Connect with us


GOP leaders feel squeeze as shutdown threat nears




Continue to article content

The votes with the 34 Republicans within the powerful House Military Committee will be critical to the next bill: In the last four months, each stopgap bill has witnessed dwindling support looking at the GOP caucus.

The last vote – just days before Christmas – was suspenseful, with House Republicans keeping their eyes to the voting scoreboards through to the final minutes. Just hours before, GOP leaders were made to strip emergency disaster funding from the stopgap bill to make sure that its passage after conservatives revolted against higher spending.

In that December vote to maintain the us government open, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi\’s Democratic Caucus remained unified from the stopgap until Republicans proved they\’re able to pass it on their own personal, forcing GOP leaders to twist the defense hawks\’ arms for support.

Part of GOP leadership\’s plea to defense hawks at the moment became a promise to possess a broader spending offer hand with the next deadline on Jan. 19. Ryan brilliant deputies said then that an accord was close, simply an additional month of negotiations should finish it down.

Now, a few days from that new deadline, there\’s little expectation on Capitol Hill that the spending cap deal shall be elapsed next Friday.

With spending talks seemingly stalled, defense hawks are threatening they will won\’t buy leaders more of their time.

"It can make a change when you\’ve got a deal and you need time for them to write it, as opposed to needing additional time to negotiate. This is a positive change,\” said Military Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas).

Thornberry and Republicans on his committee are fighting to further improve spending on national defense to a lot more than $700 billion this coming year, well above strict caps on the Pentagon budget set under law. Congress must consent to lift those caps before it could pass an omnibus spending bill to afford government entities from the other fiscal year.

Though they largely supported the past two temporary funding measures, a slew of defense hawks voted against a consistent resolution in September. The legislation included billions in hurricane recovery aid, which likely won over some lawmakers with otherwise opposed a consistent resolution.

Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) said the status associated with a deal to elevate defense spending, along with the length of the latest patch, would have been a deciding element in his vote.

\”Are we speaking about a week or two, or truly referring to months?\” Lamborn asked. \”Obviously, going months to the future with another CR is unacceptable.\”

Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), a senior Military member, also said he\’s undecided, but noted defense hawks wield considerable influence during the GOP conference. \”I know we are all critically thinking about it,\” he said.

The fight over immigration also looms large on the potential shutdown showdown.

Democrats are under fierce pressure by liberal activists – and a lot of that belongs to them members – to oppose any government funding stopgap before Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program is salvaged.

Pelosi signaled that she\’s in complete agreement using this type of strategy during a news conference Thursday.

\”People say, \’Oh, could there be destined to be another CR?\’\” she said. \”But there\’s certainly no time having another CR unless likely to agreement on DACA, on funding.\”

Multiple rank-and-file Democrats also said they should procrastinate for everyone same agreements.

Without an alternative for Dreamers, said Rep. Ruben Gallego, \”Republicans might get their unique votes around the CR.\”

But the closer GOP leaders arrive at a package on Dreamers, the much more likely they\’ll lose conservative votes for next week\’s spending bill.

\”We cannot pass a DACA, border security bill without Democrats from the Senate. And if you will enjoy Democratic votes from the Senate, that will disappoint some Republicans in your home, and they can fall off the wagon,\” said Rep. Tom Cole, a ally of GOP leadership. \”That\’s the type of a deal.\”

Even when House GOP leaders can persuade their caucus to back an immigration deal, Ryan could face another conservative revolt over any agreement to make budget caps.

Fiscal hawks in your house are already convinced they\’ll lose big in bipartisan spending talks. Sources repeat the two-year deal include possibly around $300 billion in new spending with few meaningful cuts to counterbalance the cost.

A grand bargain also can brace Obamacare and raise your debt ceiling, creating what some House Republicans already see being a nightmare.

If defense hawks and fiscal hawks unite against next week\’s funding bill, Ryan should reach throughout the aisle as a measure to woo Democrats, who might be in no mood to bail him out amid a stalemate over immigration.

Ultimately, House GOP leaders may need to depend upon a vast desire in parties to protect yourself from a destructive shutdown. Its keep is also approaches to woo reluctant lawmakers.

Multiple sources repeat the next stopgap bill is anticipated to add funding with the Children\’s Insurance coverage Program, which expired in September. In case a CHIP extension is attached to the next spending bill without partisan provisions, Republicans imagine that Democrats could well be hard-pressed to vote against it.


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