Monday, September 30, 2013

Will Boehner go Boom?


Will Boehner go Boom?

In less than 48 hours the government will be shutting its doors and closing for business unless a continuing resolution can be reached. While the Senate passed its own version of a continuing resolution to keep the government running, the question remains, how far is Boehner willing to go?

What’s most interesting about the conundrum Boehner is facing is that he must not only grapple with President Obama and the Democrats, but he must also please the conservatives in his party. Boehner and the Republicans has made it known that they will not allow for The Affordable Health Care Act, otherwise known as “Obamacare,” to remain the way it is today. While the Senate took out the defunding of Obamacare out of the legislation it sent back to the House, Boehner chose to forward a measure that would delay the implementation of Obamacare for a year, as well as repeal a medical device tax. (1) By making it known that he won’t agree to Obamacare remaining the same, he is pleasing his own party and the hard line conservatives by fighting for what they believe to be the biggest issue of the budget debates. He is also sticking it to the Democrats by continuing to keep his stance of making the delay or repeal of Obamacare non-negotiable.

In terms of a negotiation standpoint, Boehner is leaving the Democrats with very little room to negotiate with the Republicans, because the Democrats have also drawn a line in the sand by making it known that they will not vote for any resolution to fund the government that includes a provision tied to Obamacare. However, as we approach the deadline, we must also keep in mind that Boehner’s job as Speaker of The House is on the line as well. If Boehner relents and allows a continuing resolution to be passed that doesn’t delay or strip Obamacare, the Democrats will be perceived as winners. This will not only damage the Republicans as the mid-term elections approach, as it will generate some much needed momentum for the Democrats, it will all but end Boehner’s term as The Speaker of the House, as he will have been perceived to have “given in” to President Obama by the hard line conservatives. If Boehner doesn’t give in and the government shuts down, the Republican’s could be blamed by the people for not being willing to negotiate with the Democrats and for shutting down its governmental doors. This, too, could prove fatal to the Republican Party. It seems as if the only way the Republicans can win is if a shutdown leads to the Democrats blinking first and allow Obamacare to be defunded or delayed. (2)

We know that the Republicans and Democrats have drawn lines in the sand, and the stakes could not be higher for either side. As history has shown, deadlines spur action. What action or inaction that is though, remains to be seen. Will certainly find out within the next 48 hours.

Sunday, September 29, 2013

A Busy Week in the Senate, but was Nelson Busy?


A Busy Week in the Senate, but was Nelson Busy?
           
This week, the Senate and Democratic Senator Bill Nelson from Florida had a very important vote to participate in.  A governmental shutdown was fast approaching, and the House of Representatives had sent a very decidedly pro-Republican bill to the Senate to be ratified.  This bill was designed to fund the government (avoid the shutdown) and to defund Obamacare (a cause championed by many democrats nationally) at the same time.  It was a ploy by the Republicans, however it was not to be. 
Democrats, including Senator Nelson, shot down this bill and sent it back to the House in a vote this past Friday.  Senator Nelson knew from before the time of the vote that it would be a fight between the two parties and that both sides were going to have to get ready. "’In the course of the next few weeks, it's going to be a white knuckle time,’ said Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL).”  This simple quote perfectly sums up the feelings and the tension created between the two parties, with men like Senator Nelson on one side, a strong unmoving force, and Senator Ted Cruz on the other.
Besides the appropriations vote and the tension thus created, Senator Nelson has introduced legislation to help consumers correct errors on credit reports along with Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Mark Begich (D-AK).  This bill is designed to “help consumers correct errors on their credit reports.”  The push for this piece of legislation is designed to help the over 25% of consumers whose credit reports contain major errors.  According to the article on hometownsource.com, “this legislation ensures that the requirements of the FCRA are being met by requiring that credit agencies forward actual copies of documents submitted by consumers to data furnishers.” 
On the home front, Senator Nelson is attempting to help his home constituents by postponing increases in flood insurance rates, a large problem in the state of Florida, which is at sea level.  He is trying to save money for his populace at home by ridding or at least postponing the impact of such a piece of legislation.  In addition, there had previously been rumors (and none that had been fully denied by the Senator’s office) that following this term, he would try to run for governor of Florida, however, this week it has appeared even more likely that he will not enter the gubernatorial race and has in fact begun to fall from that conversation as other challengers to Governor Rick Scott have emerged.

