Boehner to Obama: Why a break for businesses only?

WASHINGTON (AP) — Framing a new argument against President Barack Obama's health care law, congressional GOP leaders called Tuesday for a delay in the law's requirement that individual Americans carry health insurance.

If the White House can grant a one-year delay for employers — as the administration did just last week — individuals should get the same consideration, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio and other senior Republicans said in a letter to the president.

"Your decision to delay one part of the law affecting employers and leave in place provisions regulating individual and family health care creates many new questions and concerns," the GOP leaders wrote. "We agree with you that the burden was overwhelming for employers, but we also believe American families need the same relief."

The White House had no immediate response to Boehner's demand.

Republicans hope their new argument will gain traction in next year's congressional elections, as the law's big push to cover the uninsured gets underway. Foes are betting the coverage rollout will be full of problems, particularly since about half the states have refused to support the federal effort.

Under the law, middle-class people with no access to job-based coverage will be eligible for subsidized private insurance, while low-income uninsured people will be steered to an expanded version of Medicaid in states that accept it.

The health care law contains coverage requirements for individuals as well as companies with 50 or more workers. Both requirements were originally scheduled to take effect next Jan. 1.

Last week, the White House unexpectedly announced a one-year delay in the employer requirement, saying the administration needed more time to work out technical details that employers find too burdensome. Some saw a political motive, since Republicans have criticized the requirement on businesses as a "job killer."

But administration officials said that the individual mandate would remain in place.

The two requirements are different. While the mandate on individuals is expected to play a major role in getting people to sign up for coverage, the employer requirement is more of a backstop, designed to deter companies from shifting to the government their traditional role in providing health benefits.

The individual mandate applies to virtually every U.S. resident, with exceptions for financial hardship, people who entered the country illegally, and prison inmates. The coverage requirement survived a determined legal challenge by "Obamacare" opponents. A divided Supreme Court upheld the mandate last year, reasoning that the penalties which enforce it are taxes constitutionally levied by Congress.

Those individual penalties start small — as little as $95 next year — but they build up with time.

The GOP leaders' letter also requested that the administration provide detailed information on the impact of its decision to delay the employer mandate.

Via Yahoo News!

Boehner says Obama lacks House support for Libya (AP)

WASHINGTON – Setting up a showdown on Libya, House Republicans agreed on Wednesday to vote on dueling measures, one to give President Barack Obama limited authority to continue U.S. involvement in the NATO-led operation against Moammar Gadhafi and the other to cut off funds for military hostilities.

Officials said the measures — a resolution and a bill — most likely would come to a vote Friday, a timetable that reflects widespread dissatisfaction with Obama's decision not to seek congressional consent for the 3-month-old war.

"The fact is the president has not made his case to the members of Congress," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters. "He's not made his case to the American people. We've been in this conflict for 90 days and the president hasn't talked to the American people for four or five weeks about why we're there, what our national interest is and why we should continue."

Emerging from a closed-door meeting on the resolution and the competing legislation, rank-and-file Republicans indicated a growing consensus for the bill, which would bar funds for Libya except for money spent this year on search and rescue, aerial refueling, operational planning, intelligence and surveillance and non-combat missions.

This was a direct response to Obama's claim that the action does not amount to full-blown hostilities and did not need congressional approval.

"It would not have funding for hostilities. Drones couldn't be used for bombing," said Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

The Libyan war has exposed deep divisions in Congress and within the GOP ranks.

Leading Republicans and Democrats in the Senate are pushing a resolution to give Obama limited authority in the conflict, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., calling it a "clear statement to our allies, to the world, to the Libyan people and to Gadhafi that we support the administration's actions on Libya."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, sponsored the resolution that would put a one-year limit on the mission and prohibit U.S. ground forces in Libya.

The House resolution to continue the mission mirrors the Senate measure.

The competing efforts put senators at odds with members of the House, including anti-war Democrats and tea party-backed Republicans, who question the legitimacy of the operation since Obama never sought congressional consent under the 1973 War Powers Resolution.

"We have a responsibility to follow the rule of law and as the chief law enforcement officer of the land so does he," Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Fla., a member of the House Armed Services Committee, said of the president.

Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said a House vote to end the operation would "give hope to this dictator Moammar Gadhafi, undermine the effort of the innocent people in Libya and strike a blow at our NATO alliance."

Obama did not seek congressional authorization when he launched air strikes against Gadhafi's forces on March 19. Lawmakers argue that Obama is in violation of the War Powers Resolution, which requires approval of the legislative branch within 60 days, with a 30-day extension. That deadline has passed.

The White House, in a report to Congress last week, said the limited U.S. role in the operation did not amount to hostilities and did not require congressional authorization, an argument that further upset lawmakers.

"That's outrageous. What do you do, spend $9 million a day to play table tennis?" said Rep. Donald Manzullo, R-Ill.

In a Senate speech, Reid argued that the challenge to Obama was politically driven.

"Some Republicans in the House of Representatives and on the campaign trail have expressed concern over our involvement in this conflict," Reid said. "They have clearly decided to use the War Powers Resolution as a political bludgeon to pursue a partisan agenda."

The Democratic leader said the question for lawmakers was whether U.S. involvement in a mission "to stop mass murder and chaos" in Libya was the right decision.

"I'm confident it was," Reid said. "Moammar Gadhafi's repressive dictatorship is a threat to the region and to the United States' national security."

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will consider the Kerry-McCain resolution next week, but the full Senate may not act for weeks.

Yahoo! News

Pelosi Gets Fiscal Religion Over Boehner Hiring Attorney to Defend Gay Marriage Ban

Published April 23, 2011

| FoxNews.com

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi isn't known as a small-government advocate. But she and members of her camp have sounded more like fiscal conservatives ever since House Speaker John Boehner hired a law firm for up to $500,000 to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal law banning gay marriage.

"The hypocrisy of this legal boondoggle is mind-blowing," Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said in a statement to the Washington Post this week. "Speaker Boehner is spending half a million dollars of taxpayer money to defend discrimination. If Republicans were really interested in cutting spending, this should be at the top of the list."

Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement that the California Democrat's "newfound concern for saving taxpayers money is encouraging."

"We hope it means we can count on her support for reducing DOJ's budget to recoup any costs incurred by the House so that taxpayers will bear no added cost for the administration's refusal to defend the laws of the United States," he said.

The contract with former Bush administration solicitor general Paul Clement was made after President Obama instructed the Justice Department in February not to defend the law he called unconstitutional. The department said other groups can do so, prompting House Republicans to pick up the slack.

Before the cost of the contract was revealed, Pelosi and Boehner exchanged several letters, turning the issue into a political football.

Pelosi sent Boehner a letter last month asking how much it would cost taxpayers for Clement's law firm to defend at least 12 DOMA cases.

Boehner responded in a letter to Pelosi on Monday, saying the Justice Department should reimburse the House for court costs. He also said he shares Pelosi's concerns over the cost of defending the law in court and intended to "redirect" some of the department's money to the House as repayment.

But Boehner, who is traveling in Pakistan, didn't say how much money was at issue or how he would force the department of repay the House.

Pelosi sent Boehner another letter the same day, pressing him further to reveal the cost of the contract. She also argued that Congress shouldn't enter into "this lengthy and costly litigation," citing one lawsuit that the House plans to fight: a "gay widow" who was forced to pay $360,000 in estate taxes because DOMA prevented her from legally filing for a martial tax benefit.

"This case is a prime example of the injustice perpetuated by DOMA on millions of American families," Pelosi wrote.

When the contract was released -- showing that Clement would work for $520 an hour with a $500,000 cap that could be raised if both sides agreed in writing and received approval from the House Administration Committee -- Pelosi still wasn't satisfied.

In her second letter to Boehner Wednesday, she says the contract still left a number of unanswered questions.

Since Democrats were not informed of the expense approved by House Republicans on a bipartisan legal advisory board, she wants to know whether there was a call for bids, how the $500,000 fee and $520-per-hour rate were established, and what restrictions will be imposed on the lobbying practices of Clement's law firm to avoid any conflicts of interest.

