Barbara Boxer took the Senate floor on Wednesday to discuss
the economic effects of House Republicans attempting to repeal the Affordable
Care Act by neglecting to pass a continuing resolution to raise the debt
ceiling in order to prevent a shutdown of the federal government. She played the political card by highlighting
that the current vote would be the forty-second attempt from lawmakers to
repeal the Act by vote, on top of the Supreme Court review of the case that
deemed it constitutional (Youtube). Boxer’s
priority in the speech was to express to the American people that necessity to
raise the debt ceiling relates to past spending, and does not act as means to
overturn Obamacare. She presented
figures that display the Obama Administration as successfully cutting the
deficit and creating jobs in comparison to his predecessor. She also presented figures regarding positive
recovery from the recession from the auto industry, stock market and housing
industry. She concluded her speech by
outlining the benefits of the Affordable Care Act, focusing on her home state
of California, and using examples of cost cutting measures the act has already implemented. On her twitter, two days later, Boxer posted,
“There they go again – leading us
toward fiscal disaster as they push their mean-spirited right wing agenda” referring
to the Republican’s push to repeal the Affordable Care Act and failing to
address the looming government shut-down (Twitter). In the same day she posted again referring to
the Republicans, “And this comes just a day after they voted to deny nutrition
to poor kids” (Twitter). Both tweets had URL attachments to press releases from
her official Senate website further describing her position on the Republican’s
stall of the bill to raise the debt ceiling (Boxer).
Further issues with the Affordable Care Act also prevalent
in the news this week was a public battle between Boxer and Republican Louisiana
Senator Vitter over whether or not lawmakers and aides are required to pay
subsidies (Politico). Vitter called for
a Senate vote to “end health- insurance subsidies for members of Congress” (The
Sacramento Bee). Boxer, a democrat, and
stark supported of the legislation opposes this push which, in essence, would
exempt lawmakers from the requirements of buying insurance. A vote on the bill would increase costs for
staffers and aides (Politico). The
measure comes as a rider provision on an otherwise bipartisan energy bill
(Politico). Democrats countered Vitter’s
proposal by suggesting legislation that would prevent health care payments to lawmakers
who voted for Vitter’s legislation even if it fails, and those lawmakers that
have ever solicited prostitutes. This
was a direct hit on Vitter’s personal life because of a previous sex
scandal. The attacks continued when Vitter
called for an ethics investigation into Boxer’s actions and whether she was monetarily
compensated for her contest of the bill (Politico). Boxer, a sitting member of the Congressional
Ethics Committee once again countered threatening an investigation into Vitter
(Politico). This battle between the two
lawmakers represents sparring down the aisle and the turmoil that results from
battling party interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment