Saturday, April 22, 2017
Justice Dept threatens sanctuary cities in immigration fight
![]() |
| Little Dutch Boy trying to plug the dam leak with a finger? |
![]() |
| Dam Leak. |
The Trump administration intensified its threats to crack down on so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to comply with federal immigration authorities, warning nine jurisdictions Friday that they may lose coveted law enforcement grant money unless they document cooperation.
It sent letters to officials in California and major cities including New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and New Orleans, all places the Justice Department's inspector general has identified as limiting the information local law enforcement can provide to federal immigration authorities about those in their custody.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has warned that the administration will punish communities that refuse to cooperate with efforts to find and deport immigrants in the country illegally. But some of the localities remained defiant, despite risking the loss of funds that police agencies use to pay for everything from body cameras to bulletproof vests.
"We're not going to cave to these threats," Milwaukee County Supervisor Marina Dimitrijevic said, promising a legal fight if the money is pulled.
CALIFORNIA GOP MOVES FORWARD WITH PLAN TO PUNISH SANCTUARY CITIES
Attorney General Sessions speaks after he and
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly toured the ports of entry and met
with Department of Justice and DHS personnel in El Paso, Texas,
Thursday, April 20, 2017. (Ruben R. Ramirez/The El Paso Times via AP)
After a raid led to the arrests of 11 MS-13 gang members in California's Bay Area "city officials seemed more concerned with reassuring illegal immigrants that the raid was unrelated to immigration than with warning other MS-13 members that they were next," the department said in a statement.
The federal law in question says state and local governments may not prohibit police or sheriffs from sharing information about a person's immigration status with federal authorities.
The money could be withheld in the future, or terminated, if local officials fail to prove they are following the law, wrote Alan R. Hanson, acting head of the Office of Justice Programs. The grant program is the leading source of federal justice funding to states and local communities.
Kevin de Leon, leader of California's state Senate, rejected the administration's demand, saying its policies are based on "principles of white supremacy" and not American values.
FILE - In this Jan. 25, 2017 file photo, a woman
holds a sign at a rally outside of City Hall in San Francisco. The Trump
administration is moving beyond rhetoric in its effort to crack down on
so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with federal
immigration authorities. The Justice Department is forcing nine
communities to prove they are complying with an immigration law to
continue receiving coveted law enforcement grant money. (AP Photo/Jeff
Chiu, File)
(Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.)
Leaders in Chicago and Cook County, which shared a grant of more than $2.3 million in 2016, dismissed the threat. So did the mayor's office in New York City, which received $4.3 million. The Justice Department singled out Chicago's rise in homicides and said New York's gang killings were the "predictable consequence of the city's soft-on-crime stance."
"This grandstanding shows how out of touch the Trump administration is with reality," said Seith Stein, a spokesman for the New York City mayor's office, calling the comments "alternative facts." Crime is low thanks to policies that encourage police cooperation with immigrant communities, he said.
The jurisdictions also include Clark County, Nevada; Miami-Dade County, Florida; and Milwaukee County, Wisconsin.
They were singled out in a May 2016 report by the Justice Department's inspector general that found local policies or rules could interfere with providing information to immigration agents. Following the report, the Obama administration warned cities that they could miss out on grant money if they did not comply with the law, but it never actually withheld funds.
The report pointed to a Milwaukee County rule that immigration detention requests be honored only if the person has been convicted of one felony or two misdemeanors, has been charged with domestic violence or drunken driving, is a gang member, or is on a terrorist watch list, among other constraints.
It also took issue with a New Orleans Police Department policy that it said might hinder communication with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That city received nearly $266,000 in grant money through the program in fiscal year 2016. New Orleans has used Justice Department funding to pay for testing DNA kits, police body cameras, attorneys for domestic violence victims and other expenses.
Zach Butterworth, Mayor Mitch Landrieu's executive counsel and director of federal relations, said the city drafted its policies in consultation with federal immigration and Homeland Security officials. It was reviewing the Justice Department's letter.
"We don't think there's a problem," he said.
Butterworth said the New Orleans Police Department has seen a 28 percent drop in calls for service from people with limited English since November.
"People are scared, and because of that, they're less willing to report crime," Butterworth added.
Other places also insisted they were in compliance. Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo, the elected head of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, said the city and county were wrongly labeled sanctuary cities.
Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele said that community is hardly succumbing to violence.
"Milwaukee County has its challenges but they are not caused by illegal immigration," he said in a statement. "My far greater concern is the proactive dissemination of misinformation, fear, and intolerance."
Iran: Group claims regime is 'in full gear' on covert work on nuclear weapons
![]() | |||||||||||
| Resistance group alleges Iran grossly violating nuclear deal |
![]() |
| National Council of Resistance of Iran |
At a news conference in Washington, members of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) brandished recent satellite imagery and intelligence purportedly derived from informants inside the Iranian military to bolster their claim that the Islamic Regime is still working covertly on what nuclear experts call weaponization: the final station on the path to nuclear weapons.
“The engineering unit that is charged and tasked with actually building the bomb in a secret way for the Iranian regime is called the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research,” said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of NCRI’s Washington office. That unit, whose Persian acronym is SPND, was first exposed by Jafarzadeh’s group in 2011, and was designated by the State Department in 2014 because U.S. officials said SPND “took over some of the activities related to Iran’s undeclared nuclear program.”
“Our information shows that their activities have been continuing in full gear, despite the JCPOA,” Jafarzadeh said, using the acronym for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which is the formal name for the nuclear deal.
NCRI’s startling claim came in the same week that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson certified to Congress that Iran is meeting the terms of the JCPOA but also announced an interagency task force to reevaluate the entire deal, saying the JCPOA is not meeting its objective. President Trump followed that up the next day by saying the Iranians “are not living up to the spirit of the agreement.”
That prompted a sharp tweet of rebuke from the Iranian foreign minister, an architect of the nuclear deal. Dr. Javad Zarif posted: “We’ll see if US prepared to live up to letter of #JCPOA let alone spirit. So far, it has defied both.”
Asked about NCRI’s allegation and supporting evidence, Michael Anton, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said only that his colleagues are “carefully evaluating” the NCRI package against “the best intelligence reporting and analysis available to the United States.”
NCRI’s satellite imagery is focused on the military base at Parchin, a site to which inspectors for the International Atomic Energy Agency have been granted only limited and tightly controlled access. The photos outline an area in the north of the sprawling base where installations surrounded by berms are visible. According to NCRI officers, the newly constructed site is known internally as “Plan 6.”
There, the dissident group alleged, a sub-unit of SPND known as METFAZ – another Persian acronym for the formal title of the Center for Research and Expansion of Technologies on Explosions and Impact – is working with high explosives in ways the NCRI said are identical to the “possible military dimension” that Western officials long suspected Iran was pursuing with its nuclear program.
Skeptics of NCRI note that it is the political affiliate of an Iranian opposition group, known as MEK, that spent fifteen years on the State Department’s list of foreign terror organizations. But many have seen NCRI’s disclosures about alleged clandestine nuclear activities or sites in Iran borne out, starting with the group’s identification of the theretofore secret installations at Natanz and Arak. Frank Pabian, an adviser on nuclear nonproliferation issues at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, was quoted in 2010 as telling the New York Times of the NCRI: “They’re right 90 percent of the time.”
To assess the imagery of Plan 6 at Parchin, Fox News consulted a pair of nuclear scientists and arms control analysts who are among the world’s most renowned. David Albright, the trained physicist and former U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq, told Fox News the structures visible in the satellite photography are consistent with a facility that makes high explosives; but he noted that Iran has the right to do so under the JCPOA, and that the imagery yielded no outward sign that Iran was also testing high explosives at the site. Still, he believes the IAEA should press for access there. “The international inspectors should use authorities under the nuclear deal to go and look at this site, and see what's going on and start to verify a critical part of the nuclear deal,” Albright said, “namely, those activities involved in the development of nuclear weapons.”
Olli Heinonen spent nearly three decades at the IAEA, eventually rising to the level of the number-two official at the agency: deputy director-general. He has traveled to Iran for inspection tours and other business some twenty-five times. He reached a similar assessment about Plan 6, even as both men emphasized the need for more information to make determinative judgments.
“We see that the buildings are surrounded by berms; they are a distance from each other. This is a typical design for a site that works with high explosives,” Heinonen told FoxNews. “I think there are serious questions to be asked [of] the Iranian government. Most likely IAEA should have access to this site.”
Neither the IAEA nor the Iranian mission to the United Nations responded to requests for comment.
Gas stations in North Korea's main city restrict services, speculation that China is reducing supply
Drivers in Pyongyang are scrambling to fill up their tanks as gas stations begin limiting services or even closing amid concerns of a spreading shortage.
A sign outside one station in the North Korean capital said Friday that sales were being restricted to diplomats or vehicles used by international organizations, while others were closed or turning away local residents. Lines at other stations were much longer than usual and prices appeared to be rising significantly.
The cause of the restrictions or how long they might last were not immediately known.
North Korea relies heavily on China for its fuel supply and Beijing has reportedly been tightening its enforcement of international sanctions aimed at getting Pyongyang to abandon its development of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles.
The issue was raised at a regular Chinese Foreign Ministry news conference in Beijing on Friday after a Chinese media outlet, Global Times, reported gas stations were restricting service and charging higher prices.
But spokesman Lu Kang gave an ambiguous response when asked if China was restricting fuel deliveries.
"As for what kind of policy China is taking, I think you should listen to the authoritative remarks or statements of the Chinese government," he said, without elaborating on what those remarks or statements are. "For the remarks made by certain people or circulated online, it is up to you if you want to take them as references."
One of China's top North Korea scholars, Kim Dong-jil, director of the Center for Korean Peninsula Studies of Peking University, said he had not heard of new restrictions on fuel to pressure Pyongyang, but said they are considered to be an option.
China's Ministry of Commerce had no immediate comments.
President Trump has said that he has a “very good relationship” with the Chinese president, Xi Jinping. The Journal, earlier this month, reported that Trump was scheduled to meet for 10 to 15 minutes, but ended up talking for three hours.
Gasoline was selling at $1.25 per kilogram at one station, up from the previous 70-80 cents. According to a sign outside a station where ordinary North Korean vehicles were being turned away, the restrictions took effect on Wednesday.
Gasoline is sold in North Korea by the kilogram, roughly equivalent to a liter (0.26 gallon).
When buying gas in North Korea, customers usually first purchase coupons at a cashier's booth for the amount of fuel they want. After filling up the tank, leftover coupons can be used on later visits until their expiration date. A common amount for the coupons is 15 kilograms (19.65 liters or 5.2 U.S. gallons).
Supply is controlled by the state.
The military, state ministries and priority projects have the best access. Several chains of gas stations are operated under different state-run enterprises -- for example, Air Koryo, the national flagship airline, operates gas stations as well.
Prices can vary from one station to another.
Traffic in Pyongyang has gotten heavier than in past years, when visitors were often struck by the lack of cars on the capital's broad avenues.
The greater number of cars, including swelling fleets of taxis, has been an indication of greater economic activity, as many are used for business purposes, such as transporting people or goods.
Trump to unveil tax cut he says could be biggest ever
President Trump on Friday said businesses and individuals will receive a "massive tax cut" under a tax reform package he plans to unveil next week.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Trump said the plan will result in tax cuts for both individuals and businesses. He would not provide details of the plan, saying only that the tax cuts will be "bigger I believe than any tax cut ever."
The president said the package will be released on "Wednesday or shortly thereafter" — just before his 100 day mark in office. He will face opposition in Congress as the possibility of a government shutdown by the end of the month lingers.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin initially set a goal of getting tax reform passed by August, but that deadline has slipped. Mnuchin now says the administration still hoped to get a bill passed well before the end of the year.
Mnuchin on Thursday said economic growth from proposed tax cuts would come close to $2 trillion over 10 years.
Steve Forbes, in an interview on Fox Business’ "Your World With Neil Cavuto,” said Trump is doing the right thing by aggressively pushing for tax cuts.
"I think he's recognized that if he doesn't get this economy moving in a way that people visibly feel it, he and the Republicans are going to be in deep trouble next year," Forbes said.
He added that Trump will have to push congressional Republicans to get the tax plan through as soon as possible, because even if it's approved in the short-term, it will take time for Americans to truly feel its effects.
"When you make an investment, it doesn't mean the building rises up the next day, or the factory rises up the next day, or the services are available the next day," Forbes said. "It takes time to make these things happen. ... Why aren't they realistic about how the world works?"
In March, a Fox News poll found that 55 percent of participants believed they pay too much in taxes, The number was down from a record 63 percent in march 2015.
Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist said this week that he's confident that tax reform will be passed despite recent delays.
Norquist said there is agreement between the White House and Republicans in the House and Senate. That includes cutting the corporate rate from 35 to 20 percent, while small businesses would go from 40 down to 25 percent, which he called "very important."
Friday, April 21, 2017
Oh, shut up: Let's prosecute criminal campus crazies
![]() |
| Ann Coulter |
Ever tried dealing with a playground bully? What
shuts him (or her, for our politically correct readers) up fastest? A
bloody nose.
Bullies operate on the assumption that they are safe from retribution. When they find out that’s not true, they curdle like spoiled milk. Until then, their conduct can only spiral further out of control.
That’s what’s happening at colleges across America. Students who think they can dictate what is said on their campus are shutting down any point of view they oppose. That’s not youthful indiscretion. It’s a crime. And the perpetrators should be prosecuted for it.
This week, the University of California at Berkeley – a communist commune that poses as a cathedral of learning – succeeded in getting conservative commentator Ann Coulter’s scheduled speech canceled. The university later suggested she give her speech on May 2 but she rejected that date.
The reason for the original cancellation: college administrators feared her presence might pose a security risk.
A risk to whom? Coulter? She can take care of herself. The students who, masked in balaclavas and paisley handkerchiefs, think the best way to express their opinion is to smash in windows and set fire to cars? They want their freedom of speech to be unabridged, including acts of violence. Coulter sets only verbal bonfires with her intentionally overheated rhetoric.
It’s time for college administrators and campus police to grow a pair, and prosecute students who engage in these antics. Shutting down free speech is a crime, as Jay Sekulow, the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, knows.
”What’s going on with Ann Coulter is classic viewpoint discrimination,” Sekulow told me. “The Supreme Court has been consistent that viewpoint discrimination is a violation of free speech. And that is illegal.”
So who needs to take action? “It’s the school’s job to prevent the protests from becoming violent,” Sekulow says. “Letting students create a hostile environment that shuts down free speech opens the school to lawsuits.”
So let’s stop worrying about the students’ rights and prosecute the criminals among them. Here’s how, according to Sekulow:
“In a public place, and that includes the campus, you’re allowed to videotape what the students are doing. From a criminal perspective, the campus police would have to bring the lawsuit against people who are rioting. Frankly, until now, what the campus police have been doing is nothing. And the result is that free speech is being shut down. This goes way beyond political correctness. This is criminal conduct.”
College life is a time for young people to be exposed to new ideas, to weigh them and decide what works for them as they form their adult personalities. The message today’s students are getting is: agree with me or keep your mouth shut. That’s not education. It’s tyranny.
John Moody is Executive Vice President, Executive Editor for Fox News. A former Rome bureau chief for Time magazine, he is the author of four books including "Pope John Paul II : Biography."
Bullies operate on the assumption that they are safe from retribution. When they find out that’s not true, they curdle like spoiled milk. Until then, their conduct can only spiral further out of control.
That’s what’s happening at colleges across America. Students who think they can dictate what is said on their campus are shutting down any point of view they oppose. That’s not youthful indiscretion. It’s a crime. And the perpetrators should be prosecuted for it.
This week, the University of California at Berkeley – a communist commune that poses as a cathedral of learning – succeeded in getting conservative commentator Ann Coulter’s scheduled speech canceled. The university later suggested she give her speech on May 2 but she rejected that date.
The reason for the original cancellation: college administrators feared her presence might pose a security risk.
A risk to whom? Coulter? She can take care of herself. The students who, masked in balaclavas and paisley handkerchiefs, think the best way to express their opinion is to smash in windows and set fire to cars? They want their freedom of speech to be unabridged, including acts of violence. Coulter sets only verbal bonfires with her intentionally overheated rhetoric.
It’s time for college administrators and campus police to grow a pair, and prosecute students who engage in these antics. Shutting down free speech is a crime, as Jay Sekulow, the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, knows.
”What’s going on with Ann Coulter is classic viewpoint discrimination,” Sekulow told me. “The Supreme Court has been consistent that viewpoint discrimination is a violation of free speech. And that is illegal.”
So who needs to take action? “It’s the school’s job to prevent the protests from becoming violent,” Sekulow says. “Letting students create a hostile environment that shuts down free speech opens the school to lawsuits.”
So let’s stop worrying about the students’ rights and prosecute the criminals among them. Here’s how, according to Sekulow:
“In a public place, and that includes the campus, you’re allowed to videotape what the students are doing. From a criminal perspective, the campus police would have to bring the lawsuit against people who are rioting. Frankly, until now, what the campus police have been doing is nothing. And the result is that free speech is being shut down. This goes way beyond political correctness. This is criminal conduct.”
College life is a time for young people to be exposed to new ideas, to weigh them and decide what works for them as they form their adult personalities. The message today’s students are getting is: agree with me or keep your mouth shut. That’s not education. It’s tyranny.
John Moody is Executive Vice President, Executive Editor for Fox News. A former Rome bureau chief for Time magazine, he is the author of four books including "Pope John Paul II : Biography."
Arkansas judge barred from execution cases after death penalty protest
![]() |
| Murder cases taken away from anti-death penalty prosecutor |
Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen was referred to a disciplinary panel after his demonstration outside the governor’s mansion.
Griffen’s protests sparked outrage among capital punishment supporters as well as lawmakers who described his actions as judicial misconduct and potential grounds for removal from the bench.
"To protect the integrity of the judicial system this court has a duty to ensure that all are given a fair and impartial tribunal," the court said in its two-page order.
Justices also referred Griffen to the state Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission to consider whether he violated the code of conduct for judges.
In the past, Griffen has said he’s opposed to the death penalty but that his personal beliefs shouldn’t discredit or disqualify him from taking up cases involving capital punishment.
On Friday, Griffen granted a restraining order preventing Arkansas from using its supply of vecuronium bromide, one of three drugs it uses in executions, because the pharmaceutical company said the state misleadingly obtained the drug.
The Arkansas Supreme Court on Monday night granted the state's request to vacate Griffen's ruling, potentially clearing the way for the state to carry out its first execution in nearly 12 years.
The case involving the drug was reassigned to another judge shortly after the Supreme Court issued its order Monday disqualifying Griffen from cases about the death penalty or Arkansas’ execution protocol.
Lawmakers have suggested Griffen's actions may be grounds for the Arkansas House to begin impeachment proceedings, saying the demonstration and a blog post Griffen wrote on the death penalty last week may amount to "gross misconduct" under the state constitution.
The Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission confirmed Monday an investigation of Griffen is pending following the state Supreme Court referral.
Griffen, who served 12 years on the state appeals court, previously battled with the judicial discipline panel over remarks he made criticizing President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq. The panel ultimately dropped its case against him.
Griffen testified before the state Legislature in 2015 against a religious objections measure that was criticized as anti-gay, and he regularly blogs about current events in posts that weave in Biblical passages. They include a post days before his ruling that criticized the execution push in Arkansas.
"While the world meditates about divine love, forgiveness, justice, and hope, Arkansas officials plan to commit a series of homicides," he wrote.
