OOPS! Here it is,
you decide
The Piner Enterprise LLC
43 Town & Country Dr STE 119-84
Fredericksburg, VA 22405-8730
Voice: 678-658-7991
Republicans party has become the “Almond Joy Party”. Sometime they
act like a nut and sometime they don’t.
Congress
proposes and ratifies laws and amendments. Congress declares war. They make
laws, represent their constituents, and serve on committees. Congress decides
how to spend our money and shapes foreign policy.
Voices of United States is pleased to feature:
By Mr. John
Giokaris’ article,
“The Facts About our Do
Nothing Congress”
It
was a busy day on Capitol Hill on Thursday March 8. The House passed a jobs
bill targeted towards helping startup businesses by a large bipartisan vote of
390-23 while the Senate blocked approval of the Keystone XL pipeline once again
despite a 56-42 majority vote, which included 11 Democrats. Not the type of
action many expected in this election year. Despite accusations of being
“extremist,” “obstructionist,” and a “do nothing Congress,” it’s clearly
evident that the Republican House is passing more bipartisan legislation than
the Democratic Senate, or even the White House.
The
six bills in the JOBS Act passed by the House would make it easier for small
companies to go public by providing them a temporary reprieve from Securities
and Exchange Commission regulations, removing SEC restrictions preventing small
businesses from using advertisements to solicit investors, and removing SEC
restrictions on “crowd funding” so entrepreneurs can raise equity capital from
a large pool of small investors. For getting 148 votes from the opposing party,
that sure doesn’t sound like “extremist” legislation to me. Not even all
Democrats, moderate Republicans, and Independents could
support President Barack
Obama’s jobs bill.
In
the Senate, despite a 56-42 bipartisan majority vote, the Democrats blocked
approval of the Keystone XL pipeline once again due to lack of obtaining a
filibuster-proof majority. Democratic Senators Max Baucus (D-Mont.); Mark
Begich (D-Alaska); Kay Hagan (D-N.C.); Mary Landrieu (D-La.); Joe
Manchin (D-W.Va.); Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.); Mark Pryor (D-Ark.); Jon
Tester (D-Mont.); Jim Webb (D-Va.); Bob Casey (D-Pa.); and Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)
all voted for the pipeline.
And
Republicans are supposed to be the “obstructionists?”
For
that matter, the GOP House is still the only entity in Washington that has even passed a 2012
budget, which the Senate killed. Meanwhile, it’s been more than 1,000 days since the
Harry Reid-led Democratic Senate passed any budget, and Reid has publicly stated he
has no intention to do so anytime soon.
But
it’s the House Republicans who are the “do nothing Congress,” right?
The
truth is there are several other golden opportunities for bipartisan
cooperation that could solve a lot of other problems even in an election year,
including pro-growth
tax reform, which 36 Democrat, Republican, and Independent senators, 100 Republican and Democrat congressmen, the bipartisan “Gang of Six” plan, and the president’s own Simpson-Bowles debt commission have
all come out in strong support for.
Liberals claim time and time again that it’s the
Republicans who have drifted far right while the Democrats have “moved
centrist.” Yet over the last year, it’s the Republican Party leadership that
has worked toward bipartisan solutions like pro-growth
tax reform, domestic energy development, and increasing access to credit for small business owners and
entrepreneurs.
The
far left leadership of the Democratic Party cares more about raising tax rates, appeasing environmentalists, subsidizing green energy campaign donors with
taxpayer money, doubling down on
out-of-control levels of spending, and blocking any
entitlement reform.
This
is the profile of a “centrist” Democratic Party? Compared to what? Lenin? Mao?
Letter
to the Editor: Do-nothing Congress
By
Janice Lawrence, Sand Springs
Published:
7/10/2012 2:22 AM
Last
Modified: 7/10/2012 2:58 AM
This
do-nothing Republican Congress is taking over the government, bypassing the
president and the opinions of the American people, pushing the Keystone XL
pipeline through the United States despite concerns to the environment or
people.
Claiming
jobs all around, the Cornell Institute study is not as optimistic about the
thousands of jobs portrayed; a small job percentage will be in Oklahoma.
The
existing line has leaked numerous times due to defective pipe by a company now
being sued. Greenhouse gas emissions, toxic oil sludge - are a few of the
environmental concerns. China cannot understand why it isn't built now - the
same China whose people wear surgical masks when outside in order to breathe
the air.
There
is no guarantee this oil will be used in the United States or benefits given to
America at all. This pipeline definitely will help the lobbyists for China;
these lobbyists will be rewarded for their assistance in the pollution and
selling out of the American people.
These
Republicans give no thought to land being taken from Americans in their imminent-domain
grab. It is sad when leaders in office sell out America to the highest-paying
foreign country in an attempt to become the richest millionaire in Washington,
D.C.
Read
more from this Tulsa World article at Http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=62&articleid=20120710_62_A13_Tionti157408
The
term "do-nothing Congress" has become the accepted norm over the past
two years, according to a new survey that would put lawmakers to shame if some
weren’t actually admitting a degree of pride in that fact during this election
year.
A new
Gallup poll finds that 78 percent of likely American voters believe Congress
has been a total failure the past two years while only 16 percent approve of
what it's done, which is one of the worst ratings the polling organization has
documented since 1974. Ironically, the findings have both Democrats and
Republicans agreeing that the current Congress “will go down in history as one
of the least active,” according to Bloomberg News.
Some
Democrats, like Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, see it as “an accomplishment” that
his party was able to block what he told Bloomberg were efforts by Republicans
“to really move in the wrong direction.”
But Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, a Democrat who plans to retire at the end of this year, told Bloomberg, “We’ve become the kick-the-can-down-the-road Congress,” with members on both sides of the aisle being locked in “disagreement about whether you do anything until you get right down to the wire and then something has to be done.”
But Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, a Democrat who plans to retire at the end of this year, told Bloomberg, “We’ve become the kick-the-can-down-the-road Congress,” with members on both sides of the aisle being locked in “disagreement about whether you do anything until you get right down to the wire and then something has to be done.”
Rep.
Phil Gingrey agreed, adding that things probably won’t change until at least
after the election. “I don’t think we are in any 'let’s-bury-the-hatchet' mood
today,” the Georgia Republican told Bloomberg. “The American people are not
giving us a very high approval rating because they are tired of us not being
able to get anything done.” That pretty much sums up the attitude of voters
this election season — that politics is once again ruling the day on Capitol
Hill.
At the
moment, according to the Gallup survey of 1,014 adults July 9-12, both parties
get pretty close to equal blame. In the July survey, Democratic members of
Congress did have a slight 18 percent to 14 percent edge in job approval over
their Republican colleagues. But that margin switches back and forth with each
new poll, and the numbers are quite often nearly similar.
Overall,
the views of Gallup survey participants apparently are still being been driven
for the most part by the fact that Congress has done little to produce new
legislation that creates jobs and helps get the economy growing again. In fact,
according to Bloomberg News, most of the 54 bills sent to President Barack Obama
this year did little more than extend programs already created, name post
offices, and convey land parcels. Last year was slow as well. Only 90 bills
made it to Obama.
“Neither
party has much of an incentive politically to work with the other,” Julian
Zelizer, a Princeton University history and public affairs professor, told
Bloomberg. “Nobody will want to do something that will cost their seats in
November.” Congress, he added, is “incapable of taking the big steps early”
because it is “more polarized than it has been in decades.” For some voters,
however, no news from Capitol Hill may be good news. For example, a Rasmussen
Reports national telephone poll July 7-8 of 1,000 likely voters found that 66
percent “believe that there is too much government power and too little
individual freedom.” Only 8 percent of respondents said they believe “the
opposite to be true.”
Read
more on Newsmax.com: Voters
and Lawmakers Agree: It Is a ‘Do-Nothing Congress’
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election?
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election?
