United States Congress of Fail - Part 4

[fraurosena]

And another one jumping off the sinking ship.

 

[fraurosena]

Good grief. I didn't realize it was that many already. If they keep this up, will there be any left come November?

 

[GrumpyGran]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Good grief. I didn't realize it was that many already. If they keep this up, will there be any left come November?

 

Hurrah! Go away, assholes.

[fraurosena]

Well now... could it be that McTurtle is well aware that if he passes a budget, the Repugs will have to start entitlement and welfare reform, which could have disastrous consequences in an election year? 

GOP may skip budget, kneecapping 2018 ambitions

Spoiler

Republican leaders are considering skipping passage of a GOP budget this year — a blow to the party’s weakened fiscal hawks that would squash all 2018 efforts to revamp entitlements or repeal Obamacare.

White House and Hill GOP leaders discussed the possibility of forgoing the painful budget process during last weekend’s Camp David legislative summit, according to four sources familiar with the talks. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has argued that he cannot pass controversial deficit-reduction legislation using powerful budget procedures with his new 51-vote majority — and wasn’t even sure he could find the votes for a fiscal blueprint in the first place.

Abandoning the budget, however, would be an embarrassment for Republicans, who for years railed against Democrats when they avoided one of the most basic responsibilities of Congress.

But more importantly, it would mean the GOP’s 2018 agenda would be sharply limited: Only with passage of a joint House-Senate budget can Republicans deploy reconciliation tools, which allow them to circumvent the Senate filibuster and bypass Democrats, as they did on last year’s successful tax bill and failed Obamacare repeal push.

That means no entitlement reform or welfare overhaul in 2018, a key priority for fiscal conservatives eager to shrink the now $20 trillion federal debt. Instead, President Donald Trump wants to focus on enacting a massive infrastructure package with help from Democrats. And conservatives are not happy about it.

The House GOP, for instance, will probably have to try to pass such a document to keep its more conservative conference happy. But GOP leaders are under no illusion that such a plan could pass the Senate.

It’s one of the reasons some GOP leaders have discussed “deeming” top-line spending numbers — simply setting total spending levels without passing a budget. One idea that’s surfaced includes deeming numbers as part of any budget accord with Democrats in the coming days and weeks.

That’s unlikely to halt the push from some House Republicans for a budget, however. House conservatives say they are itching for a fiscal brawl in 2018, even if it means going up against GOP leaders.

Many House Republicans are still stung from last year’s budget standoff with the Senate, when the House was forced to abandon plans for steep cuts to “mandatory” programs and swallow the Senate’s deficit-busting blueprint. House conservatives are even fine with slicing deep into politically sensitive programs like Medicaid, food stamps or low-income housing subsidies to write a budget that reaches balance in 10 years — a task made exponentially more difficult after the GOP passed its tax plan that boosts federal deficits by more than $1 trillion over a decade.

In fact, House Budget Committee members have already started discussing priorities for their fiscal blueprint, including mandatory spending cuts they want to tackle this year. Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.), the outgoing chair of the House Budget Committee, said members have come up to her and said, “‘As soon as we get back, we’ve got to start on this budget again, and we’ve got to make sure we do mandatory spending cuts.’”

In a sit-down with POLITICO this week, Black said it would “absolutely” be a mistake for the House to skip a budget this year.

“They’re the problem,” she said, pointing to the Senate. “They don’t seem to have the same energy to get this financial situation under control, and that disturbs me, because you need both sides to do it.”

Rank-and-file lawmakers aren’t the only Republicans who will be unhappy with this outcome. Speaker Paul Ryan was eyeing reconciliation to pursue an ambitious welfare overhaul, though McConnell squashed the notion. Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina is one of several Republicans who’ve expressed a desire to take another run at health care using the fast-tracking tool.

Other Republicans seemed baffled that leaders would forfeit such a powerful legislative instrument so quickly.

“They need to change the [Senate] cloture rule, but until they do, the only way we’re going to be able to accomplish anything is through reconciliation,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) said. “We have to use reconciliation.”

3

 

[fraurosena]

If only all of them would do this...

 

[fraurosena]

AHA! See here, the reason for all the sudden flip-flopping, my friends.