The ball is back in Boehner's court.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Boehner seeks to divert funds for gay marriage fight

Updated at 2:20 p.m. ET

House Speaker John Boehner said he intends to divert funding from the Justice Department to the U.S. House so Congress can defend the federal law that bars recognition of same-sex marriage.

The Ohio Republican disclosed this in a letter to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who is strongly opposed to Congress going to court to defend the 1996 law. An estimate on court costs was not given.

Earlier this year, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that Obama administration would no longer defend the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, a Clinton-era law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The law also says that states cannot be forced to recognize same-sex marriages from other states.

While President Obama does not support same-sex marriage, he views the Defense of Marriage Act as "unfair," according to spokesman Jay Carney.

Boehner asked the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group -- consisting of the top leaders of Congress -- to defend the law in court. The GOP members of the group sided with Boehner.

"By the president's action through the attorney general we have no choice," Boehner's letter says. "The House now faces that additional burden and cost."

Boehner said he has directed the House's counsel and the House Administration Committee to ensure that there are "sufficient resources" and expertise to defend the law. Paul Clement, a former solicitor general for President George W. Bush, has been retained by Boehner and the Republicans to defend the Defense of Marriage Act.

Clement's hiring has been slammed by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest gay and lesbian civil rights group.

"Not only are House Republican leaders defending the indefensible, they've brought in a high-priced attorney to deny federal recognition to loving, married couples, " said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign.

Solmonese said Boehner is "grasping at straws" in his call to divert funds from the Justice Department for the law's defense.

Matt Miller, a spokesman for the Justice Department, declined to comment.

See photos of: Nancy PelosiTags:Nancy PelosiJohn BoehnerEric Holder .div-wrapper

View the Original article

Raw Data: Boehner, Reid Joint Statement on Budget Deal

FoxNews.com

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., tonight released the following statement Friday night:

"We have agreed to an historic amount of cuts for the remainder of this fiscal year, as well as a short-term bridge that will give us time to avoid a shutdown while we get that agreement through both houses and to the President. We will cut $78.5 billion below the President's 2011 budget proposal, and we have reached an agreement on the policy riders. In the meantime, we will pass a short-term resolution to keep the government running through Thursday. That short-term bridge will cut the first $2 billion of the total savings."

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article

Boehner Plans to Pass Spending Cuts With GOP Help Alone

Associated Press

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet

WASHINGTON –  Sometimes in politics and legislation, whether you win is less important than how you win.

That's the dilemma facing House Speaker John Boehner as he tries to round up the votes to pass a fast-approaching spending compromise and avert a partial government shutdown by week's end.

Boehner, R-Ohio, wants the overwhelming majority of those votes to come from his fellow Republicans, even if dozens of easily attainable Democratic votes could help carry the budget bill to victory.

The goal complicates Boehner's task, and possibly could push the bill farther to the right. It motivates him to battle for the votes of conservative Republicans who are demanding deeper spending cuts, and greater changes to social issues such as abortion access, than the Democratic-controlled Senate and President Barack Obama say they can accept.

If Boehner can argue convincingly that it's the only route to House passage, Democrats conceivably could yield on some points they might otherwise win. At the same time, however, Boehner is trying to persuade Republicans that some compromise is inevitable.

"We control one-half of one-third of the government," he said last week. "We can't impose our will on the Senate."

Eventually, both parties must decide where to draw the line in negotiations and whether to risk a government shutdown that could trigger unpredictable political fallout.

Some congressional veterans say Boehner is taking the only realistic approach for a speaker who wants to stay in power. If he cuts a deal that relies heavily on Democrats' votes, he could alienate scores of House Republicans, who might in turn start seeking a new leader.

Members of both parties say Boehner probably could assemble 218 votes easily, if he didn't care who cast them.

President Obama pressed the House and Senate leaders Saturday to agree to a budget in time to avert what he says would be an economically harmful government shutdown, but restated his opposition to certain spending cuts and other provisions insisted upon by Republicans.

Obama delivered the message in separate telephone conversations with Boehner, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., the White House said.

