Paul Ryan's Fantasy

Paul Ryan does not seem to understand the political climate right now.  John Boehner understands the Obamacare is here to stay.  Earlier this year he said in an interview with Diane Sawyer "I think the election changes that, it's pretty clear that the president was re-elected, Obamacare is the law of the land." 

Congressman Ryan should probably get on the same page with the Speaker.  Today on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace he had the following exchange.  To Wallace's credit, he didn't let his comments go without comment.

Ryan: These are increases that have not come yet, so by repealing Obamacare and the Medicaid expansions, which haven't occurred yet, we are basically preventing the explosion of a program that is already failing. So we're saying, don't grow this program through Obamacare because it doesn't work.

Wallace: Are you saying, as part of you budget, you would repeal -- you assume the repeal of Obamacare?

Ryan: Yes.

Wallace: Well, that's not going to happen.

Ryan: Well, we believe it should, that's the point.

Chris Wallace is exactly right, it isn't going to be repealed.  The House GOP has tried dozens of times to repeal it, and have failed miserably.  As more and more benefits of the Affordable Care Act become available to people, the popularity of the law increases.  His budget is dishonest because it centers around an impossibility.  Obamacare is here to stay and the country is better for it.  

VAWA Passes House Despite Some Republican Opposition

Last week the House finally passed the Violence Against Women Act, which the Senate had passed earlier.  The Republicans in the House had been holding up this legislation for quite some time.  Speaker Boehner finally brought the Senate version of the bill to the floor for a vote and it passed 286-138, winning over 199 Democrats and 87 Republicans.

The Republicans had proposed their own version of VAWA, which did not include the same protections for LGBT, Native Americans living on reservations or undocumented women.  It would create extra steps for Native women that are brutalized on reservations to find justice.  It would also create very strict guidelines for undocumented victims.  LGBT families would not be included in the protections.

Megan Whittemore, a spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said, “The House is expected to take up a strong Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization...so we can protect all women from acts of violence and help law enforcement prosecute offenders to the fullest extent of the law.”  Apparently she thinks excluding certain groups from protection constitutes "all women."

This is why it was really no shock when Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) admitted that she opposed VAWA because it granted protections to those groups. 

When you start to make this about other things it becomes an “against violence act” and not a targeted focus act… I didn’t like the way it was expanded to include other different groups. What you need is something that is focused specifically to help the shelters and to help out law enforcement, who is trying to work with the crimes that have been committed against women and helping them to stand up. 

Watch here:

Ah, I see.  If only we used the money to open new crisis centers and shelters, maybe on reservations, she would support it.  And then there is that bit about diluting the money that goes to the existing shelters, so she probably wouldn't want new shelters being opened either.  The only way I read her comments is that she is upset that these extra provisions are taking away money from women in her district, her predominately white district.  If she was truly about protecting women, adding more groups of women to protect would not be a problem for her.

I won't even touch how she seems to oppose an "against violence act."

These groups do need protection just as much as any women in America do.  If a lesbian is the victim of domestic violence does she not deserve justice?  Does an immigrant deserve justice?

There is currently an epidemic of sexual assaults on Native American reservations.  This is why it was so important for this provision to be included.  While it's estimated that 1 out of 6 American women will be raped and/or sexually assaulted in her lifetime, more than 1 in 3 Native American women will be raped in her lifetime.  And 80% of rapes on reservations are committed by non-natives.  This creates many legal hurdles for reservation authorities.  Only Federal authorities can prosecute crimes on tribal lands.  This means that many rapes are not reported.

An NPR investigation also revealed a system underfunded and often broken: a tribal health center inadequately staffed and without rape kits to collect DNA from victims; tribal leaders and Native police unable to prosecute non-native perpetrators; and a patchwork of confusing jurisdictions in which federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement intersect and clash with each other.

Lindsey Graham's Unserious Proposal

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has come up with a great idea to save money and avoid the sequestration: cut the Affordable Care Act.

The Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, has helped millions of young people by allowing them to have coverage they would not otherwise have had.  This law also helps poorer Americans.  It helps the single mom that has to work three part-time jobs to make ends meet, none of which would provide her health insurance coverage.  Likewise, the sequester would also disproportionately impact the poorer end of the population.  So essentially, Sen. Graham wants the President to choose between hurting the poor by eliminating Obamacare or hurting the poor by forcing Republicans to force the sequester.

This is a ridiculous choice Sen. Graham is proposing.

The White House has released a Fact Sheet on how the sequester will affect people and the economy should Congress allow March 1st to pass without addressing the issue.  With people like Sen. Lindsey Graham and Speaker John Boehner on the case, I would not be surprised if the sequester happens.

Here are some of the impacts the sequester would have: via WhiteHouse.gov

• Cuts to education: Our ability to teach our kids the skills they’ll need for the jobs of the future would be put at risk. 70,000 young children would be kicked off Head Start, 10,000 teacher jobs would be put at risk, and funding for up to 7,200 special education teachers, aides, and staff could be cut.

• Cuts to mental health: If a sequester takes effect, up to 373,000 seriously mentally ill adults and seriously emotionally disturbed children could go untreated. This would likely lead to increased hospitalizations, involvement in the criminal justice system, and homelessness for these individuals.

• Cuts to food safety: Outbreaks of foodborne illness are a serious threat to families and public health. If a sequester takes effect, up to 2,100 fewer food inspections could occur, putting families at risk and costing billions in lost food production.

• FBI and other law enforcement – The FBI and other law enforcement entities would see a reduction in capacity equivalent to more than 1,000 Federal agents. This loss of agents would significantly impact our ability to combat violent crime, pursue financial crimes, secure our borders, and protect national security.

• Emergency responders – FEMA would need to reduce funding for State and local grants that support firefighter positions and State and local emergency management personnel, hampering our ability to respond to natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy and other emergencies.

• Homelessness programs – More than 100,000 formerly homeless people, including veterans, would be removed from their current housing and emergency shelter programs, putting them at risk of returning to the streets.

• AIDS and HIV treatment and prevention – Cuts to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program could result in 7,400 fewer patients having access to life saving HIV medications. And approximately 424,000 fewer HIV tests could be conducted by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) State grantees, which could result in increased future HIV transmissions, deaths from HIV, and costs in health care.

All of these programs contribute to a stronger society. It doesn't make sense to cut these before cutting the inflated Defense budget.

Friday Shakedown

History was made yesterday when Senate Republicans filibustered Chuck Hagel's nomination for Secretary of Defense.  A President's nomination of a cabinet secretary has never been filibustered before.  Sometimes they will not win the confirmation vote but this isn't even being brought to a vote.  The filibuster is out of control and Harry Reid lost his chance to fix it.

Wayne LaPierre continued making a fool of himself to rational people while stroking his base yesterday.

After the Senate passed the Violence Against Women Act, Speaker Boehner "might" consider bringing it to a vote in the House.  How considerate of him.

The President Has His Game Face On

I predicted last year when I was discussing politics with some friends that a second term Obama would be very different than a first term Obama.  I said that he was playing the long game, a full eight years, instead of just concentrating on his current term.  The person I was talking to was upset that the President had not been more aggressive when dealing with the Republicans on healthcare and the last debt ceiling debate.  Those are legitimate complaints, of course, but if the past couple weeks are any indication, I was right.

The rumor that the President was floating the idea of compromising with cuts to entitlements like Social Security and Medicare threw the leftwing blogoshere into a tizzy.  Of course, now we see that those cuts did not happen to cut a deal.  The cuts were punted down the road but President Obama’s game face has not gone anywhere.  From the recent gun debate in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, to the upcoming debt ceiling talks, the President has made it clear that he is not fooling around. 

Speaker John Boehner is not a strong Speaker and cannot reign in the crazies in his caucus.  The debt ceiling debate should be fun to watch with several congressional Republicans threatening to raise articles of impeachment against President Obama.  Several members are also in support of a government shutdown.

Thankfully, a couple Republican Senators have broken with their party and acknowledge that a rise in the debt ceiling is necessary.  It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming weeks.