Pro-Life Democrats threaten to block healthcare reform bill
Despite President Obama’s statement that the time for “bickering” is over, the healthcare reform bill still faces some serious roadblocks on its way to passage. What the president calls “bickering” is what most people consider debate and negotiation. “Bickering” was a term that the president used to describe partisan debate but the latest “bickering” is coming from the pro-life Democrats.
The pro-life caucus will move to block the healthcare reform bill unless an amendment is added to the legislation that will specifically prohibit the federal funding of abortion.
It seems as if the abortion language in the bill is a bit murky, the Hyde amendment prohibits federal funding of abortions but because it is attached to Health and Human Services Appropriations there is speculation that money can still be used to fund abortions by any new programs that are started up and funded under the healthcare bill itself.
Rep. Bart Stupak has a simple solution to what quite possibly could be a loophole that would allow federal funding of some abortions; he wants to attach the Hyde amendment directly to the healthcare reform bill. This would close up any loophole that may exist in the bill as it is currently written.
He is threatening to stop the bill from making it to the floor for a vote if his proposal is not met.
If our amendment is not made in order we will try to shut down the rule, preventing the health care bill from coming to the floor for a vote,” Stupack stated. “If the Speaker believes that abortion funding is not in the bill then she should let me have my amendment, because if anything it would just be redundant.”
He hits the nail on the head about Speaker Pelosi. If she truly believes that the current language already stops all federal funding of abortion than she should have no problem moving this language to the main portion of the healthcare reform bill, this would guarantee that outcome. As he said, it will just be redundant.
But if she refuses to move the language to the main portion of the bill than she is admitting that it is possible that this loophole does exist and she is unwilling to close it. There would be no other reason for her to be unwilling to move the language to guarantee an outcome that she already claims exists in the legislation.
Her actions on this issue will tell us all that we need to know about Nancy Pelosi’s position; if she moves the language she will satisfy the needs of the pro-life Democrats and guarantee that federal money will not be used for any abortions, but if she refuses to move the language than a possible loophole may remain open that will allow the federal funding of some abortions and she will lose the pro-life Democrats.
It seems like it should be an easy decision for her to make if the language already exists that bans all federal funding of abortions. If she risks losing pro-life Democrats over her unwillingness to move this language than there is definitely and ulterior motive at play here. Why else would she face the embarrassment of having the healthcare reform bill stopped by her own party over where language is located in the bill?
I guess it comes down to one question, which lobby is greater? The pro-life Democrats or the pro-choice lobby.
Does Lindsay Graham support cap and trade?
Yesterday I wrote an article about Lindsay Graham in which I stated that I thought he supported the cap and trade portion of the climate change bill. I may have been mistaken, it appears as if he supports A climate change bill but not THE climate change bill that was introduced by John Kerry and Barbara Boxer last month.
In the editorial that Lindsay Graham co-wrote with John Kerry he stated that “we are also convinced that we have found a framework for climate legislation to pass Congress.” The question remains, what is in that framework? Certainly John Kerry, who is a leading proponent of the energy tax otherwise known as cap and trade, will not give up on this portion of the bill. Any bill that John Kerry supports will have cap and trade in it.
Lindsay Graham has stated that he is for getting a climate change bill passed and that now is the time to act. If his idea is to allow cap and trade in order to get nuclear power and oil drilling language inserted into the bill that is not good enough. Cap and trade must be defeated.
I would offer a full retraction of yesterday’s article but the fact is that we do not know where Lindsay Graham stands on this issue anymore, we do not know what he is willing to negotiate, all we do know is that he is willing to negotiate and he wants a climate change bill passed in the near future.
We will be watching him closely.
Latest poll (10/11/09) shows Harry Reid in big trouble
Over the last few months polls have shown that Harry Reid could be in trouble in his bid for re-election and today the latest polls came out that confirm this belief.
Only 38% of Nevada voters view him favorably while 50% of the voters view him unfavorably. It is always bad news when an incumbent has negativity ratings above 50%, Harry Reid is right on that threshold. But with only 38% of voters viewing him in a favorable light Harry Reid’s day as a United States senator could be numbered.
If the election was held today Harry Reid would lose to the two top contending Republican candidates.
49 percent of respondents picked Lowden and 39 percent chose Reid. In another, 48 percent picked Tarkanian to 43 percent for Reid.
This is bad news for Harry Reid and good news for the rest of the country. While there is still plenty of time for Harry Reid to recover, this latest poll has to leave the senator from Nevada more than a little nervous. This poll should make Democrats all over the country a little nervous as well, Harry Reid is one of the Democrat party leaders and if he is in trouble it could signal problems for the Democrat party as a whole in next year’s elections.