Negotiations continued Saturday on a bill to fund government operations through Sept. 30, the end of the budget year. They have zeroed in on cuts in the $33 billion range, but haven't agreed on where to make them.

Government funding expires at midnight Friday. Much of the government would shut down without a new budget in place.

Obama told the leaders that he opposes using the budget process to "further an ideological agenda" by pursuing issues that aren't related to reducing spending or the deficit, the White House said. Obama also said he objects to cuts that would undermine economic growth and job creation.

He said shutting the government would hurt the economy just as it's beginning to create jobs. On Friday, the government reported that the unemployment rate had fallen to a two-year low of 8.8 percent in March and that the economy added 216,000 jobs last month.

After keeping a low profile and delegating the negotiating to Vice President Joe Biden, his budget director and other White House aides, Obama has begun to press publicly for a deal as this latest deadline nears. He has signed several short-term spending bills to keep the government in business.

He said Friday that compromise was within reach.

But Boehner said Saturday in the weekly Republican address, recorded before he spoke with the president, that "there is no agreement.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article

Boehner Plays Down Claims of Budget Deal, Says GOP to 'Fight' for Cuts

AP

House Speaker John Boehner and other GOP leaders discuss budget negotiations on Capitol Hill in Washington March 29.

House Speaker John Boehner dashed cold water Thursday on claims that the two parties had agreed on how much to cut from the rest of this year's budget, saying Republicans would "continue to fight" for an earlier budget proposal Democrats adamantly oppose. 

Democrats had earlier claimed negotiators were working on a proposal for around $33 billion in spending cuts. Vice President Biden reported "good progress" on budget talks, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., went so far as to claim the parties had "agreed upon a number." 

But while that target is indeed on the table, Boehner said Republicans have not agreed to it. 

"There's no agreement on numbers, and nothing will be agreed to until everything is agreed to," Boehner said. "We're going to continue to fight for the largest spending cuts that we can get." 

He said that means Republicans will keep fighting for the GOP-backed budget that passed the House last month and stalled in the Senate. That budget proposal would cut $61 billion from last year's levels, and contains myriad cuts to organizations like Planned Parenthood which Democrats decry as mere political score-settling. 

Democrats have hammered the message that Republicans are reticent to come down from the $61 billion mark because they're under pressure from Tea Partiers. "I'm sure it's not easy trying to negotiate with the Tea Party screaming in his right ear," Reid said in a statement Thursday. 

Both parties are casting the other as "extreme," amounting to a public-relations battle that has made the negotiations themselves all the more fragile. 

The tentative split-the-difference plan would end up where GOP leaders started last month as they tried to fulfill a campaign pledge to return spending for agencies' daily operations to levels in place before President Obama took office. That calculation takes into account the fact that the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, is about half over. 

The $33 billion figure is well below the cuts the House passed last month, but it still represents significant movement by Senate Democrats and the administration after originally backing a freeze at current rates. 

"There's no reason why, with all that's going on in the world and with the state of the economy, that we can't avoid a government shutdown," Biden told reporters after a meeting in the Capitol with Senate Democratic leaders. 

Some Tea Party-backed GOP lawmakers want the original $61 billion. With a Tea Party rally set for Thursday on Capitol Hill, it's unclear how many of the 87 freshmen Republicans elected last fall could live with a smaller compromise.

Both sides said the figure under consideration is tentative at best and depends on the outcome of numerous policy stands written into the bill. 

Some conservatives appear insistent on the full range of spending cuts, but others recognize that compromise is required to win Obama's signature and support from Democrats who control the Senate. 

Far bigger fights are ahead on a longer-term GOP budget plan that takes a more comprehensive approach to the budget woes. Also looming is a must-pass bill to allow the government to borrow more money to meet its commitments. Republicans hope to use that measure to force further spending cuts on the president. 

"I don't believe that shutting down government is a solution to the problem. Republicans and Democrats need to work out a compromise," said Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H. "Let's get this over with and get on to the budget." 

But Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who earlier warned that "It's time to pick a fight," wants party leaders to hang tough. 

The legislation would bankroll the day-to-day operating budgets of federal agencies -- including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- through Sept. 30, the end of the current budget year. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »

View the Original article