Latest News

John Boehner Calls For Obama To Compromise On Jobs Bill

2011-10-06T14:07:14Z

WASHINGTON -- Speaker John Boehner's office is leading a new call for the president to compromise with House Republicans on pieces of his jobs bill, now that the bill in its entirety has been declared dead in the House of Representatives.

The speaker's office unveiled a graphic on Thursday stating that "all roads lead to nowhere for the president's job bill" unless the White House is willing to compromise on portions with the Republican-controlled House.

President Barack Obama repeatedly called in recent weeks for Congress to pass his $447 billion American Jobs Act, which the White House sent to Congress on Sept. 12.

But neither chamber has expressed much interest in passing the bill as is, with even the Democrat-controlled Senate announcing this week they will change the way the bill's spending is funded, targeting millionaires for a five percent tax increase rather than pegging the payment on broader tax increases on the wealthy and ending subsidies for big oil. Senate Democrats filed their modified jobs bill on Wednesday.

In the House, the bill is likely to be taken up in a piecemeal fashion -- if at all -- based on the few portions that Republicans and Democrats agree on. Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said on Monday the bill would not be voted on in its entirety.

"You know, this all-or-nothing approach is unreasonable," Cantor said when asked about Obama's push to pass the full bill. "There are many issues that I have listed here that we can work together on. So instead of continuing to maintain this sort of campaign posture, let's do something to work together."

The graphic released on Thursday is part of a call by House Republicans for Obama to compromise on his jobs bill. Boehner identified a few main areas of potential agreement in a September letter to his conference. Republicans may be willing to extend a 100 percent bonus depreciation for businesses, create tax incentives for hiring veterans, allocate some infrastructure funding, authorize unemployment insurance reforms and change a three percent withholding requirement for government contractors.

See the full graphic from Boehner's office below:
Boehner Plan to Pass Bill

Earlier on the Huffington Post:

Janet Napolitano: Immigration Effort 'Got Off To A Bad Start'

2011-10-05T19:18:00Z

WASHINGTON -- Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano admitted on Wednesday that there had been major missteps in rolling out Secure Communities, a much-criticized immigration enforcement program that three states have attempted to quit.

"I know there has been a lot of discussion about Secure Communities -- and to be perfectly candid, this program got off to a bad start," Napolitano said in a speech at American University, according to prepared remarks. "We did not explain clearly how it works and who is required to participate."

Secure Communities uses fingerprints taken by local police during arrests to detect undocumented immigrants, part of the Obama administration's effort to detect and deport more criminals who are in the country illegally.

The initiative faces major opposition from immigrant rights groups, who say it nets too many undocumented immigrants who have broken no other laws and threatens public safety by making immigrants fearful of police. In a few counties and three states, concern over public safety has led lawmakers to decide to end participation in the program entirely.

But when counties, and then states, attempted to opt out of the program, they were told that the Department of Homeland Security would continue to use fingerprints anyway. Massachusetts, Illinois and New York attempted to end their participation in Secure Communities earlier this year, but were thwarted by DHS officials.

For that reason, groups have called on the department to terminate Secure Communities entirely, despite reforms to the program that were announced this summer. Among the reforms were additional efforts to prevent victims of domestic violence from being caught up in the system.

Napolitano said the program would not be eliminated, calling it "the single best tool at focusing our immigration enforcement resources on criminals and egregious immigration law violators."

"Termination of this program would do nothing to decrease the amount of enforcement," she said. "It would only weaken public safety and move the immigration enforcement system back towards the ad hoc approach where noncriminal aliens are more likely to be removed than criminals."

The secretary's remarks did not convince the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, part of a coalition of groups that has repeatedly sued the government to obtain more information about the program. Pablo Alvarado, director of the organization, repeated his call for DHS to end the program after Napolitano's Wednesday speech.

"We are happy to hear Secretary Napolitano mention [Secure Communities] and 'termination' in the same sentence," Alvarado said in a statement. "Despite the political spin and marketing campaign to defend a failed program, [Secure Communities] has proven to be a disastrous policy for our nation and for our communities. It should be ended before it leads to the further Arizonification of the country."

Still, the push for a different approach to immigration enforcement has led to one change: The Obama administration announced in August that DHS would review some 300,000 deportation cases and close those deemed "low-priority." If noncriminals are caught up in the Secure Communities system, they could be helped by this policy change.

Republican lawmakers in particular have been critical of the new deportation policy. But Napolitano said it would make the country more, not less, safe.

According to Napolitano, the government is set to deport record numbers of undocumented immigrants this year.

"[E]xercising discretion with more speed and better prioritization than at any time in history, protecting victims of domestic violence, engaging in work site enforcement rather than workforce raids is not cosmetic tinkering," she said. "It is real change, with real results."

Earlier on the Huffington Post:

Super Committee Holds More Closed-Door Meetings

2011-10-05T18:30:40Z

WASHINGTON -- The six Democratic members of a 12-member super committee with extraordinary powers to shape spending over the next decade held another secret meeting on Wednesday, out of view of the press and public.

The lawmakers, appointed to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction by leadership, have held the majority of their meetings behind closed doors, despite calls for its discussions to be as open as possible. They are tasked with finding at least $1.2 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade, possibly making cuts to entitlement programs, discretionary spending and the military as well as reforming the tax code.

But so far, most meetings have been held in private, with lawmakers declining to say much of anything to reporters. The committee is now meeting twice each day, once midday and once in the evening, but releasing little information about what is discussed. On Wednesday, a few reporters milled around outside during the meeting of Democratic lawmakers as staffers guarded the closed door, but no information was released when the members exited.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a committee co-chair, defended the closed-door meetings before entering yet another private meeting on Wednesday afternoon. She told reporters the committee will make its final decisions in front of the public, but needs privacy to be "honest with each other."

"I remember well one time when I was very little and I was fighting with my brother every other minute and my mother put us in a backroom and said don't come out until you got it figured out," Murray told reporters. "We stared at each other for a while, but we came out friends."

The secretive nature of the meetings is even more significant because the committee was created in a private process during negotiations over raising the debt ceiling, said John Wonderlich of the pro-transparency Sunlight Foundation.

"The process that led us here was secretive to its core ... The law that created the super committee was only reviewed for a few hours by Congress and the public before they created it and passed it," he said. "We've always said that it's fine for Murray to call to meet any time she wants -- you can't keep members of Congress from talking each other -- but that's not what's happening here. This is an all-day meeting."

The committee has not issued a press release since Sept. 13, and held its last public hearing on Sept. 22.

The plan they eventually unveil, which is slated to come out before Nov. 23, will hold a special advantage over run-of-the-mill legislation: it will be filibuster-proof in the Senate, requiring only 51 votes for passage rather than the typical 60, and will not allow for amendments in either chamber.

The 12-member super committee has three members from each caucus or conference, led by Murray and Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas). The other Democratic members are Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Reps. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) and Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.). The Republicans are represented by Sens. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), and Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and David Camp (R-Mich.).

Of course, many of the members are high-ranking, making it difficult to set up meetings on short-notice, and public hearings require booking witnesses. The committee must, under its rules, give at least 48 hours notice before a public hearing.

As of Wednesday afternoon, no information about the next public hearing had been announced.

UPDATE: 6:10 p.m. -- This post was updated to include statements made by Sen. Murray later on Wednesday.

Rick Perry As Pro-Immigrant? Not Quite, Students Say

2011-10-03T20:20:36Z

WASHINGTON -- Maria Fernanda Cabello, a 20-year-old junior at Texas A&M University, moved to Texas from Mexico when she was 12 years old. She and her family came into the country on tourist visas that later expired, and she is now undocumented. Cabello graduated fifth in her class in high school and is now studying political science, with plans to go to law school when she graduates in 2013.

After that, she isn't sure what she'll do. The governor of her state, GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry, helped her go to college by signing a law in 2001 to provide in-state tuition to some undocumented students. But he is not helping her, or any other undocumented immigrants, with much else. Because Perry does not support the federal DREAM Act -- which would give students like Cabello a path to legal status-- his supposedly "soft on immigration" stances do not extend to helping undocumented young people work in the United States. Even after the state pays to educate them.

"That's what's a little upsetting about Rick Perry," Cabello said. "We're all very thankful that he signed the in-state tuition into law, but at the same time he says he does not support the federal DREAM Act. So we're kind of in limbo."

Perry is being criticized by both sides for his immigration policies, which are more centrist than most of the Republican field but still far to the right of Democrats. From the left, critics point out that most of his policies are tough on undocumented immigration, with attempts to crack down on community policing strategies that help undocumented immigrants. From the right, candidates attack him for being soft on immigration, arguing his in-state tuition bill is a magnet for undocumented immigration.

Other candidates have hit Perry hard for signing the in-state tuition law, which allows anyone who attended at least three years of high school in Texas to get in-state tuition, provided they sign an affidavit saying they will apply for legal status as soon as they can. But beyond that law, his positions on immigration, for the most part, mirror those of other Republican presidential candidates.