Lindsay Graham supports the cap and trade bill
Once the healthcare reform debate is behind us there are a couple of more battles that we must fight–illegal immigration and climate change. The House has already passed its climate change bill but it has disappeared in the senate amidst the healthcare debate. It has been forgotten about but it is not gone. Recently the talks about acting on the climate change legislation have begun to resurface. It appears as though the senate will tackle this legislation next as it is farther along in the process.
Senator Lindsay Graham has co-written a piece for the New York Times along with John Kerry in which he gives his support for the climate change legislation. The legislation that they are proposing has some good ideas in it– building more nuclear plants and more domestic exploration for oil– but the problem remains that an “aggressive” cap and trade proposal remains in this bill.
Apparently Lindsay Graham is supporting the cap and trade portion of this legislation. John Kerry has been a leading proponent in this tax system so I can only guess that if Lindsay Graham is teaming up with John Kerry that he sympathizes with John Kerry’s cap and trade position. The same goes for another Republican– John McCain. John McCain is also working with John Kerry in trying to force this tax on the American people.
Democrats support for the House bill has been described as mild at best so this is a win for Democrats who will need Republican support to pass any cap and tax legislation. Unfortunately Lindsay Graham just won re-election last year so by the time of his re-election bid the voters may have forgotten about this. At least he is hoping that they will.
This bill still has a long way to go before it ever becomes law. There are some good portions of this bill but the fact remains that this whole bill focuses around the cap and trade aspect of the bill.
As long as cap and trade remains in the bill I can not support it. The cap and trade portion of this bill looks like it will play the same role that the “public option” portion of the healthcare bill has been playing. This will be the part of the bill that people and politicians either rally to or run from.
The debate on this bill has not begun yet but it is coming. It is never too early to start calling and writing your representatives. We are going to have to be heard on this issue as loudly as we can be. I think that this bill still faces some huge hurdles. Surely the far left will disagree with the oil exploration and the increased nuclear plants while the right will oppose cap and trade, but we can’t remain silent.
We can’t afford to have more Republicans come out in support of cap and trade, let them know that we are watching them.
As I first wrote about in this post, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona has been ordered by Homeland Security, and more specifically, Janet Napolitano to stop his “controversial” policy of arresting illegal aliens.
Sheriff Arpaio has vowed to keep on arresting illegal aliens whether the Feds like it or not.
We’ve been doing it for two years and have been very successful, but I guess they don’t like to enforce illegal immigration laws,” Arpaio told CNSNews.com. “[It] doesn’t make any difference. I’m still going to continue my programs, regardless of what the feds like or don’t like
The sheriff’s policy seems pretty straight forward:
When we come across illegal aliens, we arrest them
But:
That’s the part they (Homeland Security) don’t like, and that’s the one they took away
The problem that Janet Napolitano has with this policy? She feels that the sheriff is racial profiling. It is more important for the department in charge of making sure we are safe at home to ensure that the sheriff appears to be politically correct than to actually protect the citizens of this country. That is the message being sent by Janet Napolitano.
This man is trying to do his job, he is trying to protect the American people from the onslaught of illegal aliens. Since 2007 he has arrested over 15,000 illegal aliens. He is doing something right, we need more sheriffs like this one. The problem, besides being too politically correct, is that Homeland Security doesn’t understand that coming to this country illegally is illegal. Homeland Security is ignoring the fact that a crime already has been committed by illegal aliens as soon as they illegally arrive in this country.
Janet Napolitano does not want Sheriff Arpaio to have the power to arrest illegal aliens for the primary offence of breaking and entering the country, she wants the sheriff to wait until the illegal alien has committed another crime before an immigration status check is allowed. This is ass backwards. Illegal aliens should be arrested BEFORE they commit a crime against an American citizen, this idea shouldn’t be that hard to comprehend.
Thankfully there are still men like Sheriff Arpaio out there who are willing to take on the federal government when they feel the government is in the wrong. Keep up the good work sheriff, the American people are behind you.
President Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize
By now everyone has heard that President Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize. I wasn’t even going to write about is but it is the topic de-jour so I feel obligated to mention it. I still don’t intend to spend much time on this topic because even Barack Obama’s most ardent supporters know exactly how silly it was for Barack Obama to win this prize.
When I woke up this morning and saw the headline on Politico.com that Barack Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize I honestly thought that it was an opinion piece. I almost didn’t read the story but decided to. I was actually shocked to find out that Barack Obama had in fact won the prize.