Sources: 

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jamie-dupree/2013/sep/23/some-talk-avoiding-government-shutdown/

http://hometownsource.com/2013/09/24/klobuchar-begich-nelson-introduce-legislation-help-consumers-correct-errors-credit-reports/

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=329332

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/bill-nelson-staying-out-helps-rick-scott-charlie-crist-and-nan-rich
  

You Can't Shut Me Down

Without a doubt the largest situation Congress is facing is the looming government shutdown. Republicans have stated they would be willing to let the government shutdown occur if some stipulations are not met, the delay of the Affordable Care Act being one of them. A bill that would do just that while also providing funding for the government was passed in the House last week, although Timothy Bishop voted against it. Timothy Bishop did however vote in favor of a bill that allows military funding to continue even after a government shutdown. This is a contingency plan, almost a bill to cover Congress' back in the likely case they cannot come together on a bipartisan level.
    Timothy Bishop continues to rebuild and repair his communities affected by Super Storm Sandy. He signed a petition, along with bipartisan members of Congress from New York and New Jersey, to FEMA administrator Craig Fugate to extend the deadline for homeowners affected by Sandy to file a Proof of Loss claim.1 Some people are still waiting for estimates on the damage, and some still find new issues, so they do not know the full claim damage. This extension would be another 6 months from October 15th, and would ease the stress on homeowners. This extension has no negative effects for either Tim Bishop and the Democrats nor the Republicans, so bipartisan agreement was much more achieveable. Another effort to support the rebuilding and ultimate shoring up (No pun intended) of the south shore of Long Island happened this week when Mr. Bishop and New York Senator Chuck Schumer announced the Army Corps of Engineers would begin building new dunes along the beaches to protect against future storms.2 This would serve as a temporary solution until a new solution is thought out long term. The commitment by Mr. Bishop to helping rebuild in the aftermath of Sandy has gained him favorable support from people all across the island.
    Mr. Bishop continues to work with military veterans in his district, as for the second time in three weeks he has given service medals to those who had trouble receiving them.3 His continued work in honoring the military veterans of this country has gained him multiple donations from various organizations.
    In other local news, Mr. Bishop has again had a meet and greet with Democratic challengers to local town boards, specifically in Amagansett.4 He continues not only to lobby for Democrats to take control in local municipalities, but also to put himself out there as someone who can relate to those who ultimately will vote for him or not.


1) http://timbishop.house.gov/latest-news/gillibrand-schumer-bishop-bipartisan-group-of-congressional-members-urge-fema-to-extend-deadline-for-flood-insurance-claims-for-sandy-homeowners/
2) http://timbishop.house.gov/latest-news/bishop-schumer-secure-commitment-from-army-corps-that-emergency-stabilization-dune-construction-project-on-fire-island-will-start-in-january/
3) http://timbishop.house.gov/latest-news/bishop-honors-gabler-familys-four-generations-of-military-service/
4) http://easthamptonstar.com/Government/2013926/Political-Briefs-092613

The Storm


The tumultuous whirlwind of political games continued this week as Senator Barbara Boxer was once again accused by fellow Environment and Public Works Committee member, Senator David Vitter, of an ethics violation regarding a healthcare amendment elaborated on in my previous post.  Vitter, for the second time, approached the Senate Committee of Ethics to file a complaint against Barbra Boxer and Senator Harry Reid after a similar one from last week was dismissed.  The Boxer camp termed the complaint “baseless” in a statement following Vitter’s second complaint and followed up by criticizing Vitter for “using the Ethic Committee to launch political attacks”.[1] 

