US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7171

On March 22 2017 07:34 Plansix wrote:
2018 is the prize right now. The political climate could be anything in 4 years. But one year from now people are going to have to start thinking about running for the House and Senate. And they are going to have plenty of ammunition.

Two influential conservative advocacy organizations — Heritage Action and Club for Growth — remain opposed to the GOP Obamacare repeal bill, offering some measure of cover for wary Republicans who have yet to sign on.

Heritage Action — the advocacy arm of the Heritage Foundation, the think tank that had helped shape some of the Trump administration's health policies — again warned Tuesday that the American Health Care Act doesn’t go far enough to repeal Obamacare. That followed a similar warning from Club for Growth, a free-market advocacy organization, on Monday night.

“Barring additional changes, the AHCA keeps the architecture of ObamaCare (Title I regs) in place,” Heritage Action CEO Mike Needham posted on Twitter, minutes after President Donald Trump wrapped up a meeting with the House Republican conference. Heritage wants those insurance regulations eliminated.

“Heritage Action will be keyvoting against,” Needham added, meaning that lawmakers would be scored unfavorably if they vote for the AHCA.

Club for Growth on Monday night warned that House leadership hasn't made sufficient changes to the bill and announced an ad buy of more than $500,000 targeting potential swing votes including Reps. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.), Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.), John Katko (R-N.Y.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Rob Wittman (R-Va.), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), Pete King (R-N.Y.), Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Don Bacon (R-Neb.).

Several of the targeted lawmakers — including Lance, Katko, Ros-Lehtinen and Issa — have voiced serious doubts about the bill or already said they wouldn't vote for it. However, MacArthur said that he would back the bill after Monday night's modifications addressed his concerns about the cost of premiums.

On March 22 2017 07:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:

I have a hard time not seeing the Republican party going full Titanic in two years. Trump and the cartoon vilains that surround him have done more damage to the GOP brand than Bush did in 8 years, and that's no small achievment. And when millions of people are gonna start losing medical coverage it's not going to be pretty at all.

On March 22 2017 07:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:

I have a hard time not seeing the Republican party going full Titanic in two years. Trump and the cartoon vilains that surround him have done more damage to the GOP brand than Bush did in 8 years, and that's no small achievment. And when millions of people are gonna start losing medical coverage it's not going to be pretty at all.

On March 22 2017 08:39 Plansix wrote:

What were you doing in 2010? Never underestimate the power of a large group people elected by running against an outgoing president to completely fail 2 year later.

A former U.S. official and NATO diplomat told Reuters, which first reported the story, that NATO quietly offered to move the dates to fit what would be Tillerson’s first Brussels visit on his schedule. The official said the State Department declined the initial offer.

It is highly unusual for a U.S. secretary to skip NATO ministerial meetings, which are held separately for foreign and defense ministers several times a year. The last secretary of state to miss a foreign ministerial was Colin Powell, who canceled his ministerial attendance last-minute during the start of the Iraq war in 2003.

NATO has convened defense and foreign ministerial meetings since the early days of the Cold War. The meetings are one of the only semi-regular venues for European ministers to get face-time with their American counterparts. They’re also a critical mechanism for getting things done in the NATO bureaucracy, Townsend said. “It drove us to put down on paper alliance positions and hash out agreements and actions,” he said.

On March 22 2017 08:44 WolfintheSheep wrote:

Shockingly, being elected is not actually a good goal in and of itself.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House is instructing Cabinet heads and agency officials not to elaborate on President Donald Trump's proposed budget cuts beyond what was in a relatively brief submission, a move Democrats decried as a gag order.

Budget director Mick Mulvaney wrote in a memo late last week that until the full budget release in May, "all public comments of any sort should be limited to the information contained in the Budget Blueprint chapter for your agency," referring to the 53-page document released last Thursday.

The budget traded a $54 billion boost for the military for crushing cuts to domestic programs like medical research, community development, foreign aid and a slew of other services. Typically, Cabinet heads and agency officials testify before the respective congressional committees on the budget after its release.

Mulvaney said department and agency heads should not make "commitments about specific programs" or provide further detail about cuts to programs that went unmentioned in last week's summary budget, which glossed over many of the most politically difficult details.

"It is critically important that you not make commitments about specific programs if they are not expressly mentioned in the budget," Mulvaney wrote in the memo. "Similarly, you should not address account-level details. Comments of such specifics need to wait until the release of the full budget."

Mulvaney's memo is similar to edicts issued by previous administrations, both Democratic and Republican.

"Was it a gag order in 2009 when President Obama's OMB issued a similar memo?" said Mulvaney spokesman John Czwartacki. He also noted that Mulvaney was confirmed to lead the Office of Management and Budget almost one month later than was the experience of earlier administrations.

But the current order is stricter since Trump's initial budget submission is far lighter on details than the interim budget submitted by President Barack Obama in 2009, for instance. Mulvaney also said that only Cabinet or agency heads should testify before Congress, which is problematic since relatively few subcabinet officials have been nominated, much less confirmed.

In addition, House hearings featuring Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and top National Institutes of Health officials have been postponed, leading Democrats to charge that the White House has issued a gag order to avoid negative publicity about the budget.

"I can understand why no one from the administration would want to come up to the Hill — or is allowed to come up to the Hill — to defend the budget," said top House Appropriations Committee Democrat Nita Lowey of New York. "DeVos doesn't want to come up here to defend the cuts to afterschool programs. And who wants to come up to the Hill to hear from members about cuts in heart research, cancer research, autism, diabetes, and on and on?"


Trump's budget landed with a thud on Capitol Hill, with even the administration's staunchest allies lining up against cuts to programs like foreign aid, after-school programs, and agriculture and education.

"America being a force is a lot more than building up the Defense Department. Diplomacy is important, extremely important, and I don't think these reductions at the State Department are appropriate," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press.

"There are things on the domestic side that are extremely important," McConnell added, saying he'll defend the NIH and stave off a plan to eliminate funding for the Appalachian Regional Commission, which funds economic development projects in his state.

The administration's complete budget request is slated for release in mid-May, far later than is typical even in a presidential transition year.

Defense Secretary James Mattis is testifying on Wednesday before the Senate Appropriations Committee in a defense panel hearing focusing on "the budget and readiness of the Department of Defense."

Under Mulvaney's edict, Mattis is supposed to testify about Trump's detailed submission for an immediate $18 billion Pentagon budget hike but say nothing about the $603 billion military budget for the budget year starting in October beyond a two-page summary issued last week.

On March 22 2017 08:50 Plansix wrote:

Yep. Espeically when you run on doing deeply unpopular shit, like removing health care. Sure, it was a good talking point and people got mad about it. But its like running on abolishing property tax. Sure, all home owners hate paying it. But we also don't like our schools being shit or dirt roads. But I bet you could get elected on that ticket in some states.

On March 22 2017 08:48 Gorsameth wrote:

Because the 2 sides, even within the Republican party are to opposed to eachother.

The Freedom Caucus where never going to vote for a health care system that brings affordable care for the poor/chronically ill.
And the other side cannot vote for a plan that does not provide their constitutions with adequate healthcare.

There is no acceptable solution for the Republican Party as a whole, thats why they didn't make an alternative during the last 6 years.

Edit: The best shot they probably had was making an actual working improvement and going for the Democrats + decent Republicans. And it would have been a really really long shot to begin with.

On March 22 2017 10:12 Wegandi wrote:


I forgot, the only solution to the issue of price is Government...obviously in double speak land, being against Government healthcare means you're for higher prices. (if you can't tell, I'm rolling my eyes really strenuously)

On March 22 2017 10:12 Wegandi wrote:


I forgot, the only solution to the issue of price is Government...obviously in double speak land, being against Government healthcare means you're for higher prices. (if you can't tell, I'm rolling my eyes really strenuously)