Friday, February 10, 2017
Senate confirms Price as HHS secretary in party-line vote
The Senate early Friday morning confirmed President Trump’s pick to head the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., will likely be leaned on by the administration to undo many components of Obamacare.
It was the Senate's fourth consecutive contested vote for a Trump Cabinet secretary. Partisan battles for Cabinet posts are usually rare, but the first weeks of Trump's presidency have seen little collegiality between the two sides.
Price is a veteran House member and orthopedic surgeon who Republicans call a knowledgeable pick for the job. Democrats say he's an ideologue whose policies would snatch care from many Americans.
VIDEO: SENATE DEMS TURN ATTENTION TO PRICE
Citing Price's long-time support for revamping the Medicare program for the elderly, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that with Price's confirmation, "The Republicans launch their first assault in their war on seniors." Trump has said he won't cut Medicare.
Republicans see Price as a knowledgeable leader who will help scuttle Obama's health care overhaul, partly by issuing regulations weakening the law. Democrats describe an ideologue with a shady history of trading health care stocks and whose policies will snatch insurance coverage from Americans.
"He seems to have no higher priority than to terminate health coverage for millions of people," said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. She said his preference for limiting women's access to free birth control was "not only wrong, it's arrogant."
Price's nomination is part of a larger clash in which Republicans want to quickly enact priorities long blocked by Obama. Democrats, with few tools as Congress' minority, are making a show of resistance, stretching some floor debates to the maximum 30 hours Senate rules allow.
The high stakes plus Trump's belligerent style have fed the combativeness. They've also produced remarkable scenes, including Democratic boycotts of hearings, Republicans suspending committee rules to approve nominees and GOP senators voting to bar Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., from joining a debate.
Until recently chairman of the House Budget Committee, Price has proposed repealing Obama's health law and replacing it with tax credits, health savings accounts and high-risk pools for sick, costly consumers. Democrats say those ideas are inadequate and would leave people unprotected against significant health expenses.
Republicans have yet to produce a replacement plan and have differed over when they will do so.
Price has supported ending federal payments to Planned Parenthood, and paring Medicaid and giving states more power to shape the health care program for the poor. He'd reshape Medicare's guaranteed health coverage for the elderly into a program offering subsidies for people to buy policies.
Democrats have accused Price of lying about his acquisition of discounted shares of an Australian biotech company and benefiting from insider information. They've also asserted he pushed legislation to help a medical implant maker whose stock he'd purchased.
Price has said he's done nothing wrong. It's illegal for members of Congress to engage in insider trading.
The Senate has approved the previous three consecutive Cabinet nominees along mostly party lines.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., became attorney general by 52-47 after Warren was punished for reading a 1986 letter by Coretta Scott King criticizing him. Betsy DeVos was approved as education secretary, rescued by Vice President Mike Pence's tie breaker in a 51-50 vote, and Rex Tillerson won approval 56-43 as secretary of state.
That contrasts with the past four decades, when Senate records show most Cabinet selections have been approved overwhelmingly.
During that period, no secretary of state nominee received fewer than 85 votes. The closest tally for health secretary was the 65-31 roll call for Obama's 2009 pick, Kathleen Sibelius.
Just four of 31 votes for Obama Cabinet vacancies drew at least 40 "no" votes, as did only two of 34 votes for Cabinet positions under President George W. Bush.
Defiant Trump tweets "SEE YOU IN COURT" after ruling again blocks immigration order
A defiant President Donald Trump tweeted “SEE YOU IN COURT” after a San Francisco federal appeals court Thursday upheld the suspension of his controversial immigration order.
He also warned the security of the nation was at stake and said he expected to easily win the case.
Top presidential adviser Kellyanne Conway told Martha MacCallum on “The First 100 Days” that she could not specify if Trump meant he would take it to the Supreme Court, but there were “different options” open to the White House.
She added that the ruling “does not affect the merits at all.”
The panel of three judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously refused to reinstate the order after a federal judge had issued a halt to it last week.
But the Justice Department said it is "reviewing the decision and considering its options.” Trump later tweeted: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"
He also told the White House press pool shortly after the ruling, "it's a political decision and we'll see them in court...it is a decision that we will win in my opinion very easily.
Asked how he learned about the decision, Trump replied, "we just saw it, just like you did."
Trump issued the executive order, which placed a 90-day pause on immigrants from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Sudan, on Jan. 27, causing chaos and outrage at airports across the country. The order also imposed a 120-day pause on all refugees, and an indefinite pause on refugees from Syria.
The case was given to the appeals court after a Seattle federal judge last week ordered a halt to Trump’s order. Judge James Robart issued a temporary restraining order after Washington state and Minnesota both sued.