This battle is an offshoot of the larger Democrat-Republican battle in Congress following the Republican-controlled House’s vote to defund the Affordable Care Act by attaching a provision to a continuing resolution to fund the government. [2] On Friday, the Senate removed this provision to defund the Affordable Care Act and passed H.J.Res. 59:Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014.  This amended legislation would continue funding the federal government until November 15th without the GOP amendment to defund healthcare.  The original bill the House passed also included “construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, eliminating funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and rolling back several Environmental Protection Agency regulations” before its revision in the Senate.  Senator Boxer was one of the 54-44 yea votes all of which were Democratic and Independent legislature votes.  The remaining 44 votes were Republican votes with two GOP members refraining from voting.[3]  Boxer’s yea vote, along with her Democrat peers, displays an example of the gridlock that may result from separately controlled Chambers.  Saturday, the House once again sent the bill back to the Senate with the healthcare measure reinserted.   In this specific case, the casualty of neither chamber compromising is the shutdown of certain government entities. The House made virtually irrelevant concessions, adding a delay in funding of the Affordable Care Act instead of complete defunding, and a “repeal of a tax that helps pay for it”.[4]  While the government shutdown would only be partial, its occurrence would be political ammunition for both parties and still have an effect on the American public, making voter approval of Congress even lower.



[1] http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/vitter-files-new-expanded-ethics-complaint-against-reid-boxer/
[2] http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/28/20732222-shutdown-nears-as-house-passes-funding-bill-that-delays-obamacare?lite
[3] http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/s209
 
[4] http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-government-shutdown-house-20130928,0,6090370.story

Potential Government Shutdown: Where does Lance stand?


          The hot topic in Congress right now is the debate of passing a conflict resolution   that would avert a national government shutdown.  The current fiscal budget is set to expire at midnight this coming Monday, so a new budget must be drafted and approved.  Much conflict surrounding the budget is whether or not to defund Obamacare and if so for how long.  This morning the House chose to mark-up the bill further and send it back to the Senate for a re-read (Dumain et al. 2013).  Representative Leonard Lance was one of the Republican House Reps that chose to send back the continuing resolution of this potential government shutdown.  The reasoning is that even with the changed language by the Senate Democrats, there should be at least a one-year delay of the Obama Healthcare Law. 
            Representative Lance as well as other Republican Representatives of similar districts in New Jersey have voted the same way and strongly agree with Lance.  They don’t necessarily agree with the potential action of a government shutdown, but they do believe Obamacare should not be included in the resolution for now.  They have strong reservations concerning Obamacare, but feel that there are key government agencies and operations that would be negatively effected in the event of a complete government shutdown.  They feel that it would be highly detrimental to many individuals and organizations, and the majority of the citizens would be affected.  Lance is quoted on his view of the potential shutdown in the Daily Record, “The government has essential tasks to perform.  In particular, I want to make sure our military gets paid.”  I’m not sure if Lance’s emphasis or mention specifically of the military were what his constituents would most agree with.  There is about a less than 1% participation of the individuals in his district in the military, which is very interesting.  I am not sure whose support he is trying to gain by specifically mentioning the military rather than any other government-funded organizations.
            Lance’s decision and view of the resolution aligns with the views of his constituents.  His district includes a majority of Hunterdon County, which is a very affluent (19th-highest ranked per capita income of all the counties in the U.S.) area, most residents would be opposed to Obamacare because of the extreme control of government and little need for any type of social welfare programs.  In addition, there are about 3% of residents who live below the poverty line.  There is also a very low unemployment rate, or number of residents without health insurance that they are receiving from their job.  Also, most residents have ties to or work for pharmaceutical companies in the region including Merck&Co, J&J, Pfizer, etc.  The top job industry in Hunterdon County has been listed as specifically healthcare and social services (http://lwd.dol.state.nj.us/labor/lpa/pub/factbook/hunfct.pdf).  Therefore, Obamacare would not be significantly benefitting the district in any way.  Obamacare would only be raising the already ridiculously high taxes, which currently range from $10,000-$12,000 a year depending on the property.
            Overall, it will be interesting to follow Lance and see if the budget is halted and there is indeed a government shutdown.  The shutdown may not necessarily affect Lance’s constituents either way because of the high number of jobs in private versus public sectors, yet Lance is in opposition of it.  Also, if the CR is amended will Obamacare still be included in it, and if so, this is something that would greatly affect his constituents.
*Sources:
Dumain, Emma, and Matt Fuller. Roll Call, "More Shutdown Drama as House Sends CR Back             to Senate." Last modified September 29, 2013. Accessed September 29, 2013.

