Posts Tagged ‘113th Congress’
CNN Poll, Congress ‘Worst In Their Lifetimes’ , Crooks And Liars
In 113th Congress, GOP, GOP Obstruction on December 26, 2013 at 1:36 PMRepresentUS: For High Information People Only (Video)
In 113th Congress, GOP Obstruction, Jim Himes, Karl Rove on December 12, 2013 at 12:18 PMRepresentative Jim Himes first caught our attention when he helped push through a bill written by CitiGroup lobbyists. As it just so happens, CitiGroup is also Rep. Himes’ #1 financial backer. That’s why we decided to make a “generous donation” of our own.
We decided to target Jim Himes because he’s emblematic of a much larger systemic problem: Our Congress is being corrupted by big money and no longer represents the people. Rep. Himes co-sponsored and helped push a bill called H.R. 992 through the House. 992 would further deregulate derivatives, a financial instrument that played a major role in the 2008 crisis (source).
Our organization doesn’t have a position on derivatives trading. What we do have a position is corruption, and this is a textbook case. The New York Times revealed that 992 was written by big bank lobbyists — 70 of the 85 lines in 992 were written by lobbyists for CitiGroup (source).
As it just so happens, Jim Himes has received more money from CitiGroup than any other member of Congress — The only politicians who received more money from CitiGroup in the 2012 election cycle were Mitt Romney and Barack Obama (source). 7 of the top 10 interests funding his campaign committee and leadership PAC were financial services institutions (source).
The Congressman who co-sponsored a bill written by big bank lobbyists — a bill which would directly benefit big banks if it ever becomes law — is completely dependent on those same banks to get reelected. Jim Himes also sits on the House Financial Services committee. He’s supposed to regulate the financial sector, and instead he’s letting their lobbyists write our laws. It’s flagrantly corrupt, and astonishingly legal.
What used to be a shoebox full of unmarked bills has been replaced with a handful of checks from a lobbyist. The nature of corruption has evolved, and our laws have failed to evolve with it. That’s why we’re pushing for the American Anti-Corruption Act: A law that would put and end to the legalized bribery that’s come to define modern politics. Click here to read the Act, and add your name to the petition on this page to show your support the Act and join the movement.
The following accompanies the YouTube video above.
Reid Drops the "NUKE" Option
In 113th Congress, HARRY REID on November 21, 2013 at 2:53 PM![](https://scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/1476557_10202787193587763_123348893_n.jpg)
![mushroom-Cloud](https://i0.wp.com/ww2.politicususa.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/mushroom-Cloud.jpg)
Senate Votes For Nuclear Option
Posted: 11/21/2013 12:36 pm EST | Updated: 11/21/2013 1:33 pm EST
C-SPAN Video
|
If you take a look at the following Facebook meme, you should get the picture.
Questions
Q139. “Why can’t I find anything about filibusters in the Constitution?”
![]() A. The short answer is because there is nothing there to find: the Constitution does not contemplate the filibuster in any way, directly or indirectly. So, then, what is all this talk about the Framers, the Senate, the filibuster, and its relationship to the Constitution?
|
The Senate procedure was not part of the Us Constitution. In fairness, the procedure has been used throughout modern US History and it has been used by both sides of the congressional isle.
Segregation Now, Segregation Tomorrow, Segregation Forever!
In 113th Congress on November 4, 2013 at 4:29 PMLet’s face it, if you are reading here you are not a right-wing ideologue, probably not a far-right libertarian; and you may consider yourself an independent or progressive moderate. We define moderate progressive, or those who will claim such, people who would not hesitate to ignore the past and vote for a GOP ticket based on candidate charisma. Charisma would have to be the decision-point as no GOP candidate can even remotely claim: “The GOP is good for the nation.“ Of course, any candidate can claim such, but no GOP candidate can display data that would back-up the claim.