The question is why did Obama deserve the award? Certainly there were other candidates who had actually accomplished something that were far more deserving of the award. The committee’s reason for giving Obama the award was basically that he inspired people to hope for a better future. They gave him the award based on what they hope he will accomplish, not for what he has accomplished. They gave him the award for his rhetoric and not for his actions.
Apparently bowing to kings and apologizing for America on every foreign trip that he takes trumps the fact that Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan once and probably will again, (on this issue I agree with the president), he has alienated Israel, pissed off England, allowed Iran to continue to work toward producing nuclear weapons, allowed North Korea to test nuclear weapons, and legitimized the Taliban. His dream that he will help to usher in a nuclear free age is falling apart around him but it is his vision of that world that won him this award, not what he has done to ensure his vision becomes a reality.
But hey, other than that, with Obama the future looks bright.
As the House Ethics Panel continues to investigate Charlie Rangel’s tax fraud they continue to expand their investigation. It just keeps getting worse for Charlie Rangel as today the panel has unanimously voted to expand the investigation yet again.
This investigation has gone on for almost two years now and it is time for Charlie Rangel to step down from the House Ways and Means Committee, if not permanently than at least until the investigation has ended.
This man is in charge of the committee that writes the tax laws and he is under investigation for tax fraud. How can this man still be the head of the House Ways and Means committee? When will the Democrats finally turn on him? Or will the continue to blindly support this hypocrite?
John Boehner once again has summed up the situation perfectly:
Given the expanded investigation announced today, it is past time for Speaker Pelosi to insist that Chairman Rangel step aside until the ethics committee completes its work,” Mr. Boehner said. “The American people wont stand for having a chairman of the Houses tax-writing committee who is under investigation for not paying his taxes. What more has to happen before Speaker Pelosi does the right thing?
I guess that I don’t entirely blame Charlie Rangel for his decision to stay on as the head of the House Ways and Means committee, after all the Democrats appear perfectly willing to let him stay, but in the long run you would think that it would be better for the Democrats if Charlie Rangel were to step down. Certainly the American people would be better off.
There is a huge double standard in Washington, we all know that, you don’t need to look any further than the politicians who tell us that we have to sacrifice to stop global warming while they are flying around the world in private planes to see the double standard, and this is just another example of Washington’s hypocrisy.
During the last two election cycles the Democrats ran against the culture of corruption in the Republican party, claiming that they would run the most ethical government in recent history. But when you see people like Charlie Rangel and John Murtha both being investigated and you see the Democrats blindly stand behind them you begin to realize that the more things change the more they stay the same.
John Boehner is right, it is beyond time for Charlie Rangel to step down. If he will not step down it becomes the Democrat’s responsibility to remove him. The American people deserve at least that much.
Janet Napolitano wants to relocate illegal immigrants from jail to “converted hotels”
Janet Napolitano is advocating the relocation of some illegal aliens from prisons to “converted hotels” and “nursing homes.” Her belief is that there are different types of illegal aliens and once they are caught not all of them belong in jail. I agree with that to a degree. None of them belong in American jails, all of them should be deported, but that is not what she is advocating here.
To better manage detention operations, ICE will develop a risk assessment and custody classification, which will enable detainees to be placed in an appropriate facility,” DHS said in a statement. “ICE will pursue detention strategies based on assessed risk and reduce costs by exploring the use of converted hotels, nursing homes and other residential facilities
As I wrote above, she believes that there are different classifications for illegal aliens.
Our detention system has some who have committed crimes, others whose crimes under federal law is a misdemeanor, others who have as I said before not committed a crime at all
I disagree with that very premise. ALL illegal immigrants have committed a crime, hence the word “illegal.” These people committed a crime to get into the country in the first place. This truth seems to be foreign to Janet Napolitano.
She is hiding behind the mask of asylum seekers to push her agenda.
We will begin to house nonviolent non-criminals, such as newly arrived asylum seekers, at facilities commensurate with the risks that they present
There is a process for a person to apply for asylum in the United States and it does not include sneaking into the country and disappearing into the shadows as all of those who have been rounded up while hiding in the country illegally have been doing.
A person may apply for asylum before they enter the country but they are also allowed to apply for asylum after entering the country but the fact remains that those seeking asylum actually have to apply for asylum. That is not what is happening in this case. Illegal aliens are being rounded up and are being sent to jail. If there are any asylum seekers among those that are rounded up it is their own damned fault for not following the proper asylum application process. The reason that they have not applied for asylum is because they are not seeking asylum.
Janet Napolitano is using the asylum excuse to justify her position that illegal immigrants do not belong in jail simply for breaking into the country,and to lessen the criminal act of breaking into this country. The truth is that she is soft on illegal immigration and she does not believe that these people should be arrested until they have committed an additional crime. By that time it is too late. What good does it do to let illegal immigrants hide in the shadows until they commit a crime that affects American citizens that could have been avoided by jailing and deporting the illegal immigrant before they committed a crime against an American citizen?
Janet Napolitiano is in charge of the Department of Homeland Security and as such it is her job to protect the American people yet she finds it more important to protect illegal immigrants against arrest and deportation that she finds it to protect the American people. This is just the latest example.
While most polls show that the American people support stronger border enforcement and tougher punishment for illegal aliens Janet Napolitano is advocating the exact opposite. She is out of touch with mainstream America.
During the campaign President Obama promised to close GITMO and when he signed the executive order that ordered GITMO to be closed next January it marked the first, and only campaign promise to the far left that he has kept.
But Barack Obama botched the GITMO closing from the very beginning, Sure, he threw his far left lap dogs a bone to keep them happy but he hasn’t accomplished anything on the GITMO issue yet, and he is going to miss his January deadline for closing GITMO.
His biggest problem was the fact that he was too short-sighted– he signed the order to close GITMO without even bothering to decide what to do with the prisoners. Even the Democrat controlled congress realized what a disaster this was and withheld the funding for the closure of GITMO by a 90-6 vote.
As the article I linked to above states; once it was learned that terrorists may be headed to the United States for trial once they were released from GITMO whatever public support the president had for closing GITMO eroded. I still believe that there was never widespread support behind closing GITMO and I still believe that closing GITMO was mainly only a serious issue to the far left. But those who are not on the far left who supported the closing of GITMO had second thoughts once the idea was floated about bring some of these terrorists to the United States for trial.
The vote in the senate alone should have been enough for the president to realize that the support to close GITMO just isn’t there– with the people and in the senate. It was a campaign issue during the Democrat primary when all of the far left voters came out to nominate the most liberal person that they could find, but the average American person would just assume keep the prisoners right where they are.
Once the president actually has a plan on what to do with the GITMO detainees perhaps the senate will reverse itself and vote to give Obama the funds he needs to close the prison. If he wasn’t in such a hurry to appease the far left he probably would have taken the time to devise a plan before he ordered the prison closed. He was in a hurry and so he worked backwards, he signed the order and then just hoped he would come up with a plan in time to keep his deadline. That is not going to happen.
These were serious miscalculations by the president and now it is time to play the blame game. President Obama couldn’t possibly be at fault for his own rash decisions. Somebody has to take the fall for the president, so move over granny, and make room for Greg Craig. It is getting crowded under the bus
House Democrats oppose taxing “Cadillac” healthcare plans
Over half of the Democrats in the House of Representatives have signed a letter asking that the government not tax the “Cadillac” health insurance plans. 154 Democrats do not agree with the idea of taxing a person’s healthcare benefits.
The letter from 154 House Democrats to Speaker Nancy Pelosi urges her “to reject proposals to enact an excise tax on high-cost insurance plans that could be potentially passed on to middle-class families.”
This is a major part of the healthcare reform bill and with 154 Democrats opposed to the healthcare benefits tax and with almost universal opposition by Republicans to this tax major problems could be brewing for this bill. The health insurance tax along with cuts in Medicare are the largest proposals for funding this legislation. If a health insurance tax is opposed in the house the funding for this bill will be basically non-existant.
And then there is another aspect to the health insurance benefit tax that has been forgotten that Rep. Joe Courtney has reminded us about.
Taxing health benefits was explicitly debated in the campaign by presidential candidates and people running for Congress
You remember all of the debate in the presidential election about John McCain’s plan to tax a person’s healthcare benefits, don’t you?
Then-candidate Barack Obama attacked Republican Sen. John McCain in a series of television ads last fall for a plan to lift the tax exemption on health insurance plans, which he cast as a radical departure and a crippling new tax
John McCain proposed this idea and was ridiculed by Barack Obama and other Democrats– and rightfully so. But now Barack Obama and the Democrat leaders are advocating the same policy that they claimed was “radical” and “crippling” just a few short months ago. What has changed that has made John McCain’s idea suddenly a good idea?
Thankfully there are 154 Democrats and a united Republican party in the House to hopefully remove this proposal from the table and effectively kill the healthcare reform bill.
The people spoke on this issue before the election and they chose a candidate who claimed that he did not support a tax on healthcare benefits. Luckily there are still many in the House of Representatives that remember this. Hopefully they will be able to hold President Obama to his campaign promise on taxing healthcare benefits.