"Perry is no moderate on immigration," said Frank Sharry, executive director of pro-immigration reform group America's Voice. "He's not as extreme as the rest of the Republican field, but he's no moderate. He always says 'secure the border first' before we can talk about more reform. 'Secure the border' in Republican speak means comprehensive immigration reform -- never."

Texas was the first state to give in-state tuition, in a relatively non-controversial vote in 2001 (only four members of the legislature dissented). Twelve states followed over the next decade: California, Utah, New York, Washington, Oklahoma, Illinois, Kansas, New Mexico, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Maryland and Connecticut.

The laws are far from "amnesty," or blanket legalization for undocumented immigrants -- they don't even help students toward legal status. In fact, Perry opposes bills that would allow undocumented immigrants to gain legal status, such as comprehensive immigration reform or the federal DREAM Act, which would allow some undocumented young people to get work authorization and green cards in exchange for going to college or joining the military.

Perry repeatedly defended his law in recent weeks, taking jabs from fellow Republican candidates who call it an incentive for more immigrants to move to the United States. Perry says it was important to help undocumented young people get an education so they could contribute back to the state.

"Are we going to kick these young people over to the curb and say you can't have access because the fact of the matter is that there is no way they can pay the out of state tuition?" he said at a town hall appearance on Saturday. "And are we going to have them on the government dole over here, where they're not educated, or are we going to have them in our institutions of higher learning, paying in-state tuition, pursuing citizenship?"

Most arguments for the federal DREAM Act mirror the remarks Perry has made in defense of his in-state tuition law. Proponents of each argue the young people were brought into the United States by their parents and have been educated in public K-12 schools. The state invested their education up to this point, so the federal DREAM Act, and Perry's law, are about allowing them to work and contribute in turn to the country. President Barack Obama made a similar argument for the federal DREAM Act in a round-table talk with Latino news outlets.

But students who benefit from the in-state tuition, though grateful for the law, say it does not really allow them to work in many professional settings. Since Perry does not support the federal DREAM Act, his arguments for the in-state tuition law don't match reality, they say. The students get an education, but they can't use it.

"It's a love and hate relationship with Rick Perry. ... Rick Perry has made the state a better place but he needs to take a step forward and put the kids to work, because they're ready to work" said Stephanie Canelas, a 20-year-old Texas A&M student. "They're more than willing to serve."

Canelas, a college sophomore, has lived in Texas since moving to the United States from Honduras 11 years ago. Like Cabello, she and her family came in on tourist visas, then overstayed them.

She is one of an estimated one percent of all Texas college students -- many of them undocumented -- to benefit from Perry's in-state tuition law, according to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The law also benefits American citizens and legal residents who were born out of state. Since 2001, more than 35,000 students benefited from the law, receiving about $33.6 million in in-state tuition benefits and financial aid from fall 2004 to summer 2008.

But Texas financial aid is only partially funded by state taxes. The state has no individual income tax, only a sales tax, meaning the undocumented families pay into the system in the same way as others. Most state universities are supported by the Permanent University fund, which gets most of its money from oil drilled on state-owned land in western Texas. Tuition, in the end, funds only about a quarter of the universities' overall funding, with most coming from other revenue sources.

"Here in Texas we have a sales tax, so my parents and I have been paying into the system forever," Canelas said. "Now we get to benefit from it as well."

On other immigrant-related issues, Perry has proved to be far less moderate than his predecessor as governor, former President George W. Bush. While Bush pushed for comprehensive immigration reform at the national level, Perry helped to pass a bill requiring identification to vote and vetoed a bill to give undocumented immigrants driver's licenses.

Perry originally opposed Arizona's S.B. 1070 law, which requires police to ask for papers from those they arrest and suspect to be undocumented, saying he would not support such a law for Texas. But he supported a similar bill called S.B. 9 in Texas, which would have banned so-called "sanctuary cities" where officers are instructed not to ask about immigration status. The bill would have also required the use of Secure Communities, a controversial immigration enforcement program that turns over all fingerprints taken by local police to federal immigration authorities. It failed in the Texas state legislature.

"He was for in-state tuition, but the context was quite different," Sharry said. "George W. Bush had just gotten elected president, and Bush was famous for being a true moderate on immigration. In-state tuition at that time was viewed as kind of a stepping stone to broader reform, and Perry was seen as part of that Texas tradition."

"He may have been a moderate in 2001, but in 2011 he's not," he added.

Still, Perry is likely to continue to be attacked by Republicans for the in-state tuition law, which Republicans say takes spots away from Americans in favor of undocumented students. Cabello said that assertion is absolutely false.

"I don't think I'm taking anybody's spot because I worked very hard to get here," she said. "I didn't get accepted to A&M because I'm undocumented -- they're status-blind. All they saw was my application and all of the things I had achieved. I feel like I deserve to be here. I earned my spot."

Now, students who benefited from the law just want a chance to use their education going forward. Karla Resendiz, 25, went to the University of Texas at Austin with in-state tuition under the Perry law. She graduated in 2010 with a degree in pharmacy, which she cannot use because she is undocumented. Resendiz was a National Merit Scholar, meaning her preliminary SAT scores were in the top 96th percent of test-takers, and she graduated in the top five percent of her high school class.

"It's a shame that immigrants, and immigration in general, is getting used as a political pawn when there are real people behind these arguments," Resendiz said. "There are students who have a lot of potential, and until people stop using it as talking points and start looking the people behind this law, it's going to be really hard to move forward."

See where other candidates stand on immigration issues:

Obama 'Absolutely Certain' There Will Be A Latino Candidate In His Lifetime

2011-09-28T17:30:24Z

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said on Wednesday he is "absolutely certain" there will be a competitive Latino candidate for president in his lifetime, adding that the growing number of Latino voters will push for more representation in politics.

"Just look at the demographics," he said at a roundtable with Latino news outlets, including HuffPost Latino Voices. He added that the Latino population is "growing faster than any other population. … With numbers comes political power."

The Census Bureau estimates the Latino population will grow by more than 10 million in the next decade, and reach 102.6 million by 2050. Latinos will make up an estimated 24.4 percent of the total United States population by 2050, Bureau estimates show.

There are a few possible future candidates already in the political arena, including Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida.

No Latino has ever made it to the White House, although at least one has entered the race. Bill Richardson, a former New Mexico governor, made a bid for the White House in 2008.

Had he won, he would have been the first Latino president of the United States.

"I wouldn't run as a Hispanic candidate. I would run as an American, proud to be Hispanic," Richardson said on ABC's "This Week" in 2007. "I wouldn't just be focusing on Hispanic issues or trying to get the Hispanic vote."

Obama: Defense of Marriage Issue Will Be Settled Soon

2011-09-28T16:32:31Z

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said he thinks the courts will decide "fairly soon" whether to end the Defense of Marriage Act, hinting that he believes the courts will agree with his administration that the law is unconstitutional.

"The position that my administration has taken, I think, will have a significant influence on the court as it examines the constitutionality of this law," he said Wednesday at a roundtable with latino news outlets. "Once that law is put down -- and I don't know what the ruling would be -- addressing these bi-national issues could flow from that decision."

The president announced in February that his administration would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which bans gay marriage at a federal level, because he believes the law is unconstitutional.

HuffPost Latino Voices asked Obama at the roundtable how his administration would address bi-national couples, gay and lesbian men and women who want to petition for legal status for their foreign-born partners. Under the Defense of Marriage Act, these men and women are barred from doing so, even if they are legally allowed to marry in their state.

The law also bars gay and lesbian men and women from federal benefits for marriage and allows states to block them from getting married. Obama said he cannot comment on how the current cases against DOMA will be decided, but said he believes the law should be repealed.

"I can't comment on where the case is going to go, I can only say what I believe, and that is that DOMA doesn't make sense, it's unfair, I don't think it meets the demands of our constitution," he said.

Obama said he supports ending the Defense of Marriage Act through Congress, but thinks the likelihood of passing such a repeal is unlikely because of heavy opposition from the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

"The likelihood of us being able to get the votes in the House of Representatives for a DOMA repeal are very low at this point," he said. "Truthfully, the recourse through the courts is probably going to be the best approach."

Still, there is some possibility for reprieve for bi-national couples. The Obama administration announced in August it would close some deportation cases based on family ties to the United States, including whether the man or woman is in a long-term, committed partnership or marriage. Senior administration officials confirmed that gay and lesbian immigrants would be included in this policy.

Spanish-Language Ads To Target Mandatory E-Verify

2011-09-27T17:35:00Z

WASHINGTON -- Spanish-language ads will target Republican congressmen from California for their support of a federal employment eligibility program called E-Verify, an immigrant rights group and a labor union announced Tuesday.