With
just a few short weeks remaining before the end of the 2011
session, Congress has passed its fewest number of bills in at least
the last 10 non-election years. According
to The Washington Post, the 326 bills passed by
the House of Representatives is roughly one-third of the number they
passed in 2009 (970) and barely a quarter of the number passed in 2007
(1,127). The Senate has approved 368 bills, also well below its
typical off-year numbers and the fewest since 1995.
As a result, the President Obama has
only signed 62 new laws through November 30, compared to 88 signed by President
Clinton in 1995, the last time Republicans took over the House with a Democrat
in the White House.
Of course, some people would welcome
this result, as there is certainly an argument to be made against
over-legislation. Majority Leader Eric Cantor says he wants to
"stress quality over quantity" and the House has eliminated most
"commemorative" legislation, like resolutions honoring sports teams
and the renaming of post offices.
However, the lack of official action
does underscore just how divided our divided government currently is. Long,
drawn-out battles over things like the debt ceiling and the payroll tax have
handcuffed Congress' ability to get other things done. Compromises, especially
on the budget, have been few and far between. The House has passed just six of
the 11 appropriations bills needed for next year and the Senate has ignored
most of the legislation sent to them by the lower chamber. And who could forget
the colossal waste of time that was the supercommittee? The lack of cooperation
will only intensify once the 2012 campaign season gets underway in
earnest.
Tuesday,
January 24, will mark the 1,000th day since the
U.S. Senate has passed a budget—an
egregious dereliction of duty on Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid’s (D–NV) watch. By enacting continuing resolution upon continuing
resolution (short-term measures to keep the government running, spending money at
the current rate), the Senate has taken a pass on leading, all to the detriment
of the poor and middle class.
The
budget process forces Congress to set priorities to protect the people’s money
and put it to its appropriate use. Instead, the Democrat-controlled Senate has
abdicated its responsibility. The result? The deficit is soaring, causing a
looming tax burden and injecting uncertainty into the economy, leaving jobs and
economic growth on the table. It’s no wonder the U.S. economy’s growth is so tepid.
As
the 1,000th day nears, here are some facts about America’s budget and why the
Senate must take action to be stewards of the people’s money as the
Constitution requires:
The
last time the Senate passed a budget was on April 29, 2009.
Since
that date, the federal government has spent $9.4 trillion, adding $4.1 trillion
in debt.
As
of January 20, the outstanding public debt stands at $15,240,174,635,409.
Interest
payments on the debt are now more than $200 billion per year.
President
Obama proposed a FY2012 budget last year, and the Senate voted it down 97–0.
(And that budget was no prize—according to the Congressional Budget Office,
that proposal never had an annual deficit of less than $748 billion, would
double the national debt in 10 years and would see annual interest payments
approach $1 trillion per year.)
The
Senate rejected House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R–WI) budget by
57–40 in May 2011, with no Democrats voting for it.
In
FY2011, Washington spent $3.6 trillion. Compare that to the last time the
budget was balanced in 2001, when Washington spent $1.8 trillion ($2.1 trillion
when you adjust for inflation).
Entitlement spending will more than double by 2050. That
includes spending on Medicare, Medicaid and the Obamacare subsidy program, and
Social Security. Total spending on federal health care programs will triple.
By
2050, the national debt is set to hit 344 percent of Gross Domestic
Product.
Taxes
paid per household have risen dramatically, hitting $18,400 in 2010 (compared
with $11,295 in 1965). If the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire and more
middle-class Americans are required to pay the alternative minimum tax (AMT),
taxes will reach unprecedented levels.
Federal spending per household
is skyrocketing. Since 1965, spending per household has grown
by nearly 162 percent, from $11,431 in 1965 to $29,401 in 2010. From 2010 to
2021, it is projected to rise to $35,773, a 22 percent increase.
Despite
all of these blatant red flags, the Senate has utterly failed to execute the
most basic, fundamental function of governance at the worst possible time when
the country’s fiscal house is in disarray, the U.S. credit rating is in
continual jeopardy, entitlement spending is ballooning, defense spending
is on the chopping block, and the economy is in shambles.