Griffen, 64, is a Baptist minister who was first elected as Pulaski County judge in 2010. He ran twice unsuccessfully for state Supreme Court — including a bid for chief justice in 2004. In his other state Supreme Court race in 2006, Griffen challenged his rival to a debate over the free-speech rights of judges.
Griffen said he wouldn't consider a person's participation in an anti-execution event enough, on its own, to warrant disqualifying a juror from a death penalty case. The question, he said, is whether the juror could set his or her personal views aside and follow the law.
"We do not require people to come into court with blank slates, either in their minds or their heart," he said Saturday.
Congress grappling with shutdown threat as funding deadline zooms into view
Once again, Congress is staring at the edge of the abyss.
Lawmakers return to session next week with just four days to fund the government and avert a shutdown. The deadline is April 28.
The dynamics are different this time, compared with the 2013 meltdown. There’s a Republican House and Senate. This is the first government funding go-round with President Trump occupying the White House. No one is quite sure how the Trump administration will handle the negotiations or what are their untouchable requests. But there’s not a lot of time to figure this out. Some Republicans fret that House GOP leaders burned way too much time trying to rescue their stunted health care bill.
A lapse in government funding would represent the second major legislative failure by Trump and the Republican Congress. A shutdown, following the failure to repeal and replace ObamaCare, could prove politically catastrophic for the exclusive, governing party in Washington.
But here are the keys. First, funding the government could, yet again, hinge on ObamaCare. Secondly, while Republicans run Washington, Democrats hold many of the cards in this poker game.
The House GOP’s stumble to repeal and replace ObamaCare before the recess didn’t appear to have a direct connection to the pending government funding battle. But now it may. Just days ago, Trump declared he would yank subsidies known as “cost-sharing reductions,” or CSR’s, from ObamaCare programs. The government directs the CSR payments to insurers who grant coverage to low-income people. A dried-up subsidy could force insurers to drop ObamaCare and spike premiums for the poor.
Trump views the ObamaCare subsidies as leverage to force Democrats to the table on health care. Democrats contend the president is holding the health care assistance “hostage” and imperiling those who aren’t well off. Trump has engaged with few Democrats since taking office on addressing ObamaCare or funding the government. Those who lose coverage (many of whom backed the president last fall) will know precisely who forced them to lose coverage should Trump successfully strip the subsidy. Still, there’s no better place to withdraw the subsidies than in the upcoming spending bill. One would think the president would drop the CSR’s in this spending bill if he’s serious about the new policy.
But that is a poison pill. Republicans may love the idea. However, it torpedoes any notion that Democrats might support the spending package.
“The spending bill cannot be done by one party alone,” opined Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., before the recess. “These bills can’t pass without a reasonable number of Democratic supporters in the Senate.”
Therefore, is the president willing to stick to his guns on the ObamaCare subsidies or test the possibility of a government shutdown?
Blame the Democrats for this? Well, it’s hard to do that when Democrats don’t formally control any of the levers in Washington.
This is why it’s hard to make good on campaign promises. The rhetoric sure sounds lofty in the cornfields of Iowa and the snows of New Hampshire. But now?
Speaking of campaign promises, how’s funding for that wall going? It’s unclear if Trump will insist lawmakers attach money for the border wall to this upcoming spending package. But you can bet that Democrats will again bolt if that scenario comes to pass.
Wouldn’t the president latch money to construct the wall to this spending bill if he were serious about the project? But then again, Trump probably could get the wall and fail to keep the government open, too.
Plussing-up military dollars? Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., is clear the Pentagon needs a jump-start in funding. That’s something else on which Trump campaigned. But Congress operates under the Budget Control Act of 2011. That plan capped what’s called “discretionary” spending for years down that road and created “sequestration,” the budgetary phenomenon of arbitrarily limiting various spending pots regardless of need. Under the Budget Control Act, the “discretionary” spending ceiling (excluding entitlements like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security) for this cycle is $1.07 trillion. Pouring in additional money for the military (or, for that matter, the wall) busts those sequestration limits. Keep in mind that many fiscal conservatives in the House and Senate want to spend less overall. That’s one of the reasons Republicans need to lean on Democrats for votes to keep the lights on in Washington.
One of the best ways to determine the musculature of a policy is to calculate how much money Washington devotes to a given initiative.
How about stripping sanctuary cities of federal dollars? A good place to execute that policy would be a rider in this spending bill. Democrats would interpret such an approach as another poison pill and balk at voting for such a measure.
With the deep uncertainty over whether Congress can address all of this in such a short timeframe, there’s already discussion of punting and adopting a stopgap measure of a week or two.
But are these policy promises idle threats or does the president insist on Congress including such provisions in the spending bill? Does Trump concede on a few subjects and let Democrats score some wins? Do they fail to work any of this out and spark a government shutdown?
Congress completed much of the work on the spending bills behind the scenes over the past few months. Back in December, Democrats only wanted to fund the government through late March. Republicans demanded late April and prevailed. Never mind that House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., promised to abandon the now common practice of bundling together spending bills rather than advancing them individually. That approach could come later this year. But Congress certainly didn’t do any of that ahead of this spending deadline.
So something has to give. And yet again, Congress stares into the abyss.
Capitol Attitude is a weekly column written by members of the Fox News Capitol Hill team. Their articles take you inside the halls of Congress, and cover the spectrum of policy issues being introduced, debated and voted on there.
Republicans float new ObamaCare replacement plan
House Republicans are shopping around a new ObamaCare replacement plan, amid pressure to deliver a legislative win as President Trump nears the end of his first 100 days.
“We have a good chance of getting it soon. I’d like to say next week, but I believe we will get it” eventually, Trump said Thursday at a White House press conference.
“We’re very close,” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said a day earlier at an event in London.
Fox News is told they hope to have revised legislative text in the coming days, and lawmakers are set to discuss the proposal on a conference call this weekend. But it’s unclear when such a plan could hit the House floor or what level of support it might have – Congress is currently on recess, and lawmakers won’t return until next week.
Fox News is told that leaders have not yet tried tallying support for the document on Capitol Hill.
"The question is whether it can get 216 votes in the House and the answer isn't clear at this time,” a senior GOP aide said. “There is no legislative text and therefore no agreement to do a whip count on."
A White House source said they could potentially have a vote by the end of next week, though they put the chances at 50-50.
The failure in March to pass an earlier replacement bill for the Affordable Care Act, amid widespread criticism of the plan, marked a major setback for Trump’s early presidency. He has since turned his attention to foreign affairs – especially the Syrian crisis – but continues to press for a new health care plan, blaming a bloc of House conservatives for the March meltdown.
Complicating any renewed efforts, however, is next Friday’s deadline for Congress to pass a new budget measure. Congressional Republicans and the Trump administration likely will have to court Democrats to avoid this scenario. Further, the timetable is tight, with the House not set to return until Tuesday night.
Interestingly, the government shutdown drama and health care could be directly linked.
Just days ago, Trump declared he would yank subsidies known as “cost-sharing reductions” from ObamaCare programs. The government directs the CSR payments to insurers who grant coverage to low-income people. A dried-up subsidy could force insurers to drop ObamaCare and spike premiums for the poor.
Trump views the ObamaCare subsidies as leverage to force Democrats to the table on health care. Democrats contend the president is holding the health care assistance “hostage” and imperiling those who aren’t well off.
Trump said Thursday he wants to pass both a health care package and budget bill.
“The spending bill cannot be done by one party alone,” opined Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., before the recess. “These bills can’t pass without a reasonable number of Democratic supporters in the Senate.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Tom Homan Shreds Democrat Victory-Lapping Over ICE's MN Drawdown With Inconvenient Facts
President Donald Trump’s Border Czar Tom Homan made one thing unmistakably clear about the ICE drawdown in Minneapolis, ...
-
How many times do we need to say this? If you’re here illegally and get caught, you’re going back. It’s the la...
-
The problem with the courts is the same as the problem with many of our other institutions. Called the Skins...
-
CNN’s Scott Jennings once again took liberals to the cleaners on the Abrego Garcia case, the ‘Maryland man...



