Reid goes HAM on the House

Senator Reid spent a majority of his time ripping the House this week. The focus  of his speech was on the Republicans and the unwillingness of them to pass the ACA. Reid was all business and spoke only in ultimatums. Reid said "To be absolutely clear, the Senate will reject both the one-year delay of the Affordable Care Act and the repeal of the medical device tax. After weeks of futile political games from Republicans, we are still at square one: Republicans must decide whether to pass the Senate’s clean CR, or force a Republican government shutdown. Senate Democrats have shown that we are willing to debate and vote on a wide range of issues, including efforts to improve the Affordable Care Act. We continue to be willing to debate these issues in a calm and rational atmosphere. But the American people will not be extorted by Tea Party anarchists." (politicususa) It seemed to me that his comments about calm and rational debate is a shot at Senator Cruz's rant(for lack of a better word). All of the arguing seems to be less about the bill and more about not letting Republicans get what they want. The trend it seems in Congress especially in the last 10 or so years is there is less and less cooperation amongst the parties, instead working hard together to create laws to help the people, political ambition has enveloped the members of Congress. Everything about politics now is a zero sum game hence why every provision in these bills is fought over and stalled. In the video posted it seems like Reid also agrees. I feel also that this governmental shut down will wake up a lot of peoples political conciseness. 

LINK TO VID:  http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/09/27/video-harry-reid-“tea-party-anarchists”-need-“get-life”-and-talk-about-something-other

   http://www.politicususa.com/2013/09/28/harry-reid-tells-pointless-house-republicans-we-extorted-tea-party-anarchists.html

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/09/28/reid-senate-will-reject-one-year-health-care-delay-medical-device-tax/ 

Why so quiet, Rodney?

Over the past week, Capitol Hill has witnessed the most legitimate threat to the Affordable Care Act since House Republicans began their push to have the measure repealed. Representatives from the GOP have mounted a frightening campaign to suspend the budget of the federal government as leverage to prevent new healthcare market places from opening on October 1. A few pieces of legislation endorsing a government shutdown were voted on in the house in the late evening of Saturday September 28. All of this legislation passed the House with virtually unanimous support from congressional Republicans. Obviously, Rodney Frelinghuysen was one of the Republicans who voted in favor of these bills. Interestingly, in an interview on Friday the 27th Frelinghuysen said that he was against Obamacare, but also against a government shutdown. (Dailyrecord.com) This statement and the fact that he voted together with his party on all of these measures indicates that he is participating, with the rest of the House Republicans, in the stalemate tactics initiated by Ted Cruz earlier in the week. It is beyond reason to believe that members of the GOP are earnestly pursuing a government shutdown, and Frelinghuysen’s interview indicates as much.
Beyond this stalemate in Washington, there was a major political development in Frelinghuysen’s home state this week. On Friday September 27, Judge Mary Jacobson of NJ ruled that New Jersey’s ban of gay marriage was unconstitutional. Many New Jersey politicians, including Rep. Rush Holt (D NJ-9), state senator and democratic gubernatorial candidate Barbara Buono, Mayor Cory Booker of Newark, and Sen. Robert Menendez, made public statements via their social media accounts praising this decision. The office of Governor Chris Christie has also made its position available to the public, saying it would likely appeal this decision to New Jersey’s highest court. (New York Times) Frelinghuysen however, along with Republican Rep. Scott Garrett (NJ-5), did not make a public statement.
This type of behavior is consistent with Frelinghuysen’s track record on gay marriage. His views on this issue are only accessible to individuals capable of conducting analysis and research beyond the scope and capacity of the lay citizen. The “issues” page on his website does not include a position on the matter, and there is no evidence of him making a statement one-way or the other in any public media forum. The majority of his constituents, like the majority of the American people, are likely not informed enough to do the research necessary to learn that in 2007 he voted in the affirmative on a bill prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation, and voted against an amendment to the constitution that would have defined marriage as the union between a man and a woman in 2006. (ontheissues.org) 
In fact, this past March, Mark Dunec, a democrat who has declared his intent to run for Frelinghuysen’s seat in November 2014, sent a letter to the editor of the New Jersey path local newspaper in Frelinghuysen’s district voicing concern over his evident silence. Dunec wrote that “several neighbors called the Congressman’s offices in New Jersey and Washington only to be told by his staff members that they were unaware of the Congressman’s position on gay marriage.” (NJ Patch)
Though this letter was obviously polemical in nature, its content is indicative of something quite interesting. Frelinghuysen’s voting record indicates that, at the very least, he does not feel the federal government should enforce discriminatory norms against homosexuals. Yet he has remained silent on this issue in the public forum. It is troubling to consider the fact that a member of the House has held a silent stance on one of the most prevalent issues in contemporary lay political discourse.
What is one to make of the fact that Representative Frelinghuysen has not taken the steps necessary to make his constituents aware of his stance on one of the most heated issues of the day? It is likely a matter of seeking to maintain the support of his heavily Republican district. Openly supporting gay marriage could arguably hurt his reputation among Republican voters partisan groups in his district. The fact that Rep. Garrett was also silent would support this line of thinking. The reality is that prominent elected Democrats from NJ came out in support of this ruling, and some Republicans, Governor Christie being a notable exception, remained silent. As such, this incident is a perfect example of the heavily partisan characteristics of the American legislature.  
Lastly, apropos to the discussion of Frelinghuysen’s stance on environmental issues in my previous post, on September 26, he voted along with an overwhelming majority of his party against an amendment to H.R. 687, the  Southeast Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2013. The legislation includes a proposal for a new land mine, and amendment sought “[t]o protect water quality and water quantity for the people living and working near this proposed mine, given estimates that mining operations will consume the equivalent of the annual water supply for 20,000 homes.” (govtrack.us) Obviously, Frelinghuysen’s vote reflects a priority to sacrifice the quality of water for the sake of limited spending. While he did not indicate a value to the contrary during his visits to superfund sites last week, this vote is further proof of a disparity between Frelinghuysen’s voting record on environmental issues and his self-promulgated image as an advocate of environmental causes.