One
thousand days without a budget is an embarrassing number, but the
level of spending, deficits, and taxation that results from the Senate’s
failure to exact even a modicum of fiscal discipline is terrifying. Senator (D-NV)
Reid has said it would be “foolish” to pass a budget, but failing to pass it is
proving to be beyond irresponsible. The middle class will be left holding the
bag, paying for the Senate’s reckless negligence with soaring deficits, higher
taxes, and a weak economy as far as the eye can see.
The countdown to 1,000
days goes on. Keep lawmakers accountable by displaying our widget on your
website. Just copy the code below and paste it onto your site.
Congress
proposes and ratifies laws and amendments. Congress declares war. They make
laws, represent their constituents, and serve on committees. Congress decides
how to spend our money and shapes foreign policy.
What Are The Duties of Congress
The
question, "what are the duties of congress?" is a common question in
Civic and Social Studies. The first Congress meeting was in 1774 in which
delegates from the original 13 colonies met to discuss the future of their
land. Two years later, they formed the Second Continental Congress to declare
independence. With such a rich and long history, just what are the duties of
Congress?
What
is Congress?
Congress
is a legislature of government of the United States that involves two branches,
one called the House of Representatives and the other the Senate. The House of
Representatives contains 435 delegates from select districts. They serve
two-year terms and the number in each state depends on the population. There
are two Senators per state and serve two-year terms in a staggered format.
The most
fundamental duty of Congress is to make laws. These laws must be coherent in
the role of the United States and must promote the execution of the
Constitution of the United States. This may sound like Congress has
unchallenged power but the included words like "necessary for the
execution" and "provide for the common defense" makes it impossible
for Congress to develop laws that violate any other part of the Constitution.
Besides making laws, Congress also passes bills and debates current laws. All
laws that Congress enacts must go to the President for review and approval.
Another basic
law that answers the question "what are the duties of Congress" is
that Congress shall have the ability to declare war. Now, they don't have
control over declaring war and it's not a spontaneous decision because both
houses and the President must approve the war.
Congress also
has the duty to coin money. In more terms about money, Congress also has the
duty to collect taxes and pay debts. Also, Congress must also provide enough
money to provide a reasonable defense for the United States, which reads in
Article I as "raise and maintain the military."
A duty that
Congress often performs is the ability to override any Presidential vetoes. The
majority must be in agreement, which involves a two-thirds vote from Congress.
Lesser
Known Duties
Congress
doesn't just take money; make money or appropriate funds for different reasons.
Congress also creates uniform rules of bankruptcy and naturalization. They also
need to watch over the sciences and arts so they have the duty to promote those
branches for advancing the United State's history and mark on the world.
Congress
has the duty to monitor the trade between states, although that duty is less
prominent now than in the early years of the United States of America. What is
more common is the duty to control trade between other countries.
Borrowing
money is also a duty of Congress. Of course, this is based on the credit of the
United States, but Congress has an inherent duty to make sure the government
has sufficient operating capital.
Accountability
Congress
also has an unwritten duty to be responsible. Besides war, Congress is held
accountable for its actions for all other duties it upholds. War is not
included because it involves more than just Congress and it cannot be solely
responsible or accountable for any decisions, good or bad, in declaring war.
A
United States Citizen's Duty
It
is the right of all American citizens to demand accountability of Congress and
any duties they fulfill. Whether it's overspending or spending money for the
wrong reasons or making frivolous laws to collect more taxes, you have a duty
to express your displeasure or ask for reasons from your local representative.
Senators and Representatives work for you to better the United States and your
community, so if you aren’t performing your duty, how can you expect Congress
to do theirs?
The House of
Representatives.
Representatives
must be at least 25 years of age, citizens of the United States for at least
seven years, and, at the time of their election, live in the State whose
Congressional District they represent. Every ten years, a census of
the population of the U.S. must be held, after which House seats are
reallocated among the states on the basis of population. Each state has at
least one Representative; thereafter seats depend on number of people living in
that state.
The Official Web Site of the U.S. House of Representatives is http://www.house.gov/
U.S. Senate
Senators
must be at least thirty years old, citizens of the United States for at least
nine years, and must, at the time of their election, be inhabitants of the
State which they will represent. They do not necessarily have to be
residents of that state at the time of election. Senators represent
their State and each State is given two U.S. Senators regardless of their
population. States with small populations have the same representation as
States with large populations. This obviously violates the democratic
principle of one person, one vote. This concession to the small States dates
from Great Compromise at the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
This
makes the U.S. Senate a malapportioned or unrepresentative body. Until
1913 when the Seventeenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was added, U.S.
Senators were not even popularly elected. They were chosen by
their respective State legislatures. Only as our Republic became
more democratic did popular election procedures come to be applied to the
Senate.
The Official Web Site of the U.S. Senate is http://www.senate.gov/
Since U.S. Senators serve for six years, one third of the membership is elected
every two years. U.S. Senators are grouped into three classes.
Class 3 States have races for the U.S. Senate in 2010.
Organizational
Structure of Congress
Congress
is organized on the basis of three overlapping principles: It is
organized on the basis of our political parties. It is functionally
organized on the types of legislation enacted. And Congress has its own
leadership organization. Both the leadership organization and
the committee organization of Congress are linked to the party
organization.
1.
Party Organization. Almost all members of Congress are elected on the basis of
their political party affiliation. They run as either Republicans or
Democrats. Third party candidates, who usually call themselves
Independents, are rarely elected.
Once elected, Congress people and Senators affiliate either with the Republican
Conference or the Democratic Caucus. Both political parties have Policy
Committees to help the parties make strategic and tactical decisions.
Both parties also maintain Campaign Committees to help members gain re-election
and to defeat Members of Congress from the other party. House and Senate
maintain distinct committees.
2.
Leadership Organization. Each political party elects its own
leaders. These leaders become the leaders of the Congress. The
party with the majority in the House or Senate had the Majority Leadership positions
and the party with the minority in the House and Senate has the minority
positions.
House Leadership:
Majority Party
Speaker of the House
Majority Leader
Assistant Majority Leader
Majority Whip
Minority Party
Minority Leader
Assistant Minority Leader
Minority Whip
Majority Party
Speaker of the House
Majority Leader
Assistant Majority Leader
Majority Whip
Minority Party
Minority Leader
Assistant Minority Leader
Minority Whip
Senate Leadership
President of the Senate is the Vice President of U.S.
President Pro Tempore--Senator of the Majority Party with Seniority
Majority Leadership
Senate Majority Leader
Assistant Senate Majority Leader
Senate Majority Whip
Minority Leadership
Senate Minority Leader
Assistant Senate Minority Leader
Senate Minority Whip
President of the Senate is the Vice President of U.S.
President Pro Tempore--Senator of the Majority Party with Seniority
Majority Leadership
Senate Majority Leader
Assistant Senate Majority Leader
Senate Majority Whip
Minority Leadership
Senate Minority Leader
Assistant Senate Minority Leader
Senate Minority Whip
3.
Committee Organization. The actual work of Congress, both in the
House and Senate, is done through committees. There are four types of
committees: a) standing committees, b) select committees, c) joint
committees, and d) conference committees.
a.
Standing Committees are the real workhorses of Congress. They are
functionally organized in ways similar to the organization of the Executive
Departments. All bills are submitted to standing committees and must go
through these committees before being approved by the full House or Senate.
b.
Select Committees are created for special reasons to investigate some
current issue or problem, which is not being handled by the regular standing
committees.
c.
Joint Committees have members from both the House and Senate. They
are created for either very important reasons such as the Joint Committee on
Intelligence or very mundane reasons such as the Joint Committee on the Library
of Congress. The need for secrecy motivates the first; its narrow
significance the creation of the second.
d.
Conference Committees are created each time a bill is passed in different
versions by the House and Senate. Conference Committees are designed to
iron out the differences. Conference Committees have members from both
House and Senate. They are, thus, a kind of joint committee, but they
function only until a given bill is reconciled.