America's Voice and the Service Employees International Union said they will run three Spanish-language ads aimed at Reps. Elton Gallegly and Dan Lungren as well as California Republicans in general. The ads will appear on radio stations in Sacramento, Santa Barbara and East San Gabriel Valley and in La Opinion, the largest Spanish-language newspaper in the country.

"Once again, Republican Congressmen are promoting a terrible immigration plan that would harm Latino workers in California and across the country," the basic ad says, according to a translation provided by its sponsors.

A bill that would make use of E-Verify mandatory for all employers passed out of the House Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote last Wednesday, with support from Gallegly and Lungren. Currently, E-Verify is a voluntary Internet-based system to help employers confirm that individuals are authorized to work in the United States.

But the system has at times led to false negatives, indicating that legal workers are actually undocumented. This "database full of errors" could put Latinos and other minorities out of work, the ad charges -- a claim backed up by the Government Accountability Office and the Center for American Progress.

E-Verify errors can cost jobs for workers and waste time for employers, said Eliseo Medina, secretary-treasury of the Service Employees International Union, on a conference call announcing the ad buy.

"It is a bad bill for workers, it is bad for employers and it is bad for the economy," Medina added.

In its December 2010 report, the GAO found that E-Verify errors were still common, especially when it came to foreign-born workers, and could lead to "the appearance of discrimination." Naturalized citizens are 26 times more likely to be caught up in the system's errors than native-born Americans, according to a December 2009 report by the Department of Homeland Security.

Supporters of the bill argue that these figures have improved and that errors will decrease even more as additional companies participate in the E-Verify program. But House Republicans on the Judiciary Committee blocked an amendment last week that would allow class-action lawsuits on behalf of workers who lose wages due to such errors.

One of the Spanish-language ads will hit Lungren in particular for pushing a provision that would allow the entry of 500,000 new agricultural guest workers, whose presence could lower wages and overall standards, as well as force undocumented farm workers even further underground.

"Jobs and workers will simply move into a cash economy, reducing tax revenues by, we estimate, more than $17 billion," said Arturo Rodriguez of the United Farmworkers of America on the conference call. "The guest worker programs that are being proposed will ... be utilized to undermine the jobs of domestic workers that are here today, ready to work and do those jobs."

The ads quote Reynaldo Arevalo, a citizen who has worked as a mushroom picker for more than 20 years. "This plan treats me and my co-workers like we’re disposable," he says. "We are human beings, and we should be treated as such."

Senate Turns To Plan B On Funding Government

2011-09-26T23:32:00Z

WASHINGTON -- The Senate passed a stopgap funding bill Monday to keep the government running, ending a weeklong battle over disaster aid that has turned out to be moot.

Congress tied itself up in knots for a week arguing over emergency aid for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, only to have the agency announce that its funds may last until the end of the fiscal year, perhaps running dry for only a day or two.

Congressional leaders from both parties had agreed back in July to spend $1.043 trillion to keep the government running while the super committee works on plans to cut the deficit.

But that plan went off the tracks when mounting natural disasters stressed the FEMA budget, and rather than simply pass a White House request for $500 million in emergency spending, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) declared that something else would have to be cut first.

"Eric Cantor, a Republican from Virginia, started this fight when he said we cannot fund the 2011 disasters without an offset," said Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) on the Senate floor Monday.

Then the offsets turned out to be a non-issue when FEMA announced it would not run out of money early this week, as expected. The agency shook up the debate on Monday when officials said current disaster relief funds could last until the end of the week, eliminating the need for emergency money. A FEMA official said the agency recouped about $40 million last weekend when funds were returned to the agency from completed projects.

Because FEMA can apparently stay afloat until the first day of the new fiscal year, Oct. 1, the House and Senate may be able to agree on a clean continuing resolution with no offsets or emergency aid funding. Leaders of the two houses had already agreed to an overall government spending figure last month. And now the Senate has passed a clean stopgap funding bill.

The Senate's other option, a continuing resolution that would fund the government and provide disaster money without offsets, failed in a 54-35 vote on Monday.

The bill's passage came down to 10 Republicans who supported a larger aid package for FEMA two weeks ago: Sens. Roy Blunt (Mo.), Scott Brown (Mass.), Susan Collins (Maine), Dean Heller (Nev.), John Hoeven (N.D.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and David Vitter (La.).

Of those, six ended up voting against the amended continuing resolution on Monday: Blunt, Heller, Hoeven, Rubio, Toomey and Vitter. The bill fell six votes short of the 60 it needed to move forward.

After the failed vote, the Senate moved to two votes to continue funding the government. First, the clean continuing resolution that would extend government funding until Nov. 18. Then, a vote on a one-week funding extension to prevent a government shutdown if the House delays in passing a longer-term bill. Both will be sent to the House if they pass the Senate.

"I think it is very clear that this is the right way to go," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said on the floor. "It shows us we don't need to focus on 2011 funding. … This compromise should satisfy Republicans because it includes the 2012 FEMA funding, and it should be a win for Democrats because it does not include offsets."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that FEMA's ability to keep running was "vindication" of the GOP position.

"Before we spend the taxpayer money, we should have a real accounting of what is actually needed," he said.

If House members agree to the Senate's amended bill, they could pass the bill by unanimous consent, which would allow most members not to return to Washington, D.C., noted Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) at a press conference on Friday. Aides said on Monday that a voice vote was still a possibility.

"I think if that's the bill that comes to the House, and I hope it will, it wouldn't even necessitate, in my view, calling the House back, we could pass it by unanimous consent," Hoyer said last week.

Jennifer Bendery contributed to the report.

Senate Turns To Plan B On Funding Government

2011-09-26T23:32:00Z

WASHINGTON -- The Senate passed a stopgap funding bill Monday to keep the government running, ending a weeklong battle over disaster aid that has turned out to be moot.

Congressional leaders from both parties had agreed back in July to spend $1.043 trillion to keep the government running while the super committee works on plans to cut the deficit.

"Eric Cantor, a Republican from Virginia, started this fight when he said we cannot fund the 2011 disasters without an offset," said Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) on the Senate floor Monday.

The Senate's other option, a continuing resolution that would fund the government and provide disaster money without offsets, failed in a 54-35 vote on Monday.

Of those, six ended up voting against the amended continuing resolution on Monday: Blunt, Heller, Hoeven, Rubio, Toomey and Vitter. The bill fell six votes short of the 60 it needed to move forward.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that FEMA's ability to keep running was "vindication" of the GOP position.

"Before we spend the taxpayer money, we should have a real accounting of what is actually needed," he said.

Jennifer Bendery contributed to the report.

House Passes Funding Bill, Set To Die In Senate

2011-09-23T05:00:54Z

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans set the stage early Friday for another fight over government funding, passing a stopgap bill that Senate Democrats say will not make it through the Senate.

The bill, which funds the government until Nov. 18 and provides emergency disaster aid to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, passed in a 219 to 203 vote, mostly along party lines. Two dozen Republicans voted against the bill.

It won almost full support from Republicans, an improvement for Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) over a failed vote on a nearly-identical funding bill just a day prior. But to win over members in his own conference, Boehner and other GOP leaders inserted a provision that would make it even more unpalatable to the other side, adding more offsets for disaster funding that Democrats say should not be offset at all.

Senate leaders said they will not back down, offering to stay in session next week to ensure FEMA and government funding are in place.

“The bill the House will vote on tonight is not an honest effort at compromise," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in a statement before the vote. "It will be rejected by the Senate. …. The Senate is ready to stay in Washington next week to do the work the American people expect us to do, and I hope the House Republican leadership will do the same."

Both chambers settled on a funding figure for the government more than a month ago, while setting the terms for a debt ceiling increase. But since then, a number of disasters have occurred that made emergency funding for FEMA a necessity.

Republicans, urged by their constituents to cut as much government spending as possible, moved to offset disaster funding in the continuing resolution by cutting $1.5 billion from an energy loan program. But those spending cuts were not enough for 48 Republicans, who voted on Wednesday against the funding bill in hopes for higher cuts. Leaders responded with one addition that, though relatively small, went after a program that provided loans to the failed and politically embarrassing Solyndra company, a solar energy company once hailed by the Obama administration as a model green company, but now under an FBI investigation after filing for bankruptcy last week.

Senate Democrats rejected the idea that disaster aid should be offset at all, arguing Congress should approve aid first and find the money later.

“The feeling in there [the caucus] is we’re fed up with this,” Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said after a caucus meeting on Thursday. “They know what it takes for us to extend the [continuing resolution] and keep the government in business and this brinkmanship of maybe we will and maybe we won’t -- we’re sick of it, we’re tired of it. The American people are sick of it too.”

They stuck to a firm message they have used all week: Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were approved without offsets, so why should emergency disaster aid be subjected to them?

"The general [sense] was look, we're dealing with folks who spend money on nations overseas unpaid for all of the time," Rep. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said Thursday. "They're unwilling to pay for nation-building here, and it's wrong."

The question now will be whether the House and Senate can come to an agreement -- and when. Either way, both sides have said it will be the other's fault if disaster aid is delayed by partisan bickering.

"The Senate should pass this bill immediately, and the president should sign it, because any political games will delay FEMA money that suffering American families desperately need," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said Thursday in a statement.

House Passes Funding Bill, Set To Die In Senate

2011-09-23T05:00:54Z

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans set the stage early Friday for another fight over government funding, passing a stopgap bill that Senate Democrats say will not make it through the Senate.

Senate leaders said they will not back down, offering to stay in session next week to ensure FEMA and government funding are in place.

Senate Democrats rejected the idea that disaster aid should be offset at all, arguing Congress should approve aid first and find the money later.

They stuck to a firm message they have used all week: Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were approved without offsets, so why should emergency disaster aid be subjected to them?

Rick Perry Defends Immigration Stance: 'I Don't Think You Have A Heart'

2011-09-23T02:59:25Z

Rick Perry went on the defense on the topic of immigration during the Republican debate Thursday night, but stood behind his support for a bill that provided in-state tuition to some undocumented students.

"If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no reason than they've been brought there, by no fault of their own, I don't think you have a heart," he said. "I still support it greatly."

The other candidates piled on Perry, criticizing him for his support for the in-state tuition bill. The bill allows some undocumented students, who went to high school in Texas and are working toward legal status, to qualify for in-state tuition at Texas state colleges.

"You're sort of making this leap that unless the taxpayers subsidize it they won't be able to go," Rick Santorum said. "The point is, why are we subsidizing this? … Why should they be given preferential treatment as an illegal in this country?"

"Yes, I would say that he is soft on illegal immigration," he added.

Perry's statements on the border fence were also a point of contention. While the others said the border must be secured with a fence, Perry argued a fence would not work as well as boots on the ground.

The most substantive question was about E-Verify, an employment verification program already used by federal agencies and contractors to screen for undocumented workers. Newt Gingrich said he would support making the program nationwide, as some House Republicans hope to do, and dismissed worries that it would cost employers.

"We'd be far better off to outsource E-Verify to American Express and Mastercard and Visa because they actually know how to run a program like that without massive fraud," Gingrich said. "Second, the program should be as easy as swiping your card to buy gasoline, so I would ask of employers, what is it you would object to?"

John Boehner: There Is No Threat Of Government Shutdown

2011-09-22T16:01:31Z

WASHINGTON -- House Speaker John Boehner said on Thursday there is no threat of a government shutdown, downplaying whispers that he cannot control his conference enough to pass a stopgap bill to fund the government.

"Trying to get 535 people to come to an agreement on anything around here is difficult," Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters. "But we knew that going in. We're working our way through this. I've always been confident we'll be able to come to an agreement, and we will."

Boehner's leadership ability was called into question Wednesday by a vote on the continuing resolution, which would fund the government from Oct. 1 to mid-November. The bill must be passed by Sept. 30 to avoid a government shutdown, and the clock is ticking down as lawmakers prepare to leave on Friday for a week-long break.

The bill went down in a 195-to-230 vote, with 48 Republican members and nearly all Democrats opposed. But Boehner downplayed the bill's failure, saying it was part of the job.

"I have no fear in allowing the House to work its will," Boehner said. "I've long believed in it, and I continue to believe in it. Does it make my life more difficult? Yes, it does."

The failure of the bill means House leaders must go back to the drawing board, changing the bill to win more votes. Boehner declined to hint on how the bill will be changed, which could take the form of further cuts, changing the offsets for emergency disaster funding or eliminating offsets altogether.

The offsets are meant to pay for emergency disaster relief through the Federal Emergency Management Agency by taking money from a loan program that brought manufacturing jobs back to the United States. Democrats have strongly opposed the offsets, arguing they should not be part of disaster aid and could impede job-creation.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) rejected the idea on Tuesday of using offsets for emergency aid funding.

Boehner is caught in the middle and must choose which way to move. Moving to the right might appease some conservative members, who called last week for additional cuts to the funding bill. But moving to the left, by switching or eliminating offsets, would win over Democrats, and has the added benefit of being more likely to pass the Democrat-controlled Senate.

Asked whether he would move to appease Democrats or conservative Republicans, Boehner laughed at the characterization that he was caught between a rock and a hard place.

"Welcome to my world," he said.

Boehner argued the failure of the bill was mostly the fault of Democrats, many of whom said they would support it before ultimately voting it down. The bill's funding levels were decided in a fight over raising the debt ceiling last month, which many hoped would make the current bill easy to pass.

"This continuing resolution was designed to be a bipartisan bill, and we had every reason to believe that our counterparts across the aisle would support it," he said. "Once they began to see where some of our votes were, they decided to play politics and vote against disaster relief for millions of Americans who've been affected."

Boehner will huddle with his conference later on Thursday to discuss the way forward for the bill. He hinted that leaders hope to resolve the issue in the next two days, before a scheduled week-long recess next week.

"I surely hope" the House will not be in session this weekend, he said.

John Boehner: There Is No Threat Of Government Shutdown

2011-09-22T16:01:31Z

The bill went down in a 195-to-230 vote, with 48 Republican members and nearly all Democrats opposed. But Boehner downplayed the bill's failure, saying it was part of the job.

"I have no fear in allowing the House to work its will," Boehner said. "I've long believed in it, and I continue to believe in it. Does it make my life more difficult? Yes, it does."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) rejected the idea on Tuesday of using offsets for emergency aid funding.

Asked whether he would move to appease Democrats or conservative Republicans, Boehner laughed at the characterization that he was caught between a rock and a hard place.

"Welcome to my world," he said.

"I surely hope" the House will not be in session this weekend, he said.

House Democrats Vow To Vote Against Stopgap Spending Bill

2011-09-21T16:48:00Z

WASHINGTON -- House Democrats are being urged to vote against a bill on Wednesday to continue funding the government, putting it one step closer to a shutdown next week.

"I expect a great majority of Democrats to be voting no on the [continuing resolution] today," Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters after a meeting with his caucus.

Full Democratic opposition could mean the bill will not have enough support to pass the House. If they lose all Democratic support, Republican leaders can only spare 24 votes from their party to retain a majority sufficient to pass the bill. But 51 Republicans, Led by Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), said in a letter to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) last week that they want further cuts to discretionary funding as part of the continuing resolution, signaling the bill may not receive full support from GOP members.

Leaders in the House and Senate have been sparring over the inclusion of emergency disaster aid in the continuing budget resolution, which must be passed by Sept. 30 to prevent a government shutdown. House Republicans insist funding for disaster aid should be included in the continuing resolution and be offset by cutting an energy loan program.

Democrats in the House and Senate decried this move on Tuesday, saying it could both delay aid to people who need it and destroy a program that creates jobs for American people.

The minority whip's office urged Democrats to vote against the bill, saying cuts to the energy loan program, called the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, could cost thousands of jobs.

"This is a dangerous cut that will affect American jobs and another example of the Republicans' inability to compromise, and the continuation of their no jobs agenda," the Whip email read. "Members are urged to VOTE NO on H.R. 2608."

Hoyer plans to vote against the bill, he said on Wednesday.

"Clearly, a [continuing resolution] needs to pass," Hoyer told reporters on Tuesday. "But again, it doesn't need to pass with this in it."

Democrats have a long-shot plan in place to pass a continuing resolution without cutting the energy loan program, sources told The Huffington Post. Before the House takes up the continuing resolution, lawmakers must first adopt a rule to take up the bill. After an hour-long debate, the Rules Committee Ranking Member Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) will make a motion to stop the House from moving to a full vote on the continuing resolution.

If Democrats are successful, they will gain control of the floor and will have one shot to make amendments to the continuing resolution.

Democrats will then substitute the Senate version of disaster relief emergency funding, which passed with some Republican support last week, Democratic sources said. The practical effect of this measure will be to eliminate the need for spending offsets for disaster relief, allowing the loan program to the auto industry to remain intact.

It may be a tough feat, but Democratic Hill sources point to a letter being circulated by Rep. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) that has now attracted more than 100 signatures. The letter urges Republican leadership to drop the cuts to the energy loan program.

But even if the Democrats' maneuver fails, Republicans will have to drum up sufficient support to get the bill to pass the House. If the House fails to pass a bill, the fight over disaster aid offsets could extend to next week, when the House and Senate are scheduled for a week-long recess.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) drew a firm line on Tuesday against cuts to offset disaster aid funding, saying his caucus would be willing to stay in town next week to fight for a continuing resolution with more aid, without cuts to job-creating programs.

Senate Democrats plan to to amend the House version of the continuing resolution, if it comes to them, to include a measure passed by the Senate last week that would fund disaster relief without offsets.

Reid said a government shutdown may be possible, because Democrats will not hedge on the issue of offsets for disaster funding.

"I'm actually not that sure," Reid said of avoiding a shutdown, "because the Tea Party-driven House of Representatives has been so unreasonable in the past."