Custom Search
Showing posts with label House of Representatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label House of Representatives. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

House Stenographer Speaks Out About Freemason Rant On House Floor: 'Did Not Have A Breakdown' (Videos)

By Susan Duclos


Many reading might remember the name Dianne Reidy from an episode which was labeled bizarre by many, courageous by others, and which made national news after she took the House floor by surprise speaking of Freemasons, God and how we cannot serve two masters.


Dianne and her husband Dan are now speaking out about the incident which headlined for weeks. (2nd Video below)


The first video below produces the best sound track of the incident which went viral at the time, where DAHBOO7 notices that despite her name being Dianne, the people dragging her off the floor of the House were calling her "holly" or "molly."


Transcript of her floor statements:


"He will not be mocked, he will not be mocked," Reidy yelled multiple times. 
"This is not one nation under God. It never was. Had it been... the Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons, they go against God," she said, according to a Public Radio International reporter on hand. 
"You cannot serve two masters," she said.




The second video is Dan and Dianne, where she claims she "Did Not Have a Breakdown."

Via TheBlaze:


“I remember getting up to the podium and after saying, ‘God will not be mocked.’ I don’t have a memory of anything else that was said that evening until I was escorted off the floor,” Reidy said during the 38-minute video statement.

She later added, “I knew that God was going to speak through me, and I knew it was going to be during the vote, raising the debt ceiling level and ending the government shutdown.”




Cross posted at Before It's News


Monday, October 21, 2013

What Really Happened When The House Stenographer Was Pulled Off the Floor? (Video)

By Susan Duclos

Some think that when Diane Reidy yelled about God and freemasons and not being able to serve two masters on the floor of Congress before being dragged away, was brave, some say crazy, some say she was speaking the truth and others think she needs mental health help...... but what really happened that night?Truthstreammedia breaks it down, looks at the original footage, not just what the media keeps showing readers and viewers, and they noticed some interesting things.

Watch and see for yourself.


Video details:

Because the mainstream media isn't telling. 
Following weeks of bizarreness coming out of D.C., now we have this. The House stenographer was pulled off the floor after an outburst (story on that here:http://truthstreammedia.com/outburst-...).  
It's weird because the mainstream media dubbed the part of the outburst that happened after she was already pulled off the floor and standing near the elevators over the part where she's up at the dias podium, leaving the majority of TV viewers thinking that's what she actually said up there (even though you can hear the elevator ding as she's being pulled off the floor...obvious boo boo there, mainstream media). 
Weirder still, most mainstream media sources only show the vid once she's at the podium. Check out the full video on C-SPAN where a guy says something to her, nods, THEN she gets up almost robotically and goes to the podium and as she's yelling, that guy isn't even looking up at her but it would appear he's texting somebody... mission accomplished? But to what end?





Cross posted from Before It's News

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Crazed Liberal Freemason Ranter Says God Made Her Do It (Video)

By Susan Duclos

Further information has come to light on the story I wrote on Wednesday, titled "Congressional Stenographer Rants About Freemasons And God On House Floor."

The ranting stenographer's name is Dianne Reidy (which still leaves the reason for people clearly calling her "Holly" on the video/audio which will be shown below again, unexplained) and she is a registered liberal with two children who claims that for the past two-and-a-half weeks "the Holy Spirit has been waking me up in the middle of the night and preparing me (through my reluctance and doubt) to deliver a message in the House Chamber."

"That is what I did last night."

According to the New York Post, the married mother, who makes $126,050 a year registered to vote in 1991 as a member of the Liberal Party. 
On her Facebook page, she is a fan of several Christian-oriented groups, including the evangelical In Touch Ministries, led by TV preacher Charles Stanley. She was interviewed by Capitol Police before being sent to a hospital for a mental health evaluation.
A reminder of Reidy's antics on Wednesday's article, linked above:
“He will not be mocked, he will not be mocked,” the raving woman screamed.  
“This is not one nation under God. It never was. Had it been… the Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons, they go against God,” she said, according to a Public Radio International reporter on hand.
“You cannot serve two masters,” she said.



You can see her dragged off the floor in the video below, shown last night but well worth seeing again, and after that there is an audio where a man can be heard calling her "Holly."









Cross posted at Before It's News

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

'We Write You As Fathers And Mothers'- Syria Parliament Letter To US House Of Representatives - (Video)

By Susan Duclos

With all the information about Syria, not much has been written about a letter, dated September 4, 2013, from the Syrian Parliament and sent to the U.S. House of Representatives, much like the ones they sent to the UK and to France.

'We write to you as fathers and mothers, as members of families and communities, which really are not so different to yours. Moreover, we write to you as human beings asking: if you bomb us, shall we not bleed?! The innocent people will be harmed."

Read the rest below from the embedded letter. Beneath that is a video clip of the UK news report about the letter they received.