Functions
of Congress
 |
Legislate
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Executive
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Constituent (Constitutional)
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Electoral
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Judicial
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Investigative
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Supervisory
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Ombudsman Function
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Constituency Service: Helping Constituents.
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Fund Raising for Political Campaigns
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Campaigning for Re-Election
|
This newsletter is sponsor by Life
is Byte without The Hype Please support our efforts by Purchasing a book online
only @ http://www.ownmybooks.com/home/html
Email:
ThePinerEnterpriseLLC@gmail.com
Thanks for your support!
Robert Draper Book: GOP's Anti-Obama Campaign Started Night Of
Inauguration
Posted: 04/25/2012
2:53 pm Updated: 04/26/2012 10:09 am
WASHINGTON -- As President Barack
Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican
lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at
a private dinner in Washington.
The event -- which provides a
telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured -- serves
as the prologue of Robert Draper's much-discussed and heavily-reported new
book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of
Representatives."
According to Draper, the guest list
that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps.
Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling
(Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican
Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign
(Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt
Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank
Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority
Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)
-- who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.
For several hours in the Caucus
Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to
not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's
legislative platform.
"If you act like you're the
minority, you're going to stay in the minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as
saying. "We've gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge
them on every single campaign."
The conversation got only more
specific from there, Draper reports. Kyl suggested going after incoming
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for failing to pay Social Security and
Medicare taxes while at the International Monetary Fund. Gingrich noted that
House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) had a similar tax
problem. McCarthy chimed in to declare "there's a web" before arguing
that Republicans could put pressure on any Democrat who accepted campaign money
from Rangel to give it back.
The dinner lasted nearly four
hours. They parted company almost giddily. The Republicans had agreed on a way
forward:
Go after Geithner. (And indeed
Kyl did, the next day: ‘Would you answer my question rather than dancing around
it—please?’)
Show united and unyielding
opposition to the president’s economic policies. (Eight days later, Minority
Whip Cantor would hold the House Republicans to a unanimous No against Obama’s
economic stimulus plan.)
Begin attacking vulnerable Democrats on the airwaves. (The first National Republican Congressional Committee attack ads would run in less than two months.)
Begin attacking vulnerable Democrats on the airwaves. (The first National Republican Congressional Committee attack ads would run in less than two months.)
Win the spear point of the House
in 2010. Jab Obama relentlessly in 2011. Win the White House and the Senate in
2012.
"You will remember this
day," Draper reports Newt Gingrich as saying on the way out. "You’ll
remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown."
Draper's timeline is correct. On
Jan. 21, 2009, Kyl aggressively questioned Geithner
during his confirmation hearings. On Jan. 28, 2009, House GOP leadership held the line against the
stimulus package (Senate GOP leadership would prove less successful in stopping
defections).
The votes, of course, can be
attributed to legitimate philosophical objection to the idea of stimulus
spending as well as sincere concern that the secretary of the Treasury should
personally have a clean tax-paying record. But what Draper's book makes clear
is that blunt electoral-minded ambitions were the animating force.
Whether or not that's shocking
depends on the degree to which one's view of politics has been jaded. What's
certainly noteworthy is the timing. When
Mitch McConnell said in October 2010 that
his party's primary goal in the next Congress was to make Obama a one-term
president, it was treated as remarkably candid and deeply cynical. Had
he said it publicly in January 2009, it would likely have caused an uproar.
By extension, however, the Draper
anecdote also negatively reflects on the Obama administration for failing to
appreciate how quickly congressional Republicans would oppose the president's
agenda.
This newsletter is sponsor by
Back Door Daddies “Like it or Not” Please support our efforts by Purchasing a
book online only @ http://www.ownmybooks.com/home/html
Thanks for your support!
I
hear what you say but, I see what you do “Governor Romney & Rep (R-WI) Paul
Ryan”
This
newsletter is sponsor by Military Assistance command Vietnam, Mobile Advisor
Team 69, My way “Boots on the Ground” Please support our efforts by Purchase
online only @ http://www.ownmybooks.com/home/html
Email:
ThePinerEnterpriseLLC@gmail.com Thanks you!
Ron Haskins, GOP Welfare Reform Architect, Blasts Mitt Romney Ad
The
Huffington Post | By Amanda
Terkel Posted: 08/08/2012 10:34
am Updated: 08/08/2012 12:35 pm
Mitt
Romney's latest television ad attacks the Obama administration for announcing a
"plan to gut welfare reform by
dropping work requirements." It's a strong allegation, but according to a
former Republican congressional aide who was key to crafting welfare reform in
the 1990s, it's also not true.
"There's no plausible scenario under
which it really constitutes a serious attack on welfare reform," Ron
Haskins, who is now co-director of the Brookings Institution's Center on
Children and Families, said in an interview with NPR that aired on Wednesday.
Haskins
spent 14 years on the staff of the House Ways and Means Committee's Human
Resources Subcommittee, first as welfare counsel to the Republican staff, then
as the subcommittee’s staff director. In 2002, he was President George W.
Bush's senior adviser on welfare policy.
Welfare,
formally known as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, is administered by states within
federal rules. Last month, the Department of Health and Human Services invited states to apply for
waivers from some rules in order to run "demonstration
projects" so that states could "consider new, more effective ways to
meet the goals of TANF, particularly helping parents successfully prepare for,
find, and retain employment."
Haskins
noted that the requirements states have to meet in order to receive the waivers
are quite rigorous.
"First
of all, the states have to apply individually for waivers," he said.
"And they have to explain in
detail, sometimes using data, why this approach would lead to either
more employment or better jobs for people who are trying to welfare or get off
welfare."
As
The Huffington Post's Arthur Delaney has pointed out, this
waiver policy was sought out by Republican governors. In a release defending
its waiver request from conservative backlash last month, the office of Utah
Gov. Gary Herbert (R) said, "Utah's request for a waiver stems from a
desire for increased customization of the program to maximize employment among
Utah’s welfare recipients."
In
2005, as Massachusetts governor, Romney also signed a letter in support of a
waiver policy -- a fact left out of his new TV ad.
Haskins
said he's not sure if the Obama administration had the authority to make these
changes to the welfare program; it might have required congressional approval.
But even so, that doesn't mean they will "gut" the program.
"So
it was kind of like, Democrats sticking their finger
in the Republicans' eye because they just did a sneak attack,
didn't consult and so forth," he said.
Former
President Bill Clinton, who signed welfare reform into law in 1996, hit back
against Romney's charges on Tuesday night.
"Governor
Romney released an ad today alleging that the Obama administration had weakened
the work requirements of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act," Clinton said in a
statement. "That is not true."
Listen to the NPR interview:
UPDATE:
11:15 a.m. -- On a Republican National Committee conference call on Wednesday,
The Huffington Post's Sam Stein asked Newt Gingrich about Haskins' assessment.
"I
was sorry that he has such a lack of imagination," said Gingrich, who was
Speaker of the House when welfare reform was being written.
"The
thing someone needs to ask Ron Haskins is simple: why was 407
non-waiveable?" he added, referring to a section of the welfare reform
law. "He was in the room. So were people like [former Michigan Gov.] John
Engler's staff and [former Wisconsin Gov.] Tommy Thompson's staff and [former
Utah Gov.] Mike Leavitt's staff and [former Virginia Gov.] George Allen's
staff. It was the most integrated state-federal reform I think that has ever
been tried on Capitol Hill. And so, they all agreed because they were hardcore
solid conservatives who believed in work ethic. And the bill he is describing
says it is non-waiveable."
The
waiver authority in section 1115 of the Social Security
Act -- where this law lives -- allows states to waive requirements in Section
402. Language in 402 requires "a parent or caretaker receiving assistance
under the program to engage in work" as it is outlined in 407.
Essentially, 402 is the section that has the work requirement, while 407 contains
the details.
CORRECTION: A
previous version of this article misidentified John Engler as a former member
of Congress. He was in fact the former governor of Michigan.
No comments:
Post a Comment