Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Hey, that's me!
#NoFucksWereGiven #BiteMeChina note
Going further to strip rights away from Americans, Governor Scott Walker just exempted his administration
from being investigated for illegal activity.
Now, however, Governor Scott Walker won’t have to endure any more intrusive investigations.
Wisconsin laws previously had allowed witnesses to use what was referred to as a “John Doe” proceeding to request search warrants, call witnesses, and offer immunity in cases where probable cause that a crime was committed is yet to be confirmed. Now, however, Governor Scott Walker has signed legislation insuring that prosecutors won’t be able to use the John Doe proceedings to investigate things like political misconduct and bribery. After last Friday, the only thing that prosecutors will be able to use the John Doe law on will be limited to other, more violent felonies.
Additionally, the new law signed by Governor Scott Walker also places a six-month time limit on secret probes in Wisconsin and limits the secrecy to district attorneys, law enforcement officials, judges, and investigators. The secrecy under the new law will not extend to witnesses and suspects under investigation.
As expected, Scott Walker signing the law that gets rid of the John Doe proceedings was both cheered and jeered at the Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison.
Democratic Representative Peter Barca admonished Walker.
“We may never know if there are political crooks popping champagne corks today knowing that their crimes will now be very difficult to investigate and even harder to prosecute.”
On the other side, one of Scott’s backers, Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, was glad that the John Doe proceeding was put to bed.
“These changes were desperately needed in Wisconsin and our state is better off now that it’s law.”
The state senate and assembly in Wisconsin are both controlled by the Republicans, and the vote to pass legislation to eliminate the John Doe proceedings followed party lines.
More fun news about Republicans, starting with the scramble to get a budget deal passed
. Emphasis mine.
Ahead of a crucial Wednesday, when Rep. Paul Ryan is expected to be nominated to succeed Boehner as speaker, Republicans were running into a fresh set of problems as they tried to ram through the last-ditch budget deal, with lawmakers from rural states objecting to cuts to the crop insurance program and others balking at the proposal's price tag.
As Boehner tried to lock down votes on the House floor, a number of lawmakers refused to endorse the plan, angry that they were being jammed by their party leaders and worried about the effect the plan may have on their districts. Even close Boehner allies, like Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, chairman of the powerful Rules Committee, suggested to CNN he was seriously weighing opposing the deal. "Agriculture, agriculture, agriculture are my problems," Sessions said.
The concerns spanned the gamut — including the backroom nature of the talks that produced a deal lawmakers will be forced to vote on with little time to review. Many Republicans also believe they should have won more concessions from the White House for raising the debt ceiling until 2017. While GOP leaders still expressed confidence the bill would pass as early as Wednesday, it appeared that the final vote tally could be close and only a minority of Republicans would back a plan strongly supported by Democrats.
"I think we'll be in a good place," House Majority Leader Kevin Mc Carthy, R-California, said Tuesday night.
As House Republicans worked their members, Senate Republicans and Democrats realized they had a problem on their hands, too. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, planned to mount a filibuster in an attempt to delay final passage — and some rural state senators from both parties were threatening to vote against the plan. That means Senate Republicans could need roughly 20 of their members to vote to break a filibuster, a hurdle that Majority Leader Mitch Mc Connell will have to overcome next week.
Privately, Boehner abruptly dropped in for a brief strategy session in the office of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a long-time adversary but whom he needs now to push the deal over the finish line. Boehner — who has a reputation for getting emotional — left, appearing to have tears in his eyes. The two men — in addition to Mc Connell and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — realized that they had their work cut out for them.
Tuesday afternoon the Congressional Budget Office informed leaders that the methods they used to pay for the deal left them roughly $5 billion short. Leadership aides from both parties downplayed the budget hole, saying the CBO didn't give them full credit for the savings they came up with and there would likely be some technical changes to the bill, but no major revisions. Reid said the CBO issue won't sideline the deal. "The number isn't quite right, but that doesn't matter," Reid said. "The point is this: the CBO numbers have fluctuated for more than a week. One day up. One day down. We are satisfied with the agreement we have."
Another problem facing leaders: Rural lawmakers sharply objected to language included in the deal that would cut into crop insurance subsidies for farmers. House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway, R-Texas, began circulating a letter Tuesday urging fellow Republicans to oppose the bill until the provision is removed. "As chairman of the Ag Committee, I got to protect the integrity of the farm bill," Conaway said. "The overall impact is to flush insurance companies out of business, which I think is the President's intent."
Under the deal, rate of return for crop insurance will be lowered to 8.9% — down from 14.5% — in order to cut costs and help pay for the increased spending. Republicans and Democrats agreed to raise domestic and defense spending by $80 billion over the next two years, with an additional $32 billion in emergency war funding. It would extend the national debt limit until March 2017 and make cuts to the Social Security disability program.
Conaway, along with the Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, and top committee Democrats, issued statements blasting the change to the crop insurance program, and arguing they would oppose any changes to the 2014 farm bill they negotiated. "While congressional leaders may sell this package as providing budget stability, it is anything but stable for farmers and ranchers," Roberts said in a statement. "Once again, our leaders are attempting to govern by backroom deals where the devil is in the details. I will continue to oppose any attempts to cut crop insurance funding or to change crop insurance program policies."
Florida Rep. Dennis Ross, a member of the House GOP whip team, told reporters he planned to vote against the bill mainly because of the "ag issue," but he also cited concerns about not getting more in return for suspending the debt ceiling.
On Tuesday afternoon, sources said that party leaders were engaged in a furious round of back-channel talks with the CBO to ensure that the price tag of the proposal didn't scare away support. By Tuesday afternoon, leaders were trying to ensure that the deal wouldn't cost more than anticipated, a potential problem for fiscal conservatives. Many Republicans, however, were still reserving judgment — particularly since the bill was proposed shortly before midnight and could be voted on right before Boehner officially hands the speaker's gavel over to Ryan.
Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Florida, said his district consists of seniors and farmers — two groups who are "not going to be ecstatic about some of the things that are in there." He added: "I'm a little frustrated that we're doing a (whip) check right now because I have no idea."
On both sides of the Capitol, lawmakers were frustrated about the process of being forced to capitulate on a key concession — raising the debt ceiling — without more time for debate. Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson called the process "disgusting" and threatened to vote against it. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Illinois, said he was "leaning no" on the deal, pointing to the way leaders crafted the way to pay for it. "There's a crop insurance in there I didn't know about," he said.
After a Tuesday morning meeting where GOP lawmakers played a video montage feting Boehner, the Ohio Republican expressed confidence that the deal would be passed Wednesday. But Boehner, too acknowledged the process could have been a little less sloppy. "This is not the way to run a railroad," he told reporters, contending he had no other choice.
And then we have Ben Carson, who is apparently for redistributing wealth, except for when he's against it
, with such dizzying logic I feel like I'm on a roller coaster.
But confronted about the comments in a recent interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, Carson said he was talking about schools specifically serving poor students. "I'm talking about the fact that there are a lot of public schools that exist in areas that are economically deprived that don't have the facilities that are necessary to provide the best education for our children," said Carson, who attended inner city public schools in Detroit. Carson said the government has "a responsibility to educate everyone and looking at the best system in order to do that."
"I think it's very different than a situation where someone is working hard, is making a lot of money, is providing a lot of jobs and is contributing to the fabric of America, and us going along and saying, 'Well, this one, he has too much, and this guy over here, he has too little, so let's just take this one's and give it to that one.' That's much more arbitrary," he said.
"We are talking about the entire nation," Carson told Tapper when he was pushed about whether spreading money to promise education is different than the principle of redistribution of wealth on an individual level. "And we're talking about what makes us competitive in the world. And the great divide between the haves and the have-nots is education. That's very different than redistributing funding because you think it's the social thing to do."
In a Facebook post Tuesday, Carson further pushed back on the idea he favors the redistribution of wealth to pay for education. "I do not support the national pooling of property tax receipts. That is a falsehood," he said.
Carson wrote that he does support government funding for schools serving poor students in urban and rural areas. "Education is the key to unlocking the enormous potential of our students. I support Title 1 funding to raise up poor inner-city and rural schools to a level where these children can get the education they deserve," he wrote. "My support has absolutely nothing to do with property tax payments used to fund our schools."
The budget bill is going to be one of those compromise deals that nobody is completely satisfied with. It might be the best we're going to get, but that doesn't mean the Tea Party caucus won't try to sabotage it.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The problem is that any budget that Republicans are willing to vote for enough to pass (and to bypass a Senate filibuster) is going to have stuff in it that's bad for the country. Government is something that happens through compromise.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"(Guy's basically a health care and insurance wonk)
With the Carson checklist, the one that jumped out at me was his wanting to give the Legislature the ability to boot out Judges that overrule popular opinion.
All I could think of was 2 things - Loving v. Virginia
, and Brown v. Board of Education
. Both benefited African-Americans greatly. All three overrided popular opinion in the communities they had the largest impact in. And if it weren't for Brown v. Board in particular, that asshole might not even be a surgeon! So for him to go "Fuck you, got mine" is hypocrisy at its goddamned highest.
Yeah, deleted that - for some reason I thought that was the one overturning the damn thing.
edited 28th Oct '15 1:58:34 PM by ironballs16
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"Not even gonna turn it on. I'll wait for the recaps.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

edited 27th Oct '15 5:21:37 PM by sgamer82