- Both Parties Brace for Obama Immigration Decision
- Iowa Lawmaker Guilty of Receiving Illegal Payments
- The ISIS Economy
- Walker Holds Edge in Wisconsin
- Deadlocked in Iowa
May 14, 2013
It took four days in Congress for predictably unanimous rhetorical outrage at the IRS to devolve into a predictably partisan disagreement over the proper legislative response.
There may be 100 senators willing to vote to excoriate the agency for subjecting conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status to an intensified level of investigation. But there’s no sign that a necessary 60 of them will get behind meaningful legislation to make sure that positioning anywhere along the ideological spectrum is never the interest of the tax auditors again.
Many things were widely predicted for Barack Obama when he first ran for the White House five years ago, and many recent presidents were seen as likely role models. One side of the great partisan divide forecast historic achievements in the mold of FDR, while the other side foresaw overreaching failure in the mold of Jimmy Carter.
But almost no one — save a couple of commentators on the ideological fringe — expected Obama would get to a second term and find his legislative agenda suddenly frozen in the face of a bipartisan wave of comparisons to Richard Nixon.
“The Day the Obama Administration Went All Nixon On Us,” is the headline on today’s post from Will Bunch on the left-leaning Huffington Post, who focused his ire on revelations of Associated Press phone record seizures by the Justice Department.
“This is an agency with an enemies list,” target=”_blank”>Lou Dobbs said of the IRS on the right’s favorite cable news network, Fox, after Obama’s Monday news conference. “This is a president whose inner Nixon is being revealed.”
“Has Obama Taken a Page Out of Nixon’s Playbook?” asks the headline atop a column today by editor Jacqueline Leo in the budget hawkish but otherwise down-the-middle Fiscal Times. “There may not be direct parallels to the Obama administration, but the events of the last few months have become too big to ignore. There’s the Benghazi cover up; a slew of executive orders that bypass Congress; the IRS targeting of GOP conservative organizations; and now, the intrusion, violation and intimidation of a major news organization.”
That commentators from the left, right and center have all seen the parallels to the 37th president, who was forced to resign when his views of the “imperial presidency” jumped the shark during Watergate, should be “chilling” to the president, to use the word being ascribed to both the IRS special scrutiny for conservative groups and the DOJ’s unprecedented prying into a newsroom’s operation as party of a leak inquiry.
Forty years on, the Nixon taint remains probably the most difficult for an American politician to scrub away. And the fact that it’s being applied so widely now could not be worse for the president’s timing, because it means his already teetering domestic legislative agenda may well be supplanted at the Capitol for months to come by nothing but oversight hearings.
May 13, 2013
Campaign 2012 was a vintage year for House members seeking promotion to the Senate: A dozen tried, and half of them made it.
There were an imponderable number of other variables, of course, but that 50 percent success rate would suggest that the oldest up-or-out move in the American political playbook is working better than ever. In the five previous elections, 16 of the 45 House members who staked their careers on a run for Senate succeeded in moving to the north side of the Capitol — still, a winning bet 36 percent of the time.
So why are so many current House incumbents saying, “No, thanks,” to opportunities to run for the “upper chamber”? Full story
President Barack Obama moved tentatively today to join the bubbling outrage at the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups, although he said he didn’t have sufficient reason yet to either condemn outright or apologize directly for the tax agency’s behavior.
“If it turns out that IRS employees acted in anything less than a neutral and non-partisan way, then that is outrageous,” Obama said in a mid-morning news conference with visiting British Prime Minister David Cameron.
But he also said he would wait to say more about the revelations — that groups with conservative-sounding names were singled out for heightened IRS scrutiny before being granted tax-exempt status during the 2012 campaign — until Treasury’s inspector general for taxes concludes whether the behavior was politically motivated or otherwise broke regulatory rules.
That yearlong investigation is done and the recommendations are expected to be made public this week, maybe as soon as today.
Since the story broke May 10, congressional anger has come mainly from Republicans, who are falling all over themselves promising all manner of investigations, hearings and legislation. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., for example, called today for the ouster of the IRS commissioner. Full story
May 10, 2013
After a two-week break — heralded by the quick and bipartisan capitulation to exempt the flying public but no one else from the sequester’s scythe — the budget wars are getting started again.
But signs point to the next few skirmishes fizzling fast.
Although it appeared likely when the year began, with a last-minute deal that looked like only a balky skid along the edge of the fiscal cliff, Congress is not facing a summer that’s going to look like 2011 all over again.
That’s mainly a consequence of the government’s short-term fiscal position, which on paper looks pretty good. The Treasury’s balance sheet for April was $113 billion in the black, the biggest monthly surplus in five years. Steady economic growth and the higher tax rates put in effect in January have quickened the flow of revenue. And the flow of spending has slowed now that those deep spending cuts, once dismissed as too indiscriminate to carry out, have nonetheless been put in place (except, of course, for those air traffic controllers).
The result is a federal deficit for the first seven months of this budget year totaling $488 billion, or just two-thirds of what it was during the same period the year before. At that pace, there will be less red ink on the books in September, at the end of fiscal 2013, than in any year since the finale of the George W. Bush administration.
With news like that, it’s going to be essentially impossible for conservative Republicans to build a head of steam behind their “shut it down” crusade. Full story
The growing opposition to Labor secretary nominee Thomas E. Perez and EPA director pick Gina McCarthy is very similar to what’s going on with the intensifying congressional skepticism about the Obama administration’s performance in the Benghazi consulate attack.
Republicans have raised detailed and substantive concerns about how Perez has performed as Justice Department civil rights chief and what McCarthy has been doing as the government’s principal clean air regulator. Along the same lines, they have uncovered a welter of reasons to wonder whether the State Department was on its toes before the Sept. 11 attack in which the American ambassador to Libya and three others died — and whether it’s been on anything close to its best behavior in explaining itself since.
Without doubting for one moment the sincerity of the GOP motives or the intensity of their legitimate oversight concerns in any of those matters, it’s also totally fair to observe the obvious political and policy benefits for them on all three fronts. It’s possible to have genuine concerns about poor government performance and be politically opportunistic at the same time. Full story
May 9, 2013
This week’s get-out-of-town day in the Senate was one of the more schizophrenic in recent memory, leaving aides and lobbyists little clue about what sort of mood will reign after the weekend.
On the one hand, the most consequential legislative debate this year got off to an efficiently substantive, occasionally eloquent and solidly bipartisan start. Members of the immigration overhaul “gang of eight” moved to embrace some limited ideas for boosting border security, hoping to attract more Republican votes. Then they united to stop other GOP amendments they all viewed as poison pills.
With C-SPAN broadcasting much of the proceedings in the cavernous Hart Central Hearing Room, the first session in what could be a two-week Senate Judiciary Committee markup was widely hailed as reflecting the legislative process at its civics-textbook best.
Not so on the fourth floor of the Dirksen Building, where another TV feed provided live — albeit static — pictures of eight empty chairs reserved for the Republicans on the Environment and Public Works Committee. The senators banded together to boycott the day’s session, which, under an arguable wrinkle in the rules, stopped the panel from advancing Gina McCarthy’s nomination to run the EPA.
The choreographed petulance was one of three passive parliamentary moves this week by the Republican high command, which seems suddenly willing to test fate by resorting to just the sort of partisan high jinks the electorate says it abhors. The intensified use of the throw-the-rule-book-at-’em approach came off as all the more curious in light of the immigration debate’s bipartisan sense of purpose and decorum. Full story
Republican resistance to President Barack Obama’s second-term plans intensified another couple of notches today.
Speaker John A. Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell announced they would simply ignore a provision in the health care law calling on each leader to pick someone for a new panel with the power to dictate Medicare spending reductions without fear of congressional reversal.
The two said in a letter to Obama that such a bureaucratic maneuver was the best way they knew to protest the new Independent Payment Advisory Board, in light of their inability to kill it by repealing Obamacare completely.
At the same time, all eight Republicans boycotted this morning’s meeting of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which under a wrinkle in the rules prevented the panel from advancing Gina McCarthy’s nomination to run the EPA.
The protest came less than 18 hours after the Republicans on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions panel leveraged another obscure procedural obstacle to stop Thomas E. Perez’s nomination for Labor secretary from getting to the Senate floor.
The question for the GOP is whether those oppositional tactics, which are all about passive parliamentary maneuvering rather than overt ideological argument, will provide any traction for their policy objectives or if they will only succeed at further annoying an electorate wary of partisan hijinks. Full story
May 8, 2013
No special-election winner in modern congressional history has had to put off a celebratory swearing-in because of a pending court date.
It’s just one more reminder of why no special-election winner in modern congressional history will arrive in Washington with less good will from his new colleagues than Mark Sanford. Which is why it’s not surprising that he won’t actually come back to Congress before the middle of next week.
At 9 points, Sanford’s margin of victory Tuesday was decisive enough that the certificate-of-election formalities could have been overlooked and he could have flown to Washington to become the new Republican House member for South Carolina’s coastal Lowcountry. Instead, he spent much of Wednesday working to make sure part of his past would not put an immediate crimp on his future.
Ted Cruz remains combustibly in the news again this week — a high-profile speech to Republican faithful in early-primary South Carolina followed up with another tart public spat in the Senate, with Majority Harry Reid likening him to a schoolyard bully.
Four months into his time as the junior Republican senator from Texas, Cruz appears to operating on the principle that no amount of publicity is too much — especially for someone who’s suddenly tilting toward a run for president. His affect will get plenty more media attention starting Thursday, when the Judiciary Committee on which he sits opens debate on the immigration overhaul, probably lasting until Memorial Day. Cruz is going to work to slow or derail the bill at every turn.
All the while, the 42-year-old has been working diligently to cultivate his conservative base on social media, with what looks to be decent success. If he runs for the GOP nomination in 2016, he’ll potentially be doing so with the help of more Twitter followers than anyone else in the field.
Some enlightening detail about this has been assembled in recent days by the Houston Chronicle, the senator’s hometown paper. Its Texas on the Potomac blog made Cruz a test case of an effort to gauge the social media usage of all 38 members of the state’s congressional delegation.
Cruz is averaging 353 new followers every day and he sends out an average of 3.5 tweets daily — Wednesdays being his most prolific days. The favored conservative hashtags #defundobamacare or #2ndamendment are in more than half the posts @SenTedCruz has sent so far. He’s only tweeted 405 times from his Senate account, but those missives have collectively been retweeted almost 105,000 times. (The most recent, about the Benghazi embassy contretemps, went out at breakfast time and had been retweeted almost 4,000 times before noon.)
And get this: 86 percent of Twitter sentiment about the senator has been positive, by the Chronicle’s calculation.
May 7, 2013
In the fortnight after the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in two same-sex-marriage cases, half a dozen senators announced they had changed their minds to support the right of gays and lesbians to wed.
The wave of turnabouts a month ago was important because it reinforced the notion that elected politicians were hurrying to get right with a seismic shift in public opinion — no matter what the justices decide to do.
But on a more tangible level, the fact that 54 senators now back marriage equality doesn’t have much real meaning. That’s simply because legislation to universalize gay marriage is nowhere near the realm of possibility.
That said, the size of that bloc could prove decisive for the fate of two measures that may show life this year.
If the justices rule, as the arguments signaled they might, and strike down a central section of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act — the part that, in effect, prevents federal agencies from recognizing same-sex marriages in states where they’re legal — it’s a sure bet that culturally conservative Republicans will begin pushing replacement legislation. But those 54 votes would be more than sufficient to prevent such a bill from ever getting through the Senate filibuster starting gate.
More important than that defensive block for many in the gay rights community is the potential help the 54 could give legislation banning most bias against homosexuals on the job. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act would extend federal employment discrimination protections under the 1964 Civil Rights Act to sexual orientation. Full story
It makes intuitive sense that the states with the most people, which means the largest congressional delegations, tend to have the most influence over national lawmaking and the federal purse strings.
The formula for the Roll Call Clout Index was designed to reflect that notion, with its emphasis on the number of lawmakers each state has at the Capitol, their seniority and assignments to leadership positions and the most powerful committees.
It would be tough for California, by far the most populous state since the first clout study back in 1990, to finish in a spot other than No. 1 — and it never has. It’s big enough that seven of its House members sit on the Appropriations Committee and their share of the panel’s seats (14 percent) is only slightly ahead of the their share of the national population they represent (12 percent).
Size and stability also mean that in the index for the 113th Congress, out this week, the delegations from Texas, New York, Florida and Michigan also continued to hold spots — that they’ve never yielded — in the top 10, and Pennsylvania re-entered that tier after a time away.
But the delegations from four of the 10 most populous states underperformed in the new study — most significantly, the team from Illinois, which at 12.9 million residents is the fifth biggest state, but which dropped seven notches since its 2011 and 2009 rankings. Illinois is now No. 17 in overall clout. Full story
May 6, 2013
Amassing seniority and keeping plenty of members in the party in power are two of the most important things a state can do to bulk up its influence in Congress.
Both have been difficult feats for plenty of states recently, given the shift of House control in 2010, the reapportionment and redistricting that soon followed and the much-higher-than-normal departure of 28 senators in the past two elections.
Which is why it’s not a real surprise that this year’s Roll Call Clout Index shows a significant scrambling of the pecking order since Barack Obama’s presidency began in 2009. Some states are seeing surges in their potential for influence, while others are looking at throw weights in precipitous decline.
As mentioned in this space recently, the sudden ascent of Louisiana — which now has the fourth-most-potent delegation after finishing in the low 30s in the previous two studies — was central to the story of the year, which is that the Gulf Coast region has more collective power than any other region. Meanwhile, Massachusetts, which for two decades had routinely finished in the top 10, slipped down to 20th just as the Boston Marathon bombings were putting the state in the national spotlight.
But those delegations were hardly alone in seeing reversals of fortune in the past four years. In part because of generational turnovers in their delegations, four other states besides Massachusetts have seen their spots in the rankings drop by double digits between 2009 and this spring, while new positions of power and surges in federal spending have caused three other states besides Louisiana to jump more than 10 positions. Full story
The 13th biennial Roll Call Clout Index will be scrutinized by congressional staff from all 50 states, all of them eager to see how their bosses’ delegations stack up against the rest. But because a vast majority of Hill aides live in the Washington metro area, you can bet they’ll also be looking at how much potential the states of Maryland and Virginia have in the new Congress.
As you can see in this interactive graphic detailing the results of our study, both states that surround the capital held on to spots in the top 10 — impressive by the objective measure that Virginia is 12th in population and Maryland is 19th. (Obvious spoiler alert: The District of Columbia won’t be found in our study. Not having anything close to full-fledged representation in either the House or Senate essentially negates whatever persuasive powers and committee seniority Democratic Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton brings to the table.)
Both Maryland and Virginia have seen their potential delegation influence slip a bit since the last Clout Index. Virginia, which peaked at No. 5 two years ago, has dropped back one notch. Maryland, which wasn’t in the top ranks a decade ago, came in 9th this time after finishing two spots higher in 2011, but it remains the second-smallest state (after Louisiana) in the top tier. Full story
May 3, 2013
Gauging congressional clout is arguably an enterprise that falls somewhere between happy hour argument and inexact science. But it’s happening almost constantly on Capitol Hill. Roll Call has tried to help the conversation along for many years now by taking objective stock of every delegation’s potential sway in each of the past dozen Congresses.
The latest iteration of the Roll Call Clout Index is now complete, and the story of how power has shifted in the 113th Congress is clear: The states that anchor the Gulf Coast have much more stroke than ever before. Play this nifty interactive graphic to see why. Full story