House Republicans amend the NDAA addressing Tommy Tuberville’s concerns
On Thursday, Congressional Republicans added several partisan amendments to the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, including one overturning the DoD policy on abortions. The amended NDAA passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday. President Joe Biden said it is “irresponsible” for U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville to block the confirmation of military officers in protest of a Defense Department policy that pays for travel for service members and their dependents to go out of state to get an abortion in state’s that have banned or restricted elective abortions. “He’s jeopardizing U.S. security by what he’s doing,” Biden said of Sen. Tommy Tuberville. “It’s just totally irresponsible, in my view.” Biden had demanded that Republicans address the Tuberville issue. “I expect the Republican Party to stand up — stand up and do something about it,” Biden continued. “The idea that we don’t have a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the idea that we have all these promotions that are in abeyance right now and we don’t know what’s going to happen, the idea they were injecting into fundamental foreign policy decisions what in fact is a domestic social debate on social issues, is bizarre. I don’t ever recall it happening, ever. And it’s just totally irresponsible, in my view.” “I’m confident that the mainstream Republican Party no longer, does not support what he’s doing, but they got to stand up and be counted,” Biden said. “That’s how it ends.” House Republicans responded Thursday by amending the NDAA on the House floor. The House passed an amendment by Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) prohibiting the Secretary of Defense from paying for or reimbursing expenses relating to abortion services 221 – 213. Only two Republicans voted against including Jackson’s abortion amendment. The House also passed several other GOP priorities. The House passed an amendment by Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Montana) that prohibits TRICARE from covering and the Department of Defense from furnishing sex reassignment surgeries and gender hormone treatments for transgender individuals 222 – 211. The House passed an amendment by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-South Carolina) prohibiting the provision of gender transition procedures, including surgery or medication, through the Exceptional Family Member Program 222 to 210. The House passed an amendment to prohibit federal funds from being used to establish a position within the Department of Defense for anything similar to Chief Diversity Officers or Senior Advisors for Diversity and Inclusion 217 – 212. The House passed an amendment by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado) prohibiting the Department of Defense Education Activity schools from purchasing and having pornographic and radical gender ideology books in their libraries. The House passed an amendment by Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) that requires a study and report on health conditions arising in members of the Armed Forces after the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine by a voice vote. Rep. Boebert proposed an amendment prohibiting Defense Department schools from having “pornographic and radical gender ideology books in their libraries.” That passed 222-209. Rep. Norman’s amendment to ban Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion within the Department of Defense was narrowly adopted 214-213 on the second vote. An amendment from Rep. Eli Crane (R-Arizona) prohibiting the Pentagon from requiring training in certain “race-based concepts” was adopted 214-210. Not all amendments passed. A series of five proposals to limit U.S. involvement in Ukraine failed. An amendment from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) to prohibit using federal funds for training on diversity, equity, and inclusion was rejected Thursday in a 210-221 vote. The House rejected an amendment from Reps. Davidson and Chip Roy (R-Texas) that “expresses a sense of Congress that the U.S. should not continue subsidizing NATO member countries who choose not to invest in their own defense by meeting” established financial contribution targets. The vote was 212-218, with two Democrats voting to support the measure and eight Republicans voting against it. An amendment to prohibit the transfer of cluster munitions to Ukraine was rejected 147-276-2. 98 Republicans and 49 Democrats voted in favor, and 121 Republicans and 155 Democrats voted against. The House rejected an amendment prohibiting using federal funds to rename military bases. The Republican changes to the NDAA meant that it lost Democratic support in the final vote. Democrats denounced the amendment as a cruel, harmful amendment to roll back a DoD policy helping service women travel to get the reproductive health care they need, putting the health and lives of over 230,000 women in uniform at risk. Democrats also denounced amendments that strip medically-necessary care for LGBTQ+ service members. Congresswoman Terri Sewell (D-AL07) voted against the NDAA due to the Republican changes on the floor. “For the past 62 years, Republicans and Democrats have come together to craft bipartisan defense authorization bills that would support our troops and strengthen our national security,” said Rep. Sewell. “But this year, rather than continuing that essential tradition, Speaker [Kevin] McCarthy has caved to the most extreme members of his party and allowed the radical right wing to poison the defense bill with culture war provisions that would undermine our military readiness and harm our service members.” “I did not take this vote lightly,” continued Sewell. “I have proudly voted in favor of the annual defense bill every year since coming to Congress. But I cannot and will not support a bill that would rip basic health care away from our service members and make bigotry and discrimination a centerpiece of our defense policy. Republicans need to stop playing politics with our national security.” The NDAA authorizes funding levels for the Department of Defense (DoD) and allows the Armed Forces to pay, train, and equip U.S. service members, support America’s allies worldwide, and carry out essential national security operations. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York), Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Massachusetts), and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-California) released a joint statement after the chamber approved a number of conservative amendments to the NDAA. “Extreme MAGA Republicans have chosen to hijack the historically bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act to continue attacking reproductive freedom and jamming their right-wing ideology down the throats of the American people,” the Democratic trio wrote in a joint statement. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com
Ted Cruz calls for special counsel to investigate Attorney General Merrick Garland
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is calling for a special counsel to investigate Attorney General Merrick Garland over perjury and obstructing justice claims. Cruz did so as U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-California, said the House would begin an impeachment inquiry into Garland after IRS whistleblowers came forward to members of Congress alleging Garland blocked an investigation into Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son, and lied about it under oath. McCarthy tweeted, “We need to get to the facts, and that includes reconciling these clear disparities. U.S. Attorney David Weiss must provide answers to the House Judiciary Committee. If the whistleblowers’ allegations are true, this will be a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry into Merrick Garland’s weaponization of the DOJ.” IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley testified before Congress that the U.S. Attorney in charge of an investigation into Hunter Biden, David Weiss, said he wanted to bring charges but was prevented from doing so by Garland. McCarthy also told Fox News the inquiries would start by July 6. In his podcast, “Verdict with Ted Cruz,” on Monday, Cruz said, “The evidence is mounting and mounting and mounting … it is getting so bad even the corrupt corporate media cannot ignore this anymore.” Cruz played a clip of Garland saying at a news conference, “I certainly understand that some have chosen to attack the integrity of the Justice Department … by claiming that we do not treat like cases alike,” referring to what senators have argued when comparing how President Biden and former President Donald Trump have been treated by the department. “Nothing could be further from the truth. We make our cases based on the facts and the law,” Garland said. Cruz said Garland is “the one who has politicized this process and is burning down the integrity of the Department of Justice to the ground. The people accusing him work for him … they are his own … employees, and they’re … mad.” Cruz said Garland’s response was self-righteous and compared him to a despot. He also said what Garland said was “objectively false: ‘We use the same standards for everyone.’ Well, OK, you’re name is Biden you can have classified documents everywhere … but if you’re Trump, we’re sending in the stormtroopers.” “It’s time the Department of Justice needs to appoint a special counsel to investigate Merrick Garland for obstruction of justice and perjury,” he said. Cruz cited Shapley’s testimony, which indicated that Garland committed perjury and lied under oath to Congress. Garland then removed him from the case, which Cruz said is illegal and needs to be investigated. Cruz called for an investigation after he previously called out the deputy director of the FBI over bribery allegations related to both the president and his son, and is still demanding answers. Cruz also welcomed the House impeachment inquiry, saying, “There is serious evidence that Merrick Garland lied to me, under oath, when I questioned him about his role in obstructing the Hunter Biden probe.” When asked by Newsmax’s James Rosen about the accusations, White House spokesman John Kirby walked out of the room and wouldn’t answer questions. At another press briefing, when similar questions were asked, another White House spokesperson said she didn’t know what the reporters were referring to and didn’t have a comment. When asked if the White House believed Garland committed perjury, she smirked and made several facial expressions, shaking her head, and said, “I don’t have any comment on this.” Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Rivalry between Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis deepens with dueling New Hampshire campaign events
The rivalry between Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former President Donald Trump deepened Tuesday as the two leading Republican White House candidates mocked each other during dueling events in the critical early voting state of New Hampshire. Addressing a town hall in Hollis, DeSantis vowed to “actually” build the U.S.-Mexico border wall that Trump tried but failed to complete as president. He also pledged to tear down Washington’s traditional power centers in ways that Trump fell short. Speaking later at a Republican women’s luncheon in Concord, Trump countered that DeSantis was being forced to settle for second place in the primary and accused the governor of supporting cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other entitlement programs as a way to tame federal spending. Beyond the rhetoric, the conflicting events demonstrated each candidate’s evolving strategy. DeSantis took extensive audience questions — a trademark in New Hampshire politics that he eschewed during his previous visit to the state, drawing criticisms that he was stilted and overly scripted. Trump, meanwhile, offered a free-wheeling speech for more than an hour. He didn’t take questions in Concord, and reporters covering the event were confined to a pen, chaperoned to the bathroom, and told they could not speak to attendees in the conference center ballroom or even in the hallways. But the former president answered questions at a subsequent stop in Manchester, where he opened his New Hampshire campaign office. DeSantis, asked about people who had twice voted for Trump because of his promises to “drain the swamp” in Washington, used his answer to draw some of his sharpest contrasts yet with the former president. “He didn’t drain it. It’s worse today than it’s ever been,” DeSantis said. He added that such promises don’t go far enough because a subsequent president “can just refill it.” “I want to break the swamp,” DeSantis said, pledging to take power out of Washington by instructing Cabinet agencies to halve the number of employees there. DeSantis has tried to gain ground on Trump by questioning the former president’s continued hold on the national Republican party. At his town hall, the governor slammed the GOP’s “culture of losing” under Trump and mentioned the “massive red wave” that many in the GOP predicted but that never materialized nationally in last year’s midterm elections. “We had a red wave in Florida,” DeSantis said, noting he easily won reelection last fall. “But that’s because we delivered results in Florida.” Many leading Republicans remain fiercely loyal to Trump, but there is some evidence that the attacks against the former president are resonating. Speaking about Trump on Tuesday, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, said, “Can he win that election? Yeah, he can win that election.” “The question is, is he the strongest to win the election?” McCarthy continued on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “I don’t know that answer.” He clarified later in the day to the conservative news outlet Breitbart that Trump “is stronger today than he was in 2016.” In his own speech, Trump noted that polls show him with large primary leads. He seized on DeSantis saying that, while Social Security and other programs need to be guaranteed for older adults, there may be work “in a bipartisan way to figure out how do you strengthen this” when it comes to younger people. “You can bet he’ll be doing it later,” Trump said of cuts to the programs. “And he’ll be doing it to you.” Trump also vowed to “drain the swamp once and for all” but used the slogan more to criticize President Joe Biden than the Florida governor. “You can’t drain the swamp if you’re part of the swamp, and Joe Biden and other opponents, many of them, are all owned, controlled, bought and paid for, 100%,” Trump said. The former president also largely echoed DeSantis’ sentiments in promising that “this election will be the end of the world for the corrupt political class in our nation’s capital.” DeSantis was also asked about the pro-Trump mob that overran the U.S. Capitol in January 2021, and responded, “If it’s about relitigating things that happened two or three years ago, we’re going to lose.” “I had nothing to do with what happened that day. Obviously, I didn’t enjoy seeing it,” DeSantis said. “But we’ve got to go forward on this stuff. We cannot be looking backwards.” That, too, clashed with Trump, who repeated baseless claims Tuesday that he was denied a second term by election fraud. Numerous federal and local officials, a long list of courts, top former campaign staffers, and even Trump’s own attorney general have all said there is no evidence of the fraud he alleges. The candidates’ simultaneous visits highlighted the role that New Hampshire, the first-in-the-nation GOP primary state, will play in deciding the next Republican presidential nominee. Much of the focus of the early primary has been on Iowa and South Carolina, where evangelical Christians are dominant. Spending time in New Hampshire, by contrast, gives the candidates were testing their messages in front of a more libertarian-leaning electorate. Trump’s first-place finish in New Hampshire’s 2016 Republican primary, after losing Iowa to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, helped propel him to party dominance. But his Democratic rivals won the state in the 2016 and 2020 general elections. Before his speech Tuesday, Trump announced that his New Hampshire team features 150-plus dedicated activists and organizers throughout the state’s 10 counties. Sabrina Antle, from the town of Henniker, said she couldn’t afford to attend the Concord lunch. She and her 9-year-old daughter tried to see the former president later in Manchester, but that event reached capacity before they got in. “I’m a Trumper, but I wouldn’t be upset with Ron DeSantis because I think he’d do a stand-up job,” Antle said. “I just don’t know if he has the attitude Trump has, just the assertiveness.” DeSantis’ campaign angered some members of the New Hampshire Federation of Republican Women by scheduling his town hall around the same time Trump was addressing the group’s luncheon. It called DeSantis’ event “an attempt to steal focus from” its
House censures Rep. Adam Schiff over Trump-Russia investigations
The House voted Wednesday to censure California Rep. Adam Schiff for comments he made several years ago about investigations into Donald Trump’s ties to Russia, rebuking the Democrat and frequent critic of the former president along party lines. Schiff, who will stand in front of the House while the resolution is read, becomes the 25th House lawmaker to be censured. He was defiant ahead of the vote, saying he will wear the formal disapproval as a “badge of honor” and charged his GOP colleagues of doing the former president’s bidding. “I will not yield,” Schiff, who is running for the Senate in his home state, said during debate over the measure. “Not one inch.” More than 20 Republicans voted with Democrats last week to block the censure resolution, but they changed their votes this week after the measure’s sponsor, Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, removed a provision that could have fined Schiff $16 million if the House Ethics Committee determined he lied. Several of the Republicans who opposed the resolution last week said they opposed fining a member of Congress in that manner. The final vote was 213-209. The revised resolution says Schiff held positions of power during Trump’s presidency and “abused this trust by saying there was evidence of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.” Schiff was one of the most outspoken critics of the former president as both the Justice Department and the Republican-led House launched investigations into Trump’s ties to Russia in 2017. Both investigations concluded that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election but neither found evidence of a criminal conspiracy. “Representative Schiff purposely deceived his Committee, Congress, and the American people,” the resolution said. Schiff, the former Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and the lead prosecutor in Trump’s first impeachment trial, has long been a top Republican political target. Soon after taking back the majority this year, Republicans blocked him from sitting on the intelligence panel. The House has only censured two other lawmakers in the last 20 years. Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona was censured in 2021 for tweeting an animated video that depicted him striking Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., with a sword. Former Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel of New York was censured in 2010 for serious financial and campaign misconduct. The censure itself carries no practical effect, except to provide a historic footnote that marks a lawmaker’s career. But the GOP resolution would also launch an ethics investigation into Schiff’s conduct. While Schiff did not initiate the 2017 congressional investigation into Trump’s Russia ties — then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, a Republican who later became one of Trump’s most ardent defenders, started it — Republicans arguing in favor of his censure Wednesday blamed him for what they said was the fallout of that probe, and of the separate investigation started that same year by Trump’s own Justice Department. Luna said that Schiff’s comments that there was evidence against Trump “ripped apart American families across the country” and that he was “permanently destroying family relationships.” Several blamed him for the more than $30 million spent by then-special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the Justice Department probe. Schiff said the censure resolution “would accuse me of omnipotence, the leader of some a vast Deep State conspiracy, and of course, it is nonsense.” Democrats aggressively defended their colleague. Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, who led Trump’s second impeachment, called the effort an “embarrassing revenge tour on behalf of Donald Trump.” Mueller, who led the two-year Justice Department investigation, determined that Russia intervened on the campaign’s behalf and that Trump’s campaign welcomed the help. But Mueller’s team did not find that the campaign conspired to sway the election, and the Justice Department did not recommend any criminal charges. The House intelligence committee probe launched by Nunes similarly found that Russia intervened in the election but that there was no evidence of a criminal conspiracy. Schiff was the top Democrat on the panel at the time. Schiff said last week that the censure resolution was “red meat” that Speaker Kevin McCarthy was throwing to his conference amid squabbles over government spending. Republicans are trying to show their fealty to Trump, Schiff said. He said he warned the country during impeachment proceedings three years ago that Trump “would go on to do worse. And, of course, he did worse in the form of a violent attack on the Capitol.” After Democrats won the House majority in 2018, the House impeached Trump for abuse of power after he threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine and urged the country’s president to investigate then-candidate Joe Biden. Schiff was the lead House prosecutor making the case for conviction to the Senate, arguing repeatedly that “right matters.” The Republican-led chamber ultimately acquitted him. Trump was impeached a second time a year later, after he had left office, for his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol. The Senate again acquitted Trump. In the censure resolution against Schiff, Luna also cited a report released in May from special counsel John Durham that found that the FBI rushed into its investigation of Trump’s campaign and relied too much on raw and unconfirmed intelligence. Durham said investigators repeatedly relied on “confirmation bias,” ignoring or rationalizing away evidence that undercut their premise of a Trump-Russia conspiracy as they pushed the probe forward. But he did not allege that political bias or partisanship were guiding factors for the FBI’s actions. Trump had claimed that Durham’s report would reveal the “crime of the century” and expose a “deep state conspiracy” by high-ranking government officials to derail his candidacy and later his presidency. But the investigation yielded only one conviction — a guilty plea from a little-known FBI employee — and the only two other cases that were brought both ended in acquittals at trial. On Wednesday, just before the vote, Schiff’s campaign sent out a fundraising email that said Luna had introduced “yet ANOTHER resolution to censure me.” “The vote and debate will happen imminently,” the email read,
Hunter Biden will plead guilty in a deal that likely averts time behind bars in a tax and gun case
President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden will plead guilty to federal tax offenses but avoid full prosecution on a separate gun charge in a deal with the Justice Department that likely spares him time behind bars. Hunter Biden, 53, will plead guilty to the misdemeanor tax offenses as part of an agreement made public Tuesday. The agreement will also avert prosecution on a felony charge of illegally possessing a firearm as a drug user, as long as he adheres to conditions agreed to in court. The deal ends a long-running Justice Department investigation into the taxes and foreign business dealings of President Biden’s second son, who has acknowledged struggling with addiction following the 2015 death of his brother Beau Biden. It also averts a trial that would have generated days or weeks of distracting headlines for a White House that has strenuously sought to keep its distance from the Justice Department. The president, when asked about the development at a meeting on another subject in California, said simply, “I’m very proud of my son.” The White House counsel’s office said in a statement that the president and first lady Jill Biden “love their son and support him as he continues to rebuild his life.” While the agreement requires the younger Biden to admit guilt, the deal is narrowly focused on tax and weapons violations rather than anything broader or tied to the Democratic president. Nonetheless, former President Donald Trump and other Republicans continued to try to use the case to shine an unflattering spotlight on Joe Biden and to raise questions about the independence of the Biden Justice Department. Trump, challenging President Biden in the 2024 presidential race, likened the agreement to a “mere traffic ticket,” adding, “Our system is BROKEN!” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy compared the outcome to the Trump documents case now heading toward federal court and said, “If you are the president’s son, you get a sweetheart deal.” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, another presidential challenger, used the same term. Two people familiar with the investigation said the Justice Department would recommend 24 months of probation for the tax charges, meaning Hunter Biden will not face time in prison. But the decision to go along with any deal is up to the judge. The people were not authorized to speak publicly by name and spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity. He is to plead guilty to failing to pay more than $100,000 in taxes on over $1.5 million in income in both 2017 and 2018, charges that carry a maximum possible penalty of a year in prison. The back taxes have since been paid, according to a person familiar with the investigation. The gun charge states that Hunter Biden possessed a handgun, a Colt Cobra .38 Special, for 11 days in October 2018 despite knowing he was a drug user. The rarely filed count carries a maximum sentence of up to 10 years in prison, but the Justice Department said Hunter Biden had reached a pretrial agreement. This likely means as long as he adheres to the conditions, the case will be wiped from his record. Christopher Clark, a lawyer for Hunter Biden, said in a statement that it was his understanding that the five-year investigation had now been resolved. “I know Hunter believes it is important to take responsibility for these mistakes he made during a period of turmoil and addiction in his life,” Clark said. “He looks forward to continuing his recovery and moving forward.” The agreement comes as the Justice Department pursues perhaps the most consequential case in its history against Trump, the first former president to face federal criminal charges. The resolution of Hunter Biden’s case comes just days after a 37-count indictment against Trump in relation to accusations of mishandling classified documents on his Florida estate. It was filed by a special counsel, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to avoid any potential conflict of interest in the Justice Department. That indictment has nevertheless brought an onslaught of Republican criticism of “politicization” of the Justice Department. Meanwhile, congressional Republicans continue to pursue their own investigations into nearly every facet of Hunter Biden’s business dealings, including foreign payments. Rep. James Comer, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said the younger Biden is “getting away with a slap on the wrist,” despite investigations in Congress that GOP lawmakers say show — but have not yet provided evidence of — a pattern of corruption involving the family’s financial ties. Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, on the other hand, said the case was thoroughly investigated over five years by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, a Delaware prosecutor appointed by Trump. Resolution of the case, Coons said, “brings to a close a five-year investigation, despite the elaborate conspiracy theories spun by many who believed there would be much more to this.” California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was scheduled to campaign with the president Tuesday evening, reaffirmed his support for Biden’s reelection. “Hunter changes nothing,” Newsom told the AP on Tuesday. Misdemeanor tax cases aren’t common, and most that are filed end with a sentence that doesn’t include time behind bars, said Caroline Ciraolo, an attorney who served as head of the Justice Department’s tax division from 2015 to 2017. An expected federal conviction “is not a slap on the wrist,” she said. Gun possession charges that aren’t associated with another firearm crime are also uncommon, said Keith Rosen, a past head of the criminal division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware. For people without a significant criminal history, the total number of multiple types of illegal possession cases filed every year in Delaware amounts to a handful, he said. The Justice Department’s investigation into the president’s son burst into public view in December 2020, one month after the 2020 election, when Hunter Biden revealed that he had received a subpoena as part of the department’s scrutiny of his taxes. The subpoena sought information on the younger Biden’s business dealings with a number of entities, including
Daniel Sutter: The challenge of political compromise
Kevin McCarthy reached a debt ceiling compromise with President Joe Biden and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Unsurprisingly, fiscally conservative Republicans are criticizing the Speaker. Economics helps us understand the challenges in attaining the best bargain possible under given circumstances. House Republicans’ Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 revealed their debt ceiling wish list. Items included: rolling back discretionary spending and capping its growth, reclaiming unspent COVID funds, ending the student loan repayment pause and cancelation, rescinding the hiring of new IRS agents, repealing the Inflation Reduction Act’s alternative energy subsidies, and strengthening work requirements for Medicaid and food stamps. Bargaining models offer several insights. The more patient bargainer, the one able to stay at the table longer, gets better terms. The party making the last offer has an advantage. A better payoff if no agreement is reached helps a party negotiate better terms. And failed negotiations result from imperfect information when one or both parties mistakenly think the other will accept bad terms. A government shutdown or default on U.S. Treasury Securities was the outcome from no agreement. The payoff for each side in this event would be voters’ allocation of blame. The negotiating process itself could affect this; voters might blame and punish in 2024 a party refusing to bargain. Neither side wants the other to think they will accept bad terms. This illuminates the Biden Administration suggesting challenging the constitutionality of the debt ceiling law before the negotiations. Successfully executing a ruse is difficult, as small tells reveal to a shrewd negotiator a willingness to accept less favorable terms. Speaker McCarthy and Senator Schumer both represented others who had to approve a deal. Representation creates a way to appear inflexible. Many union leaders have told management that their members would never accept given terms. People not in the room cannot give off any tells. Studying economic models only helps so much. A good negotiator must be able to put insights to work in real bargaining. Political bargaining is difficult for a second reason, namely, discerning which goals to compromise on. A deal including every item in the Fiscal Responsibility Act is clearly good. Deciding which goal to not compromise or whether a half measure advances a goal is much more complicated. Bargainers inevitably face Monday morning quarterbacking. Every Republican can claim he or she would have gotten a better deal. We cannot replay this negotiation with another Republican in charge, making such claims untestable. Compromise is often unsatisfying. People who care strongly about a vision of a good society and the government policies needed to implement this vision will dislike compromising their values. We admire frequently uncompromising politicians. The changing media environment over the past forty years – talk radio, cable news, the internet, YouTube, and live streaming – have given voice to purists on the left and right. Republicans think that uncompromising leaders – instead of Bob Dole, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, or now Speaker McCarthy – would put liberals in their place! This criticism confuses consistency in personal life and politics. We can always live by our personal values. We can always conduct our business and professional affairs by our (hopefully high) standards or treat others with decency and respect. Politics is the making of government decisions affecting everyone. Liberals and conservatives cannot both implement the policies needed to attain their visions. America is a liberal democracy based on the moral equality of citizens. This implies that only the consent of the governed legitimates government and that all citizens should consent. Only compromise between the values of the left and right can secure consent of all the governed. Advocates of no-compromise politics seemingly do not view those they would impose upon as their moral equals. Did Speaker McCarthy get a good deal? Only political insiders can possibly judge this. The willingness to negotiate a deal acceptable to both sides is good news if we want America to remain a liberal democracy. Daniel Sutter is the Charles G. Koch Professor of Economics with the Manuel H. Johnson Center for Political Economy at Troy University and host of Econversations on TrojanVision. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Troy University.
Katie Britt votes against debt ceiling bill
U.S. Senator Katie Britt voted against the bipartisan debt ceiling plan, H.R. 3746 – the Fiscal Responsibility Act, on Thursday after efforts to amend the package were blocked. The debt ceiling sets the amount of money the U.S. Department of the Treasury can legally borrow to pay the country’s financial obligations. H.R. 3746 will suspend the debt ceiling with no set monetary limit, among other provisions. The national debt is currently more than $31.8 trillion. The deficit is estimated to grow by as much as $4 trillion over the next 19 months. “The United States currently has a national debt of nearly $32 trillion, and it is rapidly rising with each passing minute,” said Senator Britt. “It’s clear that if we don’t change our dire financial trajectory, it will make the American Dream unattainable for our children and our children’s children. This issue is not only a question of our country’s economic security, but our moral obligations to future generations. Decisive action and tough decisions are needed to finally get control of wasteful government spending and put America’s fiscal house in order. While I appreciate the diligence of Speaker McCarthy in attempting to make the best out of the crisis scenario caused by months of President [Joe] Biden refusing to even have a conversation about this issue, we must do more.” Both Britt and Senator Tommy Tuberville voted no on the debt ceiling deal. Senator Britt joined Senator Rick Scott (R-Florida) and eight Republican colleagues to introduce the Full Faith and Credit Act, legislation that would have ensured that the federal government avoids default and prioritizes meeting America’s obligations to our military, veterans, and seniors after reaching the debt ceiling. During debate of H.R. 3746 on the Senate floor, Senator Britt supported several efforts to improve the legislation in a fiscally responsible manner. However, all of these amendments were defeated by Senate Democrats. On Thursday night, the Senate voted to send a compromise bill to President Biden’s desk that extends the government’s borrowing authority until January 2025 and staves off a potentially disastrous default next week. A large bipartisan majority of the Senate voted 63 to 36 to approve the bill, which passed the House on Wednesday night. 31 of the 49 Senate Republicans voted against the deal, including Senate Republican Conference Committee Chairman John Barrasso (Wyoming). Senate Democrats were not happy about caps on non-defense discretionary spending, tougher work requirements for federal food assistance, and approval of a controversial natural gas pipeline. Forty-five of the Senate Democrats voted for the bill to avoid default. Four Democrats and independent Bernie Sanders voted against the deal. The bill was negotiated between President Biden and Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-California). “No one gets everything they want in a negotiation, but make no mistake: this bipartisan agreement is a big win for our economy and the American people,” President Biden said in a statement. The federal government collects $4.7 trillion in taxes, including $2.6 trillion in income tax revenues. The federal government spends $6.1 trillion annually, producing a current budget deficit of $1.48 trillion annually. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Reps. Terri Sewell and Robert Aderholt vote in favor of the bipartisan debt ceiling bill
Congressman Robert Aderholt (R-AL04) and Congresswoman Terri Sewell (D-AL07) released statements after voting in favor of the bipartisan Fiscal Responsibility Act. “With the circumstances that we find ourselves in with a divided government, I think this agreement not only reflects the reality of the situation, it is a step in the right direction,” said Congressman Aderholt. ”If Republicans were in control of the Senate and the White House, then I would certainly expect more – more cuts to domestic spending, more funding for our national defense, more restraint on the debt ceiling in the future. However, under this bill, we will, for the first time in our nation’s history, spend less money than we did the previous year. It will lead us to smaller government and more prosperity. We all know that this agreement is not perfect, but let’s be clear: Republicans will not stop here in our ongoing fight for fiscal accountability.” Sewell said that H.R. 3746, the bipartisan budget agreement, was necessary to prevent a devastating default. Sewell said that the bill also rejected Republicans’ extreme demands to make deep cuts to programs that Alabama families rely on. The agreement, negotiated by President Joe Biden, protects against cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans’ health care, historic infrastructure, and climate investments. It also prevents Republicans from manufacturing a similar crisis in the next two years by suspending the debt limit until January 1, 2025. “House Republicans could have passed a clean bill to address the debt ceiling months ago, but instead chose to hold the American people hostage and bring our economy to the brink of crisis in order to advance their extreme agenda,” said Rep. Sewell. “To be clear, this bill is far from perfect, but it prevents a default. It prevents future efforts to hold this nation hostage for the rest of the 118th Congress, and it prevents cruel Republican cuts. This budget agreement that President Biden negotiated protects funding for education, health care, veterans’ benefits, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Most importantly, it prevents Republicans from forcing a devastating default that would kill countless jobs in my district and destroy our economy.” “I join in expressing my frustration with the crisis that my Republican colleagues have manufactured,” Sewell said. “The American people deserve better than a Republican Majority that chooses to govern crisis-by-crisis.” Sewell shared a section-by-section summary of the Bipartisan Budget Agreement is available here. The legislation was negotiated between the Republican leadership led by Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy with President Biden and the Congressional Democrats. The deal will raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion. The legislation passed on a bipartisan 314 to 117 vote. The legislation now goes to the Senate for its consideration. The legislation is expected to receive swift passage as the default deadline looms. The issue divided the Alabama Congressional delegation. Terri Sewel (D-AL07), Robert Aderholt (R-AL04), Jerry Carl (R-AL01), and Mike Rogers (R-AL03) all voted in favor of the debt ceiling agreement. Barry Moore (R-AL01), Dale Strong (R-AL05), and Gary Palmer (R-AL06) voted against the deal. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Barry Moore votes against debt ceiling deal
On Wednesday, Congressman Barry Moore voted against the Fiscal Responsibility Act. The legislation was negotiated between Republican leadership led by Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy, President Joe Biden, and the Congressional Democrats. The deal will raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion. This is double the amount that was in the Republican plan that passed out of the House of Representatives, the Limit, Save, Grow Act. “The so-called ‘Fiscal Responsibility Act’ promises to saddle Americans with $4 trillion in new debt and kick the can down the road for two more years,” said Moore. “This is a massive disappointment and a far cry from what Republicans passed in the Limit, Save, Grow Act. We must stand up to the Biden Administration and make stronger reforms if we want to protect our children and grandchildren from generations of burdensome debt.” The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 avoids a financially crippling default on the national debt, but it does so by adding $4 trillion to the national debt. Moore expressed his concerns that the deal offers, at best, a 2-year spending freeze and provides only minor reforms to Federally-funded social welfare programs. Moore also cited that the deal includes only minor permitting reform that fast tracks IRA-subsidized unreliable energy and batteries. Moore also expressed concern that the deal includes an administrative pay-go that can be waived and provides no Congressional oversight role. It upholds Biden’s student loan bailout, provides no funding for border security, keeps 98% of IRS expansion spending, and only reclaims $28 billion in COVID funds. Moore was one of just 71 Republicans who voted against the legislation. 46 Democrats also voted in opposition to the bipartisan bill. The House on Wednesday night passed a bipartisan bill to suspend the debt ceiling, overcoming vocal opposition from conservative and liberal lawmakers and bringing the country one step closer to avoiding an economy-rattling default ahead of next week’s deadline. The legislation passed on a bipartisan 314 to 117 vote. The legislation now goes to the Senate for its consideration. The legislation is expected to receive swift passage as the default deadline looms. U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned that the U.S. could run out of cash to pay its bills by June 5, risking the nation’s first-ever default. “Passing the Fiscal Responsibility Act is a crucial first step for putting America back on track,” McCarthy said on the House floor Wednesday. “It does what is responsible for our children, what is possible in divided government, and what is required by our principles and promises.” The bipartisan deal suspends the debt limit through Jan. 1, 2025, so the next debt ceiling increase will be after the 2024 election, but likely before the next presidential inauguration. Barry Moore is serving his second term representing Alabama’s Second Congressional District. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Debt limit deal is in place, but budget deficit is still a multi-decade challenge for U.S. government
Even with the new spending restraints in the debt limit deal, the U.S. government’s deficits are still on course to keep climbing to record levels over the next few decades. The projections are a sign that the two-year truce between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., might be only a pause before a far more wrenching set of showdowns over the federal budget. Why is the debt slated to keep rising? It’s due to the growing costs of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Both Biden and McCarthy ruled out any cuts to Social Security and Medicare, two programs that benefit older voters, before their teams even began their budget talks. That omission reflects the politics around two popular programs as Democrats and Republicans prepare for next year’s presidential election. It also means the agreement finalized on Sunday keeps the risk of ever-escalating debt on the table, setting up the possibility of another bruising battle when the debt limit needs to be raised again in 2025. “You should think of this as one step,” said Marc Goldwein, senior vice president at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “The question is, can they take the next step after that?” Lawmakers know there are difficult choices ahead and that the only way through them likely involves some combination of deep spending cuts, broad tax hikes, and major changes to the retirement income and health care programs that consume an ever-growing share of federal spending. Mandatory spending — which includes Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid — already accounts for the majority of government spending. That category is equal in size to 14% of the U.S. gross domestic product, and the CBO expects it will grow to 15.6% by 2023. By contrast, discretionary spending was 6.5% of gross domestic product last year and was already projected to fall to 6% within 10 years. Goldwein said he’s optimistic that leaders in both parties will find ways to reduce the growth in spending for health care programs. Social Security will also face a reckoning as its trust fund will be unable to pay out full benefits within a decade. But some budget experts saw the deal as more focused on optics than sustainability. “This debt limit agreement is shaking out to be a political face-saving deal without much substance in terms of changing the U.S. debt trajectory,” said Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the libertarian Cato Institute. The agreement, which still has to be approved by Congress, would hold discretionary spending essentially flat for the coming year while allowing increases for military and veterans accounts. Spending growth would be capped at 1% for 2025, essentially a cut given the likely rate of inflation. Some Democratic allies see the deal as problematic because it cedes ground to Republicans who want to use the debt limit fight as an opportunity to press their policy aims, despite the risk of a default. “Looking forward, we must find a path to abolish the debt ceiling and end the absurd debt ceiling hostage-taking that Republicans engage in when they can use it as a bludgeon against a Democratic president,” said Sharon Parrott, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank. Other economic analysts took issue with GOP suggestions that the U.S. was already hamstrung by debt, even though investors continue, for the moment, to buy Treasury notes. While total federal debt — including money the government owes itself — exceeds $31 trillion, the U.S. economy possesses more than $143 trillion worth of non-financial assets in a sign that the current debt loads are manageable. “It is simply not true that the United States is broke and on the verge of a debt and deficit crisis,” said Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at the consultancy RSM U.S. But even if there isn’t an immediate reckoning over debt, there is a long-term problem that the talks purposefully ignored. The president challenged Republicans to shield Social Security and Medicare from cuts at his State of the Union address in February. GOP lawmakers jeered him for suggesting they would dare to cut the programs, leading Biden to declare, “We’ve got unanimity.” Biden specifically hailed the bipartisan agreement on Sunday for protecting Social Security and Medicare, while saying the agreement that must pass the House and Senate would prevent a possibly catastrophic default that could occur on June 5. “This is a deal that’s good news,” the president said, “for the American people.” Yet House members received a specific briefing in March indicating that entitlement programs would drive up the debt. CBO director Phillip Swagel gave a presentation showing that publicly held debt would more than double to 195% of gross domestic product in 2053. The key challenge is that an aging population means that programs for older people have costs that exceed tax revenues. Swagel provided 17 policy options for reducing the debt, six of which were tax hikes that could raise trillions of dollars over 10 years. Tax increases have been a nonstarter with Republicans, while Democrats have generally shied away from reductions to benefits. His slide deck included this warning: “The longer action is delayed, the larger the policy changes would need to be.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Debt ceiling talks grind on, but Republicans say there’s a ‘lack of urgency’ from White House
Debt ceiling negotiators for President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy traded more budget-cutting ideas at the Capitol Tuesday, but Republicans warned of a “lack of urgency” at the White House to resolve the standoff in time to avert a potentially chaotic federal default. With barely a week to go before a deadline as soon as June 1, the Democratic president and the Republican speaker were staring down a financial crisis. Failure to strike a deal would be unprecedented, and certain to throw U.S. financial markets into turmoil, inflicting economic pain at home and abroad. Markets lowered Tuesday with no deal in sight. “We’re not there yet,” McCarthy said at the Capitol, reiterating he won’t bring any bill forward “that doesn’t spend less than we spent this year.” Behind closed doors, McCarthy urged his slim House Republican majority to “just stick together” despite their own factions as he negotiates the strongest deal possible for conservatives, said lawmakers exiting the private session. He told reporters the teams are eyeing “creative” ways of rolling back spending that all sides can accept. “I believe we can still get there — and get there before June 1,” McCarthy, R-Calif., said at midday. Dragging into a third week, the negotiations over raising the nation’s debt limit, now at $31 trillion, were never supposed to arrive at this point — a crisis in the making. From the White House, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said it was “ridiculous” to suggest Biden wasn’t acting with urgency. “He wants to see this done as soon as possible,” she said. The White House insisted early on it was unwilling to barter over the need to pay the nation’s bills, demanding that Congress simply lift the ceiling as it has done many times before with no strings attached. But the newly elected speaker urged the president at an Oval Office meeting in February to come to the negotiating table on a budget package that would reduce spending to reduce ballooning deficits in the post-COVID era in exchange for the vote to allow future debt. Both men said after a crucial meeting late Monday at the White House — after the president returned from the Group of Seven summit in Japan — that talks were productive. But with time short to strike a deal, they are laboring to come up with a compromise that could be approved quickly by the Republican House and the Democratic Senate and be signed into law. Negotiations are focused on finding agreement over a 2024 budget year limit. Republicans have set aside their demand to roll back spending to 2022 levels, but say that next year’s government spending must be less than it is now. But the White House instead is offering to freeze spending at current 2023 numbers. Agreement on that topline spending level is vital. It would enable McCarthy to deliver spending restraint for conservatives while not being so severe that it would chase off the Democratic votes that would be needed in the divided Congress to pass any bill. “We are holding firm to the speaker’s red line,” said a top Republican negotiator, Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana. “Which is that we will not do a deal unless it spends less money than we’re spending this year.” The White House continues to argue that deficits can be reduced by ending tax breaks for wealthier households and some corporations, but McCarthy said he told the president at their February meeting that raising revenue from tax hikes is off the table. The negotiators are now also debating the duration of a 1% cap on annual spending growth going forward, with Republicans dropping their demand for a 10-year cap to six years, but the White House offering only one year, for 2025. Typically, the debt ceiling has been lifted for the duration of a budget deal, and in this negotiation, the White House is angling for a two-year agreement that would push past the presidential elections. Another main Republican negotiator, Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, who joined the speaker at the Oval Office Monday evening, said, “What I sense from the White House is a lack of urgency.” But on the Senate side, Republican leader Mitch McConnell said, “Look, I think everybody needs to relax.” Traveling in his home state of Kentucky, McConnell said of the back and forth, “This is not that unusual.” However, time is growing short. The House speaker promised lawmakers he will abide by the rule to post any bill for 72 hours before voting, making any action doubtful until the weekend — just days before the potential deadline. The Senate would also have to pass the package before it could go to Biden’s desk to be signed. McCarthy faces a hard-right flank in his own party that is likely to reject any deal, and that has led some Democrats to encourage Biden to resist any compromise with the Republicans and simply invoke the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling on his own, an unprecedented and legally fraught action the president has resisted for now. On Tuesday, the leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, Rep. Scott Perry, said: “We all want to stick together. But again, it’s sticking together around the right thing.” He and others are skeptical of the June 1 deadline that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said is when “it is highly likely” the government will be unable to pay all the nation’s bills. Treasury said Tuesday it is keeping in close contact with federal agencies on their planned spending as it monitors cashflows. As the negotiators focus on the $100 billion-plus difference between the 2022 and 2023 spending plans as a place to cut, other priorities Republicans are pushing as part of the deal remain on the table. Republicans also want to beef up work requirements for government aid to recipients in the Medicaid healthcare program, though the Biden administration has countered that millions of people could lose coverage. The GOP additionally wants new cuts to food aid by restricting states’ ability to waive work requirements in places
Debt ceiling: Joe Biden, Kevin McCarthy to meet Monday as negotiators ‘keep working’ to resolve standoff
The White House and House Republicans wrapped up another round of debt ceiling talks Sunday as Washington races to strike a budget compromise along with a deal to raise the nation’s borrowing limit and avert an economy-wrecking federal default. President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy spoke by phone Sunday while the president was returning home on Air Force One after the Group of Seven summit in Japan. Upbeat, McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters at the Capitol that the call was “productive” and that the on-again, off-again negotiations between his staff and White House representatives are focused on spending cuts. Biden and McCarthy are set to meet for a pivotal meeting Monday at the White House. Negotiators for the Democratic president and Republican speaker met for 2 1/2 hours at the Capitol as talks appear to be narrowing on a 2024 budget year cap that would be key to resolving the standoff. “We’ll keep working,” said Steve Ricchetti, counselor to the president, as the White House team exited. The Republicans were not seen leaving the speaker’s office and offered no immediate comment after the talks. They all face a deadline, as soon as June 1, when the government could run out of cash to pay its bills. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Sunday that June 1 is a “hard deadline.” McCarthy said after his call with Biden that “I think we can solve some of these problems if he understands what we’re looking at.” The speaker added, “But I’ve been very clear to him from the very beginning. We have to spend less money than we spent last year.” McCarthy emerged from that conversation sounding optimistic and was careful not to criticize Biden’s trip, as he had before. He did caution, “There’s no agreement on anything.” “We’re looking at, how do we have a victory for this country?” McCarthy said. He said he did not think the final legislation would remake the federal budget and the country’s debt, but at least “put us on a path to change the behavior of this runaway spending.” The White House confirmed the Monday meeting and late Sunday talks but did not elaborate on the leaders’ call. Earlier, Biden used his concluding news conference in Hiroshima, Japan, to warn House Republicans that they must move off their “extreme positions” over raising the debt limit and that there would be no agreement to avoid a catastrophic default only on their terms. Biden said “it’s time for Republicans to accept that there is no deal to be made solely, solely, on their partisan terms.” He said he had done his part in attempting to raise the borrowing limit so the government can keep paying its bills, by agreeing to significant cuts in spending. “Now it’s time for the other side to move from their extreme position.” Biden had been scheduled to travel from Hiroshima to Papua New Guinea and Australia but cut short his trip in light of the strained negotiations with Capitol Hill. Even with a new wave of tax revenue expected soon, perhaps giving both sides more time to negotiate, Yellen said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “the odds of reaching June 15, while being able to pay all of our bills, is quite low.” GOP lawmakers are holding tight to demands for sharp spending cuts with caps on future spending, rejecting the alternatives proposed by the White House for reducing deficits in part with revenue from taxes. Republicans want to roll back next year’s spending to 2022 levels, but the White House has proposed keeping 2024 the same as it is now, in the 2023 budget year. Republicans initially sought to impose spending caps for 10 years, though the latest proposal narrowed that to about six. The White House wants a two-year budget deal. A compromise on those topline spending levels would enable McCarthy to deliver for conservatives, while not being so severe that it would chase off the Democratic votes that would be needed in the divided Congress to pass any bill. Top Republican negotiator Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana, speaking alongside McCarthy at the Capitol, said the numbers “are the foundation” of any agreement. Republicans also want work requirements on the Medicaid health care program, though the Biden administration has countered that millions of people could lose coverage. The GOP additionally introduced new cuts to food aid by restricting states’ ability to waive work requirements in places with high joblessness. That idea, when floated under President Donald Trump, was estimated to cause 700,000 people to lose their food benefits. GOP lawmakers are also seeking cuts in IRS money and, by sparing Defense and Veterans accounts from reductions, would shift the bulk of spending reductions to other federal programs. The White House has countered by keeping defense and nondefense spending flat next year, which would save $90 billion in the 2024 budget year and $1 trillion over 10 years. All sides have been eyeing the potential for the package to include a framework that would speed energy project developments. And despite a push by Republicans for the White House to accept parts of their proposed immigration overhaul, McCarthy indicated the focus was on the House’s previously approved debt and budget package. “I think that we can reach an agreement,” Biden said, though he added this about Republicans: “I can’t guarantee that they wouldn’t force a default by doing something outrageous.” Republicans had also rejected various White House revenue proposals. Among the proposals the GOP objects to are policies that would enable Medicare to pay less for prescription drugs. Republicans also have refused to roll back Trump-era tax breaks on corporations and wealthy households as Biden’s own budget has proposed. For months, Biden had refused to engage in talks over the debt limit, contending that Republicans in Congress were trying to use the borrowing limit vote as leverage to extract administration concessions on other policy priorities. But with the June 1 potential deadline looming and Republicans putting their own legislation on the table, the White House launched talks on
