Mediaboss Marketing

House Republicans face the possibility of failing to pass a full budget resolution for the second year in a row, despite making progress on their goals for a fiscal 2018 budget resolution.

The stakes are much higher than last year as the budget, through the reconciliation process, has become a tool for Republicans to advance legislation without Democratic support, something they lack on nearly all of their top priorities.

Passing a budget resolution is key to the GOP goal to overhaul the tax system and helps kick-start the appropriations process because it sets topline budget numbers. Failure to adopt the fiscal blueprint would further illustrate how Republican divisions are stalling the legislative agenda in a year where GOP leaders have ambitious goals underunified government.

If we do not get a budget, most of what we want to accomplish as Republicans will take a major setback, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadowsof North Carolina said.

Rep. Tom Cole, who serves on the Budget and Appropriations committees, said finding agreement on the budget is always difficult given competing priorities among defense hawks, fiscal conservatives and appropriators, but its become more so after the House failed to get a deal last year.

Weve proven that Republicans can actually fail at [adopting] a budget when were in the majority, the Oklahoma Republican said. Weve never done that before. I thought it was a really bad thing then. I think youll see the consequences more [now].

The budget resolution, which will be among the topics discussed during a House Republican Conference meeting on fiscal issues on Wednesday (it was originally expected to be discussed at a meeting on Friday but was moved up), is where lawmakers typically unveil a topline spending number for the upcoming fiscal year. Last year, disagreement over the topline is what prevented House Republicans from passing a full budget; Senate Republicans never really tried.

The topline spending number is still a point of contention. The spending caps enacted as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 set fiscal 2018 spending levels at $549 billion for defense and $516 billion for nondefense discretionary funds.

Any changes to those topline levels need to pass both chambers of Congress to be enforceable, requiring 60 votes in the Senate.

Most Republicans want to boost defense spending (although they do not agree on the amount), but Democrats would likely only agree to a defense increase if it includes hikes indomestic spending. Previously, Democrats have insisted on, and secured, a dollar-per-dollar increase, something that is a nonstarter for conservatives, Meadows said.

In a meeting Thursday, Republicans on the House Budget Committee discussed topline spending numbers of $620 billion for defense about halfway between President Donald Trumps proposed $603 billion and the $640 billion called for by defense hawks and $511 billion for nondefense discretionary spending. Such a split, which is not finalized, is unlikely to get Democratic votes, and its unclear if it could garner enough Republican votes.

GOP appropriators haveexpressed concern about moving forward with budget numbers that Democrats have not agreed to because it could create problems with getting the appropriations bills done.

Anybody that thinks youre just going to deal the Democrats out of the appropriations process is just being naive, Cole said.

Finding the sweet spot on spending is more complicated this year because its become wrapped up in Republican negotiations over what fiscal policies to include in the budgets reconciliation instructions. The plan the GOP had mapped out in January was to use the fiscal 2018 budget reconciliation process to overhaul the tax code, but some Republicans are pushing for more.

House Freedom Caucus leaders have said their hard-line conservative membership, which prefers a lower spending baseline, is open to an increase in the topline number in exchange for a specific dollar amount of mandatory spending cuts in the reconciliation instructions. While the Freedom Caucus has yet to take a position on a specific proposal to that end, theyve been discussing the idea of looking to welfare programs such as theSupplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to achieve savings.

If the budget reconciliation [instructions] are definitive and preconditioned, then youll find great flexibility on spending numbers of those fiscal conservatives who believe that they can make some short-term adjustments in exchange for long-term mandatory reforms, Meadows said.

Leadership has been toying with the idea of including mandatory spending cut instructions but have yet to publicly back any specific proposal. Behind closed doors, theyve discussed tasking each committee with spending jurisdiction with finding $1 billion in savings, but Meadows said that would not be enough to appease conservatives.

Budget Committee Republicans discussed a target of $150 billion in mandatory savings during their Thursday meeting. That number may be too much for moderates to stomach.

Further complicating matters is a perception among some members that the Senate may not pass a budget.

Is the Senate interested in passing a budget? New York GOP Rep. Chris Collins said. Because were not so sure that they are. And if we dont have an indication that were on the same page as the Senate, why would we in the House work on something thats going to be very controversial and give our opponents lots of potential to distort, exaggerate or highlight things that would not be helpful?

Collins said theres an interest among moderate Republicans in a bipartisan tax overhaul, which would eliminate the need to use the budget reconciliation process.

If we try to do this on our own, its fraught with peril, he said.

A Senate GOP aide said the chamber does intend to pass a fiscal 2018 budget resolution but the timeline for that remains unclear. The Senate is currently busy trying to find the votes to pass a health care overhaul, which is moving through the fiscal 2017 budget reconciliation process.

House Budget Chairwoman Diane Black of Tennessee has met with the Freedom Caucus, the Tuesday Group and the Republican Study Committee in recent weeks to gather ideas across the conference. Despite the differing opinions on the topline, as well as what should be included in the reconciliation instructions, Black has expressed confidence that the House will pass a budget this year.

Well get something done, she said last week. Its just a matter of making sure we have all the pieces together.

Some more pessimistic members have raised the prospect of needing to pass another so-called shell budget, the bare minimum needed to set up the reconciliation process for a tax overhaul. Republicans passed a fiscal 2017 shell budget earlier this year to create the reconciliation instructions for a health care overhaul but billed that as a one-time solution.

GOP leadersmay struggle to find the votes for another shell budget, if it comes to that. But theyre hoping it wont.

Were going to put out a budget thats a real budget, Black said. No shells.

Paul M. Krawzakand Joe Williams contributed to this report.

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.

View post:
Prospect of Repeat Budget Failure Puts Pressure on Republicans - Roll Call

I am a registered liberal who mostly toes the party line but I am not devoted to the idea of big government. I loathe the law in New York state requiring gas pump nozzles to not latch. This means that I must stand beside my vehicle, holding the nozzle lever open, instead of latching it and walking into the gas station to use the john which, if you're an older male and hear gushing liquid, you feel a powerful urge to do, so thanks to legislative over-regulation, I am on the verge of humiliating myself.

Liberals believe in universal suffrage, but I don't think the right to vote should be extended to people walking around with wires going into their ears. If you need to walk through the world in a state of stupefaction, you don't belong in a democracy. The ballot should belong to people who pay attention.

I have other strong conservative tendencies: I accept limitations as inevitable, even sometimes futility. I once gave a very funny speech in the chapel of an Ivy League college and my voice went ricocheting around the Gothic arches and came back to me 15 seconds later and it was incomprehensible, even to me whose voice it was. I might as well have been speaking Navajo. Nobody laughed. I did not complain to authorities. I was amused. Stuff happens.

Life is unfair. The National Endowment for the Arts bestows pots of gold on poets, chickenfeed on humorists, and so what? The federal government is responsible for the announcement in airports warning you to report to authorities any stranger who asks you to carry an object aboard an aircraft. It's like telling people to report any sightings of unicorns. But who cares? Not I.

All around Washington stand handsome temples housing the ABA, NEA, AFL-CIO, the Federated Organization of Associations, the Organization of Associated Federations, the American Scatological Society, the National Recidivists Alliance, all of which have marbly lobbies and numerous executive vice presidents whose job is to buttonhole public servants. My group, UNCLE, the United Newspaper Columnists in the Language of English, has no such temple. We are harmless, like the Moose and the Elks, and ask only to be left alone.

Same with my other group, Minnesotans Oppressed by Rather Obsessive Self-Effacement (MOROSE), which, despite our resistance to attitudism, refusing to cheer at football games or join sing-alongs, has only dug a hole for itself. People regard us as a joke. We are not. We are victims of a self-mortifying culture and dare not ask anything for ourselves such as major defense installations, which go to Texas or California, but what are you going to do?

So there I am, pumping gas in Poughkeepsie, about to wet myself, all because of big government, and it dawns on me that back in my boyhood days, patient and practical-minded men and women got into politics and formed a strong bipartisan bloc that worked for decent mental health facilities and prisons, made higher education available to children of mail clerks and waitresses, created parks and protected wilderness all the basic stuff of government. That bloc seems to have evaporated and now we are locked in bitter conflict about which way is up and whether the earth is round. Crankiness is in the driver's seat.

Meanwhile, dreadful things are afoot. Powerful people want to put potheads in prison, clamp down on travel to Cuba, let banks mess around however they like, deport the folks who pick the lettuce and slaughter the hogs, and work assiduously to ease the troubles of the very rich, and if one says boo to them, they blame the media or my aunt Sally. Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country lest the quick brown fox jump over the lazy dog and President Etaoin Shrdlu endure. Sad! Total loser! You know it, I know it.

Republicans, beware. The tables will turn. We liberals will regain power by the simple method of redistricting. We will incorporate the Dakotas, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah into California, and usher in a hundred years of progressivism. What goes around comes around. Be wise. The Senate majority staffers who are trying to put lipstick on a cruel House health care bill are spitting into the wind. In 20 years, Obamacare will be gone, replaced by universal Medicare, and you will be employed as carnival workers, running the kiddie rides, and you'll stop for gas in New York and remember this column and ask yourselves, "Why didn't we listen to him then?" Well, why don't you?

Washington Post

Garrison Keillor is an author and radio personality.

Visit link:
Republicans, beware. The tables will turn. - Chicago Tribune

The Republican campaign to roll back Barack Obama's health care law is colliding with America's opioid epidemic. Medicaid cutbacks would hit hard in states deeply affected by the addiction crisis and struggling to turn the corner, according to state data and concerned lawmakers in both parties.

The central issue is that the House health care bill would phase out "Obamacare's" expanded Medicaid, which allows states to provide federally backed insurance to low-income adults previously not eligible. Many people in that demographic are in their 20s and 30s and dealing with opioid addiction. Dollars from Washington have allowed states to boost their response to the crisis, paying for medication, counseling, therapy and other services.

According to data compiled by The Associated Press, Medicaid expansion accounted for 61 percent of total Medicaid spending on substance abuse treatment in Kentucky, 47 percent in West Virginia, 56 percent in Michigan, 59 percent in Maryland, and 31 percent in Rhode Island. In Ohio, the expansion accounted for 43 percent of Medicaid spending in 2016 on behavioral health, a category that includes mental health and substance abuse.

Those states accepted the Medicaid expansion and represent a cross-section of places hardest hit by the nation's drug-overdose epidemic, which claimed more than 52,000 lives in 2015. Of the deaths, more than 6 in 10 were due to opioids, from prescription pain relievers like oxycodone to street drugs like heroin and an elephant tranquilizer.

Tracy Plouck, Ohio's director of mental health and addiction services, said Medicaid expansion dollars from Washington have allowed her state to redirect its own resources to priorities like providing recovery housing after detox. Reversing that would have real consequences for people who are trying to straighten their out their lives, she said. "If you go back into an environment where people are using, that sets you up with a risk that's nearly insurmountable."

In Youngstown, factory mechanic Paul Wright credits sustained help from Medicaid with his survival after he nearly died from a heroin overdose. Wright said he had started using as a teenager but now has been drug-free for 18 months. Before Medicaid expanded, his father's health insurance would pay for detox but not for long-term treatment. Wright would relapse. With Medicaid, he's been able to get follow-up.

"It's truly sad, but I've been to many funerals since I've been clean," said Wright, who's in his mid-20s. "I just think Medicaid honestly it saves people." And he's able to work.

The House GOP bill would end the extra funding states get through expanded Medicaid in 2020, and place a limit on overall federal spending for the program in the future. People already covered like Wright would be grandfathered in as long as they continue to meet eligibility requirements. But that's no comfort to Carolyn Givens, who runs the Neil Kennedy Recovery Center, where Wright gets help.

"If somebody could say to me, 'Carolyn, the crisis is going to be over next week,' I'd feel OK but I got 40 people on a waiting list," Givens said.

Medicaid cuts have become a major sticking point in the Senate for the GOP's American Health Care Act. Republican leaders can afford to lose only two votes, and several GOP senators from hard-hit states have been critical. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said Tuesday that senators are considering stretching the phase-out by three years, to 2023.

At a recent budget hearing, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price defended the Trump administration and raised questions about how much difference Medicaid actually makes.

The HHS budget for the opioid crisis is more than three times as great as two years ago, $811 million versus $245 million, Price said. That reflects increases approved by Congress beyond what Medicaid spends.

Questioned by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., about the consequences of reducing Medicaid's commitment, Price responded that more government spending is not the answer.

"Let me respectfully suggest ... that the programs that are out there by and large are not working," Price said. "We are losing more Americans today than we did last year. ... Clearly we're moving in the wrong direction."

Price suggested that states would be more effective with greater flexibility promised by the GOP plan for Medicaid.

Said Leahy: "As a child I believed in the tooth fairy, but I'm a little bit older now."

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said it's too early to expect a turnaround in the epidemic. "The resources are just getting to the communities," she said.

In New Hampshire, "we're just beginning to see the benefits of having the expansion of Medicaid to provide treatment for people," Shaheen added.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., wasn't convinced either. "I'm having trouble, as many of us are, reconciling your stated goal (about the opioid crisis) being one of your top three priorities with these dramatic cuts, " she said to Price during the hearing.

Cutting financing for the Medicaid expansion "would create an unsustainable financial obligation" for West Virginia, said Allison Adler, a spokeswoman for the state's health department.

Back in Youngstown, recovering addict Niki Campana said "it's like the apocalypse around here." Campana is helping other women with drug problems.

"I work with a lot of girls that struggle," she said at the Kennedy treatment center. "We can get them on Medicaid in a day and get them in treatment. For that not to be able to happen, that would be horrible."

Associated Press writers Adam Beam in Frankfort, Kent.; Becky Bohrer in Juneau, Alaska; Randall Chase in Wilmington, Del.; David Eggert in Lansing, Mich.; Morgan Lee in Santa Fe, N.M.; Ben Nuckols in Washington; Wilson Ring in Montpelier, Vt.; Michelle R. Smith in Providence, R.I.; Michael Virtanen in Morgantown, W.Va., and Brian Witte in Annapolis contributed to this report.

Read the rest here:
Republicans' Medicaid rollback collides with opioid epidemic - Chicago Tribune

Jonathan Rauch in Lawfare writes on Republicans' continued devotion to President Donald Trump:

"Perhaps there are limits to Republicans' tolerance, but if Trump hasn't already triggered them, it is hard to imagine where they are. The firing of a special prosecutor? An indictment? Possibly, but one wonders if it might be literally true that Trump could, as he once boasted, shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and retain Republican support.

"The numbers support no predictions, but they offer a hint. Even under a worst-case scenario of presidential malfeasance, removing Trump would be no easy or quick task. It would require a sea-change in Republican partisans' attitude, a change of which there is no sign today. And it would require Republican leaders to take political risks that few have shown any appetite for."

GOP defeats in 2018 might give the Democrats the majority in the House, expediting impeachment, but removing Trump would require a vote of two-thirds of the Senate. Without substantial GOP defections, Trump will be there for the remainder of his four-year term.

Could Trump be forced to resign if, for example, the choice was between resignation and being held in contempt of court for refusal to turn over financial records? Perhaps, but it's far from clear that such a standoff would occur. If it did, Trump and his fleet of lawyers could certainly delay and appeal, in essence running out the clock on his presidency.

Whether in 2020 or before, the only surefire means to protect the country from Trump is to defeat his followers, and eventually him. A third-party candidate, as my colleague Michael Gerson recognizes, could throw the race to the Democrat. My reaction to that possibility is: So? We've made the case here and been proved correct that Trump's flaws as a human being and president surpass matters of policy and put the republic at risk.

While it is true that a primary has never defeated a sitting president in more than 100 years (Lyndon Johnson chose not to run in 1968, Jimmy Carter beat back Ted Kennedy and Gerald Ford held off Ronald Reagan), Trump is helping to rewrite the political playbook. An anti-Trump Republican unsullied by sycophancy and presenting a credible program for uniting the country and addressing policy problems that have befuddled Trump would have a historic opportunity.

In the short term, the most effective way of removing Trump is to defeat again and again lawmakers who refuse to remove him, thereby advancing the prospects for impeachment and putting optimum pressure on Republican senators. (Republicans pledging to vote for impeachment or removal in the Senate based on the facts available at the time might spare themselves.)

With Georgia's special election Tuesday in the 6th Congressional District, we'll get our first inkling of just how vulnerable Republicans might be in 2018. Between now and 2018, Democrats, independents and the small cadre of #NeverTrump Republicans need to pursue two tracks simultaneously keeping the special counselor in place (and assisting in the fact-finding process with open hearings, when possible) and generating momentum to defeat the greatest possible number of Trump protectors. That might entail fielding third-party candidates and primary challenges. Democrats certainly will need to keep their base energized, field an all-star list of candidates and make the case against the extreme Trump agenda while presenting reasonable alternatives of their own.

The only real guarantee, you see, of reversing the debacle of 2016 is to defeat Trump and his minions at the polls. The solution to democracy gone astray is always more democracy.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Republicans, beware. The tables will turn.

My application to replace Sean Spicer

Trump's voters were more motivated by nationalism than economic hardship

If Republicans lose the House, Trump will be impeached

Here is the original post:
To stop Donald Trump, defeat the Republicans who enable him - Chicago Tribune

After 21 weeks at the controls of the White House and both chambers of the U.S. Congress, President Donald Trump and his Republicans have yet to pass major legislation into law and are short on time to do so before Washington's long summer recess.

The House of Representatives reconvened on Tuesday. It will be in session for the next nine weekdays, along with the Senate, which reconvened on Monday. Both chambers will take a break from July 1-9, then return and work July 10-28. After that, Capitol Hill will be quiet through the annual August vacation.

Trump set high expectations as a candidate and early in his presidency, promising to repeal and replace Obamacare, invest in infrastructure and work to cut taxes and regulations. These pledges have helped fuel a powerful stock market rally.

Trump's only big domestic policy win, aside from killing a handful of Obama-era regulations, has been Senate approval 10 weeks ago of a new Supreme Court justice. The White House has not sent Congress a legislative proposal on any major issue.

Trump has been swamped by investigations into possible ties between his campaign and alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

In Congress, the House has approved an Obamacare rollback bill, but it has stalled in the Senate. On Tuesday, Vice President Mike Pence predicted a Republican healthcare bill would be enacted by the end of summer.

Competing tax reform plans have divided Republicans in both chambers. No firm infrastructure plan has emerged, and lawmakers have not yet formulated a budget plan for 2018.

Urgent budget deadlines will follow the August break, and later in the year, lawmakers will begin focusing on the 2018 congressional elections.

Here is a look at key dates coming up.

June 20: Special House elections in Georgia and South Carolina.

June 30: Congress starts Independence Day break.

July 7-8: Trump attends G20 summit in Germany, his first face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

July 28: Congress adjourns for five-week summer recess.

July-August: U.S. Treasury may no longer be able to postpone the federal debt limit, although this may not arrive until late 2017.

Sept. 5: Congress reconvenes.

Sept. 30: End of federal fiscal year 2017. Without congressional action, funding for many programs will expire.

Oct. 1: Start of federal fiscal year 2018. Current federal spending deal expires. Without a new deal, the federal government could shut down.

(Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Lisa Von Ahn)

WASHINGTON Legislation to impose new sanctions on Russia and Iran that passed the U.S. Senate nearly unanimously last week has run into a procedural problem that could prevent a quick vote in the House of Representatives, lawmakers said on Tuesday.

WASHINGTON The U.S. Justice Department has launched a 12-city partnership to combat spikes in violent crime as part of President Donald Trump's vow to support law enforcement, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Tuesday.

Read more:
Factbox: Time slipping by for Trump, Republicans on domestic goals - Reuters