Works Consulted:

9)    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/28/nyregion/new-jersey-judge-rules-state-must-allow-gay-marriage.html?_r=0


Green Eggs and Ham: Are you serious Cruz?

On Tuesday afternoon on the Senate floor for the debate over Obamacare, Senator Ted Cruz decided to stall a vote on the bill with a filibuster that entailed a 21 hour long “talk-a-thon” where he talked about a million random things. At one point he decided to talk about the book Green Eggs and Ham by Dr. Seuss and read it out loud on the floor for his daughters. This was just another tactic to waist more time but as Senator Schumer pointed out Cruz completely missed the point of the book making democrats shake their heads in disapproval.

                On Wednesday, Senator Chuck Schumer responded to Cruz’s 21 hour marathon speech saying that he was appalled that out of all books Cruz picked Green Eggs and Ham to drag out his debate. Cruz said that this book was actually one of his favorites but it seems unlikely that he read the book as Schumer went on to say that Cruz missed the point of the book which doesn’t connect with his ideas about Obamacare at all and if he actually got the moral of the story he might think differently about Obamacare.

"Green Eggs and Ham has a moral: Don't criticize something, don't reject something, until you actually try it. Sam said he didn't like green eggs and ham for a long time. And then when he finally tried it, he liked it… Maybe Ted Cruz, once Obamacare occurred, might actually like it…I don't know if he read it."1
It seems like from the way Schumer responded, he was sort of mocking Senator Cruz for his lack of knowledge on the book. With a smirk on his face, it was almost too easy for Schumer to counter. As of right now Republicans say that a government shutdown can be avoided if democrats come to a compromise with some of the cut downs to the Obamacare law but it seems that the tactics the republicans are using, this filibuster being one of them, aren’t really working in their favor. As we get closer to the deadline, republicans are pushing more negotiations to the bill but as Senator Schumer has said time and time again, “until they send us a clean bill, we’re going to table whatever else they send us.”2

References

House Budget Shut Down by Senate; Is the Government Next?