Attorneys from the Justice Department appealed Robart’s ruling, arguing that the president’s executive power gives him the authority to place restrictions on people coming into the country.
However, the court ruling disagreed with that argument:
"In short, although courts owe considerable deference to the President’s policy determinations with respect to immigration and national security, it is beyond question that the federal judiciary retains the authority to adjudicate constitutional challenges to executive action," the court ruled.
Supporters of Trump's order argue it will help keep America safe from terrorists looking to infiltrate the United States from terror hotspots that often have inadequate vetting procedures. Opponents have argued it is unconstitutional and discriminatory – claiming that it is a “Muslim ban” and that it has harmed individuals and businesses.
The court ruled that the government has not presented "any evidence" of a sufficient national security threat from the seven countries in question.
"...[The] Government has not offered any evidence or even an explanation of how the national security concerns that justified those designations, which triggered visa requirements, can be extrapolated to justify an urgent need for the Executive Order to be immediately reinstated.
The Democratic National Committee called the ruling a "massive blow to the White House.
“Let’s be clear: This is a massive blow to the White House. The court upheld that we do not discriminate based on religion. That is what terrorists do, and what terrorists want us to do," Interim DNC Chair Donna Brazile said in a statement.
The American Civil Liberties Union also praised the ruling.
"The government’s erratic and chaotic attempts to enforce this unconstitutional ban have taken a tremendous toll on innocent individuals, our country’s values, and our standing in the world," Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Projects, said in a statement. "We will keep fighting this un-American executive order until it is permanently dismantled.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, called on Trump to abandon the order entirely.
"President Trump ought to see the handwriting on the wall that his executive order is unconstitutional. He should abandon this proposal, roll up his sleeves and come up with a real, bipartisan plan to keep us safe," he said.
If the case goes to the Supreme Court, it appears Trump’s nominee for its vacant seat, Judge Neil Gorsuch, is unlikely to be in place by the time it reached the court. It is also possible that if it goes to the high court, by that time the temporary restrictions would have expired.
The administration could also ask a larger panel of judges to hear the appeal, or accept the order and go back to the Seattle-based federal court and try and block the next legal step -- whether to grant the states’ request for a preliminary injunction—which would put enforcement of the Executive Order on hold until all the appeals are exhausted.
During arguments before the court, Washington state Solicitor General Noah Purcell argued that Trump campaign statements about a Muslim ban showed discriminatory intent.
"There are statements that we've quoted in our complaint that are rather shocking evidence of intent to discriminate against Muslims, given that we haven't even had any discovery yet to find out what else might have been said in private," Purcell said.
Trump had been outspoken in his criticism of the case, calling Robart a “so-called judge” on Twitter, and on Wednesday warning that “if the U.S. does not win this case as it so obviously should, we can never have the security and safety to which we are entitled.”
Note to bewildered Democrats: Hating Trump is not a policy
Liz Peek
Democrats are overjoyed that the 9th
Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against President Trump’s
immigration order. That figures; never mind the legal issues or the
possible impact on the White House’s ability to enact measures aimed at
keeping the country safe. Most important: it was a blow to Trump, and
Democrats couldn’t be happier. It’s gotten personal.
The decision will doubtless pump up House Democrats who are meeting in Maryland, presumably exploring a path back to relevance. Given their strident denunciations of President Trump, working with Republicans to move the country forward does not appear to be an option. As Nancy Pelosi said, "As long as the president continues down this path, there is nothing Democrats can work with him on."
Which path would that be? Maybe Trump’s immigration order, which, notwithstanding the ruling of a notably liberal court, gets approval from 55% of the country, versus 38% that disapproves? Or his proposal to revoke federal funds from sanctuary cities, a policy supported by 55% of registered voters and opposed by only 33%, according to the same new Morning Consult/Politico poll?
Democrats do not appear to be talking policy at the retreat. Instead, they are doubling down on the unprecedented vitriol with which they routinely attack Donald Trump, Donald Trump’s family, his cabinet picks, his advisors, his tweets, his policies, his hotels, his hats, his everything.
This toxic posturing could well backfire as Democrats try to win back disaffected voters. As important, it could hurt the country, and for that they will not be forgiven.
The election of President Trump, like it or not, caused a surge in optimism across the country. While embittered liberals took to the streets to protest our democracy in action, investors pumped money into stocks and consumers opened up their wallets, delivering a vote of confidence to the outsider president. One measure of consumer confidence showed a post-election surge from 46.7 in early November to a 12-month high of 52.8 in the days following the inauguration.
Since then, as Democrats have slow-walked confirming Trump’s cabinet nominees and have placed themselves squarely in front of every policy he has suggested, consumer confidence has slipped almost three points, giving up much of the post-election gain. That could quickly translate into slower spending, meaning fewer jobs.
It’s not surprising. Investors and consumers alike understand that our economy needs some juice; Trump has promised to provide that, via lower taxes and lighter regulation. Democrats, of course, object to that agenda. In fairness, it has also been disheartening that the GOP does not appear to have a tax reform plan at the ready, or an agreed-upon approach to replacing Obamacare. The country wants action; whoever is perceived to stand in the way of important reforms will pay dearly.
The liberal media will blame Trump for everything that goes wrong, including less-than-immediate gratification on Obamacare and tax reform. The media, though, get worse marks than the president these days; their incessant attacks on Trump have undermined their credibility.
A poll by Emerson College showed that while 49% of the country trusts President Trump, only 39% believe in the media. Imagine that.
Meanwhile, where is the vision that will lead Democrats out of their self- inflicted political exile? Where are their policies that will boost incomes and win back the hearts of traditional blue collar Democrats?
They have none. They attack all and every Republican idea, but propose nothing.
At the retreat, Steny Hoyer, the number two Democrat in the House, tied future gains to rebuilding “our state and local parties.” He doesn’t seem to understand that attracting voters requires a winning message. Hillary Clinton didn’t have one, and neither does the party today.
Democrats need to turn around their sinking ship, but cannot find the rudder. The outrage vented by Elizabeth Warren against every Trump cabinet nominee may be helpful to Elizabeth Warren, but it may backfire. For instance, it is hard to imagine that the middle class Pennsylvania worker – the poster child for the lost Democrat voter -- is inspired by her defamation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
Warren tweeted to call out Sessions’ supposed “radical hatred” and “racism, sexism & bigotry”; evidence for those charges during Sessions’ decades of public service are scant. Sessions is hated by the Left because he will execute the laws of the country – laws that are under attack from numerous sides. Laws that were often ignored by former Attorneys General Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder.
But it turns out the nation is ready for a little more law and order. That’s what the Morning Consult/Politico poll shows.
In fact, voters appear to like most of the executive orders signed by Trump. Some 54% think freezing new regulations is a good idea (33%), 48% like Trump’s decision on the Keystone Pipeline, against 37% that do not. Similar portions of the electorate agree with his moves on building a wall, withdrawing from the TPP and not giving federal money to organizations providing abortions.
Democrats read media outrage and recent numerous marches and protests as proof that they are right to oppose the new White House. As Hoyer said, “We represent the views of the majority of citizens.” They are wrong, and their mean-spirited obstruction will keep them in the penalty box. Especially if they step in the way of Trump’s constructive economic agenda.
Liz Peek is a writer who contributes frequently to FoxNews.com. She is a financial columnist who also writes for The Fiscal Times. For more visit LizPeek.com. Follow her on Twitter@LizPeek.
The decision will doubtless pump up House Democrats who are meeting in Maryland, presumably exploring a path back to relevance. Given their strident denunciations of President Trump, working with Republicans to move the country forward does not appear to be an option. As Nancy Pelosi said, "As long as the president continues down this path, there is nothing Democrats can work with him on."
Which path would that be? Maybe Trump’s immigration order, which, notwithstanding the ruling of a notably liberal court, gets approval from 55% of the country, versus 38% that disapproves? Or his proposal to revoke federal funds from sanctuary cities, a policy supported by 55% of registered voters and opposed by only 33%, according to the same new Morning Consult/Politico poll?
Democrats do not appear to be talking policy at the retreat. Instead, they are doubling down on the unprecedented vitriol with which they routinely attack Donald Trump, Donald Trump’s family, his cabinet picks, his advisors, his tweets, his policies, his hotels, his hats, his everything.
This toxic posturing could well backfire as Democrats try to win back disaffected voters. As important, it could hurt the country, and for that they will not be forgiven.
The election of President Trump, like it or not, caused a surge in optimism across the country. While embittered liberals took to the streets to protest our democracy in action, investors pumped money into stocks and consumers opened up their wallets, delivering a vote of confidence to the outsider president. One measure of consumer confidence showed a post-election surge from 46.7 in early November to a 12-month high of 52.8 in the days following the inauguration.
Since then, as Democrats have slow-walked confirming Trump’s cabinet nominees and have placed themselves squarely in front of every policy he has suggested, consumer confidence has slipped almost three points, giving up much of the post-election gain. That could quickly translate into slower spending, meaning fewer jobs.
It’s not surprising. Investors and consumers alike understand that our economy needs some juice; Trump has promised to provide that, via lower taxes and lighter regulation. Democrats, of course, object to that agenda. In fairness, it has also been disheartening that the GOP does not appear to have a tax reform plan at the ready, or an agreed-upon approach to replacing Obamacare. The country wants action; whoever is perceived to stand in the way of important reforms will pay dearly.
The liberal media will blame Trump for everything that goes wrong, including less-than-immediate gratification on Obamacare and tax reform. The media, though, get worse marks than the president these days; their incessant attacks on Trump have undermined their credibility.
A poll by Emerson College showed that while 49% of the country trusts President Trump, only 39% believe in the media. Imagine that.
Meanwhile, where is the vision that will lead Democrats out of their self- inflicted political exile? Where are their policies that will boost incomes and win back the hearts of traditional blue collar Democrats?
They have none. They attack all and every Republican idea, but propose nothing.
At the retreat, Steny Hoyer, the number two Democrat in the House, tied future gains to rebuilding “our state and local parties.” He doesn’t seem to understand that attracting voters requires a winning message. Hillary Clinton didn’t have one, and neither does the party today.
Democrats need to turn around their sinking ship, but cannot find the rudder. The outrage vented by Elizabeth Warren against every Trump cabinet nominee may be helpful to Elizabeth Warren, but it may backfire. For instance, it is hard to imagine that the middle class Pennsylvania worker – the poster child for the lost Democrat voter -- is inspired by her defamation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
Warren tweeted to call out Sessions’ supposed “radical hatred” and “racism, sexism & bigotry”; evidence for those charges during Sessions’ decades of public service are scant. Sessions is hated by the Left because he will execute the laws of the country – laws that are under attack from numerous sides. Laws that were often ignored by former Attorneys General Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder.
But it turns out the nation is ready for a little more law and order. That’s what the Morning Consult/Politico poll shows.
In fact, voters appear to like most of the executive orders signed by Trump. Some 54% think freezing new regulations is a good idea (33%), 48% like Trump’s decision on the Keystone Pipeline, against 37% that do not. Similar portions of the electorate agree with his moves on building a wall, withdrawing from the TPP and not giving federal money to organizations providing abortions.
Democrats read media outrage and recent numerous marches and protests as proof that they are right to oppose the new White House. As Hoyer said, “We represent the views of the majority of citizens.” They are wrong, and their mean-spirited obstruction will keep them in the penalty box. Especially if they step in the way of Trump’s constructive economic agenda.
Liz Peek is a writer who contributes frequently to FoxNews.com. She is a financial columnist who also writes for The Fiscal Times. For more visit LizPeek.com. Follow her on Twitter@LizPeek.
Trump tells Chinese president US will honor 'one China' policy
President Donald Trump told China President Xi Jinping the U.S. would honor the “one China” policy months after Trump suggested he might use American policy on Taiwan as a bargaining chip between the two sides.
Trump “agreed at the request of President Xi,” to honor the policy, the White House said in a statement late Thursday.
The one China policy had been a source of friction between the U.S. and China since Trump’s election in November. Trump had questioned Washington’s policy on Taiwan, which shifted diplomatic recognition from self-governing Taiwan to China in 1979. He said it was open to negotiation.
China bristled at the comments Trump made. Trump told The Wall Street Journal in January that “everything is under negotiation, including ‘one China.’” The interview indicated at the time that Trump intended to shake up the relationship between Washington and Beijing, particularly on Taiwan.
Beijing was initially rattled over Trump’s call with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen, the first time an American president or president-elect had publicly spoken to Taiwan’s leader in nearly four decades.
Trump then said in a television interview that he didn't feel "bound by a one China policy unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade."
Chinese media also went on the attack after Trump’s one China policy comments, calling the then-president-elect “as ignorant as a child.” The Global Times published a Chinese-language editorial headlined: "Trump, please listen clearly: 'One China' cannot be traded."
The White House sought to break the ice with China, saying Wednesday Trump wrote to President Xi wishing the Chinese people greetings for the new year and the Lantern Festival.
"President Trump stated that he looks forward to working with President Xi to develop a constructive relationship that benefits both the United States and China," the statement said.
China said it appreciated Trump’s holiday greeting. When asked if Xi felt snubbed that Trump called other world leaders, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said, “This kind of remark is meaningless.”
Up until Wednesday, Trump had been the only U.S. president in recent years not to have issued greetings when the holiday fell on Jan. 28, triggering speculation in China as to whether it was an oversight or an intentional slight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RFK's Sister Kerry Kennedy Attempt to Endorse Biden on CNN Goes a Little South - Twice
Inbreeding ? It's a pretty wild thing that members of the Kennedy family are supporting Joe Biden rather than Robert F. Kenne...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
What's the role of government? To one award-winning academic, it's discrimination according to race. On February 9th, Mic...