Author Topic: The US Congress; Congressional races  (Read 199453 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Pravda on the Hudson prepares for ending the filibuster if Dems win
« Reply #650 on: February 26, 2019, 08:13:26 AM »
 
Op-Ed Columnist

The best-case scenario for Democrats in 2020 involves winning the White House, keeping control of the House and winning a narrow majority in the Senate. There is no realistic chance that Democrats will have the 60 Senate seats needed to break filibusters.

They would still be able to pass some ambitious legislation through a process known as reconciliation, as they did to pass Obamacare in 2010 and Republicans did to pass the Trump tax cut in 2017. But reconciliation comes with major restrictions. Some of the biggest progressive goals — like a response to climate change, an expansion of voting rights and statehood for Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia — will therefore depend on whether Democrats are willing to get rid of the filibuster. A simple majority of senators has the power to do so.

The fate of the filibuster has become a standard question in interviews of the 2020 Democratic candidates. Jay Inslee, the governor of Washington State and a potential candidate, has called for its elimination. Elizabeth Warren told “Pod Save America,” “If the Republicans are going to try to block us on key pieces that we’re trying to move forward, then you better believe we’ve got to keep all the options on the table.” Kamala Harris says she’s “conflicted.” Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker and Kirsten Gillibrand all sound somewhere between torn about whether to get rid of it and unenthused about doing so.
This morning, I want to walk through both sides of the argument.




Death to the filibuster!

The filibuster arose largely as a historical accident, as Sarah Binder of George Washington University, among others, note. The founders did not intend a minority of senators, let alone a single one, to be able to obstruct the majority of the chamber.
Over the years, both liberals and conservatives have called for its demise. The filibuster “has obscured democratic accountability and made voters feel less efficacious — when voting majorities to power isn’t enough to change the way things are, it’s fair to wonder if electoral politics is worth the trouble,” my colleague Jamelle Bouie writes in his latest column. David Winston, a former aide to Newt Gingrich, called for the filibuster’s abolishment last year, arguing that it “has become the enemy of progress.”

In the past, when senators used the filibuster less often, it caused less damage. But it has now become a regular part of Senate business. Adam Jentleson, a former Democratic aide, has explained that Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, transformed the filibuster “from a procedural tool used to block bills into a weapon of nullification, deploying it against even routine Senate business to gridlock the legislative process.”

In our current polarized era, it’s folly to believe that the filibuster promotes compromise. It has not done so for years. Instead, it leads to gridlock, as Vox’s Ezra Klein notes, and flawed legislation that needs to be written with an eye toward surviving the technicalities of reconciliation. “The result is legislation that is often unfinished, poorly written, or booby-trapped,” he writes.




Keep the filibuster!

Whatever happens in 2020, neither political party is likely to control the federal government for years on end. So if Democrats scrapped the filibuster and passed major legislation, they would be risking repeal as soon as Republicans held Congress and the White House.

The uncertainty hanging over such legislation would give Americans more reason to doubt the federal government’s ability to function well. And Democrats should be looking for ways to restore trust in government, rather than adding more chaos.
Chris Coons, the Delaware Democratic senator who signed a 2017 letter along with 31 other Democrats arguing against removing the filibuster, has a simple case: “President Trump thinks it’s a great idea to get rid of it. Perhaps progressives should think that over.”

As Eitan Hersh, a political scientist at Tufts, tweeted yesterday:




 

The bottom line

My view is that Democrats don’t need to decide this question now. They won’t stir up much excitement by talking about process change. If they’re ever going to persuade the public that the filibuster should go, it will be as part of a fight over specific legislation — say, an expansion of Medicare, a major federal jobs program or a serious response to climate change in the wake of a destructive storm.

In this situation, they can first try to pass a bill through reconciliation, as Slate’s Jim Newell suggests. And if that doesn’t work, they can consider taking the next step.

There is nothing sacred about the filibuster, and it’s healthy for people to be thinking about its fate. But there is no rush.








DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
US Congress, Pelosi, Impeachment, "he's not worth it"
« Reply #654 on: March 13, 2019, 06:08:51 AM »
There is something telling about Nancy Pelosi's bizarre statement.  The don't have a high crime or misdemeanor.  If they did, they are constitutionally obligated to impeach.  He, meaning Trump, isn't worth what?  Congress performing their constitutional function correctly as intended?  No, that's not what she's talking about.  He's not worth impeaching without a high crime, inventing a non-existent violation (firing Comey?) and having the Democratic House embarrass itself conducting an anti-constitutional farce, being called out on it, exposed and defeated, and lose their fragile, ballot harvested majority that they might lose anyway in 2020.

Why are they talking impeachment BEFORE we have a high crime?  To them it is to undo the mistake that the voters made.  If voters can be wrong, maybe electing the Dem House was the mistake.  That is what a phony impeachment proceeding would expose.  She is hinting what we all know by now, Mueller doesn't have a Trump-Russia collusion charge coming in the report - because there wasn't any.  The collusion was all on the Hillary-Obama administration-Dem side and full exposure of what half of us already know is certain to come out in a Senate trial.

The Senate not only would not convict, impeachment would not win Republican votes but also would not win all the Democratic votes.  The botched impeachment would divide the Dems, make the party look bad in a very public way, lose the House, worsen their chances in the Senate, take all the oxygen and limelight away from the new entrants to the Presidential contest and guarantee Trump a second term.

In that sense, "he's not worth it" is a bit of an understatement from future minority leader Nancy Pelosi.  Still, they may do it anyway to appease the young, socialist militant wing of her party. 
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 06:15:52 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #655 on: March 13, 2019, 06:41:46 AM »
"he's not worth it" is a bit of an understatement from future minority leader Nancy Pelosi. "

of course he is "worth it " to them

they have independent counsel that has bullied him and EVERYONE around him for years looking for an excuse
now they have what 60 more investigations they turned over to the NY libs (SD NY)
and the lib guard (shifty and the heavy set nads)

isn't this simply Pelosi's way of trying to save face when she knows she can't succeed? 
something well we could impeach and he deserves it but it would put the country through too much toil. 
oh come on , that is what they have been doing the day he got into office - actually even before.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress authorized the President to declare emergencies
« Reply #656 on: March 15, 2019, 10:38:59 AM »
Sen. Tom Cotton:

"Congress has ceded too much power to the executive for more than a century, expanding an administrative state that increasingly deprives our people of a meaningful say in their government. So I invite my Democratic colleagues to reconsider the wisdom of this path. Maybe we can reform the EPA. Perhaps we can require up-or-down votes in Congress to approve big regulations so politicians can show some accountability for once.

I’m ready for those debates. Believe me, I’m ready. But in the meantime, don’t pretend we didn’t delegate all these powers, or that it’s lawless for the executive to use laws we passed, just because you deplore him."

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/03/senate-rejects-border-emergency-declaration-but-not-with-veto-proof-majority.php

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
WSJ: House Dems politicize banking (see Cass Sunstein and Nudge )
« Reply #657 on: March 18, 2019, 04:27:57 PM »


House Democrats Politicize Banking
JPMorgan and Wells Fargo cater to their demands and cut off relationships with disfavored clients.
By Megan Keller
March 17, 2019 2:40 p.m. ET
Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters leads a House Financial Services Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, March 12.


With only a House majority, Democrats are unable to enact legislation—but that doesn’t mean they’re powerless. Under the leadership of Chairman Maxine Waters, the Financial Services Committee has used its oversight powers to go after politically disfavored industries. On Feb. 5 JPMorgan Chase announced it will no longer do business with private prisons. In January Wells Fargo said it would no longer market to private prison companies, aiming to achieve the same objective by attrition.

In a February appearance before an immigrant-rights group, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she planned to use her perch on the committee to combat detention of illegal aliens: “We’re going to hold oversight hearings to make these banks accountable for investing in and making money off of the detention of immigrants,” she said. “Because it’s wrong.” Last week, when Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan appeared before the committee, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez demanded to know why the bank is “involved in the caging of children.”

She also asked: “If there was a leak from the Dakota Access Pipeline, why shouldn’t Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it, since it paid for the construction of the pipeline itself?” Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York asked why the bank finances manufacturers of “weapons that are literally killing our children and our neighbors.” If Wells Fargo would go “above and beyond what the law requires on some issues,” why not “adopt common-sense gun safety policies like other banks have done?” Mr. Sloan’s reply: “We just don’t believe it is a good idea for banks to enforce legislation that doesn’t exist.”

Yet the bank’s February announcement wasn’t limited to the detention business. It also vowed to keep an eye on “environmental and social risks” other customers pose, including those involved in oil and gas drilling, coal mining, payday lending, forestry—and, yes, gun making.

This strategy of cutting off disfavored businesses’ finances isn’t new. During the Obama administration, the Justice Department, working with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, coerced banks into breaking contact with companies in disfavored industries—including firearm and ammunition sales, pornography and payday lending—officially because they posed a risk of money laundering. The effort, known as Operation Choke Point, ended in August 2017.

Missouri Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer wants to make sure it doesn’t come back. He is sponsoring a bill, the Financial Institution Customer Protection Act, that would bar regulators from ordering or requesting that a financial institution abandon a customer over a “reputation risk.” A concrete reason, delivered in writing, would be needed for any such interference in a bank’s business.

“Banks have always tried to take a very neutral middle ground when it comes to political issues that do not impact the bank or the industry,” says Rolland Johanssen, a senior consulting associate at Capital Performance Group. But in today’s politically polarized environment, “neutral ground, that middle ground, is shrinking.”

Ms. Keller is an assistant editorial features editor at the Journal.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
2020 Congressional races have a theme:. MABA
« Reply #660 on: April 09, 2019, 05:56:56 AM »
Make Alexandria Barmaid Again!
« Last Edit: April 11, 2019, 02:47:37 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
2018 Congressional races and the fake Pulitzer
« Reply #661 on: April 11, 2019, 02:54:37 PM »
What role did these 20 articles, 10 each in the NY Times and Washington Post on non-existent Trump Russia collusion, fake stories based on fake sources, play in swinging the House of Representatives to the Democrats in 2018?

https://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1066.msg116625#msg116625

Seriously, how do you compete against that level of dishonesty and mutual back slapping?


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
al franken did his "therapy"
« Reply #663 on: July 23, 2019, 08:53:33 AM »
and multiple dems coming out in his support .

any bets as to when Al Franken will announce his comeback?

just a matter of time which we knew was the case from day one.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Lindell to run in Minnesota ?
« Reply #664 on: July 26, 2019, 06:09:38 AM »
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/07/26/rumors-my-pillows-mike-lindell-mulling-campaign-to-smother-ilhan-omars-political-career-n2550667

He definitely would get my support but only if he promises NOT to push his darm pillow while running for office

I am sick and tired of his tiring commercials



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
US Congressional races 2020, MN Senate, Jason Lewis
« Reply #666 on: August 22, 2019, 08:38:20 AM »
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/22/trump-minnesota-2020-1471551

This horribly biased article in Politico (mini-me??) exposes that this zero risk move by Republicans who had no chance before puts Democrats in a high risk, all to lose, situation. 

In Reagan's 49 state win in 1984, he lost in Minnesota.  Democrats have won the last 11 times, nearly a half century in MN, and won all but one time (1972) since Eisenhower.

Yes, Trump could win in MN; he lost by 1.5% in 2016 and is less unpopular now.  And incumbent Tina Smith is still unknown, a former Planned Parenthood executive.

You may know Jason Lewis as a back up host for Rush Limbaugh.  He is conservative, VERY knowledgeable and skilled in radio and communications.  [He also is very unhawkish on defense.]  He has said provocative things on radio that will be repeated ad nauseum on the airwaves.

This is a zero risk move because no one considers this Senate seat or the Presidential race in MN to be in play but R's could take both, plus Jason Lewis' presence in the race could sway two more House seats, his old seat and the very conservative 7th congressional district. 

Send money and get some popcorn, the map just expanded.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Minnesota
« Reply #667 on: August 22, 2019, 09:36:36 AM »
I am waiting for Al (an? , bert?, ex?, drich?, exander? , fred?,  ice?)

Franken to announce his comeback bid

We know it's coming.

« Last Edit: August 22, 2019, 02:37:01 PM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Tulsi Gabbard
« Reply #668 on: August 26, 2019, 05:17:32 AM »
Move over :

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2019/08/25/26yearold-gop-latina-announces-shes-running-for-congress-n2552153

If I was younger I would vote for her just to keep being able to look at her.
 :-o

Now I am old enough to be her grand dad I would vote for her because she is a Republican .   Though at 26 ?  may be too young.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Re: Catalina Lauf
« Reply #669 on: August 26, 2019, 06:27:27 AM »
 Tulsi Move over :
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2019/08/25/26yearold-gop-latina-announces-shes-running-for-congress-n2552153
--------------------
Nice find ccp!  Her mother came here legally from Guatamala.

Illinois 14th Congressional District is home to former Republican Speaker of the House Denny Hastert and is now represented by a Democrat.  Seems winnable. 

Good for the Republicans to find candidates who are young, female and, God forbid, pretty.  And Latina!!  I hope she is very sharp, charismatic and persuasive as well.

Catalina Lauf intro on Youtube:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZmbvShTcHM   < 2 minutes



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Texodus - helps seal fate of the Congress in 20
« Reply #671 on: September 08, 2019, 09:29:17 AM »
Republicans who did not address immigration in 16- 18 blew what will likely be their /our  only chance of doing anything about enforcing immigration laws:

https://pjmedia.com/trending/gop-texodus-and-retirement-mania-makes-retaking-the-house-doubtful/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Re: Texodus - helps seal fate of the Congress in 20
« Reply #672 on: September 08, 2019, 01:06:48 PM »
Republicans who did not address immigration in 16- 18 blew what will likely be their /our  only chance of doing anything about enforcing immigration laws:

https://pjmedia.com/trending/gop-texodus-and-retirement-mania-makes-retaking-the-house-doubtful/

Republicans at 51-49 did not have the votes to break the filibuster in the Senate for a good immigration bill during the time that they had majorities in both chambers.  They also did not have 50 Senators in lock-step, cf. McCain, Flake, Corker, Collins, Murkowski, and did not have crossover votes from red state Democrats - needed to pass landmark legislation.  The House wasn't the problem then, but is now.

New illegal arrivals are ineligible to vote, right?

The Dem projection that only new voters change the direction of the country ignores the possibility that some of their past voters will recognize the damage done by their policies.  For example, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.
https://www.cnbc.com/heres-a-map-of-the-us-counties-that-flipped-to-trump-from-democrats/
Better is the list of states and counties that flipped since Obama's first election.

If the trend now comes from Trump's 2016 win to the Dem's off year election win in 2018, Republicans are screwed.  If the real trend now is runs from Dems big win in 2008 through their smaller win in 2012 to their loss in 2016, Dems are screwed.

msm polls are right in a Dem wave election year and wrong when the turnout and swing is the other way.  Since we don't know which this is, they tell us nothing.

The retirements aren't what make the House unwinnable for anyone.  It puts candidates on a more equal footing.  More were retired in 2018 for lousy governance and messaging and losing reelection.  Retirements are what the Dems need more of, note that their leaders are octogenerians who can't relate to young voters.



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #675 on: October 22, 2019, 09:25:49 PM »
 :-D :evil: :-D

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Congress, "it will take a woman to clean up the House"
« Reply #676 on: October 24, 2019, 06:23:46 AM »
Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House.
— Nancy Pelosi, 2008
-------------------
https://truepundit.com/warning-graphic-naked-dem-congresswoman-grooms-staff-member-multiple-extramarital-affairs-with-staff-alleged/
-------------------

I think the political gays screwed up when they put the bi's and the trans' in the same group for acceptance, LGBT.  We went from one man - one woman is acceptable, to whomever you love, to anything goes, don't even know the gender.  How can a 'bi' be fully expressive and be monogamous?  Who didn't see this coming.

I wonder how this comes down if it was a Republican man sleeping around with random gender staffers, boozing it up, missing flights.  No problem? 
« Last Edit: October 24, 2019, 06:51:16 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Gays making mistake with turning the agenda into an alphabet soup
« Reply #677 on: October 24, 2019, 07:20:30 AM »
reading some of the comments posted on an article from a Dr Mckinnon who is trans genetic man to artificial female

someone wrote

" cheetah who claims to be human sets world record in the 100 yr dash!"

maybe you "had to be there" but I thought this a riot .  :-D


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18060
    • View Profile
Re: Congress, "it will take a woman to clean up the House"
« Reply #678 on: October 24, 2019, 06:18:19 PM »
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7609835/Katie-Hill-seen-showing-Nazi-era-tattoo-smoking-BONG-NAKED.html

NSFW, and not safe for how hot it sounds in theory.


Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House.
— Nancy Pelosi, 2008
-------------------
https://truepundit.com/warning-graphic-naked-dem-congresswoman-grooms-staff-member-multiple-extramarital-affairs-with-staff-alleged/
-------------------

I think the political gays screwed up when they put the bi's and the trans' in the same group for acceptance, LGBT.  We went from one man - one woman is acceptable, to whomever you love, to anything goes, don't even know the gender.  How can a 'bi' be fully expressive and be monogamous?  Who didn't see this coming.

I wonder how this comes down if it was a Republican man sleeping around with random gender staffers, boozing it up, missing flights.  No problem?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #679 on: October 24, 2019, 11:13:57 PM »
DANG!!! :-o :-o :-o

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
you must cease and desist!
« Reply #680 on: October 25, 2019, 05:01:45 AM »
says Elias and Jacobs.  :wink:

" .Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House.
— Nancy Pelosi, 2008
-------------------
https://truepundit.com/warning-graphic-naked-dem-congresswoman-grooms-staff-member-multiple-extramarital-affairs-with-staff-alleged/
-------------------

I think the political gays screwed up when they put the bi's and the trans' in the same group for acceptance, LGBT.  We went from one man - one woman is acceptable, to whomever you love, to anything goes, don't even know the gender.  How can a 'bi' be fully expressive and be monogamous?  Who didn't see this coming.

I wonder how this comes down if it was a Republican man sleeping around with random gender staffers, boozing it up, missing flights.  No problem?"


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Knaggs
« Reply #681 on: October 30, 2019, 02:39:01 PM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18060
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
george papadopoulos running for Hill's seat
« Reply #684 on: October 31, 2019, 10:29:23 AM »
moving Doug's post here  from cognitive diss. of the Left thread:

"This young man [George Papadopoulos] deserves a fair chance to clear his good name.  I heard Jennifer Horn (sp?) comment on this on Sebastion Gorka yesterday.  There are other good conservatives already running in the "jungle primary".  At some timely point in the campaign, Republicans need to self-limit their choices to one or risk having two Democrats be the choices in the general election."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
i almost felt sorry for her at the beginning of her speech
« Reply #685 on: November 02, 2019, 11:16:44 AM »
which completely changed to anger when she launched into this partisan tirade with the typical political correct propaganda:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/02/aoc-suggests-katie-hills-fate-rooted-sexism-doesnt-happen-male-members-same-way/

Nonetheless most people will remember this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Cross
« Last Edit: November 02, 2019, 11:19:14 AM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: November 05, 2019, 05:54:01 PM by ccp »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
tax games
« Reply #688 on: December 11, 2019, 09:27:30 AM »
I could bring up article on the link above but got to it here (w/o having to subscribe or log in )

https://www.wsj.com/articles/return-of-the-tax-games-11576022797

not only does it screw over the typical tax payer but reducing taxes on others (never a bad thing by itself but then the LEFT will then raise taxes elsewhere to compensate - meaning us!)

the last two sentences really ticks me off as well:

* . But what’s in this for Republicans, who passed tax reform in 2017 to simplify the code? The GOP risks rubber-stamping the Democratic agenda and enriching the Beltway tax industry in return for a few special-interest trinkets.*

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #689 on: December 11, 2019, 10:04:54 AM »
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal speaks in Washington, D.C., Dec. 10. PHOTO: SUSAN WALSH/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Impeachment suggests a hopelessly partisan Washington, but sometimes this is more for show. Republicans and Democrats are working together behind the scenes to fleece taxpayers with another burst of special-interest tax subsidies before they leave for the year.

In a rare moment of wisdom or confusion, Congress let its annual package of tax handouts expire at the end of 2017. This “extender” bill, as it’s called, is Congress’s usual way of slipping repeat tax perks to such favored friends as Nascar track proprietors, racehorse owners and green-energy outfits.

Now the main tax writers in the House and Senate are on a mission to make up for lost subsidies. Republicans have one useful purpose in wanting to pass technical corrections to their 2017 tax reform, such as fixing a mistake that denied retailers the ability to depreciate store improvements. Democrats see a political opening and want to use an extender deal to add tens of billions in new welfare-tax subsidies and a large expansion of gifts to energy companies.

Democratic House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal wants to make the $2,000 child tax credit fully refundable, which means extending it to people who don’t pay taxes. He also wants to extend the earned-income tax credit to childless adults. The Joint Committee on Taxation says the combined cost of these proposals is $80 billion over 10 years.

Over in the GOP Senate, Finance Chairman Chuck Grassley wants to bring home the green for Iowa. His top goal is reviving a $1-a-gallon tax credit for blenders of biodiesel. He’s also in favor of renewing what he calls “green-energy incentives,” including tax credits for renewable electricity and energy-efficient homes.

Republicans are also debating whether to extend the wind production tax credit. This corporate giveaway has bled taxpayers since 1992 and is finally due to meet its overdue death at the end of this year. But some in the GOP want to subsidize more noisy wind turbines across America.

Mr. Neal knows political leverage when he sees it, and in preparation for his talks with Mr. Grassley introduced the Green Act that includes a long wish-list of subsidies. Its lowlight is a huge expansion of the electric-vehicle tax credit. Current law gives a $7,500 tax credit to the relatively affluent buyers of an auto maker’s first 200,000 electric vehicles, and some of the big car makers have hit that limit. Mr. Neal wants to raise the limit to 600,000 cars, at an estimated cost of $16 billion over a decade.

Mr. Neal’s bill also has handouts for solar power, microturbines, hydrogen fuel cells, carbon capture technology, waste-energy recovery products, and so much more. No cost estimates yet, but count on a big number.

The Democratic political motives here are obvious given how they have nothing so far to show for retaking the House in 2018. They want to grease business lobbies with subsidies that will be repaid with campaign contributions to keep the House in 2020. By larding the tax code with credits that reduce revenue, they also increase fiscal pressure to raise tax rates across the board—a priority of the political left.

But what’s in this for Republicans, who passed tax reform in 2017 to simplify the code? The GOP risks rubber-stamping the Democratic agenda and enriching the Beltway tax industry in return for a few special-interest trinkets.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Trump in the Congressional races
« Reply #690 on: December 23, 2019, 07:42:08 AM »
It's hard for challengers to raise money in the Congressional races and it's hard to do advertising in congressional districts that take up only part of a media market where you have to pay for the ad in the whole media market. 

Enter President Trump who has been raising money hand over fist.  When he sets up a rally in a key area, all of his best supporters living quietly in the area send his campaign their cell number and email address in order to get the "free tickets" and they are working those lists hard for fundraising,

Without a doubt and especially in the aftermath of impeachment, Trump is running against the Democrat House just as much as he is running against their future nominee.  By someone's count, there are 31 Democrats running for reelection in Trump friendly districts.  I think the number is higher because he will outperform the polls.  Trump is already running ads against those Representatives for their impeachment vote.

As I like to say just a little too often, this changes everything.

Trump's impeachment vindication comes not from acquittal in the Senate, but from winning back the House.  He is otherwise CERTAIN to become the first, twice-impeached President in his second term.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Sen. Moynihan
« Reply #691 on: December 26, 2019, 11:05:50 AM »
BTW, the Congresswoman Bella Abzug mentioned in the article is the woman who, with my mother, co-chaired the McCarthy for President campaign in the 17th CD of NY.  The comittee met in our dining room and various luminaries of that time visited:  Ted Sorenson, Betty Fridan, then Congressman Ed Koch, McCarthy campaign chairman Allard Lowenstein, and more.  This came to an end when my step-father out for shouting too loud too many times hahaha.


https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/a-senator-who-will-be-sorely-missed-at-trumps-impeachment-trial?source=EDT_NYR_EDIT_NEWSLETTER_0_imagenewsletter_Daily_ZZ&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_122619&utm_medium=email&bxid=5be9d3fa3f92a40469e2d85c&cndid=50142053&esrc=&mbid=&utm_term=TNY_Daily

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #692 on: December 26, 2019, 02:33:20 PM »
MCarthy or Moynihan ?

Moynihan is one of the few Democrats I respect though disagree with the liberal.

The other would be Congressman Van Drew


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #693 on: December 27, 2019, 12:47:52 PM »
Eugene McCarthy

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile
don't know him
« Reply #694 on: December 27, 2019, 02:06:56 PM »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_McCarthy

i was too young or for that matter mostly before me.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #695 on: December 27, 2019, 04:55:56 PM »

"Though he was initially given little chance of winning, the Tet Offensive galvanized opposition to the war and McCarthy finished in a strong second place in the New Hampshire primary. After that primary election, Kennedy entered the race and Johnson announced that he would not seek re-election. McCarthy and Kennedy each won several primaries before Kennedy was assassinated in June 1968"

This was when the committee headed by Bella Abzug and my mother was active.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #696 on: December 31, 2019, 07:26:53 AM »
Chris Christie: Three House Seats In Deep Blue New Jersey Could Flip Red Because Of Impeachment
-----
Dear Nancy, Schiff, AOC, 'Omar,' Dean Phillips and Nadler, It would be a shame if something happened to your precious little House majority...

Nothing hurts more than a self inflicted wound.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 51751
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress; Congressional races
« Reply #697 on: December 31, 2019, 02:05:59 PM »
Wasn't there something about redistricting lines falling to Reps benefit for about 3-4 seats as well?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10813
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12689
    • View Profile
Re: The US Congress, Is Pelosi's new action binding on Iran?
« Reply #699 on: January 06, 2020, 08:34:10 AM »
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-moves-to-limit-trumps-actions-in-iran-with-war-powers-resolution-vote

They should have considered the idea of future Presidents with different policies when they passed the last authorizations. 

Iran can strike us.  We cannot strike back.  This makes us safer, how?

Wag the dog:  Trump should not take any actions in an election year because the Democrats' crazy responses would then also have to happen in an election year.  Unfair!