ABC NEWS/FUSION POLL (Langer Research Associates)
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE (full survey results pdf)
METHODOLOGY – This ABC News/Fusion poll was conducted by telephone Oct. 17-20, 2013, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 1,002 adults, including landline and cell-phone-only respondents. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including design effect. 5
• Among all adults, 53 percent think women have fewer opportunities than men in the workplace. But that ranges from 68 percent of Democrats to 38 percent of Republicans, a difference of 30 percentage points. Comparing the most unlike groups, liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans, it’s 76 vs. 35 percent.
• Forty-one percent overall think nonwhites have fewer opportunities than whites in society. Fifty-six percent of Democrats say so, as do 62 percent of liberal Democrats (more than the number of nonwhites themselves who say so, 51 percent). Among Republicans that dives to 25 percent.
• Forty-three percent of Americans say it would be a good thing if more women were elected to Congress – but the range here is from six in 10 Democrats and liberals alike to just 26 percent of conservatives and 23 percent of Republicans. Instead two-thirds or more in these latter two groups say it makes no difference to them.
• Just 23 percent overall say it would be a good thing if more nonwhites were elected to Congress; 73 percent instead say it makes no difference to them. Seeing this as a good thing peaks at 50 percent among liberal Democrats (far more, in this case, than the number of nonwhites themselves who say so, 29 percent). Among conservative Republicans, it’s 5 percent.
• Thirty-nine percent of adults say they trust the government in Washington to do what’s right; six in 10 don’t. Apparently reflecting views of the Obama administration, trust peaks at 62 percent of Democrats, as many liberals and 69 percent of liberal Democrats. Just a quarter of Republicans and conservatives, and 18 percent of conservative Republicans, feel the same.
• Support for legal status for undocumented immigrants, 51 percent overall, ranges from 77 percent among liberal Democrats to 32 percent among conservative Republicans. Views on this issue also show sharp differences among other groups – for example, nonwhites vs. whites, 70 vs. 43 percent; and adults younger than 40 vs. their elders, 61 vs. 47 percent.
• Fewer than half of all adults, 45 percent, say political leaders should rely somewhat or a great deal on their religious beliefs when making policy decisions. But again the range is wide: Six in 10 conservatives, as many Republicans and 65 percent of conservative Republicans hold this view. That falls sharply to 39 percent of Democrats and independents alike, four in 10 moderates and 32 percent of liberals.
![]() |
If after viewing the Atlantic Cities maps, you remain one who feels race and ethnicity (and gender) in congress makes little to no difference, we suspect you are from the majority population. While living the majority population is not a crime, being a denizen of the majority population group has conferred privileges not shared with other demographic groups. It is unfortunate, but as we look at the focus of the 112th Congress and 113th Congress people who live as minorities, women, LGBT and poor in America do not get a fair shake from a government to which each group pay taxes.
The Sequester: A Sham And The Right Loves It!
In GOP on July 10, 2013 at 7:22 PM
Re-post from Facebook
There is no death with dignity in starvation. This graphic makes me heartsick. Is this what Congress was looking for when they said yes to the sequester?
Jeanene
End Coffee Party Movement
We at the TPI are firm in our belief the GOP is as pleased with the sequester as they are with Fox News and with copious legislation regarding women’s rights.
The "Sequester": The Legacy Of The Worst Congress In US History
In Obama Administration on June 30, 2013 at 9:47 PM
Sequester Watch, #2 | Jared Bernstein | On the Economy Apr 29, 2013
National Priorities Dot Org (March 2013)
COMPETING VISIONS: PRESIDENT OBAMA, REP. PAUL RYAN, SEN. PATTY MURRAY, AND HOUSE PROGRESSIVES RELEASE BUDGET PROPOSALS FOR 2014
- UPDATE: Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget passed the House in a vote of 221-207, and Sen. Patty Murray’s budget passed the Senate in a vote of 50-49. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget did not pass the House.
- UPDATE (April 10, 2013): Inserted President Obama’s budget proposal column.
- UPDATE (April 12, 2013): Check out our easily-readable one-page version.
Public Opinion: What Do Americans Want? | President Obama | Rep. Paul Ryan and the House Budget Committee | House Congressional Progressive Caucus | Sen. Patty Murray and the Senate Budget Committee | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Job Creation | 95 percent say restoring the job market is a top priority. | $166 billion over 10 years for job creation initiatives, including infrastructure repairs and tax credits for small businesses that hire or raise wages. | No new funding for job creation. | $4.2 trillion over 10 years for job creation through infrastructure investment, tax credits, and aid to the 50 states and the District of Columbia. | $100 billion in near-term spending for job creation, including $50 billion for transportation infrastructure and $10 billion for worker training programs. |
Medicare | 88 percent say it is very important to preserve the long-term stability of Medicare. | Negotiates for lower prescription drug prices and raises premiums on wealthy retirees, among other changes, to save $392 billion over 10 years. | Beginning in 2024 seniors would receive a lump sum of money to buy private insurance. The lump sum would keep pace with inflation but not the rate of health care cost growth. | Negotiates for lower prescription drug prices to save $157 billion over 10 years. | Saves $275 billion over 10 years by accelerating health care reforms that reward quality of care rather than pay fee-for-service. |
Social Security | 88 percent say it is very important to preserve the long-term stability of Social Security. | Proposes changing cost-of-living adjustments using an inflation measure known as “chained CPI” to reduce benefits over time and save $230 billion over 10 years. | Requires the president and Congress to submit plans for the long-term financial outlook of Social Security. | No proposed changes. | No proposed changes. |
Tax Loopholes | 80 percent want to see loopholes closed for big corporations, while 66 percent want to see loopholes closed for wealthy taxpayers so that money can be used for deficit reduction. | Places limits on tax deductions for the top 2 percent of income earners (to raise $529 billion over 10 years). Among other changes, ends the “carried interest” loophole that benefits hedge fund managers ($16 billion) and eliminates special tax breaks for oil and gas companies ($44 billion). | Plans to close tax loopholes but does not specify which ones. | Closes loopholes that favor oil, gas, and coal companies, and that create incentives to move jobs overseas. Eliminates corporate loopholes for stock options, private jets, and meals and entertainment. Also eliminates the home mortgage-interest deduction for vacation homes and yachts. | Plans to close tax loopholes for $975 billion in deficit reduction but does not specify which ones. Plans to target loopholes that currently benefit the wealthy and major corporations. |
SNAP (food stamps) | 75 percent oppose cuts to SNAP. | No proposed changes. | Makes deep cuts to SNAP funding and converts the program to a block grant administered at the state level. | Increases funding for SNAP as part of an overall increase of $312 billion over 10 years for income security programs. | No proposed changes. |
Education | 73 percent say it’s very important to make a college education more affordable, while 83 percent oppose cuts to K-12 education. | Expands access to pre-kindergarten education to move toward a goal of universal pre-kindergarten education and expands mandatory funding for Pell grants. | Freezes the maximum Pell grant award at the same level for the next 10 years, provides financial aid to fewer families, and reduces general discretionary spending for education. | Expands the education budget and provides $25 billion over 10 years to hire back 300,000 laid-off teachers and modernize 35,000 public schools. | Calls for supporting elementary and secondary education and making college more affordable but does not specify how. |
Individual Taxes | 70 percent want a simpler tax code with lower rates and 66 percent want to see higher taxes on the wealthiest taxpayers. | Places limits on tax deductions for the top 2 percent of income earners, as noted above. Also imposes a “Buffett rule” – a minimum tax rate on millionaires – to raise $53 billion over 10 years. | Steeply reduces tax rates for top earners by replacing the current tax brackets with just two brackets of 10 percent and 25 percent. | Ends the Bush-era tax cuts for families earning over $250,000, creates five new tax brackets for millionaires and billionaires, and ends special low tax rates for investment income. | Places limits on tax expenditures claimed by the top 2 percent of income earners. |
Corporate Taxes | 64 percent want to see corporations pay more in taxes, while 73 percent want to prevent corporations from avoiding taxes by shifting profits overseas. | Proposes no new taxes on corporations. Would close some tax loopholes as part of tax reform to simplify the tax code and lower tax rates, thereby raising no new tax revenue from corporations. | Reduces the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent and releases overseas profits from U.S. taxation. | In addition to closing tax loopholes (specified above), creates a “Wall Street sales tax” on financial transactions including the sale of stocks and bonds. | Proposes changing corporate tax provisions that allow corporations to avoid taxes with offshore operations. |
War Funding | 60 percent favor removing troops from Afghanistan as soon as possible. | Does not specify. | Provides $47 billion for war funding in 2014, a cut of 53 percent below the 2013 level. Maintains annual war funding of $37 billion or more for the next decade. | Calls for an expedited troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and ends war funding beginning in fiscal 2015. | Based on current plans to end the Afghanistan war in 2014, provides $100 billion in fiscal 2013, $50 billion in fiscal 2014 and $25 billion in fiscal 2015. |
Military Funding | 58 percent would like to see major reductions in military spending. | Prevents across-the-board budget cuts known as sequestration from affecting the military budget. Proposes a Department of Defense base budget of $526.6 billion in 2014, a cut of 1.6 percent. | Prevents across-the-board budget cuts known as sequestration from impacting the military budget. | Reduces military spending by $897 billion over 10 years through a smaller force structure and reductions in Cold War-era weapons. | Would gradually reduce military spending beginning in fiscal 2015, for a savings of $240 billion over 10 years. |
Medicaid | 52 percent support the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare, while 46 percent oppose any cuts to Medicaid. | Maintains the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare. | Makes deep cuts to Medicaid funding and converts the program to a block grant administered at the state level. | Maintains the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare and increases funding for Medicaid through supplemental grants to states over the next two years. | Maintains the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare. |
Budget Totals
Public Opinion: What Do Americans Want? | President Obama | Rep. Paul Ryan and the House Budget Committee | House Congressional Progressive Caucus | Sen. Patty Murray and the Senate Budget Committee | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Proposed Change in Spending | 56 percent want to see a mix of spending cuts and tax increases; 35 percent want cuts only. | $1.2 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years. | $5.7 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years. | $3 trillion in spending increases over 10 years. | $837 billion in spending cuts over 10 years. |
Total Proposed Change in Tax Revenue | 56 percent want to see a mix of spending cuts and tax increases; 5 percent want only tax increases. | $583 billion in new tax revenue over 10 years. | No change in tax revenue. | $5.7 trillion in additional tax revenue over 10 years. | $923 billion in additional tax revenue over 10 years. |
Total Deficit Reduction | 72 percent say deficit reduction is a top priority. | Reduces deficits by $1.8 trillion over 10 years. | Reduces deficits by $5.7 trillion over 10 years. | Reduces deficits by $2.7 trillion over 10 years. | Reduces deficits by $1.8 trillion over 10 years. |
The Daily GOP Ignominious: Defunding ACORN Still?
In Boehner, Cantor on June 4, 2013 at 3:55 PMJohn Boehner climbed up on stage last week, railed about the scandals in the Obama Administration, and again proclaimed he is about “jobs”, yet look at what they do.
Huffington Post
WASHINGTON — House Republicans are scheduled to vote on two separate budget bills this week, each of which would reject funding for the poverty activism group ACORN, despite the fact that ACORN disbanded three years ago.
ACORN, also known as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, came under heavy fire in the fall of 2009 after conservative videographer James O’Keefe released a set of selectively edited videos that appeared to show its employees offering advice on tax avoidance related to prostitution and child smuggling. Independent investigations by the California attorney general, the Massachusetts attorney general and the Brooklyn, N.Y., district attorney would later clear ACORN of criminal wrongdoing, and an investigation by the Government Accountability Office would clear ACORN of charges that it mishandled federal funds.
But in the fall of 2009, Congress banned federal funding for ACORN using broad language that applied to “any organization” that had been charged with breaking federal or state election laws, lobbying disclosure laws or campaign finance laws or with filing fraudulent paperwork with any federal or state agency. The funding ban also extended to any employees, contractors or others affiliated with any group so charged.
There is something seriously wrong with the tea party laden House or Representatives.
Did you vote for thes epeope? Come on admit it, now did you?
I think I will spend no more time on this piece.
….AND THE BAND PLAYS ON….