Showing posts with label Kevin McCarthy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kevin McCarthy. Show all posts

Friday, August 1, 2014

Report: New House bill on border crisis will limit Obama’s power to expand executive amnesty to new illegals; Update: Two separate bills

Report:NewHousebillonbordercrisiswill

Report: New House bill on border crisis will limit Obama’s power to expand executive amnesty to new illegals; Update: Two separate bills

posted at 10:41 am on August 1, 2014 by Allahpundit

Still waiting for fuller details but Chad Pergram sees some sort of victory for tea partiers in the making. Initially, Boehner wanted to keep his own border bill separate from Ted Cruz’s and Marsha Blackburn’s bill limiting DACA, Obama’s 2012 amnesty for DREAMers. Only if House Republicans passed Boehner’s bill, the leadership insisted, would they get a vote on Cruz/Blackburn. But that was no real incentive: Either the House itself would have killed the Cruz/Blackburn bill or the Senate surely would have killed it. The only way to make DACA part of the ongoing negotiations in Congress was to add it to Boehner’s own bill, as part of the House’s formal offer to Harry Reid. I.e. “one bill, one vote.”

Mission accomplished?

On the other hand:

Chad Pergram’s the only reporter with details on the bill that I’ve noticed but that’s newsy enough that it’s worth flagging now. I’ll update as more details are known. As for the timetable, Pergram says they’re going to at least pay lip service to formal procedure in passing this thing even though they’ll end up ignoring Boehner’s “three-day rule” for posting the text of a bill before it’s voted on. First comes a vote authorizing the House to take up a “same day rule,” then comes the posting of the bill’s text, then comes a meeting of the House Rules Committee followed by a vote of the House on the new rule, and then finally a vote on the bill itself sometime in the late afternoon or early evening. If all goes well, the GOP will have a new message for the August recess — they’ve now formally warned the president that he should go no further than he’s already gone in granting executive amnesty. If he goes ahead and issues a mega-amnesty for adult illegals in September anyway, it’ll look more like outright defiance of the will of one branch of Congress than Congress “refusing to act” or whatever. That might help, however marginally, in the messaging war that follows.

Here’s your thread, just in case you’re following along on C-SPAN today. Updates to follow. One other point in closing in case it’s ambiguous: Cruz/Blackburn wouldn’t *repeal* DACA, it would simply close it off to new applicants. That’s a concession to the politics here. The GOP’s willing, however grudgingly, to take on Obama’s executive action, but it fears the “anti-Latino” brand enough that it won’t expel kids who are currently in the program.

Update: Speaking of the messaging war, Becket Adams wonders why congressional Republicans don’t do something bold to stress the urgency of the border crisis and cancel their recess in August. If you want to show that you’re the party that’s more serious about illegal immigration, here’s your chance:

This form of protest, which was first suggested by Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren, would not only signal to the American public that House leadership gives “a damn” about the crisis, but it also would likely force the White House and the Senate to act on immigration reform (as failure to do so would invite terrible optics ahead of the November midterm elections). Obviously, getting the Obama administration to act on illegal immigration is more important than mere political posturing, the point of the protest being that it may produce a solution to the crisis.

True, it’s a bit “inside the beltway” to talk about so-called “optics” and midterms, but sticking around the city likely won’t hurt the House Republicans. So why not at least consider the idea? It seems like it could be an easy win, one that could hand a much-needed confidence boost to Republican leaders who have likely forgotten what victory feels like.

Update: At least one tea partier is satisfied.

Update: Nope, I’m wrong. The Cruz/Blackburn bill is being split off after all.

Not sure what’s different today from last night. Maybe Pergram’s wrong and Boehner’s agreed to allow a vote on Cruz/Blackburn no matter what; yesterday, Cruz/Blackburn wouldn’t have come to the floor unless and until Boehner’s bill passed. Or maybe the House leadership is whipping votes for Cruz/Blackburn too, so that that bill will at least pass the House before it dies in the Senate.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Quotes of the day

Quotesoftheday postedat10:41

Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on July 31, 2014 by Allahpundit

After a chaotic afternoon, which saw the GOP leadership suddenly pull their [border crisis] legislation from the House floor because of flagging support, lawmakers planned a Friday morning meeting at 9 a.m. to try to plot a path forward. Plans are in flux, and subject to change at any minute, aides and lawmakers warned.

In a Thursday afternoon meeting, Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) heard from a number of Republicans who did not want to leave Washington until a package passed the House — a sentiment reflected by nearly every lawmaker who emerged after the meeting ended…

The turmoil is stunning considering how far to the right the GOP leadership pulled this bill. Boehner, McCarthy and Scalise, the new GOP whip, crafted a process that would have given the House a vote on legislation to stop the Obama administration from expanding its deferred deportation program. But even that wasn’t enough…

The political impact of this decision is not clear, but if the House doesn’t vote, Democrats will be able to say that the GOP left Washington for an entire month without passing legislation to address the influx of migrants across the U.S.-Mexico border.

***

Boehner’s decision to punt on the border bill set off a wild scene on the House floor during a vote on the highway bill. Dozens of moderate and mainstream conservative Republicans, furious with the far-right Republicans who torpedoed the legislation, surrounded Boehner and newly minted Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), demanding that they not leave town without voting on immigration legislation…

“America did not send us here to do nothing,” said Rep. Steve Southerland II (R-Fla.), a junior member of the leadership team facing a tough November election.

***

Inside the meeting, Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) vowed that if need be, he would miss his son’s upcoming wedding to stay in Washington to pass the bill.

But other lawmakers were punchy.

“Well, let’s see, I’ve been bitching about this for, what, 15 months? Democrats wants the votes and Republicans want cheap labor. They didn’t want to do anything with it, now they’re going to wait until the last minute? You know, I have a forum I’m supposed to be at, I can’t be, on this very subject,” Michigan Rep. Kerry Bentivolio said…

In the meeting, most Republicans expressed support for figuring out some way – any way – to pass a bill that is widely expected to go nowhere but was hoped to give the GOP a political advantage over the recess.

***

In fact, House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, told ABC News that he was at the airport when he was summoned back to the Capitol for a closed-door GOP meeting. Rogers said it became clear this morning the conservative defections were growing, but he said he and others believe the House should vote — up or down — on immigration.

“I would like to see us have a vote,” Rogers said in an interview.

There is an unusual air of uncertainty in the Capitol, mixed with a big dose of dysfunction, as rank-and-file Republicans discuss whether to have a vote on immigration before they go home for August recess.

Rep. Justin Amash, R-Michigan, told ABC News that he believes lawmakers need to vote. Leaving town without doing so, he said, will be difficult to explain to constituents. He supports the immigration bill.

***

Republicans have been repeatedly criticized for not offering a governing agenda if they take power. What happened Thursday underscores why that has been so difficult. Getting the party’s factions on the same page has proved more than difficult. In some states where Republicans control the governorship and the legislature, there has been a backlash to their governing agenda. Kansas and North Carolina are two prime examples.

In Congress, Republicans have spent four years attacking the Affordable Care Act with a series of votes to repeal or defund it. But is there a Republican alternative they are collectively promoting this fall? No. Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.) told reporters at a breakfast held by the Christian Science Monitor on Thursday that he is working on one — but that it is just one of several GOP ideas on health care.

House Republican leaders say Democrats are hypocritical to blame them for the gridlock and chaos. They point to a series of bills approved with Democratic support that are parked in the Senate with no action. They say Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) should let senators vote on them. But by their own high-voltage missteps, they draw attention away from that and to themselves. They reinforce a narrative that remains not in their favor.

***

(1) Politically speaking, it would be malpractice to skip town having done nothing on this issue — which everyone agrees is an acute, urgent crisis. Conservatives have not been bashful about labeling it as such, and for good reason. So Republicans’ table-pounding about the problem, and endless demands that President Obama go to the border to survey the situation, all looks like cynical, empty point-scoring if they then proceed to do literally nothing about it before heading home for a month. Members will be asked about this crisis over the break. Republicans need an answer to give beyond, “Obama and the Democrats are terrible, and this situation is intolerable.” They need to be able to say, “we’ve passed X bill that accomplishes Y and Z to alleviate the unacceptable status quo” — and then pivot to nailing Obama and the Democrats, etc, etc. Passing nothing would also led Reid off the hook for his shameless obstructionism, rather than applying appropriate pressure via passed legislation. There’s a reason why Reid has been doing everything within his power to derail Boehner’s bill, including floating theories explicitly designed to turn House Republicans against each other. Sprinting into his trap — again! — would be unfathomably stupid.

(2) On principle, Republicans (at least nominally) hold one of Congress’ two chambers. They’re asking voters to give them control of the other one, too. Yes, it’s true that Harry Reid has promised to kill the House proposal in the Senate and that Obama has issued a veto threat. In other words, even if the House passes something, it won’t become law. Shame on the Democrats for playing such myopic and cynical games. But that is not an excuse for Republicans to abandon attempts to govern. Complaining about the other side’s intransigence rings uniquely hollow when your own side can’t get its act together in support of any solution. If Republicans believe the border situation is a genuine and immediate crisis, they have an obligation to act.

***

The agony of the House border bill seems to have two causes:

1) It has too many substantive weaknesses and loopholes for a bill that is supposed to buttress enforcement (Ryan wrote about the critical Numbers USA analysis here; Bill Kristol noted a number of the problems in his “kill the bill” post here).

2) It fails to address the president’s looming lawlessness in his contemplated new DACA. It seems the bare minimum Republicans could ask for in a border bill would be a provision denying the president the ability to waive more immigration laws. Yet, leadership has been resistant about talking about Obama’s potential new DACA, let alone including anything on it in the bill. Under heavy conservative pressure, it promised a mostly symbolic stand-alone measure.

Heaven knows the leadership has had trouble passing other bills, and it may be that it still gets this one through. But it is clear that just the prospect of Obama’s new DACA is creating an urgency about responding to his lawlessness that it will be very hard for Republicans to ignore.

***

The House leaders are thus far insistent they will not close the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. They would rather be embarrassed in their failure to do anything than do the right thing and close this program.

They even had some Democrat support, but could not muster enough votes to give Barack Obama more money to cause more problems. So much for the new McCarthy-Scalise team.

This, by the way, is a big win for Ted Cruz of Texas and Jeff Sessions of Alabama Both Senators have come out forcefully against the House plan not including DACA. It appears enough Republicans in the House listened.

Think about this for a minute: House GOP Leadership would rather do nothing about the immigration problem than secure the border. Anything they passed would have been blocked by Harry Reid. Anything. Yet they were too scared to come out as the party that supports securing the border. So they scuttled the whole thing rather than take a position popular with the American public.

***

The president and the Senate leadership have made clear they’ll never accept it. So what’s the point of passing it? Leadership’s answer is—well, we’ll get credit for trying to do something. But will they? From whom? The mainstream media? Perhaps for one day. Then the media will focus on what further compromises the GOP leadership will accept in September, on why Republicans won’t go to conference with the original Senate bill or parts of it, and on splits in GOP ranks about immigration. GOP town halls during the August recess will be dominated by challenges about the merits of the bill leadership rushed through—challenges members won’t have an easy time answering and that Republican House and Senate challengers certainly don’t need to be dealing with. Rushing the bill through now will make what Republicans think and don’t think about immigration the lead topic for August. It will take the focus off what President Obama has done about immigration. Rushing through a poorly thought through GOP bill will take the focus off the man who is above all responsible for the disaster at the border—the president.

If the GOP does nothing, and if Republicans explain that there’s no point acting due to the recalcitrance of the president to deal with the policies that are causing the crisis, the focus will be on the president. Republican incumbents won’t have problematic legislation to defend or questions to answer about what further compromises they’ll make. Republican challengers won’t have to defend or attack GOP legislation. Instead, the focus can be on the president—on his refusal to enforce the immigration law, on the effect of his unwise and arbitrary executive actions in 2012, on his pending rash and illegal further executive acts in 2014, and on his refusal to deal with the real legal and policy problems causing the border crisis. And with nothing passed in either house (assuming Senate Republicans stick together and deny Harry Reid cloture today), immigration won’t dominate August—except as a problem the president is responsible for and refuses seriously to address. Meanwhile, the GOP can go on the offensive on a host of other issues.

***

Via RCP.

***


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Report: New House bill on border crisis will limit Obama’s power to expand executive amnesty to new illegals

Report:NewHousebillonbordercrisiswill

Report: New House bill on border crisis will limit Obama’s power to expand executive amnesty to new illegals

posted at 10:41 am on August 1, 2014 by Allahpundit

Still waiting for fuller details but Chad Pergram sees some sort of victory for tea partiers in the making. Initially, Boehner wanted to keep his own border bill separate from Ted Cruz’s and Marsha Blackburn’s bill limiting DACA, Obama’s 2012 amnesty for DREAMers. Only if House Republicans passed Boehner’s bill, the leadership insisted, would they get a vote on Cruz/Blackburn. But that was no real incentive: Either the House itself would have killed the Cruz/Blackburn bill or the Senate surely would have killed it. The only way to make DACA part of the ongoing negotiations in Congress was to add it to Boehner’s own bill, as part of the House’s formal offer to Harry Reid. I.e. “one bill, one vote.”

Mission accomplished?

On the other hand:

Chad Pergram’s the only reporter with details on the bill that I’ve noticed but that’s newsy enough that it’s worth flagging now. I’ll update as more details are known. As for the timetable, Pergram says they’re going to at least pay lip service to formal procedure in passing this thing even though they’ll end up ignoring Boehner’s “three-day rule” for posting the text of a bill before it’s voted on. First comes a vote authorizing the House to take up a “same day rule,” then comes the posting of the bill’s text, then comes a meeting of the House Rules Committee followed by a vote of the House on the new rule, and then finally a vote on the bill itself sometime in the late afternoon or early evening. If all goes well, the GOP will have a new message for the August recess — they’ve now formally warned the president that he should go no further than he’s already gone in granting executive amnesty. If he goes ahead and issues a mega-amnesty for adult illegals in September anyway, it’ll look more like outright defiance of the will of one branch of Congress than Congress “refusing to act” or whatever. That might help, however marginally, in the messaging war that follows.

Here’s your thread, just in case you’re following along on C-SPAN today. Updates to follow. One other point in closing in case it’s ambiguous: Cruz/Blackburn wouldn’t *repeal* DACA, it would simply close it off to new applicants. That’s a concession to the politics here. The GOP’s willing, however grudgingly, to take on Obama’s executive action, but it fears the “anti-Latino” brand enough that it won’t expel kids who are currently in the program.

Update: Speaking of the messaging war, Becket Adams wonders why congressional Republicans don’t do something bold to stress the urgency of the border crisis and cancel their recess in August. If you want to show that you’re the party that’s more serious about illegal immigration, here’s your chance:

This form of protest, which was first suggested by Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren, would not only signal to the American public that House leadership gives “a damn” about the crisis, but it also would likely force the White House and the Senate to act on immigration reform (as failure to do so would invite terrible optics ahead of the November midterm elections). Obviously, getting the Obama administration to act on illegal immigration is more important than mere political posturing, the point of the protest being that it may produce a solution to the crisis.

True, it’s a bit “inside the beltway” to talk about so-called “optics” and midterms, but sticking around the city likely won’t hurt the House Republicans. So why not at least consider the idea? It seems like it could be an easy win, one that could hand a much-needed confidence boost to Republican leaders who have likely forgotten what victory feels like.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Thursday, July 31, 2014

House GOP abandons border crisis bill, can’t find 218 votes; Update: One more try? Update: Tomorrow

HouseGOPabandonsbordercrisisbill,can’tfind

House GOP abandons border crisis bill, can’t find 218 votes; Update: One more try? Update: Tomorrow

posted at 2:41 pm on July 31, 2014 by Allahpundit

Boehner offered to schedule a vote on Ted Cruz’s anti-DACA bill if House conservatives agreed to pass his bill first. No dice. You can understand why: By splitting Cruz’s bill off into a separate bill instead of attaching it to his own, Boehner was setting it up for failure. Either the House would have killed it or the Senate surely would have killed it. The only way to keep the DACA issue at the center of the border-crisis debate is to make it part of the House leadership’s offer and force Reid and Obama to dig in on it. Evidently Boehner wouldn’t do that.

And so we head to the August recess with no Republican proposal on the table.

Faced with certain defeat, Boehner (R-Ohio) pulled the legislation from consideration Thursday afternoon, according to guidance from leadership advisers. With more than 20 House conservatives opposed, Boehner did not have enough votes from his own Republican ranks because virtually all Democrats opposed the legislation…

With almost no Democratic support, Boehner needed to corral votes virtually entirely from within his own Republican caucus, and he faced a group of House conservatives who worked hand-in-hand with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) in plotting their strategy to bring down the legislation in pursuit of a more purely conservative approach.

Democrats blamed Boehner for chasing after conservative votes that were never going to materialize, after he initially proposed a more robust $1.5 billion plan that likely would have drawn some Democratic votes. Instead, as conservatives balked at that price tag, GOP leaders shrank the bill in an effort to grow the Republican vote – while losing Democrats.

“The worse the bill, the more votes on the Republican side,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in the closing minutes of the debate.

Kay Granger, who helped write Boehner’s bill, said they got to 214 votes, among them conservative stalwart Jeb Hensarling. It’s interesting that Boehner preferred to see the bill tank rather than tweak it by adding in some Democratic proposals in hopes of getting to 218 with help from Pelosi’s caucus. I wonder if that’s because he thought he couldn’t find enough votes there either or because the politics of immigration are so hot right now, with border hawks like me perpetually nervous about the leadership playing ball on amnesty, that he decided failure was more palatable than selling out.

Here’s the leadership’s statement. Read it closely and tell me which line pops out at you.

“There are numerous steps the president can and should be taking right now without the need for congressional action”? I realize they’re hinting that he can expedite deportations himself, without any action by Congress, but this is not an idea you want to push at a moment when you’re suing the guy for unlawful executive action and your base is frantic that he’s going to unilaterally amnestize five million illegals. In fact, as Gabe Malor says, the House’s failure to pass a bill will be used by O as further evidence that he needs to act alone. “See? Not only can’t the House and Senate agree, even House Republicans can’t agree. I need to step in.” And here’s Boehner all but encouraging him.

But look. Obama already threatened to veto Boehner’s bill even if it passed the Senate, which it wouldn’t have. Nothing substantive was lost here, just a talking point during the recess. Maybe Cruz’s ploy will work and the leadership will come back in September newly willing to add an anti-DACA provision to their own offer. And even if not, Cruz fans can take comfort that he’s well positioned now to carry the anti-amnesty banner in 2016. Much to the horror of Republican establishmentarians, it looks like he’s going to campaign on ending Obama’s amnesties for DREAMers and, inevitably, for adults. You’ll have one candidate in the race running right-ish on this issue.

Update: One last gasp left before the recess?

Update: Hold the phone. There’s a hastily scheduled conference huddle at 3 p.m. Can they get four votes?

Update: The recess is postponed, if just for a day.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

House GOP abandons border crisis bill, can’t find 218 votes; Update: One more try?

HouseGOPabandonsbordercrisisbill,can’tfind

House GOP abandons border crisis bill, can’t find 218 votes; Update: One more try?

posted at 2:41 pm on July 31, 2014 by Allahpundit

Boehner offered to schedule a vote on Ted Cruz’s anti-DACA bill if House conservatives agreed to pass his bill first. No dice. You can understand why: By splitting Cruz’s bill off into a separate bill instead of attaching it to his own, Boehner was setting it up for failure. Either the House would have killed it or the Senate surely would have killed it. The only way to keep the DACA issue at the center of the border-crisis debate is to make it part of the House leadership’s offer and force Reid and Obama to dig in on it. Evidently Boehner wouldn’t do that.

And so we head to the August recess with no Republican proposal on the table.

Faced with certain defeat, Boehner (R-Ohio) pulled the legislation from consideration Thursday afternoon, according to guidance from leadership advisers. With more than 20 House conservatives opposed, Boehner did not have enough votes from his own Republican ranks because virtually all Democrats opposed the legislation…

With almost no Democratic support, Boehner needed to corral votes virtually entirely from within his own Republican caucus, and he faced a group of House conservatives who worked hand-in-hand with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) in plotting their strategy to bring down the legislation in pursuit of a more purely conservative approach.

Democrats blamed Boehner for chasing after conservative votes that were never going to materialize, after he initially proposed a more robust $1.5 billion plan that likely would have drawn some Democratic votes. Instead, as conservatives balked at that price tag, GOP leaders shrank the bill in an effort to grow the Republican vote – while losing Democrats.

“The worse the bill, the more votes on the Republican side,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in the closing minutes of the debate.

Kay Granger, who helped write Boehner’s bill, said they got to 214 votes, among them conservative stalwart Jeb Hensarling. It’s interesting that Boehner preferred to see the bill tank rather than tweak it by adding in some Democratic proposals in hopes of getting to 218 with help from Pelosi’s caucus. I wonder if that’s because he thought he couldn’t find enough votes there either or because the politics of immigration are so hot right now, with border hawks like me perpetually nervous about the leadership playing ball on amnesty, that he decided failure was more palatable than selling out.

Here’s the leadership’s statement. Read it closely and tell me which line pops out at you.

“There are numerous steps the president can and should be taking right now without the need for congressional action”? I realize they’re hinting that he can expedite deportations himself, without any action by Congress, but this is not an idea you want to push at a moment when you’re suing the guy for unlawful executive action and your base is frantic that he’s going to unilaterally amnestize five million illegals. In fact, as Gabe Malor says, the House’s failure to pass a bill will be used by O as further evidence that he needs to act alone. “See? Not only can’t the House and Senate agree, even House Republicans can’t agree. I need to step in.” And here’s Boehner all but encouraging him.

But look. Obama already threatened to veto Boehner’s bill even if it passed the Senate, which it wouldn’t have. Nothing substantive was lost here, just a talking point during the recess. Maybe Cruz’s ploy will work and the leadership will come back in September newly willing to add an anti-DACA provision to their own offer. And even if not, Cruz fans can take comfort that he’s well positioned now to carry the anti-amnesty banner in 2016. Much to the horror of Republican establishmentarians, it looks like he’s going to campaign on ending Obama’s amnesties for DREAMers and, inevitably, for adults. You’ll have one candidate in the race running right-ish on this issue.

Update: One last gasp left before the recess?

Update: Hold the phone. There’s a hastily scheduled conference huddle at 3 p.m. Can they get four votes?


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

House GOP abandons border crisis bill, can’t find 218 votes

HouseGOPabandonsbordercrisisbill,can’tfind

House GOP abandons border crisis bill, can’t find 218 votes; Update: One more try?

posted at 2:41 pm on July 31, 2014 by Allahpundit

Boehner offered to schedule a vote on Ted Cruz’s anti-DACA bill if House conservatives agreed to pass his bill first. No dice. You can understand why: By splitting Cruz’s bill off into a separate bill instead of attaching it to his own, Boehner was setting it up for failure. Either the House would have killed it or the Senate surely would have killed it. The only way to keep the DACA issue at the center of the border-crisis debate is to make it part of the House leadership’s offer and force Reid and Obama to dig in on it. Evidently Boehner wouldn’t do that.

And so we head to the August recess with no Republican proposal on the table.

Faced with certain defeat, Boehner (R-Ohio) pulled the legislation from consideration Thursday afternoon, according to guidance from leadership advisers. With more than 20 House conservatives opposed, Boehner did not have enough votes from his own Republican ranks because virtually all Democrats opposed the legislation…

With almost no Democratic support, Boehner needed to corral votes virtually entirely from within his own Republican caucus, and he faced a group of House conservatives who worked hand-in-hand with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) in plotting their strategy to bring down the legislation in pursuit of a more purely conservative approach.

Democrats blamed Boehner for chasing after conservative votes that were never going to materialize, after he initially proposed a more robust $1.5 billion plan that likely would have drawn some Democratic votes. Instead, as conservatives balked at that price tag, GOP leaders shrank the bill in an effort to grow the Republican vote – while losing Democrats.

“The worse the bill, the more votes on the Republican side,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in the closing minutes of the debate.

Kay Granger, who helped write Boehner’s bill, said they got to 214 votes, among them conservative stalwart Jeb Hensarling. It’s interesting that Boehner preferred to see the bill tank rather than tweak it by adding in some Democratic proposals in hopes of getting to 218 with help from Pelosi’s caucus. I wonder if that’s because he thought he couldn’t find enough votes there either or because the politics of immigration are so hot right now, with border hawks like me perpetually nervous about the leadership playing ball on amnesty, that he decided failure was more palatable than selling out.

Here’s the leadership’s statement. Read it closely and tell me which line pops out at you.

“There are numerous steps the president can and should be taking right now without the need for congressional action”? I realize they’re hinting that he can expedite deportations himself, without any action by Congress, but this is not an idea you want to push at a moment when you’re suing the guy for unlawful executive action and your base is frantic that he’s going to unilaterally amnestize five million illegals. In fact, as Gabe Malor says, the House’s failure to pass a bill will be used by O as further evidence that he needs to act alone. “See? Not only can’t the House and Senate agree, even House Republicans can’t agree. I need to step in.” And here’s Boehner all but encouraging him.

But look. Obama already threatened to veto Boehner’s bill even if it passed the Senate, which it wouldn’t have. Nothing substantive was lost here, just a talking point during the recess. Maybe Cruz’s ploy will work and the leadership will come back in September newly willing to add an anti-DACA provision to their own offer. And even if not, Cruz fans can take comfort that he’s well positioned now to carry the anti-amnesty banner in 2016. Much to the horror of Republican establishmentarians, it looks like he’s going to campaign on ending Obama’s amnesties for DREAMers and, inevitably, for adults. You’ll have one candidate in the race running right-ish on this issue.

Update: One last gasp left before the recess?

Update: Hold the phone. There’s a hastily scheduled conference huddle at 3 p.m. Can they get four votes?


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Monday, June 23, 2014

House GOP leader-elect Kevin McCarthy: Let the Export-Import Bank die

HouseGOPleader-electKevinMcCarthy:LettheExport-Import

House GOP leader-elect Kevin McCarthy: Let the Export-Import Bank die

posted at 7:21 pm on June 23, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

Wow. Maybe the GOP leadership actually picked up on some of the anti-crony capitalism/corporate welfare sentiment reverberating off of Eric Cantor’s primary defeat after all, because back in 2012, McCarthy voted to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank — but this outright acquiescence to the growing campaign to let the bank’s charter expire for good on September 30th is not going to be a welcome development for a lot of K-Streeters. The relevant Export-Import question comes in just after the six-minute mark:


CHRIS WALLACE: Authority for the Export-Import Bank, which backs, supports, helps encourage, the selling of U.S. products overseas, expires in September. Do you agree with conservatives who say that the Export-Import Bank is a form of crony capitalism that should be put out of business? Allowed to expire?

KEVIN MCCARTHY: One of the biggest problems with government is that they go and take hard-earned money so others do things that the private sector can do. That’s what the Ex-Im Bank does. The last authorization with the Ex-Im Bank directed the president and the treasury secretary to wind down the Ex-Im bank, negotiate with the other countries to wind them down so we have a level playing field. We’ve got hearings going on next week in Financial Services, which I sit on. I think Ex-Im Bank is one that’s something government does not have to be involved in. The private sector can do it.

CHRIS WALLACE: So, straightforward question, you can say right here. You would allow the Ex-Im Bank to expire in September?

KEVIN MCCARTHY: Yes, because it’s something that the private sector can be able to do.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Sunday, June 22, 2014

Open thread: Sunday morning talking heads

Openthread:Sundaymorningtalkingheads

Open thread: Sunday morning talking heads

posted at 8:01 am on June 22, 2014 by Allahpundit

What’s your pleasure this morning? 2016 hopefuls throwing rhetorical punches over Iraq and foreign policy or Kevin McCarthy trying to reassure conservatives that, no, really, he’s one of them? For McCarthy, turn to “Fox News Sunday.” Maybe he’ll give us an inkling of whether there’s any last-gasp chance for amnesty this year or if it’ll have to wait for the new term. Expect plenty of compliments for new majority whip Steve Scalise, too. Scalise is a conservative but he and McCarthy have a good relationship, one of the reasons that Marlin Stutzman and some House conservatives were leery of elevating Scalise.

If you want the Iraq debate, Marco Rubio will be on “Face the Nation” to make the case for hawkishness and Rand Paul will counter on “Meet the Press” and “State of the Union.” MTP’s already leaked the soundbite from his interview in which he says he doesn’t blame Obama for the current state of Iraq. His libertarian fans will be pleased to hear that. Will conservative primary voters? The full line-up is at Politico.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Friday, June 20, 2014

Jeb Hensarling thinking of challenging Boehner for Speaker this fall?

JebHensarlingthinkingofchallengingBoehnerforSpeaker

Jeb Hensarling thinking of challenging Boehner for Speaker this fall?

posted at 5:21 pm on June 20, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via Jamie Weinstein, House conservatives have cried wolf too many times for me to take this too seriously.

But … maybe there’s a strategy here? Maybe? Dude?

In truth, Hensarling allies explain, he had been taking seriously the encouragement to run in November. But he needed to go through an exhaustive process—meeting with advisers and colleagues to discuss strategy, and more important, discussing the decision with his family. That process, Hensarling always thought, would not need to commence until late summer or early fall…

After close consultation with his family and friends last week, Hensarling surprised those close to him by suggesting that his obstacles—which they thought were prohibitive to his seeking a top leadership post—were overcome in the deliberation process…

[I]n fact, people close to him started reading between the lines of that statement—“not the right office at the right time”—and wondered if Hensarling was up to something. Maybe he didn’t want to challenge McCarthy for leader this week, they whispered, because his grand plan was to challenge Speaker John Boehner in November.

“I think he’s going to run in November,” a House Republican and longtime Hensarling ally said this week. “And if he runs, he runs for the top spot.”

Three possibilities. One: It’s true! We’re going to have an all-out brawl within the GOP for the future of the House in five months. If conservative voters turn out in droves in the midterms, maybe the establishmentarians backing Boehner will conclude that there’s no resisting the party’s ideological trend any longer. Better to bow to Hensarling, keep Kevin McCarthy in place as majority leader to be a moderating force on the leadership, and go from there. Okay, but … apart from notable tea-party wins over Cantor and, maybe, Thad Cochran, centrist Republicans actually did awfully well holding off conservative challengers this spring. Mitch McConnell, the right’s biggest target, won with ease. The establishment, backed by business money, is in no mood to make accommodations with the right at the moment, especially after the shutdown. (Remember this post, from the last time righties started whispering about knocking off Boehner?) This is not going to be a bloodless coup. And if there’s going to be a fight, it stands to reason that the guy who’s already banked 218 votes twice for Speaker has the advantage.

Two: The Speaker talk is a big fake-out from Hensarling fans. What he really wants is majority leader, but if his allies start whispering about challenging Boehner, maybe centrists will get nervous and try to accommodate him with a lesser position. As long as Boehner gets to decide what does and doesn’t reach the floor, establishmentarians may feel okay with replacing McCarthy with Hensarling as an olive branch to the right. The party needs to be unified for 2016, after all, and that would help do it. The problem is, Boehner’s allies in the House and their friends in the Chamber of Commerce absolutely insist on passing comprehensive immigration reform before 2016 and Hensarling could make that impossible as majority leader. Cooperation on that point may be their price for abandoning McCarthy. If Hensarling plays ball on some sort of amnesty, they’ll consider him. If not, war.

Three: This is all nonsense, pushed by tough-talking conservatives to try to scare Boehner into retiring but with nothing actually behind it. Like I say, they’ve cried wolf before in the name of impressing grassroots tea partiers. At what point do we stop believing them and start treating them like posturing blowhards? Philip Klein wonders:

The way things have gone in major legislative battles over the past several years (such as with the debt ceiling, government funding bills, and the “fiscal cliff” tax deal) is that House conservatives have consistently voted against compromises. This has led House leadership to cut deals that can pass the House with the help of Democratic support.

This dynamic has allowed House conservatives to maintain a ruse. They can go back to their constituents and perpetuate the myth of themselves as brave freedom fighters standing up for conservative principles against a wobbly GOP leadership that’s gone native in the Washington swamp. Meanwhile, because House leadership cut deals, House conservatives didn’t have to deal with the consequences of bond markets freaking out because Congress never raised the debt limit, or of a taxpayer backlash because rates went up on all income levels once all of the Bush tax cuts expired.

Conservative House members would no longer have it so easy if staunch conservatives were to seize control of House leadership. So, at the end of the day, they’re perfectly happy with the Boehner-McCarthy team.

Matt Lewis thinks conservatives won the war over Eric Cantor but “lost the peace” now that Kevin McCarthy’s replaced him, but Klein’s point is that they haven’t really lost. They like being out of power because it lets them maintain their purity while ensuring that the House doesn’t do anything too risky like hitting the debt ceiling. Is that what this latest Hensarling rumor is about — a cheap way to show righties that they’re super serious about taking Boehner out this time while knowing that they don’t have the numbers to beat him? And don’t really intend to try?


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair