Connect with us


Republicans lack votes in order to avoid a shutdown




Continue to content articles

Inside your property Republican Conference, you can find three main factions of potential \”no\” votes: defense hawks unhappy above the leadership\’s failure to increase Pentagon funding; the Freedom Caucus, the target audience of conservative hard-liners; and members who will be simply unsure where to start.

House Military Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) and Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) – both key players on defense issues – will back the funding bill, depending on Turner and also a top House Republican.

\”I\’m voting to your CR in support of the speaker and the efforts to get a budget deal,\” Turner said.

Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.), a defense hawk whose state stands to perform from funding for your Children\’s Medical care insurance Program this month, said Wednesday he was \”torn\” covering the bill.

\”It\’s a reasonably tough opt for me, however it is a legitimate tough choose all of us, because I think all of us cherish defense and every one of us care about\” children\’s health, Byrne said, suggesting he will in the end back the proposal.

Knowing the vote is close, Ryan, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California and other GOP leaders debated on Wednesday morning getting in touch with add more provisions on the package, for instance funding for community health centers. In fact, they thought i would advance while using package as is also, said GOP sources.

But Freedom Caucus leaders say their group alone has enough disgruntled members to dam niche if Democrats remain opposed.

The group\’s chairman, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), is wanting to elbow himself to the broader spending and immigration talks. Meadows said his main priority is always to be certain Ryan contains a intend to end the \”stop-and-go\” budgeting cycle.

Noting that Congress has passed three continuing resolutions, or CRs, to prevent government entities running, he said, \”So discomfort this CR likely to deliver a plan that\’s different than the previous three? Shall we be just gonna hope that Feb. 16 surpasses Jan. 19 just because it\’s within a different month?\”

Trump is pressuring Meadows to vote for the funding bill, and GOP leaders hope it may bring Freedom Caucus members around. The White House issued an official statement in support of the CR package on Wednesday afternoon.

Restless conservatives have already been asking Ryan and various senior Republicans for concessions to acquire those to yes, though early unclear whether they\’ll have them. Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.) said he\’s primed for assurances from GOP leaders that they will place a conservative Dreamers bill created by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) on to the floor. But GOP leaders have resisted, fearing a vote would upset bipartisan immigration predicts shield young immigrants from deportation.

Other Freedom Caucus members are pushing to add a yearlong appropriation for that Pentagon. GOP leaders, however, are aware that will fail during the Senate, in order that they aren\’t entertaining the idea.

\”It\’s crisis management at its worst,\” Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.) complained. \”Nobody needs to banned the costa rica government, in case they load this up – they\’ve got a battle within this.\”

House Democrats will refuse to bail out GOP leaders if Republicans can\’t placed the votes themselves.

\”My sense is everybody\’s likely to be unified on this. And also a planning to have many defections, if any,\” said Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.). \”We don\’t have bargaining power as we don\’t stay unified.\”

When asked whether Democrats would uniformly vote up against the bill, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said, \”We\’ll see what they\’re going to do, on the other hand think that\’s the case.\”

During a news conference on Wednesday, Ryan attempt to blame Democrats for virtually any problems passing the funding bill, inspite of the internal GOP schism.

\”Real deadlines are occurring this Friday,\” the Wisconsin Republican told reporters. \”That is the reason it truly is unconscionable in my opinion that they would block funding for our military or cut-off funding for these particular states that really will lose their funding for [children\’s health] by playing these political games and tying them to unrelated issues.\”

House Republicans had hoped to realize some Democratic votes by attaching policy sweeteners towards the bill, including children\’s health funding and delay within the Obamacare taxes.

But individuals the Congressional Black Caucus, whom Republicans had hoped to enlighten, say they\’re still planning to oppose the proposal.

Many CBC members were livid after Trump called certain African nations \”shithole countries\” in a meeting lawmakers on the White House yesterday. People say the episode strengthened their resolve to withhold votes until Republicans show progress at a bipartisan Dreamers deal.

Children\’s health funding \”alone most likely is not about to change much,\” said one CBC member, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), once the group\’s weekly meeting Wednesday. \”Why would we need to send a message to 800,000 young people\” that your Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program \”is not important enough to demand action into it to acquire our support?\”

Pelosi implored Democrats to vote against the measure during the caucus meeting Wednesday morning.

\”We can\’t opt for what they\’re putting forth. Not for what\’s inside it but [for] what\’s not in it,\” Pelosi told lawmakers, based on an aide within the room. \”This is the central moment for all our caucus, being bold that which we know is correct. – On the internet throw in the towel our leverage, for priorities and for our Dreamers.\”

Senate Democrats have never yet taken a conventional position over the spending package, waiting to observe how are you affected inside the house first.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) noted than a amount of Democrats \”have said they cannot along these lines deal, – [and if we] kick the can later on this time around, we\’ll be back where we started so when. So there\’s very, very secure support to never go.\”

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said there seemed to be little enthusiasm with the GOP plan in a Democratic policy lunch on Wednesday. \”A handful stood up and said, \’We\’re likely to vote from the CR.\’ Another one or two said unclear. Not a soul stood up and said that they to elect the CR.\”

Rachael Bade and Connor O\’Brien brought about this report.


Black caucus chairman pushes to censure Trump over ‘shithole’ remark





Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Cedric Richmond on Thursday introduced a solution to censure President Donald Trump over what he contends would be the president\’s racist rhetoric referring to El Salvador, Haiti and African nations as \”shithole countries.\”

The resolution – who has much more than 130 co-sponsors, including House Democratic leaders – calls over the House to publicly state its support for any nations Trump disparaged, censure and condemn the president for his statements, and demand he retract his comments and apologize.

Story Continued Below

At a news conference announcing the resolution alongside House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) as well as other Democrats, Richmond (D-La.) said Trump\’s controversial comments \”should have not been made\” and \”were factually inaccurate.\”

Richmond conceded, however, the resolution isn\’t \”privileged,\” meaning House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) might need to say yes to carry it in order with the chamber to keep a vote. It\’s almost certain Ryan will not likely do this.

\”If he doesn\’t, we then will be at other ways to just make a vote on there,\” Richmond told reporters. \”But the facts from the matter is definitely the speaker should bring it up. In the event that he doesn\’t, establishing is enabling and recurring to allow obama to perpetuate this hateful rhetoric, as well as at certain point – whether you agree or disagree – I believe this is the speaker\’s obligation to safeguard the dignity of the property.\”

If Ryan will not allow a vote, Richmond said he among others would hunt for “creative” strategies to force one.

Like most Republican leaders, Ryan hasn\’t said much for the president\’s reported comments, though he did acknowledge the other day that they are \”very unfortunate\” and \”unhelpful.\” For Richmond, however, that wasn\’t enough.

\”It\’s unfortunate when I miss my bus. Or it\’s unfortunate in the event the airlines lose my luggage,\” he was quoted saying. \”But when the president of america decides to Africa, Haiti and El Salvador which he used, which isn\’t unfortunate. That is wrong. That\’s disgusting. That is definitely hurtful. There are a variety of words because of it, but unfortunate\’s undertake and don\’t.\”

Continue Reading


Ryan's 2017 fundraising haul: $44 million





House Speaker Paul Ryan raised more than $44 million in 2017, an off-year record to get a House leader – a financial haul Republicans hope will shore up vulnerable GOP members in what\’s shaping up to often be a tough midterm cycle for Republicans.

In a final quarter, Ryan raised $4.8 million, his political operation will announce Thursday – down from $6.7 million during the third quarter.

Story Continued Below

The infusion of greenbacks is a follower of Republicans passed a tax reform law last December, which GOP members said would drive support among voters and donors. But also in 2018, Republicans must defend its 24-seat majority spanning a broad battlefield, while President Donald Trump\’s approval ratings stay in the bottom 40s and Democrats hold a broad bring success the generic ballot. Nearly 24 retirements, including California Reps. Ed Royce and Darrell Issa latest research by, will force Republicans to invest more heavily to protect these open seats.

In 2017, Ryan transferred $32 million to the National Republican Campaign Committee, which announced a unique record-breaking off-year total with $85 million raised in the last year. Ryan also transferred $1.7 million on to GOP members, as well as hosting 49 fundraisers for members.

"This eye-popping number is usually a testament to Speaker Ryan, House Republicans, as well as the agenda them to led your strugle on in 2017," said Kevin Seifert, executive director of Team Ryan, the speaker\’s fundraising committee.

Continue Reading


Bannon won't testify again on Russia Thursday





Former White House adviser Steve Bannon declined House Russia investigators\’ request to go back for a second interview Thursday, telling lawmakers through his lawyer their own obtain him to go back just 2 days after his first appearance was "unreasonable."

"The Committee\’s subpoena provides require Mr. Bannon\’s appearance for that second deposition [Thursday] at 2pm. That may be plainly insufficient time for me to undertake precisely what the Committee has asked," Bannon\’s attorney William Burck wrote within a Wednesday letter to store intelligence committee leaders obtained by POLITICO.

Story Continued Below

Instead, Burck told committee leaders that the former senior aide to President Donald Trump would return after reaching an accommodation when using the White House to make sure his testimony doesn\’t violate executive privilege.

On Tuesday, Bannon-citing instructions from your Trump administration-refused to reply Republican and Democrats\’ questions on his amount of the White House, the post-election transition team and in some cases about his conversations with the president after he was fired from his post in August. His stonewalling infuriated persons in both parties, who subpoenaed him immediately. But despite the subpoena, Bannon declined to reply to their questions.

Burck\’s letter told the committee\’s top Russia investigators, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), that Bannon remains ready to answer the committee\’s questions-but after striking an understanding together with the White House while on an acceptable scope of questioning.

"There isn\’t any conceivable solution to talk to the White House Mr. Bannon\’s time using the transition and also the White House, obtain their thoughts about the knowledge he previously provide, communicate those views back to the Committee, relay the Committee\’s views time for the White House, and then negotiate or facilitate a binding agreement amongst the Committee along with the White House from the time allotted by the Committee\’s subpoena," Burck wrote.

Committee members at the moment are weighing calling hold Bannon in contempt of Congress for avoiding their questions. They\’ve noted that White House lawyers haven\’t formally invoked executive privilege-they just have suggested that Bannon\’s testimony might implicate it.

White House officials have argued that it is customary for Congress to coordinate the scope of the questions with current and former officials to stop violating privileged information.

But GOP and Democratic lawmakers have questioned this argument, suggesting they see no reasonable interpretation of executive privilege that might preclude Bannon from discussing his time over the transition team, that is before Trump was president.

Burck indicated that the committee didn\’t have use of White House and transition documents that has to be relevant precursors to the questions for Bannon and suggested lawmakers and Bannon would require time for them to produce them and review them before Bannon\’s next interview.

"There are lots of lawyers over the Committee plus the Staff, and i also could well be surprised as long as they believed it becomes anything in addition to unprofessional even unethical should be expected to depose a witness that has did not have possibility for review relevant documents," he said.

Burck also indicated a potential disconnect between committee staff and lawmakers. He revealed that he had informed the employees of the committee, chaired by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the White House "may not permit Mr. Bannon to discuss his in time the transition and the White House unless an accommodation was agreed between your Committee plus the White House."

"Staff raised no objection to the telltale restrictions in any of such conversations," he said. "The main objection came yesterday within the Members who appear not to have been informed by Staff about our prior conversations."

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2019