 

[fraurosena]

Buh-bye, Malfoy wannabe!

[GrumpyGran]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Buh-bye, Malfoy wannabe!

Wahoo! I knew I was drinking celebrating for a reason. That maybe wasn't related to just drinking because my country is under siege. 

[fraurosena]

I'm reading more and more Dems are boycotting the State of the Union. Good. I hope they all boycott it.

House Dems plan measure to censure Trump over 's---hole countries' remarks

Quote

Two top House Democrats said Friday they will unveil a resolution next week to censure President Trump following reports he expressed a preference for immigrants from Norway over people from what he described as “shithole countries” like Haiti, El Salvador and African nations.

Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Cedric Richmond (D-La.) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, expect to formally introduce the censure resolution after the Martin Luther King Jr. Day holiday.

The two lawmakers said in a joint statement that they were “deeply disturbed and offended” by Trump’s remarks describing places like Haiti and African nations as “shithole countries.”

The Washington Post first reported that Trump made the comments during an Oval Office meeting with members of Congress about immigration policy.

In announcing their plans, Richmond and Nadler pointedly noted that Trump lost the popular vote to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in 2016 — a fact that Trump has at times claimed, without substantiation, is because of fraudulent votes.

“This censure resolution is important because America is a beacon of hope. We have to show the world that this president does not represent the real feelings of most of the American people which is part of the reason why he lost the popular vote,” Richmond and Nadler said.

“Congress must speak with one voice in condemning these offensive and anti-American remarks. There is no excuse for it.”

Some Republicans have joined with Democrats in criticizing Trump over the remarks.

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) broke his silence on the issue on Friday, saying at a WisPolitics event that Trump's comments were "very unfortunate" and "unhelpful."

Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah), a Haitian-American, called on Trump to apologize.

“The president’s comments are unkind, divisive, elitist, and fly in the face of our nation’s values,” Love said in a statement.

Richmond and Nadler said they will ask House GOP leaders to bring up the resolution for a vote, but their efforts are unlikely to be successful.

Nadler previously introduced a resolution to censure Trump when he cast equal blame on white supremacists and counterprotesters for violence in Charlottesville, Va., last August.

Earlier Friday, Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) announced that he would force another House floor vote to impeach Trump next week in light of Trump's remarks. A vote Green forced last month failed on the floor, but 58 Democrats supported it.

"Congressional condemnation of racist bigotry is not enough. In Congress, talk is cheap — it’s how we vote that counts. Next week, I will again bring a resolution to impeach @realDonaldTrump. I will put my vote where my mouth is,” Green tweeted.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has stayed away from liberals’ calls for impeachment, citing the ongoing investigations into whether the Russian government coordinated with the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 election.

But Pelosi did endorse the push to censure Trump over his handling of the white supremacists in Charlottesville, saying at the time that “with each passing day, it becomes clearer that the Republican Congress must declare whether it stands for our sacred American values or with the President who embraces white nationalism.”

Despite denouncing Trump’s response to the Charlottesville violence, Republicans almost immediately rejected the idea of censuring the president.

The censure resolution gained most of the House Democratic caucus as co-sponsors but ultimately never received any legislative action.

Congress has rarely tried to censure a president.

The only time the Senate considered censure was for President Andrew Jackson in 1834 for moving to dismantle the Bank of the United States. The censure resolution was ultimately revoked by Jackson’s allies three years later after they gained control of the chamber.

The House has moved a handful of times to censure or rebuke presidents, such as John Tyler in 1842 for abuse of powers and James Buchanan in 1860 for the handling of Navy contracts.

Some Democrats suggested censuring President Bill Clinton in place of an impeachment vote in 1998, but their efforts were not successful.

1

 

[fraurosena]

Even the Repugliklans are saying it...

Republican strategists say Democrats virtually certain to win House in 2018

Quote

Republican strategists have turned decidedly pessimistic about their prospects for the 2018 midterm elections.  Prominent Republicans are now saying privately that Democrats are virtually certain to win control of the House of Representatives.

As one senior Republican on Capitol Hill told ABC News, “If the election were held today, the House would be gone. Fortunately, the election is not today.”

Another prominent Republican strategist working on the midterm elections went further, telling ABC News point-blank that Republicans will lose the House and that this prospect unlikely to change. “The only question is whether Democrats win narrowly by picking up 25 seats or whether it is a blowout of more than 35 seats,” the strategist told me.

Allies of President Donald Trump are convinced the president will quickly face impeachment hearings if Democrats take control of the House. One Republican close to Trump predicted that not only will there be impeachment hearings but that the prospects for the president would be grim.

“Consider what happened with Bill Clinton,” the Trump ally said. “Clinton was disciplined; he had a strategy and still he was impeached.”

 

[AmazonGrace]

Shoveling Sh*t for Donald Trump, Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue Get Covered in It

As the president provides a defining moment of national humiliation and disgrace, two Republican senators diminish the authority of their office to feebly try and cover for him.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/shoveling-sht-for-donald-trump-senators-tom-cotton-and-david-perdue-get-covered-in-it

 

Spoiler

 

“I don’t recall” is the two-foot putt of politics—a gimme. No one’s going to hassle you over it. It could be total bullshit and everybody knows it’s total bullshit, but if you say I can’t recall, nobody can really challenge it, so you get away with it, and sooner or later, usually sooner, the world moves on to other matters.

So GOP senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue could easily have left it at that. They didn’t recall President Trump saying “shithole,” which was their original position last week. The country would have rolled its collective eyes but granted them their gimme. But on Sunday, they decided the Republican Party hasn’t done enough sucking up to and lying for Donald Trump, so they went on the attack. Now, they said, Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin was lying. Trump never said “shithole.” Perhaps “shithouse.” Ah, well that’s different! As the Times put it, their “recollections appeared to have sharpened.”

I suspect that what actually “sharpened” were two things. First, their knowledge that they have this big immigration bill they sponsored together, called the RAISE Act, that would cut legal immigration roughly in half over 10 years, that they want Trump to sign. And second, their realization that they’re dealing with a man so fragile and vain that if they want him to stay interested in their bill, they’d better lie for him, because lying is what Trump demands.

The bill, as the Beast’s Jackie Kucinich and Andrew Desiderio reported last August when it was dropped, has almost no hope of passage. As they pointed out, it would need to clear the 60-vote hurdle in the Senate, which isn’t happening. All Democrats will likely oppose it. Even a handful of Senate Republicans are likely to be against it. Lindsey Graham came out against it immediately, and others made unsupportive noises.

But the bill is only part of the story. The other and more important part—maybe not more important to Cotton and Perdue, but certainly more important to the republic—is the way Trump keeps going lower and lower and lower, and the way Republican elected officials keep shoveling out his path for him.

No serious person can possibly think in all honesty Trump didn’t say the word. First of all, Trump was reportedly bragging about it to friends that night. Second, How likely would Durbin be to tell an outright lie about words spoken by the President of the United States? No matter how much he may dislike a president, a senator just doesn’t do that. (Or, at least they didn’t. What Cotton and Perdue are doing now is how confidence in offices and institutions gets depleted.) There were a lot of senators who disliked Barack Obama too, but no one ever came out of a White House meeting about rural policy charging that Obama made a remark about “shithole” states.

That’s mainly because Obama was too dignified ever to use that kind of language while conducting the people’s business, but it’s also because you just don’t tell lies about what presidents said. Lindsey Graham backed up Durbin last week, without exactly going as far as Durbin did. And just Monday, Graham restated his position, phrased as a sly little dig at Cotton and Perdue: “My memory hasn’t evolved,” he told a South Carolina newspaper. He added: “It’s pretty embarrassing when you have to take your children out of the room just to report the news.” I think we all know what he means.

Cotton and Perdue have relationships with Trump that are different, although at crunch time the differences don’t appear to be amounting to anything. Cotton, of course, is one of the biggest war hawks in Washington, who once said that a successful bombing campaign against Iran would take only “several days.” Aside from the hard line on Iran, he disagrees with Trump on a lot of things: He’s pro-NATO, pro-free trade, pro-Nafta, and was pro-Iraq war. Trump’s against all those things.

But he endorsed Trump anyway in May 2016, the same day John McCain did. When asked two months later by Atlantic editor Jeff Goldberg at the Aspen Ideas Festival (yes, Cotton is the kind of Republican who gets invited to the Aspen Ideas Festival) to square his worldview with his endorsement, Cotton of course was able to rationalize it. Trump’s views, Cotton said, aren’t as radical as they seem. And where President Trump seemed to be going off the rails, why, the Republicans in Congress would keep him in check, don’t you know. “If Donald Trump is elected president, I will support him when he is right and we’ll try to change [his] direction when he is wrong,” Cotton told Goldberg.

Perdue, who is not the kind of Republican who gets invited to the Aspen Ideas Festival, was a businessman before winning his Senate seat. His great claim to fame was running the Dollar Store and supplying America with thousands of jobs that pay about $17,000 a year. He has been cozier with Trump from the start. After Perdue won, Trump summoned him to Fifth Avenue and peppered him with questions about what it was like to run as a businessman-outsider. Perdue is now, by some accounts, Trump’s favorite senator. And he’s obviously determined to keep things that way.

Trump’s remark was an important symbolic low-point of his presidency. It resonated around the world. The outrages are so numerous that we can’t always know which ones will make the history books. We can be certain that this one will. A moment of national humiliation and disgrace.

Cotton and Perdue have chosen to go out of their way to align themselves with this humiliation. Their colleague Jeff Flake is giving a speech Wednesday comparing Trump to Stalin. Cotton and Perdue might well ask themselves what that makes them.

 

 

[fraurosena]

It looks like a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. What a quandary for the Dems...

As Shutdown Talk Rises, Trump’s Immigration Words Pose Risks for Both Parties

Quote

President Trump’s incendiary words about immigration have dampened the prospects that a broad spending and immigration deal can be reached by the end of the week, raising the possibility of a government shutdown with unknown political consequences for lawmakers in both parties.

Democrats facing re-election in states that Mr. Trump carried in 2016 fear that a government funding crisis, precipitated by an immigration showdown, could imperil their campaigns. And they are growing increasingly uneasy that liberal colleagues eyeing White House bids are demanding that any spending bill beyond a stopgap measure that expires on Jan. 19 include protections for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children.

“Welcome to our world,” said Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, who is running for re-election in a state that Mr. Trump carried by 19 percentage points.

“We’ve got people running for president all trying to find their base, and then you’ve got people from Trump states that are trying to continue to legislate the way we always have — by negotiation,” Ms. McCaskill said. “And never the twain shall meet.”

But Republicans face their own uncertainties. With their party controlling the White House and both chambers of Congress, they could receive most of the blame for a shutdown, even if Senate Democrats effectively block a spending plan that does not extend the immigrant protections of an Obama-era program known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

“To believe that you can successfully blame Democrats for a shutdown over the DACA debate is naïve,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

The angry recriminations continued from allegations that Mr. Trump called African nations “shithole countries” during a White House meeting last week with lawmakers.

The president on Monday attacked Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat who is leading the immigration talks for his party and attended the White House meeting, as having “totally misrepresented” Mr. Trump’s comments in his public recounting of them. And two Senate Republicans, Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia, have raised questions over whether the term was even used, with Mr. Perdue flatly denying it had.

Mr. Graham, who admonished Mr. Trump in the meeting, has called Mr. Durbin’s account basically accurate. He took an unmistakable swipe on Monday at Mr. Perdue and Mr. Cotton.

“Since the meeting I don’t remember things differently,” Mr. Graham said. “I know what I heard, and I know what I said to the president.”

Ten Democratic senators are on the ballot this November in states that are heavily white, have little sympathy for undocumented immigrants and that Mr. Trump won. Many of these lawmakers have no desire to force a government shutdown over an immigration issue. Some of the party’s most at-risk seats are in Missouri, Indiana, West Virginia and North Dakota.

If they side with Senate Republicans, Congress could pass yet another short-term spending bill by Friday that would end the shutdown threat for now as negotiations continue.

But some Democrats considering presidential runs, such as Senators Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, are pressing Democrats to oppose any government-funding bill — no matter how short-term — that does not also protect the approximately 800,000 young immigrants brought to the United States as children, known as Dreamers. Mr. Trump rescinded the program in September and gave Congress six months to enshrine its protections into law.

Mr. Cotton, an immigration hard-liner, suggested that these Democrats will pay a price if their brinkmanship goes too far and they are seen as shutting down the government if they cannot offer amnesty for illegal immigrants.

What most alarms congressional negotiators is that political imperatives appear to have overtaken the immigration policy deliberations in the still-unfolding debate over Mr. Trump’s vulgar description in last Thursday’s meeting of some nations.

Two of the Republicans involved in the discussions complained on Monday that the days-long controversy over Mr. Trump’s comment had imperiled hopes for an agreement.

Mr. Graham said he spoke with the president on the telephone on Saturday and urged him to show the sort of leadership and restraint that many Republicans were pleasantly surprised to see during an earlier, televised immigration discussion in the White House last Tuesday.

“I told him that the President Trump that showed up Tuesday is the one that can lead the country on multiple levels,” Mr. Graham said. “I think the president realizes that it takes a bipartisan solution. But you’re not going to get a deal by tweeting, you’re going to get one by talking.”

Representative Mario Diaz-Balart, Republican of Florida, suggested that the leaks about Mr. Trump’s comments had been as detrimental as the words themselves to the cause of reaching an accord on immigration.

“You have to be able to sit down and have real tough, serious conversations,” said Mr. Diaz-Balart. “And those conversations have to be kept within the folks who are negotiating.”

Mr. Trump seemed to underscore Mr. Diaz-Balart’s remark when he took to Twitter on Monday to mock Mr. Durbin as “Dicky Durbin.”

... >presiduncial tweet<

Both Mr. Graham and Mr. Diaz-Balart were present when Mr. Trump made the disparaging remarks about African nations, which the president now denies. But the two lawmakers were reluctant to discuss the matter, not wanting to further complicate hopes for reaching an agreement.

White House officials said they remain hopeful that an immigration deal can be reached with Democrats despite what Marc Short, the president’s legislative director, called “all the noise.”

“We feel like there’s still a deal to be made there,” Mr. Short said on Monday. “Things we are asking for are common sense.”

Mr. Short said that the proposal offered by Mr. Graham and Mr. Durbin, which was summarily rejected by Mr. Trump during the contentious Oval Office meeting last week, remains the most likely basis for compromise as lawmakers and the White House attempt to find common ground.

“It is on the table as a starting point for the congressional conversations,” Mr. Short said. He said those negotiations will begin again in earnest on Tuesday, hosted by Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the House majority leader, who dined with the president at the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach on Sunday night.

The negotiators include Mr. Durbin, who told local reporters in Illinois on Monday that he stood by his account of Thursday’s meeting with the president.

“I know what happened. I stand behind every word I said,” he said, adding that he is focused on the immigration legislation “full time.”

A White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity suggested on Monday that Mr. Trump had said “shithouse countries,” not “shithole countries.” Mr. Durbin expressed disbelief that anyone would see a substantive difference between the terms.

“I stick with my original interpretation. I am stunned that this is their defense,” he said.

Two Republican officials independently said on Monday that Mr. Trump had said the original phrase.

Mr. Short said the current proposal devised by Mr. Graham and Mr. Durbin did not do enough to satisfy the president’s demands for enhanced border security. And, he said, it failed to broadly end what Republicans call “chain migration,” a process by which American citizens can eventually bring their extended families into the United States over a period of many years.

Mr. Short argued that the current proposal would actually increase the ability of DACA recipients to bring some family members into the country since, under their current legal status, they are barred from sponsoring entry for anyone else.

“Their proposal only expands chain migration for that group,” he said.

Under pressure from immigrant rights activists, Democrats are likely to resist broader efforts to limit immigrants from sponsoring their family members, an idea that Democrats view favorably as “family reunification” — a part of American immigration law for decades.

Mr. Short also urged Democrats to put off efforts to address immigrants from Haiti, Honduras, El Salvador and other countries who have been in the United States under a program called Temporary Protected Status. The Graham-Durbin plan called for issuing new visas for those immigrants after the Trump administration said they would end T.P.S. status for people from those countries.

“I don’t think we envision it as part of this deal,” Mr. Short said of the T.P.S. program. “That expands it into comprehensive immigration reform.”

For Democratic lawmakers, the pressure from their left flank to demand relief for the Dreamers is only rising.

“We are going to be telling Democrats the following: If you vote for a spending bill that does not include relief for Dreamers, you are voting for funds that will be used to deport Dreamers,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, an immigrants rights group.

But the wisdom of eventually forcing a shutdown to shield the migrants is dividing the party.

Some Democratic strategists, such as former Representative Steve Israel of New York, said Democrats should seize their leverage now that Republicans already have enough political headaches, namely the president’s historic unpopularity.

“They absolutely have the upper hand as a matter of policy and as also as a matter of politics,” said Mr. Israel. “Republicans cannot afford to shut down the government in one of the roughest midterm environments they’ve ever had. Democrats have the upper hand and they should play the upper hand.”

Yet to other Democrats, forcing a government shutdown in the same fashion that congressional Republicans did in President Barack Obama’s second term would be to take a considerable political risk, the legislative equivalent of the nuclear option.

“It looks like a big Washington mess to people,” said David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s former top strategist. “Dealing with Trump is obviously a very, very difficult issue not just for Democrats but for Republicans because he is so mercurial and unreliable. The question is: Have you reached that point now where you want to employ what is the most explosive tool in your toolbox?”

Or as Ms. McCaskill put it: “I am not interested in drawing a line in sand as negotiations continue because I think that’s how negotiations get blown up.”

 

[fraurosena]

Well this is an interesting development...

Senate DACA deal picks up GOP supporters

Quote

A bipartisan immigration agreement is picking up the support of several additional GOP senators despite opposition from President Trump and the White House. 
 
Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) office announced that GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Mike Rounds (S.D.) are signing onto the forthcoming legislation. 
 
That brings the total number of Republican lawmakers officially backing the bill up to seven, including Graham and GOP Sens. Jeff Flake (Ariz.) and Cory Gardner (Colo.)—who were part of the original "Gang of Six." 

“I’m very pleased that our bipartisan proposal continues to gain support among my Republican colleagues. Our hope is to bring forward a proposal that leads to a solution the president can embrace," Graham said in a statement. 
 
But the legislation faces an uphill climb in the Senate where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has conditioned an immigration deal getting a floor vote on Trump supporting it. 
 
“I'm looking for something that President Trump supports, and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” McConnell told reporters Wednesday. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.”
 
Trump has lambasted the Senate group's bill, which is expected to be formally announced this week. 
 
He told Reuters on Wednesday that the proposal is “horrible” on border security and “very, very weak” on reforms to the legal immigration system.
 
In addition to Trump's support, any Senate bill will likely need 60 votes to end a filibuster. 
 
If Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.), Robert Menendez (N.J.) and Michael Bennet (Colo.)—the other members of the "Gang of Six"—can win over every member of the 49-member caucus that means they will need the support from a total of 11 GOP senators. 

The uptick in support was immediately met by backlash from a coalition of GOP senators who have offered their own proposals.  

"As we have said from the beginning, any successful deal also needs buy-in from the White House. Unfortunately, the ‘Gang of Six’ proposal falls short since it fails to include even basic border security reforms," GOP Sens. James Lankford (Okla.) and Thom Tillis (N.C.) said in a joint statement. 
 
The two GOP senators added that "we still believe that we’re closer to a deal than we’ve ever been, and we are ready to work with anyone, Republican or Democrat, to get this done." 

The two senators have offered their own bill that included a path to citizenship, but was meant to be paired with a border security plan. 

GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), David Perdue (Ga.) and Tom Cotton(Ark.) said the "Gang of Six" bill "would do nothing to solve the underlying problem in our current immigration system." 

"It’s inconceivable that anyone would shut down the government over this plan. It’s time to come back to the negotiating table and focus on getting a serious solution to the DACA situation that protects all Americans and our national security," they said. 

Cotton and Perdue were part of a White House immigration meeting last week when Trump reportedly referred to several developing countries as "shitholes," though the president and the two GOP senators have accused Durbin of misrepresenting the meeting. 

And two of the four GOP senators who are signing on are also making it clear that they are open to other immigration proposals. Congressional leadership continues to hold separate negotiations. 

Alexander added on Wednesday that Graham's proposal is a "starting point for reaching consensus and will support other responsible proposals.”

Rounds echoed that, calling the Graham-Durbin proposal an "important first step." 
 
"While this bill is not perfect, I will continue to work on a product that includes appropriate e-verify provisions, a stronger border security system and lays the framework for more reform, including work visas. These are the provisions required for me to support the bill in final form so we can get to the next phase," he said. 
 
The Trump administration announced last year that it would end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, kicking the fight to Congress. 

Democrats are demanding that a short-term funding bill that needs to be passed this week to prevent a shutdown include an immigration fix. 

Durbin on Wednesday appeared optimistic that every Democrat will ultimately support his legislation, despite pushback from progressives who feel like the deal goes too far. 

Durbin implied during a floor speech on Wednesday evening that he has been able to win over the 49-member Democratic caucus—which includes a coalition of vulnerable red state members as well as progressives and 2020 White House hopefuls. 

"We have 56 senators ready to move forward with this issue," he said from the Senate floor. 

The bill would pair a fix for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that includes a pathway to citizenship, which the Trump administration announced it was ending last year, with a border security package, an elimination of the Diversity Visa Lottery and changes to family-based immigration. 
 
According to a fact sheet on the forthcoming legislation, it would include more than $2.7 billion on border security and reallocate half of the diverse lottery visages to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients. It would give half to individuals from underrepresented "priority countries." 

But Republicans argue that they have until March 5 to come up with a fix, and potentially longer after a court ordered the Trump administration to keep the program in place while litigation plays out. 

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the No. 2 Senate Republican, reiterated on Wednesday that the Graham-Durbin bill will not be the "template" for a final deal. 
 
"The longer we keep kicking that dead horse the longer we're ... going to delay getting to a real solution," he told reporters. 
 
Cornyn, Durbin and Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) met with White House chief of staff John Kelly on Wednesday. The four lawmakers are expected to meet again on Thursday.

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[fraurosena]

Awww... Tom Cotton's authoritarian fee-fees got hurt.

GOP Sen. Tom Cotton threatens to call cops on liberal constituents who keep writing him letters: report

Quote

Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-AR) office has started sending out warning letters to liberal activists who have bombarded the senator with phone calls and letters.

The Arkansas Times reports members of activist group Ozark Indivisible have been receiving cease-and-desist letters ordering them to stop trying to contact Cotton.

“This letter is immediate notification that all communication must cease and desist immediately with all offices of US Senator Tom Cotton,” the letter states. “All other contact will be deemed harassment and will be reported to the United States Capitol Police.”

One person who received the cease-and-desist letter tells the Arkansas Times that Cotton’s actions show that the senator does not have respect for any constituents who have differing views.

“I believe if Tom Cotton’s office were to respond as to why they sent this letter, I think they just honestly don’t want to listen to any citizen’s opposing view or hear the numerous grave concerns U.S. citizens have about the serious & ongoing attack on our Democracy,” the constituent writes.

Cotton’s office responded to say that it only sends out such letters in extreme circumstances.

“If an employee of Senator Cotton receives repeated communications that are harassing and vulgar, or any communication that contains a threat, our policy is to notify the U.S. Capitol Police’s Threat Assessment Section,” a spokesperson told THV 11.

Cotton staffer John Noonan writes on Twitter that one person who received the letter only did so because they called an intern a “c*nt” over the phone.

 

[AnywhereButHere]

@AmazonGrace Well, I guess if Caligula is the emperor with invisible clothes, then it makes sense that Hatch is the guy with invisible glasses. Anyone who wears glasses with any regularity knows the feeling if pushing them up your nose when you're not actually wearing them. I know I've done it and felt like an idiot when I realize that - ooops - it was contacts day! I've never quite gone as all in on it as Hatch, though. He was really trying not to break those imaginary suckers! I'll bet the invisibility feature is expensive.

Watch the guy behind him too. He looks so invested in whether the invisible glasses make it on to the table!

[Howl]

crap, crap, crap.  Possible government shut down.  Do these people ever learn?  I mean, EVER LEARN?  Anyone?  Please? 

[LeftCoastLurker]

1 hour ago, Howl said:

crap, crap, crap.  Possible government shut down.  Do these people ever learn?  I mean, EVER LEARN?  Anyone?  Please? 

Nope

[Howl]

If there is a gov'ment shutdown today, we're going to witness how it is possible for Repubs to step on their own dicks while executing a flawless circular firing squad. 

Everyone together, people: 3, 2, 1 and STEP! and TURN! now FIRE!

[GrumpyGran]

15 hours ago, LeftCoastLurker said:

Nope

And why the hell should they care. They'll still get paid.

[fraurosena]

So I was scratching my head on why the repugliklans are having such a hard time passing a budget when they control the House, the Senate and Government. This concise little article explained it for me. 

Republicans Control Everything, But Still Can’t Pass a Budget

Quote

Chris Hayes has a question:

Probably never. But it’s worth pointing out why it’s happening now. It’s because appropriations are normally handled via reconciliation, which allows the majority party to pass them with only 51 votes. This year, however, Republicans decided to use the 2017 reconciliation bill for repealing Obamacare and the 2018 reconciliation bill for passing their tax bill. So there’s nothing left, and that means they need 60 votes in the Senate.

This is the only reason they have to negotiate with Democrats in the first place. Their top priorities were taking away health insurance from poor people and giving a big tax cut to corporations and the rich. So now they’re stuck, and they’ve got a president who changes his mind so frequently that nobody can figure out what kind of deal he’d support anyway.

Lots of people will suffer if the government shuts down because Trump is insisting on a huge increase in the military budget and a wholesale change to immigration laws. But it will mostly be the poor who suffer, and the rich already have their tax cut. So I guess it’s all good.

 

[GrumpyGran]

8 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

So I was scratching my head on why the repugliklans are having such a hard time passing a budget when they control the House, the Senate and Government. This concise little article explained it for me. 

Republicans Control Everything, But Still Can’t Pass a Budget

 

I'll confess, I'm having a hard time figuring out what's going on here, but I think one of the problems is that Repubs have no clue what Dump will or won't sign. He has vacillated in the last few days, I believe because he doesn't truly understand DACA, he's desperate to get his wall and the stress of the physical is having a lingering effect. Add to that the fact that he wants his big party so bad and Kelly has told him flat out that he can't do it if the budget isn't done. Kelly has the plan but he can't keep Dump on track.

[fraurosena]

21 minutes ago, GrumpyGran said:

I'll confess, I'm having a hard time figuring out what's going on here, but I think one of the problems is that Repubs have no clue what Dump will or won't sign. He has vacillated in the last few days, I believe because he doesn't truly understand DACA, he's desperate to get his wall and the stress of the physical is having a lingering effect. Add to that the fact that he wants his big party so bad and Kelly has told him flat out that he can't do it if the budget isn't done. Kelly has the plan but he can't keep Dump on track.

As far as I can gather, the short, sharp and shocking answer is: by attempting to repeal the ACA and pushing through their tax bill, the Senate handed all the negotiating power over to the Democrats. 

Essentially, they used up the 2017 and 2018 reconciliation options (first for ACA repeal, second for their bigly tax cut for the rich) and now they can't pass a bill without 60 votes in the Senate. As they only have 51 seats, they need Democrats to vote for the budget. I gather the Dems will only do that if and when a clean DACA deal is agreed upon. But the presidunce is using his stable geniusness to confuse and confuddle everyone, and nobody knows what he wants. 

If McTurtle was smart, he'd just ignore the presidunce, do a deal, pass a budget bill, give the presidunce a lovely new piece of paper to scribble his name under, and be done with it. It's not like the presidunce will know what the hell he's signed anyway.

[formergothardite]

11 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

It's not like the presidunce will know what the hell he's signed anyway.

I'm fairly sure he would sign anything they handed him as long as it provided a photo opportunity. 

I really don't know why they don't ignore Trump and work something out. 

[fraurosena]

Word.