much business as possible before handing his speaker's gavel to Ryan, R-Wis. The newly-assembled budget plan would restore order to Washington and remove the threat of budget and debt chaos — a premier goal of congressional Republicans like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, a key architect of the pact.

Capitol Hill Democrats are likely to solidly support the agreement, although it gives greater budget relief to the Pentagon than it does domestic programs.

The legislation would suspend the current $18.1 trillion debt limit through March 2017. The budget portion would increase the current "caps" on total agency spending by $50 billion in 2016 and $30 billion in 2017, offset by savings elsewhere in the budget. And it would permit about $16 billion to be added on top of that in 2016, classified as war funding, with a comparable boost in 2017.

It also would clean up expected problems in Social Security and Medicare by fixing a shortfall looming next year in Social Security payments to the disabled, as well as a large increase in Medicare premiums and deductibles for doctors' visits and other outpatient care.

On October 27 2015 14:32 frazzle wrote:

Well, Locke WAS a product of his time. If you read any marxist historian out there they'll point out that his arguments were a de facto attempt to justify aspects of the enclosure movement as well as colonial practices. I don't doubt that Locke was, at least at some level, genuinely attempting to put into words what seemed to him to be a natural state of affairs, but this doesn't change the fact that he was a product of his time. I mean, just ask yourself, to whom was Locke speaking? Peasant farmers?

Edit: although I also agree, natural law was a philosophical concept that predates the enlightenment. It wasn't a cynical rebranding of divine right. But, I would agree with KwarK it occupied the same role in enlightenment times.

For decades, many presidential candidates campaigning in Iowa have made sure to offer their loud support for ethanol — the fuel made from corn.

Ethanol is an important industry in Iowa. The state is the top producer of ethanol in the nation, accounting for 28 percent of national production, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

But this election cycle, ethanol is not the campaign force it once was.

Take the contrast between George W. Bush's 2000 presidential campaign and the current campaign of his brother, Jeb Bush.

During a 1999 debate in Iowa, George Bush declared: "I support ethanol, and I support ethanol strongly. I'd support ethanol whether I was in here in Iowa or not."

That position helped power Bush to victory in the 2000 Iowa caucuses before eventually winning the White House. The Bush administration created the Renewable Fuel Standard that required ethanol to be blended into the nation's gasoline supply. These days, the Obama administration is proposing to scale back the proposal.

Meanwhile, Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida, has adopted a very different position from his brother on ethanol policy.

"I think, ultimately, we need to get to a point where there aren't winners or losers based on subsidies or mandates or anything else," Jeb Bush said in an interview with Iowa Public Radio.

That's a common response from Republican presidential candidates these days, and it comes at a time when the ethanol industry is struggling. New fuel-efficiency standards have lowered demand for gasoline — and ethanol — while some critics say the fuel's environmental benefits haven't panned out either.

The ethanol industry is trying to stay in the political debate by tracking what candidates are saying about the Renewable Fuel Standard and offering caucusgoers a report card on candidates' positions.

On October 28 2015 01:32 Mohdoo wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if Jeb actually doesn't want to be president and that his whole life has been managed by his father or some deep shit like that. Between his deer in headlights demeanor and statements like this that would never in a million years benefit him in any way, I don't think he actually wants to be president.

On October 28 2015 01:35 ticklishmusic wrote:
Boehner got us a budget deal, sometimes you wonder why it was so hard the last 4 or 5 times... sigh

On October 28 2015 02:18 Gorsameth wrote:

Has it actually passed congress? Until it does im not believing it

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, has received a pledge from Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) that if he is elected speaker, he will not pass immigration reform while President Obama is in office or without majority support from House Republicans.

Brooks delivered a letter to Ryan last week asking him to agree to those terms, which Ryan verbally agreed to during a meeting with the House Freedom Caucus, according to Brooks.

"Struggling American families have lost more than 8 million job opportunities to illegal aliens. All lower and middle income American workers have suffered from suppressed wages caused by the surge in both illegal alien and lawful immigrant labor supply," Brooks began in the letter. "Your past record and current stance on immigration conflicts with the values of the Americans I represent and causes great concern to me and the Americans I represent."

Brooks then asked Ryan to confirm that he would not pass immigration legislation under Obama or without the support of Republicans.

The congressman said that if Ryan does not agree to the pledges in the letter, "it will be very difficult for me to vote for you for Speaker on the House Floor."

Brooks will enter the letter into the Congressional Record on Tuesday, his office confirmed.

Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Ryan, told National Review that Ryan has made it "clear" that he will not push for immigration reform while Obama is president.

The US has reversed longstanding opposition to Iran’s participation in peace talks to end the Syrian civil war, paving the way for a possible diplomatic breakthrough in the four-year conflict.

Officials in Washington insisted the move was a “genuine multilateral invitation” and implied they had succeeded in overcoming Saudi Arabian opposition to Iran attending the talks in Vienna on Friday.

Nearly two years ago, a similar offer for Iran to attend an earlier round of talks in Geneva was hastily rescinded by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon after fierce opposition from the US, Britain and Syrian opposition groups.

But continued bloodshed and diplomatic stalemate have combined with a worsening refugee crisis and new Russian military intervention to put pressure on the international community to find a fresh political approach to ending the war.

The presence of Iran, which, along with Russia, has been a crucial ally of the Syrian government, could be a crucial factor in bringing the competing external players in the conflict to a common agreement on how to end the conflict.

The US insists that a central goal of the peace talks also remains the removal of current president Bashar al-Assad, who it says has been responsible for too many civilian deaths to remain a credible part of any future government.

“The ultimate goal that everyone wants to get to … is to come up with a framework for a successful political transition in Syria which leads to a government not led by Bashar al-Assad and that is representative of and responsive to the Syrian people,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters in Washington on Tuesday.

But Washington officials did not say whether Iran had agreed to that principle too, who had extended the invitation, or even whether Iran would accept the invitation to attend this week’s Austrian talks.

On October 28 2015 05:22 DickMcFanny wrote:
So is there any chance for Citizens United to be repealed in 2016?

Obviously no Republican would do that (barring Ron Paul, but he ain't running...), but I don't think I heard Hillary even mentioning it...

Can anyone school me on how that even came about? How did they convince the American voters that more money in politics would be a good thing?