Dec 23, 2010
The Lamest Duck
President Obama at a White House press conference on Dec 22, 2010 was jubilant that the so-called "lame-duck" Congress delivered victories for him on a number of initiatives. "Obama said Congress had its 'most productive post-election period' in decades." "And it comes on the heels of the most productive two years that we've had in generations." (Bloomberg News) Recall that when Republicans were the "lame duck" Congress they passed zero legislation.
President Obama's only one regret is that the DREAM Act did not pass, but he has vowed to continue again with the next Congress. A true picture of "accomplishments" includes a 2011 annual budget that was not passed but temporary extensions were granted to keep the government running, a 2010 unemployment rate of 9.8%, and a deficit of $1.3 trillion.
Most Recent Congressional Actions
Senate--New START Treaty.
On Dec 22 the Senate ratified the new START treaty, a nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia. The vote was 71 to 26 and 3 did not vote. Senator Burr voted against it and Senator Hagan voted for the treaty. Eleven Republicans broke rank and voted with the Democrats and they are: Senators Alexander (TN), Brown (MA), Cochran (MS), Collins (ME), Corker (TN), Gregg (NH), Isakson (GA), Johanns (NE), Lugar (IN), Murkowski (Alaska), and Snowe (ME).
A key problem with the treaty is that it allows Russian coordination over U.S. plans for a global missile defense system. Interestingly, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently warned the U.S. Senate that the New START treaty "cannot be reopened, becoming the subject of new negotiations," according to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010
The legislation passed on Dec 18, which allows gays and lesbians in the military services to openly flaunt their sexual preferences. The vote was 65 to 31 with 4 not voting. All Democrats voted for the repeal, except Senator Manchin (D-WV) who did not vote. Both Senator Burr and Senator Hagan voted for the repeal.
Eight Republican Senators voted with the Democrats including Senators Burr, Kirk (IL), Ensign (NV), Brown (MA), Voinovich (OH), Murkowski (Alaska), Collins and Snowe (ME).
Senator Burr's vote was a surprise since he did not indicate his support for the repeal previously, and initially agreed with Republicans in a procedural vote in bringing the measure to the floor. However, when the final vote was taken he voted for repeal. Politico reported that Senator Burr said, "It's just that we've had a generational change and I have vehemently objected to making a policy change of this magnitude at this time. When cloture was passed, that settled that," "It's not accepted practice anywhere in our society, and it only makes sense. But again, I was vehemently opposed to the timing of this."
[In checking Senator Burr's website several times, no comment is posted concerning his vote, as of Dec 23, 2010. His office is closed for Christmas, but they will be contacted for a comment upon reopening.]
According to Politico, Senator Collins said, "I didn't expect eight. I was delighted but surprised with the vote from Sen. Burr. I think that was a gutsy vote and I was delighted. But he was not someone who I thought to lobby on the issue." [A lot of people were surprised.]
Gay-rights leaders and White House officials were on hand to congratulate themselves for legislation which just a week ago was thought to be dead. Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell is "historic," according to Obama and reported by Politico. Joe Solmonese, president of the gay-rights group Human Rights Campaign said, "Today, we pulled out a victory from what was almost certain defeat just a few days ago."
Pat Buchanan believes this is a "political payoff" to the "homosexual rights lobby," at the "expense of our military." Among the military most opposed to the repeal are combat veterans who "warn that this will create grave problems of unit cohesion and morale." Buchanan also stated, "Marines have been sacrificed by the Democratic Party and Barack Obama to the homosexual lobby, with the collusion of no fewer than eight Republican senators."
Continuing Appropriations Act 2011
On Dec 21, the Senate passed a fiscal year (FY) 2011 funding bill to keep the government running through March 4, 2011. Senator Burr voted against it and Senator Hagan voted for it. The funding continues at the FY 2010 levels since the Congress has not passed a 2011 budget. The 2010 budget deficit is about $1.3 trillion, but the accumulated debt is nearly $13.9 trillion while the debt ceiling is at $14.3 trillion, according to the Wall Street Journal.
9/11 Healthcare Bill
The Senate unanimously approved the bill on Dec 22 for first responders who became ill as a result of 9/11. The $4.3 billion bill funds healthcare for the first responders at $1.8 billion and allows $2.5 billion to "re-open the Victim's Compensation fund," according to Senator Gillibrand's (D-NY) office. [Note: Exact cost figures are slightly different in other publications, but approximate these.]
House of Representatives
Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act
On Dec 22, the House agreed with the Senate amendments and passed legislation in a vote of 215 to 144 with 74 not voting.
NC Representatives voting for the act: G.K. Butterfield (D-1st), Bob Etheridge (D-2nd), David E. Price (D-4th), Mike McIntyre (D-7th), Larry Kissell (D-8th), Heath Shuler (D-11th), Melvin L. Watt (D-12th), and Brad Miller (D-13th).
NC Representatives voting against it: Virginia Foxx (R-5th), Sue Myrick (R-9th), and Patrick T. McHenry (R-10th). Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-3rd), and Howard Coble (R-6th) did not vote.
9/11 Health and Compensation Act
The House passed legislation to fund the healthcare of 9/11 responders on Dec 22, and the vote tally was 206 to 60 with 168 not voting.
NC Representatives voting for the act: G.K. Butterfield (D-1st), Bob Etheridge (D-2nd), David E. Price (D-4th), Larry Kissell (D-8th), Melvin L. Watt (D-12th), and Brad Miller (D-13th).
NC Representatives voting against it: Virginia Foxx (R-5th), Sue Myrick (R-9th), and Patrick T. McHenry (R-10th). Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-3rd), Howard Coble (R-6th), Mike McIntyre (D-7th), Patrick T. McHenry (R-10th), and Heath Shuler (D-11th) did not vote.
Continuing Appropriation Bill 2011
On Dec 21, the House agreed with the Senate on a $250 billion bill to keep the government running through March 4, 2011. The vote was 193 to 165 with 75 not voting.
NC Representatives voting for the bill: G.K. Butterfield (D-1st), Bob Etheridge (D-2nd), David E. Price (D-4th), Larry Kissell (D-8th), Melvin L. Watt (D-12th), Heath Shuler (D-11th), and Brad Miller (D-13th).
NC Representatives voting against it: Virginia Foxx (R-5th), Mike McIntyre (D-7th), Sue Myrick (R-9th), and Patrick T. McHenry (R-10th). Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-3rd) and Howard Coble (R-6th) did not vote
Showing posts with label START Treaty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label START Treaty. Show all posts
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Senate Debates Russia Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty
Published December 19, 2010, FoxNews.com
WASHINGTON -- An arms treaty with Russia to reduce stockpiles of nuclear warheads goes into a fifth day of discussion in the Senate on Sunday, but it's uncertain whether the debate will bring the treaty closer to passage.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he will not support ratification. He made no prediction about the treaty's success or failure if it comes to a vote, and said many Republicans are just now getting deeply involved in the issue.
"Members are uneasy about it, don't feel thoroughly familiar with it, and I think we would have been a lot better off to take our time," McConnell said. "Rushing it right before Christmas strikes me as trying to jam us. ... I think that was not the best way to get the support of people like me," he said on CNN.
Some Republicans oppose the treaty negotiated by President Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, saying that the preamble of the treaty links missile defense and strategic offensive weapons, which have been separated since then-President Ronald Reagan first negotiated START with Soviet chief Mikhail Gorbachev.
"We're just a rubber stamp for the administration and the Russians, and the administration for the first time wasn't willing to stand up to the Russians and say you're not going to implicate our missile defenses," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., the top Republican leading the charge against ratification.
On Saturday, an amendment by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., failed on a 59-37 vote to send the treaty back to the negotiating table. Kyl said Republicans have been warned that Democrats leading the debate will not permit an amendment to the treaty.
"Well what are we going through this exercise then for?" Kyl asked.
But calling it the longest length of time the Senate has debated a treaty, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin predicted the START would get the two-thirds vote needed to pass.
Kyl "has had ample opportunity to express himself, to file any amendments he thinks may be necessary. As of today, of the fifth day of debate, we've voted on one amendment. There will be another raised this afternoon. I think we need to bring this to a vote," said Durbin, who appeared with Kyl on "Fox News Sunday."
Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a supporter of the treaty, said several Republicans will support ratification and he believes the votes are there.
"The problem is getting to that final vote," Lugar said on ABC's "This Week."
Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, told the same program that the general in charge of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency says "unequivocally" there's no restraint to missile defense in the treaty.
"There is not legal binding statement whatsoever. There's a sort-of statement that for political purposes was necessary to achieve what we achieved. The important thing is the Russians wanted to have a binding statement precluding us from having a missile defense. There is nothing in there that restricts our missile defense system," Kerry said.
Kyl, who argued that former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is concerned by the language in the preamble, said he's not satisfied with President Obama's pledge to construct a missile defense system in Europe, which the president negotiated last year after the Russian Federation objected to a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
"Tell it to the Russians, send a letter to the Russians. In fact, change the preamble to the treaty, which would eliminate any doubt about the issue," Kyl said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., added that he's going to write to the Russians and won't vote for the treaty until they provide an assurance that they understand the preamble does not limit four-stage missile defense.
"You want to create chaos in the world, sign a treaty where everybody thinks the world is safer and down the road then withdraw because we intend to do something they don't want us to do. I need to know the answer to that," Graham told CBS' "Face the Nation. "Our military leaders are not in line with asking to give me the Russian view, I want the Russians to tell me their view of our ability to build a strategic missile defense and we can wait to next year."
The treaty is a foreign policy priority for Obama that would limit each country's strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, down from the current ceiling of 2,200. There's also a system for monitoring and verification.
Treaties require a two-thirds majority of those voting in the Senate, which convenes at noon for a closed session.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/19/senate-return-sunday-debate-russia-nuclear-arms-reduction-treaty/
WASHINGTON -- An arms treaty with Russia to reduce stockpiles of nuclear warheads goes into a fifth day of discussion in the Senate on Sunday, but it's uncertain whether the debate will bring the treaty closer to passage.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he will not support ratification. He made no prediction about the treaty's success or failure if it comes to a vote, and said many Republicans are just now getting deeply involved in the issue.
"Members are uneasy about it, don't feel thoroughly familiar with it, and I think we would have been a lot better off to take our time," McConnell said. "Rushing it right before Christmas strikes me as trying to jam us. ... I think that was not the best way to get the support of people like me," he said on CNN.
Some Republicans oppose the treaty negotiated by President Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, saying that the preamble of the treaty links missile defense and strategic offensive weapons, which have been separated since then-President Ronald Reagan first negotiated START with Soviet chief Mikhail Gorbachev.
"We're just a rubber stamp for the administration and the Russians, and the administration for the first time wasn't willing to stand up to the Russians and say you're not going to implicate our missile defenses," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., the top Republican leading the charge against ratification.
On Saturday, an amendment by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., failed on a 59-37 vote to send the treaty back to the negotiating table. Kyl said Republicans have been warned that Democrats leading the debate will not permit an amendment to the treaty.
"Well what are we going through this exercise then for?" Kyl asked.
But calling it the longest length of time the Senate has debated a treaty, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin predicted the START would get the two-thirds vote needed to pass.
Kyl "has had ample opportunity to express himself, to file any amendments he thinks may be necessary. As of today, of the fifth day of debate, we've voted on one amendment. There will be another raised this afternoon. I think we need to bring this to a vote," said Durbin, who appeared with Kyl on "Fox News Sunday."
Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a supporter of the treaty, said several Republicans will support ratification and he believes the votes are there.
"The problem is getting to that final vote," Lugar said on ABC's "This Week."
Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, told the same program that the general in charge of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency says "unequivocally" there's no restraint to missile defense in the treaty.
"There is not legal binding statement whatsoever. There's a sort-of statement that for political purposes was necessary to achieve what we achieved. The important thing is the Russians wanted to have a binding statement precluding us from having a missile defense. There is nothing in there that restricts our missile defense system," Kerry said.
Kyl, who argued that former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is concerned by the language in the preamble, said he's not satisfied with President Obama's pledge to construct a missile defense system in Europe, which the president negotiated last year after the Russian Federation objected to a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
"Tell it to the Russians, send a letter to the Russians. In fact, change the preamble to the treaty, which would eliminate any doubt about the issue," Kyl said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., added that he's going to write to the Russians and won't vote for the treaty until they provide an assurance that they understand the preamble does not limit four-stage missile defense.
"You want to create chaos in the world, sign a treaty where everybody thinks the world is safer and down the road then withdraw because we intend to do something they don't want us to do. I need to know the answer to that," Graham told CBS' "Face the Nation. "Our military leaders are not in line with asking to give me the Russian view, I want the Russians to tell me their view of our ability to build a strategic missile defense and we can wait to next year."
The treaty is a foreign policy priority for Obama that would limit each country's strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, down from the current ceiling of 2,200. There's also a system for monitoring and verification.
Treaties require a two-thirds majority of those voting in the Senate, which convenes at noon for a closed session.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/19/senate-return-sunday-debate-russia-nuclear-arms-reduction-treaty/
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Washington Examiner Editorial
Lame-duck Dems jam spending bill with 6,600 earmarks
By: Examiner Editorial 12/15/10 8:05 PM
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his allies are using the lame duck to push $1.2 trillion in spending. Gallup released a historic poll yesterday: The Democrat-controlled 111th Congress, now in its final, lame-duck session, is the most unpopular in the history of the pollster's surveys.
Given this week's events, it's not hard to see why. House Democrats' massive resistance to a popular, bipartisan package to prevent gargantuan income tax increases on all taxpayers in January shows they learned nothing from the 2010 election in which voters handed control of the lower chamber back to Republicans. The lame ducks keep acting as if they are still the top drakes in town, oblivious to the fact they were plucked and roasted by the voters on Nov. 2.
But if liberal intransigence in the House on taxes evinces a Congress that is "not getting it," leading Senate Democrats are going their colleagues one better by introducing a $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill that represents an act of stupefying political arrogance. This omnibus bill exemplifies a Democratic Congress that has been so preoccupied this year with its exceedingly unpopular legislative agenda that it failed to do its basic job: funding government. The Democrats who led the Senate and House refused to even pass a budget, as required by law and the Constitution, but now that they are losing power, they want one more spending spectacular before their terms end.
The 2,000-page omnibus bill contains 6,600 earmarks worth $8.3 billion, including funds for such national priorities as termite research and for a charity tied to the late House Democratic porkmeister John Murtha. The omnibus also funds Obamacare. It increases spending from last year's levels in a number of departments, immediately after an election in which runaway government spending was such a huge issue. Even worse, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his colleagues pushing this bill presented it as a political gun to the head for Senate Republicans who know the government will shut down if something isn't done by Saturday.
Senate Republicans and similarly responsible Democrats should reject the omnibus, as well as any other last-minute spending package introduced by the discredited leaders of the 111th Congress. With the tax-cut compromise headed toward final passage, the only appropriate spending measure for the lame-duck Senate to consider is one that funds the government at current levels until the new Congress is sworn in to start cleaning up the mess. Then they should go home.
If they don't, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., should, as he promised, demand a reading on the Senate floor of the full text of the omnibus and the proposed New START treaty, in order to slow-walk the irresponsible 111th Congress and prevent it from doing any more damage to the nation.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2010/12/examiner-editorial-lame-duck-dems-jam-spending-bill-6600-earmarks?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d0a045b6872ab87%2C0#ixzz18HF1xGJU
By: Examiner Editorial 12/15/10 8:05 PM
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his allies are using the lame duck to push $1.2 trillion in spending. Gallup released a historic poll yesterday: The Democrat-controlled 111th Congress, now in its final, lame-duck session, is the most unpopular in the history of the pollster's surveys.
Given this week's events, it's not hard to see why. House Democrats' massive resistance to a popular, bipartisan package to prevent gargantuan income tax increases on all taxpayers in January shows they learned nothing from the 2010 election in which voters handed control of the lower chamber back to Republicans. The lame ducks keep acting as if they are still the top drakes in town, oblivious to the fact they were plucked and roasted by the voters on Nov. 2.
But if liberal intransigence in the House on taxes evinces a Congress that is "not getting it," leading Senate Democrats are going their colleagues one better by introducing a $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill that represents an act of stupefying political arrogance. This omnibus bill exemplifies a Democratic Congress that has been so preoccupied this year with its exceedingly unpopular legislative agenda that it failed to do its basic job: funding government. The Democrats who led the Senate and House refused to even pass a budget, as required by law and the Constitution, but now that they are losing power, they want one more spending spectacular before their terms end.
The 2,000-page omnibus bill contains 6,600 earmarks worth $8.3 billion, including funds for such national priorities as termite research and for a charity tied to the late House Democratic porkmeister John Murtha. The omnibus also funds Obamacare. It increases spending from last year's levels in a number of departments, immediately after an election in which runaway government spending was such a huge issue. Even worse, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his colleagues pushing this bill presented it as a political gun to the head for Senate Republicans who know the government will shut down if something isn't done by Saturday.
Senate Republicans and similarly responsible Democrats should reject the omnibus, as well as any other last-minute spending package introduced by the discredited leaders of the 111th Congress. With the tax-cut compromise headed toward final passage, the only appropriate spending measure for the lame-duck Senate to consider is one that funds the government at current levels until the new Congress is sworn in to start cleaning up the mess. Then they should go home.
If they don't, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., should, as he promised, demand a reading on the Senate floor of the full text of the omnibus and the proposed New START treaty, in order to slow-walk the irresponsible 111th Congress and prevent it from doing any more damage to the nation.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2010/12/examiner-editorial-lame-duck-dems-jam-spending-bill-6600-earmarks?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d0a045b6872ab87%2C0#ixzz18HF1xGJU
Monday, November 15, 2010
Taxes, Nuke Treaty Top Lame Duck Congress Agenda
What is more important for the larger world is Senate ratification of a new START arms pact with Russia.
WASHINGTON -- Americans were watching closely for signs about how much tax they will pay in coming years as the lame duck Congress convenes this week for a last session before the new Republican majority takes control of the House of Representatives.
What is more important for the larger world is Senate ratification of a new START arms pact with Russia.
The new nuclear arms reduction treaty, signed by President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev in April, still has not been ratified by the Senate as required by the Constitution. The pact must receive 67 votes in the 100-seat Senate. Historically the upper chamber has overwhelmingly approved such treaties, but the rabid partisanship gripping American politics has put Senate approval in question.
READ FULL ARTICLE:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/15/taxes-nuke-treaty-lame-duck-congress-agenda/
WASHINGTON -- Americans were watching closely for signs about how much tax they will pay in coming years as the lame duck Congress convenes this week for a last session before the new Republican majority takes control of the House of Representatives.
What is more important for the larger world is Senate ratification of a new START arms pact with Russia.
The new nuclear arms reduction treaty, signed by President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev in April, still has not been ratified by the Senate as required by the Constitution. The pact must receive 67 votes in the 100-seat Senate. Historically the upper chamber has overwhelmingly approved such treaties, but the rabid partisanship gripping American politics has put Senate approval in question.
READ FULL ARTICLE:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/15/taxes-nuke-treaty-lame-duck-congress-agenda/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