     Everyone watched with anticipation as the Senate deliberated and voted on the government's budget for the coming year.  Last week, the House of Representatives passed a bill which would have removed funding from the controversial Affordable Care Act. By threatening to not pass a budget at all, House Republicans (who hold a majority of the seats in the House) managed to pass a budget which defunded Obamacare.  This week the Senate also voted on the budget. Rejecting the House bill, the Senate passed a stopgap funding bill which would keep the government running through November 15th. The Senate version of the bill included funding for Obamacare, and no additional modifications to any existing laws.  Ted Cruz (R-TX), who earlier in the week attempted to filibusterer the bill, argued after the vote that "Any vote to support a clean stopgap spending measure was tantamount to a vote in support of Obamacare (NBC)." This put many Republicans in an awkward position, and also isolated Cruz from many of his Republican Colleagues in Congress. By spinning the vote as a moral question about Obamacare, Cruz challenged Republicans by asserting that voting to keep the government running was the same as supporting Obamacare. Now that the budget has passed the Senate, it must go back to the House, who have until Monday at midnight to either pass a budget or allow the Government to shut down.

     In the event of a government shutdown, something which has not happened in 17 years, 800,000 federal workers deemed "non-essential" face furloughs. While millions more may continue working without paychecks. Government services which are considered essential are emergency services such as police, fire fighters, etc. would continue to function as normal, but parks services and hundreds of other services provided by the government would cease to function (New York Times).  Sunday morning, the House passed a resolution which would continue to fund the military in the event of a shutdown, an act which was criticized by defense secretary Chuck Hagel who said: "This is an astoundingly irresponsible way to govern...If this continues, we will have a country that is ungovernable (New York Times)." Both sides blame the other for the threat of a shutdown, each claiming that the other is being too stubborn and causing the problems.  Following the shutdowns of 1995 and 1996, Republicans were blamed and President Clinton was thus able to win an easier reelection.  Republicans now claim that they have a strategy which will shield them from potential fallout (New York Times).

Budget Battles and A New Frenemy Approches: Iran

     A new week means new problems for Congress, some foreseen and others unexpected. Next week the funding authorization for the federal government runs out, and Congress needs to reauthorize it. The Continuing Resolution would set the federal budget for the rest of the 2013 fiscal year (Open Congress) However problems arose as the Republican party to inserted language into the legislation which would have defunded many aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a key aspect of President Obama's agenda. After the continuing resolution, with the language defunding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, passed the House it went to the Senate where,  in the words of Harry Reid, any language affecting the Affordable Care Act was "dead on arrival"; interestingly this had been clearly communicated to the Republican leadership and they chose to ignore (Boerma). Upon the Continuing Resolution reaching the Senate a vote was held to invoke cloture, Senator Menendez voted for cloture, along with 77 other senators (Open Congress). With cloture invoked Senate Leader Harry Reid put forth an amendment which removed the language affecting the Affordable Care Act, Senator Menendez voted in favor of this and the amendment was passed (Open Congress). Following this the Senate moved to pass the, now amended, Continuing Resolution, which it did, with Senator Menendez voting for its passage (Open Congress). The legislation was then sent back to the House where, as of this writing, it has since been amended again to include language affecting the Affordable Care Act and sent back to the Senate (Cohen, Yan, Stewart). Menendez has walked the party line throughout this process, siding with the Democratic party on all votes regarding the Continuing Resolution, though he has not made any significant statements on, or contributions to, it.
     In other news, earlier in the week significant developments occurred in U.S-Iran relations. Over the previous two weeks details have emerged of letters being exchanged between the presidents of the two countries and of John Kerry meeting with Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif (CNN). Crowning this weeks rapid developments was a phone call between President Obama and President Rouhani, a first since 1979 (Carter). In response to developments in the United State's relations with Iran several Congressmen have expressed doubt or a need for caution, among these have been Senator Menendez. Senator Menendez, along with Senator Lindsey Gram, sent a letter to President Obama stating that while President Rouhani's election, and his subsequent statements, have projected a willingness on Iran's part to change how it acts with regards to the international community, Iran has yet to take concrete action and that until real actions have been taken President Obama should proceed with caution (Newsmax). Senator Menendez is  key player on foreign relations in the Senate as he is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, recently steering the Syria Resolution through the Senate.
Sources:
H.J.Res.59- Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014. OpenCongress. http://www.opencongress.org/bill/113-hj59/show
Boerma, Lindsey. House anti-Obamacare budget bill dead on arrival, senators say. CBS News. Posted September 22, 2013. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57604060/house-anti-obamacare-budget-bill-dead-on-arrival-senators-say/
On the Cloture Motion H.J.Res.59. Opencongress. http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2013/s/206
Voting History Senator Robert Menendez. Opencongress. http://www.opencongress.org/people/voting_history/400272_Robert_Menendez
Cohen, Tom Yan, Holly and Stewart, Martina. Dems, GOP play game of chicken as shutdown looms. CNN. Posted September 29th, 2013. http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/29/politics/shutdown-showdown/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
U.S and Iran's first direct talks since 1979. CNN. Posted September 26th, 2013. http://situationroom.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/26/u-s-and-irans-first-direct-talks-since-1979/?iref=allsearch
Carter, Chelsea. It's a three-decade first: Presidents of U.S, Iran talk directly, if only by phone. CNN. Posted September 28th, 2013. http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/27/politics/us-iran/index.html?hpt=po_t1
Senate's Menendez, Graham Push Obama to Take Tough Line on Iran. Newsmax.com. Posted September 23rd, 2013. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/graham-menendez-obama-iran/2013/09/23/id/527195

Is Dent A Two-Faced Representative?!


Over the past week, Dent has definitely faced some controversy in the news. His own constituents have been writing to the Morning Call [Lehigh Valley’s Newspaper] and formally calling Dent “the ironic representative”(The Morning Call, 2013). As mentioned in my last post, Dent went ahead and represented America at the Global Citizens Music Festival, where he planned to educate and get awareness about the Global Poverty Project, an organization that is an attempt to end world poverty. In face value, this looked like Dent was doing a great thing, but instead he was being very “ironic.” Last week, Dent voted to cut 4 million dollars from the Food Stamps program in the United States (New York Times, 2013). So how then, can Dent go and represent this organization to end poverty? Food stamps are something that it supposed to help poverty, not hinder it. In the past, Dent has voted on things accordingly, such as “No Subsidies Without Verification Act” and a bill that “authorizes states to require federal welfare work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” (Project Vote Smart, 2013). Therefore, it seems that Dent thinks that people are reaping the benefits of government subsided programs and not doing anything about going out and finding a job. He doesn’t want undeserving people getting these programs that are meant for people who really do need help. That is an understandable position to take, but it makes no sense that Dent would then go out and promote ending World Poverty. His constitutes don’t seem overly happy by their posts on the morning call, making comments such as “is he serious?” and calling his appearance at the festival a publicity stunt (The Morning Call, 2013). If it was just a publicity stunt, Dent just put himself in a pretty bad situation with the people who will vote for or against him in 2014. It is a very good thing that he is not up for re election this year because who knows how that would turn out if people think of Charlie Dent as a two faced representative.
            Charlie Dent’s ironic trend for the week didn’t stop there. Charlie Dent has been working with the NCAA to address the Penn State scandal involving Jerry Sandusky. After the scandal, the NCAA took away a large amount of scholarships from innocent football players in an attempt to punish the football program as a whole (The Morning Call, 2013). Dent is trying to push the NCAA to return all scholarships, calling the action of taking them away in the first place “deeply flawed” (The Morning Call, 2013). Dent also claimed that the NCAA President “is not looking out for the best interests of the student athletes” and that “in order to exact a pound of flesh from Penn State, they went after innocent students who had nothing to do with the underlying incident” (The Morning Call, 2013). Dent feels close to the issue since he is a graduate from Penn State. While again, this looks good at face value, I see this also as quite ironic. In voting for a huge cut in food stamps, Dent didn’t think about the innocent people who would suffer for the mistakes of the people taking advantage of the system; the bad guys. But then all of a sudden in the Penn State incident, Dent felt that innocent people shouldn’t suffer from the mistakes of the bad guys in that situation, a.k.a Jerry Sandusky. This is a double standard. Although the issues may be totally different, the underlying message that Dent is sending is the same. It confuses me how he could care for the innocent people in one instance, and then not even consider them into his decision in another. It will be interesting to see how these recent decisions affect how Dent’s constitutes see him. Like I stated earlier, Dent luckily isn’t up for re election again until 2014. I am curious to see if this will affect his generally high approval rating and give him problems being re elected next year.

References:

Lewis Predicts Shutdown


                  Due to continuing debates between the Senate and House of Representatives, the United States government may shut down on Tuesday. The main contention between the Democratic controlled Senate and the Republican controlled House revolves around the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The House passed a measure on Saturday that would suspend funding for the Affordable Care Act for another year while funding the government to prevent a shutdown on Tuesday. The majority of the House voted along party lines with two members of each party voting with the other. (TheHill) It is unlikely that the Senate will approve this, causing some to presume that the government is heading towards a shutdown, including Representative John Lewis, "I think we are on our way to a shutdown. We're closer now than ever before." (Rappler)
                  John Lewis voted against both House Resolutions regarding defunding the Affordable Care Act, while maintaining funding for the U.S. government to prevent a shutdown. While it may seem that Lewis simply voted along party lines for this vote, I believe there are several other reasons why he voted against defunding the Affordable Care Act. First, Representative Lewis receives a large proportion of his campaign donations from the health care and insurance industries, which will be affected by the Affordable Care Act legislation. Following donations from lawyers, the health care and insurance industries contribute the most to Mr. Lewis’ campaign. During the 2012 Congressional election, Mr. Lewis received nearly $300,000.00 from these industries, which accounted for approximately one-third of his donations. In terms of specific donors, Aflac contributed $10,000.00 which was the fifth most among Democratic House candidates. (OpenSecrets) Therefore, with elections revolving more and more around money each year, one could suggest that Mr. Lewis was voting in support of some of his biggest donors.
                  Another reason to suggest why Representative Lewis voted against the House Resolutions is because of the makeup of his constituency. The 5th Congressional district of Georgia is mainly comprised of sections of Atlanta and some surrounding areas. According to research done by Proximity One, the majority of the district earns less than $45,000.00 a year. (ProximityOne) The Affordable Care Act is geared towards helping citizens with low income, “The law makes preventive care—including family planning and related services—more accessible and affordable for many Americans”. (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services) Therefore, Mr. Lewis is most likely considering the importance of the Affordable Care Act on his constituents. It is important to note that members of Congress, especially the House of Representatives, are always campaigning because they face elections every two years. With this vote, Mr. Lewis might be hoping to show his constituents that he has their best interest in mind after his opponent in the 2012 Democratic primary for the 5th district said that Mr. Lewis did not care about his constituents and was resting on his laurels to continue to being reelected. (RollCall) Therefore, the increase in pressure from recent elections might have affected Lewis in voting against the House Resolutions.
                  While these reasons may suggest why Representative Lewis voted against the House Resolutions, it is also important to note that Mr. Lewis is a member of the United States House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources. This subcommittee includes issues pertaining to public assistance provisions. (Ways and Means) Mr. Lewis’ position on this subcommittee also gives him a significant reason not only to reject the House Resolution, but also to try and gather support for the issue. In a speech that he delivered on the floor of the House of Representatives, Mr. Lewis stated, “With so much to be done, so much good that we could do, this Republican Congress wants to stop the country, to deny the people a chance to see a doctor. How many times are we going to do this? What is next? Medicare? Medicaid? Social Security? This is not right; it is not fair; it is not just.” (VoteSmart) Therefore, Mr. Lewis’ position on the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources gives him the responsibility to try and gather support for the Affordable Care Act, as it includes public assistance provisions such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, as well as the Affordable Care Act.
                  It will be interesting to see how the Senate responds to the House Resolutions and whether an agreement can be made before Tuesday. I wonder if the game of politics will get in the way of actual legislation in the coming weeks.

Sources
5.     U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: http://www.hhs.gov/opa/affordable-care-act/index.html