Thursday, June 27, 2013

Senate Passes Amnesty Bill: Ryan Says House Won't Take It Up- See How Your Senator Voted

By Susan Duclos



The shoe is on the other foot today as the Senate passes their amnesty bill with a vote of 68 to 32, but Paul Ryan says the House of Representatives won't take up the Senate bill and will instead pass their own version of immigration reform.

In the recent past, the House of Representatives have passed bill after bill, with bipartisan support and the Democratically controlled Senate has either refused to bring them to the floor, or killed them along partisan lines.

Via Politico, Paul Ryan says the House won't take up the Senate bill:

Rep. Paul Ryan says the House won’t be taking up the Senate immigration bill, but it will be working on its own legislation that he says will create a “workable legal immigration system.”

The Wisconsin Republican told Sean Hannity on Fox News on Wednesday that the border security amendment to immigration reform passed by the Senate brings that bill closer to the House position, but he wants to make sure there are “triggers” in the final bill.

“We’re not going to bring up the Senate bill, we’re going to do it our own way, on our own very methodical way, because we want to make sure we get this stuff right,” Ryan said. “We want to have real triggers on the border, real triggers on what we call the e-verify.”

There is a total of 40 different jobs bills alone the House of Representatives have passed that are stuck in the Senate, many of which passed with bipartisan support, so it will be quite entertaining to see Senate majority leader, Harry Reid (D-NV) whine and complain that the Senate bill is bipartisan and the House refuses to bring it to the floor.

See How Your Senator Voted:

Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---68
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chiesa (R-NJ)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cowan (D-MA)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Flake (R-AZ)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Heller (R-NV)
Hirono (D-HI)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs ---32
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Grassley (R-IA)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Lee (R-UT)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Poll: Plurality Of Republican Voters Less Likely To Vote For Incumbent That Supports Amnesty For Illegals

By Susan Duclos

The first point here is that "pathway to citizenship" is amnesty, pure and simple. One of the main Senate supporters on the Republican side, Marco Rubio, made that very clear in 2010 when he said "First of all, earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty. It's what they call it. And the reality of it is this: This has to do with the bottom line that America cannot be the only country in the world that does not enforce its immigration laws. It is unfair to the people that have legally entered this country to create an alternative pathway for individuals who entered illegally and knowingly did so. (Video of Rubio saying that here)

According to a United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, 49 percent of Republicans say they would be less likely to vote to re-elect a lawmaker that supports amnesty aka "pathway to citizenship" for those in the country illegally. 30 percent say it wouldn't effect their vote and 15 percent would be more likely to vote for that candidate.


Among all adults surveyed, immigration is something of a moot issue: 42 percent of them said a vote either for or against immigration reform would not greatly affect their support for their senator or representative. Thirty-three percent said it would make them less likely to support him or her, and 21 percent said such a vote would make them more likely to back the incumbent.

This is a very good reason why Republicans in the House have no taste for pushing the Senate amnesty bill through the house of Representatives.

“We have a minority of the minority in the Senate voting for this bill,” said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, referring to the 15 or so Republicans expected to back the Senate measure. “That’s not going to put a lot of pressure on the majority of the majority in the House.” 

Two senior House Republican leadership aides were more blunt when speaking privately: Speaker John A. Boehner has no intention of angering conservative voters and jeopardizing the House Republican majority in 2014 in the interest of courting Hispanic voters on behalf of a 2016 Republican presidential nominee who does not yet exist.

The difference between the House of Representatives and the  Senate, other than the House is controlled by the GOP and the Senate by Democrats, is that all 435 House seats are on the ballot in the 2014 midterm elections, but only one-third (33) Senate seats are on the ballot, 23 of them seats held by Democrats and 10 seats held by Republicans.

Senate Republicans supporting the immigration reform bill which includes amnesty, have far less to worry about in the 2014 elections than House Republicans do.

Another reason the House of Representatives see no upside in pushing the Senate's amnesty bill forward lies in priority polling, from a variety of organizations, where the economy dominates what Americans feel as the most important issue and immigration doesn't even hit double digits.

The Senate amnesty bill is dead on arrival in the House.

Related

5 Senators Who Support Immigration Bill Don't Know Answer to Key Question About It




Thursday, June 20, 2013

If IRS Scandal Is 'Manna From Heaven' For GOP In 2014, Then Amnesty Is A Cup Of Poison

By Susan Duclos

The video below is Jonah Goldberg’s take on the Obama administration’s recent scandals and their political implications for 2014, specifically the IRS scandal which he calls "manna from heaven" for the GOP in 2014.


Goldberg is correct, this scandal will live on as more and more information becomes available and it can, will and should be used relentlessly in campaigns for the 2014 midterms.

Along with the NSA Prism and Verizon scandal, the DOJ attack on the media scandal and the Benghazi scandal, a reasonable person would think these could be the final nails in the Democrats' coffin for the 2014 midterms.

But wait.......

It appears that Republicans, being politicians, can take "manna from heaven" and magically turn it into a cup of poison, in one fell swoop, with the controversial amnesty bill working it's way through the Senate.

Amnesty- a pardon is granted to a large group of individuals.

RINOs and Democrats along with Obama can call it a pathway to citizenship all they want, but the U.S. already has a pathway to citizenship which millions upon millions of legal immigrants have used throughout history to become productive members of American society.

What the Senate "gang of 8" is proposing is amnesty, it is rewarding illegals, those who came or stayed in the United States illegally, by offering them a pardon for their crimes and giving them legal status.

Not only the crime of entering and/or staying in the country illegally, but the crime of identity theft and fraud to which over half of illegals in the U.S. are guilty of.

Every benefit for the GOP in the 2014 elections, regarding the multitude of Obama scandals rocking Washington, can be wiped away if House Republicans follow the Senate RINOs and Democrats over the Amnesty cliff.

Conservative supporters can only hope that Republican House lawmakers are smart enough to understand.

[Update] House Republicans do seem to understand that passing the Senate amnesty bill would gain them less voters in 2014 than it would lose,  by wiping out the millions of base Republicans and conservative voters.


Monday, June 17, 2013

Immigration Reform- Amnesty Bill Dead On Arrival At The House?

By Susan Duclos


Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, says he will not bring the immigration reform bill onto the floor of the House without the majority support of the GOP, who is the controlling party of the House of Representatives. 

Washington Examiner:

"My goal is always to bring bills to the floor that have a strong Republican majority," Boehner said. "Immigration reform is a very difficult issue. But I don't intend to bring an immigration bill to the floor that violates what I and what members of my party -- what our principles are."

The differences between the House of Representatives and the Senate is that the Senate is controlled by Democrats with a few Republicans in name only (RINO's) that are supportive of amnesty for illegal aliens as well as diverting funds from border security to provide government funded health care to illegal immigrants, as Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer plans to suggest.

Boxer's amendment funds this assistance by using fees paid by illegal immigrants applying for legalization. Under the Senate bill currently, that money is earmarked for border security. The amendment is an admission that the rush to legalization will put a strain on taxpayers. It is also an admission that border security isn't a big priority for many of those supporting this bill.

Boxer is also seeking to allow newly legalized immigrants to access federal welfare benefits sooner. Currently, it could take up to 15 years for immigrants to access the full range of federal assistance programs. Boxer would like to reduce that by 5 years. 

The Republicans in the House of Representatives understand that it would be political suicide to endorse or pass any bill that rewarded criminals, illegal aliens, for coming and/or staying in the United States illegally when so many legal immigrants followed the laws and came here legally and are productive members of society.

Any Republican that offers amnesty aka "path to citizenship" to those who broke the every first laws upon entering and/or staying in America as well as offering them taxpayer funded healthcare and welfare benefits, will suffer for it in the 2014 midterm elections.

John Boehner seems to realize this.




Saturday, June 01, 2013

Rules Committee Launches New Website

By Susan Duclos

Earlier this week, the Rules Committee launched a new website.  The site has been redesigned from scratch to provide new tools to better track legislation and to deliver an overall more user-friendly experience.  With a new search-oriented platform, it is now easier to find and sort through the text of legislation under consideration at Rules, including submitted amendments, and all official documents generated by the committee.

Chairman Sessions made the following statement today about the launch of the new website:

 "I am committed to enhanced transparency and access for members, staff, and the general public. "

This new website builds upon the progress we’ve already made in making the House a more open and accountable institution to the American people.  With timely and accurate updates, the Rules website is a go-to destination for information on the business of the House.  The new features include important upgrades that will make it easier for citizens to view the inner workings of Congress.”

Below is a short video  outlining some of the site's new features:





Cook Political Report: Simple Demographic Math Shows Built-In GOP Advantage For 2014 Midterms

By Susan Duclos


The Cook Political Report on May 31, 2013, sets aside the IRS, DOJ attack on media, and Benghazi scandals rocking the White House as well as the rocky implementation of Obamacare and digs into the "simple demographic math" and concludes the GOP have a "built-in midterm turnout advantage."

Excerpts below:

Midterm elections have always drawn older voters, and usually drawn white voters, to the polls in disproportionate numbers. Older voters are less transient, have grown deeper roots in their local communities, and pay much more attention to non-presidential elections than their younger counterparts. In the 1980s, that didn't hold partisan consequences. Today, that amounts to a built-in midterm turnout advantage for Republicans.
[...]

Republicans' built-in midterm turnout advantage really began to emerge in the early part of the last decade but has ballooned in the Obama era. That's because partisan voting patterns are more polarized by age and race than they ever have been, and Obama's coalition is more highly dependent on young and non-white voters than any presidential coalition before it. ......

[...]

As recently as 2000, House Democrats did just as well with voters over the age of 65 as they did among voters between the ages of 18 to 29. But beginning in 2002, Democrats started performing much better with the youngest voters than the oldest voters, and in both 2010 and 2012, House Democrats performed a whopping 16 points better with 18-29 year olds than voters over 65. This gap spells big 2014 trouble for Democrats running in marginal states and districts.

[...]

Between 1992 and 2012, House Democrats have always done between 30 and 39 percent better with non-white voters than white voters. However, whereas a widening generation gap between the parties has deemed existing generational turnout patterns more dire for Democrats in 2014, the story of race is a mirror image: a widening racial turnout gap between midterms and presidential years has made an existing partisan racial gulf more dire for Democrats in 2014. 


The report concludes:

For most Democratic House candidates, a good rule of thumb might be to subtract two to three points from the 2012 Democratic percentage in the district to come up with a reasonable approximation of a "starting point" for a 2014 race. That means most Democrats probably need to perform about five percent better among Independent voters in 2014 just to stay afloat at 2012 levels, and would need an even higher share of Independents to pick up seats. Wow

Bottom line, recent demographic math hands Republicans an easy advantage, but history also offers the GOP an advantage going back to 1938.

Historically, midterm elections, specifically during a second term for a president, shows their party almost always loses seats in the House and Senate, with the exception being Bill Clinton who lost eight Senate seats and 52 House seats during his first term, but gained 5 seats in the House and came up with an even 0 lost, 0 gained in the Senate, during his second term.

Year President Party President Approval Rating - Late October House Senate
1934 Franklin D. Roosevelt D nd +9 +9
1938 Franklin D. Roosevelt D 60% -71 -6
1942 Franklin D. Roosevelt D nd -55 -9
1946 Harry S. Truman D 27% -45 -12
1950 Harry S. Truman D 41% -29 -6
1954 Dwight D. Eisenhower R nd -18 -1
1958 Dwight D. Eisenhower R nd -48 -13
1962 John F. Kennedy D 61% -4 +3
1966 Lyndon B. Johnson D 44% -47 -4
1970 Richard Nixon R nd -12 +2
1974 Gerald R. Ford R nd -48 -5
1978 Jimmy Carter D 49% -15 -3
1982 Ronald Reagan R 42% -26 +1
1986 Ronald Reagan R nd -5 -8
1990 George Bush R 57% -8 -1
1994 William J. Clinton D 48% -52 -8
1998 William J. Clinton D 65% +5 0
2002 George W. Bush R 67% +8 +2
2006 George W. Bush R 37% -30 -6
Source: The American Presidency Project

Back to The Cook Political Report, which asks: "Is there any hope that Democrats can find the silver bullet to turn around their midterm turnout woes with minority and younger voters?"

The better question in my opinion would be, "Will the Republicans screw up their built-in demographic and historical advantages?"

There are a number of ways they can build on these advantages

Adding the recent scandals rocking the White House back into the equation, the Congressional Republicans in the House can satisfy the majority of Americans, 76 percent, including 63 percent of Democrats, by appointing a special prosecutor to investigate and IRS scandal of targeting conservatives and conservative groups.

It is very important though that the person chosen not have a history of being partisan in either direction or the investigation and the results will be seen as "political," and negate the overall effects of those results.

Republicans also need to tie each and every Democrat, that voted for Obamacare,  to every study, article and reported "bump and glitch," tax and regulation associated with Obamacare, immediately and relentlessly.

The GOP must learn to communicate and utilize their base and supporters. These are the people that will use forums, comment sections, social medial, emails, talk to friends and family, go door-to-door for them, and help them bypass the liberal media in order to get their message across.

Most importantly, Republicans need to back candidates that will not shoot themselves in the foot at every opportunity.

The GOP is going into the 2014 campaign season with built-in demographic and historical advantages,  a scandal ridden Democratic White House which is implementing an unpopular healthcare law that even Democrats are calling a "train wreck," they need to capitalize on every single one of them.


Saturday, May 11, 2013

Republicans Keep Their Word To Voters, Starve Obamacare, Forcing HHS To Beg Donations From Health Officials

By Susan Duclos

While the House of Representatives, controlled by Republicans, have passed a number of bills to repeal Obamacare, the Senate is controlled by Democrats and those bills have died in the Senate. The next option for the House, who controls the purse strings, so to speak, was to starve Obamacare aka Affordable Care Act, which they have done by denying requests from the Obama administration for additional funds to implement Obama and Democrats' healthcare law.

RCP screen shot from 5/11/13


Hence the news that  being reported that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is going to health industry officials to as for large financial donations to implement the unpopular healthcare law.

Over the past three months, Sebelius has made multiple phone calls to health industry executives, community organizations and church groups and asked that they contribute whatever they can to nonprofit groups that are working to enroll uninsured Americans and increase awareness of the law, according to an HHS official and an industry person familiar with the secretary’s activities. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk openly about private discussions.

An HHS spokesperson said Sebelius was within the bounds of her authority in asking for help.
But Republicans charged that Sebelius’s outreach was improper because it pressured private companies and other groups to support the Affordable Care Act. The latest controversy has emerged as the law faces a string of challenges from GOP lawmakers in Washington and skepticism from many state officials across the country.

“To solicit funds from health-care executives to help pay for the implementation of the President’s $2.6 trillion health spending law is absurd,” Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) said in a statement. “I will be seeking more information from the Administration about these actions to help better understand whether there are conflicts of interest and if it violated federal law.”

Federal regulations do not allow department officials to fundraise in their professional capacity. They do, however, allow Cabinet members to solicit donations as private citizens “if you do not solicit funds from a subordinate or from someone who has or seeks business with the Department, and you do not use your official title,” according to Justice Department regulations.

 Sebelius is no stranger to using her official capacity to act improperly:

And Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) said, “The appearance of impropriety is glaring and Congress must investigate and take action to ensure these implied threats do not continue.”

Even a whiff of impropriety would be bad news for Sebelius, who was found last year to have violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits political activity in her official capacity.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel determined in September that Sebelius had offered an “extemporaneous partisan remark” at an event in North Carolina when she spoke in support of President Barack Obama’s reelection and in favor of a Democratic candidate for governor.



As the screen shot of the recent polling on Obama and Democrats' healthcare law, commonly referred to as Obamacare, shows, more than three years after Democrats pushed Obamacare through Congress and Obama signed it into law, the American public still opposes the law more than favoring it, by an average of 11 percentage points higher for those against the law than those in favor of it.

As the more unpopular aspects of the law start being seen, those numbers are likely to get worse for Obamacare.

Which is why, three years later, Barack Obama is still trying to convince the public to support the law as evidenced by his renewed pitches.

Studies conducted after the 2010 midterm elections where Republicans took control of the House of Representative with the largest turnover of seats seen in decades, showed that voting for Obamacare is the reason Democrats lost as many seats as they did.

Republicans running in 2010 did so by promising to do everything in their power to repeal the Obamacare law. Republicans kept their word, they have voted to repeal it in multiple actions in the House, but Senate Democrats have refused to repeal it.

Republicans have done the next best thing, they are starving it, refusing to provide addition taxpayer funds to implement a law that those very taxpayers oppose.

Democratic Senators that were not on the ballot in the 2010 midterms, but voted to pass Obamacare against the opposition of the majority of the public, now are worried about paying the "political price" in the 2014 midterm elections, if implementation turns the whole thing into a "train wreck."

Out of the 21 Democratic Senate seats that are on the ballot in the 2014 midterm elections, 14 of them voted for Obamacare in 2009 (Roll call here), excluding those retiring.

Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)
Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Mark Begich (D-AK)
Mark Pryor (D-AR)
Mark Udall (D-CO)
Richard Durbin (D-IL)
Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Al Franken (D-Minn)
Tom Udall (D-NM)
Kay Hagan (D-NC)
Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
Jack Reed (D-RI)
Tim Johnson (D-SD)
 Mark Warner (D-VA)

Remember those names comes November 2014.

 Kudos to the GOP for keeping their word to the American public.


Related:

WuA Obamacare coverage.


Tuesday, May 07, 2013

Senate Passes Internet Tax Bill- See How Your Senator Voted: House Puts The Brakes On

By Susan Duclos

The Senate passed an internet tax bill on Monday, with a vote of 69 to 27 with 4 note voting. The roll call of how each Senator voted will be listed below, by position.

The House of Representatives has put the brakes on that version of the bill and lawmakers claim if it passes it will be very different from the Senate's version of the bill.

[Update] Boehner says he 'probably' can't support online sales tax bill

See how your Senator voted:

Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---69
Alexander (R-TN)
Baldwin (D-WI)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cowan (D-MA)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Fischer (R-NE)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
NAYs ---27
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Coburn (R-OK)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Flake (R-AZ)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kirk (R-IL)
Lee (R-UT)
McConnell (R-KY)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Tester (D-MT)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 4
Begich (D-AK)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Moran (R-KS)





Thursday, March 21, 2013

35 House Democrats Join Republicans In Voting Against Senate Democrats' Tax and Spend 'Budget'

By Susan Duclos

Senate Democrats took four years to finally produce a budget and as as reported at the time, it included massive tax increases, dramatically increases spending and never balances the budget, via The Hill.

“Testimony from [Budget] Committee staff clearly established that compared to current law, their alleged deficit reduction is nowhere close to $1.85 trillion, and by their own admission, is actually only about $700 billion. Removing gimmicks like the war savings accounting trick, the true deficit reduction is only around $300 billion — drastically less than the majority advertises to the nation. That is why, despite a $1.5 trillion tax increase, their budget still make no alteration to our unsustainable debt path.”

In fact, under the Senate Democratic budget, total annual outlays (spending) rise by $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years, a 61 percent increase. At the same time, taxes would go up for the 50 percent of working-age Americans who still pay them.

And they’re not talking small tax increases, but a massive $1.5 trillion. But that’s not all, because it doesn’t count $600 billion in new taxes imposed in January and the $1.1 trillion in new ObamaCare taxes slated to go into effect.

These three tax increases combined equal more money than the United States government has ever collected in a single year. And this is on top of existing taxes.


It came as no surprise that the Republican controlled House of Representatives voted against the Senate Democrats' tax and spend bill...err.... budget. What did come as a surprise was that 35 House Democrats joined Republicans in voting against it. The vote was 154-261. (Roll Call here)


Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.) said he voted against the Senate budget because it did not go far enough on entitlements.
"It is not enough entitlement reform in there going forward. It needs to be a more complete and balanced picture and it wasn't bipartisan in the end of the day," Schrader told The Hill.

Two other plans were voted down as well.

 • The House also rejected the budget from the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) in a 105-305 vote. That vote split Democrats 105-80, nearly the same as last year when they split 107-75.

• The Progressive Caucus budget was also rejected 84-327, but it managed to pick up a few more votes compared to last year. Most Democrats voted against this bill, just as they did last year when it was rejected 78-346.
 The CBC and Progressive budgets call for trillions more in taxes and spending compared to the Senate plan.

 Thursday morning, the House of Representatives passed the Ryan budget plan, which balances the budget in ten years and dramatically cuts government spending, without tax increases, with a vote of 221-207.

The Ryan budget has almost no chance of passing through the Democratically controlled Senate.

For the fourth year out of five, Barack Obama has not met the legal deadline, Feb. 4, the first Monday in February,  for proposing his own budget and it is expected to be at least nine weeks late.



Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Vid- Boehner:House Doesn't Need To Pass 3rd Sequester Replacement Before "Senate Gets Off Their Ass'

By Susan Duclos

Speaker of the House, John Boehner, at a press conference this morning explains that the House of Representatives, controlled by Republicans, has passed two separate bills to replace the sequester cuts due to automatically go into effect on March 1, 2013.

Boehner goes on to say "We have moved a bill in the House twice. We should not have to move a third bill before the Senate gets off their ass and begins to do something."

[WATCH]



Politico provides more of Boehner's comments from his media availability:

It’s time for the Senate to act,” Boehner said during a media availability after the meeting. “It’s not about the House. We’ve acted. Where’s the president’s plan to avoid the sequester? Have you seen one? I haven’t seen one. All I’ve heard is he wants to raise taxes again. Where’s the president’s plan? Where’s the Senate Democrats’ plan? I want to see it.”
The House passed the Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act (HR. 5652) in May 2012 and the Spending Reduction Act (H.R. 6684) in December. Learn more about them both here.

In the meantime, Obama has become quite the source of entertainment to Republicans, as explained by NRO:

According to several sources who attended this morning’s GOP conference meeting, House Republicans are amused by President Obama’s theatrics about the sequester, since the White House partly engineered the policy. “There was a lot of laughter about the president traveling roadshow,” says one GOP member, who requested anonymity to speak freely about the closed-door session. “We’re all concerned about the sequester, but we just don’t understand why the president has to travel thousands of miles to campaign about this, when all he really has to do is travel 1.5 miles to visit Harry Reid and figure something out.”

Monday, January 14, 2013

Marco Rubio Letter To Obama On America's Debt: 'You Failed To Lead'

By Susan Duclos

Senator Marco Rubio wrote a letter to Barack Obama, shredding him to pieces on his failure in leadership, his massive piling up of debt in his first time and his complete lack of ability or plan to reduce the nations debt.

PDF of the letter can be found here.

Full text of letter below:

January 6, 2012

President Barack Obama

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President: Any day now, news reports suggest you will ask Congress to approve yet another increase in the debt ceiling. The expected request is another $1.2 trillion, adding to a three year debt binge that has totaled $4.5 trillion on your watch and that has enabled our overall debt to surpass $15 trillion. Your latest request will push the federal debt limit well above $16 trillion.

This pending request will be the sixth time during your Presidency that Congress is being asked to keep allowing government and spending to grow at rates that are unsustainable. In other words, you have made it a routine part of your job to ask for more room to spend without any plan to reduce our debt.

Instead of making debt ceiling increases a routine Washington exercise, we need to make it routine to actually spend no more than we take in. Until then, I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.

As I wrote in The Wall Street Journal in March 2011, I will oppose a debt ceiling increase unless such an authorization is accompanied by a real plan to tackle our debt. Ideally, such a plan would feature both pro-growth elements and spending restraints, including fundamental tax reform, regulatory reform, meaningful cuts to discretionary spending, a balanced-budget amendment, and reforms to save Social Security and Medicare.

If we had done this in mid-2011 when we last debated the debt ceiling, we could have set America on a path to economic growth and prosperity. This would have led to more jobs and, in turn, to more duly employed taxpayers generating more growth-driven revenue to help us pay down our debt. Instead, you failed to lead, punted the tough decisions and, in doing so, our credit rating was downgraded for the first time in our history. It's a tragic reality but, on your watch, more and more people have come to believe that America is becoming a deadbeat nation inevitably heading toward a European-style debt crisis.

When you served in the Senate in 2006, you called raising the debt limit “a sign of leadership failure.” Using your own standard, this request will mark your sixth “sign of leadership failure” on the debt ceiling issue alone. Throughout our history, Americans have revered courageous leaders and celebrated them as profiles in courage. Unfortunately, the first three years of your presidency have been a profile in leadership failure. While you may choose to run your reelection campaign against a “Do-Nothing Congress,” your insistence on doing nothing to meaningfully tackle our debt poses a direct threat to America’s exceptional character and is leading us towards a diminished future.

America deserves leaders who will stand front and center, level with the American people about our challenges and offer real solutions to solve them. Instead of simply asking for another debt ceiling increase, I urge you to come forward with a real plan to tackle our debt in 2012.

Sincerely,
Marco Rubio
United States Senator

The news of letter comes just as Obama finished yet another long winded speech insisting he be given another increase in the debt limit by Congress without any spending cuts associated with it.

 Speaker of the House John Boehner issues his response to Obama's press conference:

“The American people do not support raising the debt ceiling without reducing government spending at the same time. The consequences of failing to increase the debt ceiling are real, but so too are the consequences of allowing our spending problem to go unresolved. Without meaningful action, the debt will continue to act as an anchor on our economy, costing American jobs and endangering our children's future. The House will do its job and pass responsible legislation that controls spending, meets our nation's obligations and keeps the government running, and we will insist that the Democratic majority in Washington do the same.”

Politico recently reported that Republicans in the House of Representatives are so fed up with Barack Obama's  refusal to address the nation's increasing debt and deficits with more than just words, that some are fully prepared to allow the shutdown of government to force Obama to start dealing with the out-of-control spending of money the country does not have and the reason Washington continues to have to increase the amount America is allowed by law to borrow.


Wednesday, January 02, 2013

Sandy-Relief Bill Stuffed Full Of Non-Sandy Related Pork

By Susan Duclos

Republicans need to strip the pork that is stuffed into the so-called Sandy Relief billbefore even considering passing such a measure.

Via Town Hall, here is a list of non-Sandy related pork that was stuffed into the bill now being dubbed as the Sandy Scam:

The pork-barrel feast includes more than $8 million to buy cars and equipment for the Homeland Security and Justice departments. It also includes a whopping $150 million for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to dole out to fisheries in Alaska and $2 million for the Smithsonian Institution to repair museum roofs in DC.

An eye-popping $13 billion would go to “mitigation” projects to prepare for future storms.

Other big-ticket items in the bill include $207 million for the VA Manhattan Medical Center; $41 million to fix up eight military bases along the storm’s path, including Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; $4 million for repairs at Kennedy Space Center in Florida; $3.3 million for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center and $1.1 million to repair national cemeteries.

Budget watchdogs have dubbed the 94-page emergency-spending bill “Sandy Scam.”
More:
$58.8 million for forest restoration on private land.
$197 million “to… protect coastal ecosystems and habitat impacted by Hurricane Sandy.”
$10.78 billion for public transportation, most of which is allocated to future construction and improvements, not disaster relief.
$17 billion for wasteful Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), a program that has become notorious for its use as a backdoor earmark program.

The media is having a field day pretending that House Republicans hung Sandy victims out to dry, but unless a relief bill actually provides relief and not totally unrelated spending which has nothing to do with helping Sandy victims, then the bill should die, be stripped of the pork, then passed.

List Of 85 House Republicans That Betrayed Their Constituents With Fiscal Cliff Vote

By Susan Duclos

[Update] Followup post with links and direct quotes from these GOP House members below which are in direct contrast to their vote for the fiscal cliff deal.

The Senate generated fiscal cliff deal passed the House of Representatives with a vote of 257/167 and 8 list as not voting. 85 Republican House members joined with all but 16 Democrats to raises taxes on 77 percent of Americans and increase the federal deficit by nearly $4 trillion over the next decade.

More on that here and here.

H/T The Blaze, below is an embedded list of the 85 House Republicans that voted for ne of the largest tax hikes on Americans.

Kudos to Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) who were part of the 151 House Republicans to vote against the bill. Shame on Speaker John Boehner for joining the 85 Republicans and almost all the Democrats to pass the pill.
Republicans who voted 'Yes' on the Senate's 'Fiscal Cliff' bill


Should John Boehner Be Replaced As Speaker Of The House On Thursday?

By Susan Duclos

The so-called fiscal cliff deal has passed Congress and Speaker John Boehner was one of 85 Republicans to vote in favor of the bill along with all but 16 Democrats in the House. The bill, which Obama has pledged to sign, has a 10-to-1 ratio of tax increases over spending cuts. (Some say 40-to-1) 151 Republicans in the House of Representatives voted against the deal.

The deal raises taxes by four percent on anyone making $400,000 or filing as a couple $450,000. The payroll tax holiday has ended so taxes are also increased on the rest of Americans workers. The bill also increases government spending by $330 billion. . The death tax has been raised to 40 percent on any amount over $5 million. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the deal will add $4 trillion to the nation's deficit over the next decade.

There are very few pundits that see anything good in this bill, but Power Line does provide an optimistic take on the fiscal cliff deal, for those that are interested.

Now for the question of the day, or perhaps the week.

Should John Boehner be elected as Speaker for the next session of Congress?

Granted John Boehner was in a difficult position over the fiscal cliff issue and there is no doubt that position will stay difficult over the next two years with a Democrat controlling the White House and Democrats in control of the Senate.

But, there is  a growing number of Republicans in the House and throughout the country that do not think John Boehner has the backbone to use the advantage of position as the party that controls the House of Representatives, therefore the purse strings of the nation.

Via BG:

American Majority Action spokesman Ron Meyer told Breitbart News late Tuesday that enough House Republicans have banded together in an effort to unseat House Speaker John Boehner from his position--they just need a leader to take up the mantle.

“At least 20 House Republican members have gotten together, discussed this and want to unseat Speaker Boehner--and are willing to do what it takes to do it,” Meyer said. “That’s more than enough to get the job done, but the one problem these guys face is they need a leader to coalesce behind.”

For the past two presidential elections, the GOP establishment has chosen "moderates" to represent the party, forgetting that in their desire to appeal to Independents and Moderates, they cannot win an election without their conservative base being united. They lost.

Thursdays vote will be indicative to conservatives voters as to whether the establishment and House Republicans have learned anything at all from party leaders' failure to choose well.

It is time to replace John Boehner as Speaker of the House, the real question is whether House Republicans have the guts or intelligence to do so.

[Update] Rep. Tom Price: "We Need Red State Leadership In The House."


Friday, December 21, 2012

Fiscal Cliff Plan B Dies

By Susan Duclos

John Boehner put plan B before the House members in private, all day, and did not have enough votes to pass it, so pulled it, without taking a vote.

Plan B is dead... sort of.... sort of.

Boehner’s statement — released after the closed meeting in the House basement — seemed to hand off the the nation’s fiscal crisis to Democrats.

“Now it is up to the president to work with Sen. Reid on legislation to avert the fiscal cliff,” Boehner said Thursday night.

Boehner’s Republican Conference has relegated their negotiator to the sidelines. Now, Republicans will see why Boehner was willing to offer Obama so much: The final deal Republicans will now have to swallow will be driven by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Obama.

“He’s tried his best,” said Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio), a longtime Boehner confidant who is leaving Congress at the end of the year. “But sometimes your best isn’t good enough in the face of some people that just don’t want to find common ground.”

Rep. Buck McKeon, a California Republican who has served with Boehner for two decades, said what happened to the speaker is a “real shame.”

“He has worked his heart out to try to get the best deal he can, and to have this happen is very sad for the country,” McKeon said.

If Boehner has pulled out of the negotiations and now Harry Reid and Obama will fashion a deal, then how on earth will said deal, which will be far more unacceptable to House Republicans, pass the House to make it to Obama's desk?

Unless all Democrats in the House vote for it with enough Republicans to garner 218 votes, it isn't possible. If enough Republicans do join in to get an Obama/Reid plan passed through the House, the 2014 elections are going to be a nightmare for the GOP.

Is this all some sort of theater?

[Update] Technically, Boehner can wait  until Obama and the Senate pass their deal, then show House Republicans how bad that deal would be for the country, then offer them a choice of the Plan B and Obama/Reids, allow a vote on both.

There isn't a whole lot of time to maneuver here, so hopefully Boehner has a plan C....


(Corrections made to this post- I know better than to write before my second cup of coffee- sorry)



Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Statement From Norquist's ATR on Boehner's Plan B: 'Not A Violation Of Tax Pledge' - PDF of Bill Linked

By Susan Duclos

House GOP Fiscal Cliff Plan B "Permanent Tax Relief 3 for Families and Small Businesses Act of 2012" Bill PDF can be found here.

Americans for Tax Reform has issued a statement supportive of John Boehner's plan B that is expected to be voted on in the House of Representatives this week.

ATR has consistently maintained that individual Members of Congress make a pledge to their constituents to oppose and vote against tax increases.  The House this week will vote on a tax bill.

This legislation—popularly known as “Plan B”--permanently prevents a tax increase on families making less than $1 million per year.  Republicans supporting this bill are this week affirming to their constituents in writing that this bill—the sole purpose of which is to prevent tax increases—is consistent with the pledge they made to them.  In ATR’s analysis, it is extremely difficult—if not impossible—to fault these Republicans’ assertion.

In particular, in this Congress the House has already voted twice to prevent any tax increases on any American.  When viewed with this in mind, and considering this tax bill contains no tax increases of any kind—in fact, it permanently prevents them—matters become more clear.  Having finally seen actual legislation in writing, ATR is now able to make its determination about a legislative proposal related to the fiscal cliff. ATR will not consider a vote for this measure a violation of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Barack Obama has already threatened to veto the bill if it makes it past the US Senate, which would then cause taxes on every American to kick in for 2013 as the Bush Era, then passed again and extended by Obama, tax cuts expire.

Senate Democrats also have publicly stated they will not pass the bill through the Senate.

[Update] Boehner introduces Plan B to the public: