Skip navigation


The two articles below are just a small sampling of what Congress thinks about the “American People” so many of them are fond of citing. It has been pointed out that many of the serving legislators are Lawyers, attorneys or what ever the descriptive term for their profession maybe. The job is to argue for or against someone or something on behalf of someone or entity. It appears that our Congress for the past 10 to 15 years (or more have been arguing against the people who elected them.MA

A Texas member of Congress Key congressman: It’s ‘a good thing’ if more Americans lose coverage

02/24/17 11:20 AM—Updated 02/24/17 12:59 PM
Rep. Mike Burgess (R-Texas) chairs the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee related to health care, which makes his perspective on the issue rather important. If Republicans ever present their alternative to the Affordable Care Act, for example, Burgess’ panel would be among the first to tackle the policy.

It was therefore rather striking yesterday when the far-right congressman appeared at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and shared an unusual insight. BuzzFeed reported:

Burgess was asked about concerns that repealing Obamacare will lead to a drop in the number of people with health insurance. He responded that it would be a good thing because it means fewer people are subject to the individual mandate.

“First off, we’re not going to send an IRS agent out to chase you down and make you buy health insurance,” said Burgess. “So if the numbers (of insured people) drop I would say that’s a good thing because we restored personal liberty in this country.”

It’s a fascinating perspective. It doesn’t matter if the ACA is helping bring health security to millions of Americans; what matters, in Burgess’ mind, is conservative ideological principles.

U.S. News’ Robert Schlesinger noted in response, “If you listened to Burgess, you’d think that all or most of [the 20 million people insured by the ACA] were dragged kicking and screaming into the system and that they yearn for liberation from the tyranny of being able to afford catastrophic illness.”

Burgess, however, isn’t the only one reading from this script. Vice President Mike Pence said this week he wants to gut “Obamacare” in order to bring back “freedom.” House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) added that his anti-ACA plans is based on a single principle: “Freedom is the ability to buy what you want to fit what you need. Obamacare is Washington telling you what to buy regardless of your needs.”

All of this must resonate with the focus groups Republicans convene, but it doesn’t make nearly as much sense as GOP officials want to believe. The New Republic’s Brian Beutler explained the other day:

Under the old order, far too many people didn’t have the ability to buy insurance in the first place. Or if they could, they were subjected to lifetime coverage limits, no coverage for pre-existing conditions, and any number of other personal barriers and restrictions.

And since Obamacare’s major accomplishment was to counter those forces, and thus enable people to get health insurance, that in turn opened up whole new areas of personal freedom: the ability to take risks and get new jobs, or start new businesses, and or simply have a sense of security and peace of mind.

So how exactly would it be a victory for “freedom” to pull out the rug from those who can finally buy health insurance?

Under the Republican approach, Americans can have the “personal liberty” of not receiving needed medical care. We can all be “free” to ration health services based on our individual wealth.

Ryan believes “freedom is the ability to buy what you want to fit what you need,” but the Speaker may not understand the point of insurance: we don’t always know what we’ll need, which is why we seek medical coverage in the first place.

I look forward to Republican policymakers telling countless Americans, “Your family is one serious illness away from financial ruin, and your health is at risk from treatable ailments, but look at how great your liberty is!”

SHY DEMOCRATS. It’s not just the GOP: Even some Democratic members of Congress are avoiding holding town halls. “From Montana to West Virginia, the nation’s most vulnerable Senate Democrats are avoiding town hall meetings as their Republican counterparts get pummeled by an energized electorate frustrated with President Donald Trump’s early agenda,” reports the Associated Press. “Some Democrats prefer to connect with constituents over the telephone or social media. Others are meeting voters in controlled environments with limited opportunities to ask questions. But few of the 10 Democratic senators facing re-election next year in states carried by Trump have scheduled in-person town hall meetings during this week’s congressional recess.”
‘HAVE SOME COURAGE.’ Former Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords, who was shot in the head during a constituent meeting in Tucson, Ariz., in 2011, urged members of Congress to have the courage to meet with the people they represent after Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert cited fears of violence as a reason to avoid town halls. “At this time there are groups from the more violent strains of the leftist ideology, some even being paid, who are preying on public town halls to wreak havoc and threaten public safety,” Gohmert said Thursday.
Giffords issued a blistering statement in reply via Americans for Responsible Solutions, the gun violence prevention group she co-founded:
“I was shot on a Saturday morning. By Monday morning my offices were open to the public. Ron Barber — at my side that Saturday, who was shot multiple times, then elected to Congress in my stead — held town halls. It’s what the people deserve in a representative.
“In the past year, campaigning for gun safety, I have held over 50 public events.
“Many of the members of Congress who are refusing to hold town halls and listen to their constituents concerns are the very same politicians that have opposed commonsense gun violence prevention policies and have allowed the Washington gun lobby to threaten the safety of law enforcement and everyday citizens in our schools, businesses, places of worship, airports, and movie theaters.
“To the politicians who have abandoned their civic obligations, I say this: Have some courage. Face your constituents. Hold town halls.”
One person who’s not afraid of town halls? Republican Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan. Sure, the libertarian-leaning lawmaker got yelled at plenty during his town hall on Thursday. But he took questions, and he’s out there telling Republicans to buck up and deal with the people they represent.

Please Donate

Please Donate


The title line of this post is from a Paul Newman movie. It certainly describes the current political climate. It appears that the majority party and it’s associated agents will say what ever they want with impunity and hope they can get away with it. The cue is taken from their leader President Trump. Mr Trump has told the truth probably, how many times? The Majority party has taken up that method of dealing with their constituents. There have been several town halls where the firmly entrenched Congress members faces hostile crowds but they continue to follow the Nazi method of communication: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”-Joseph Goebbels. The citizens of America while certainly seeking good government have been and still are bombarded by a steady stream of unabashed and from the hip falsehoods that the speakers hope we are not smart enough to see through. It does not take a wizard to know that the majority party does not have the interest of the public in mind as they continue the process of rolling back protections put in place by the previous administration. The mid year elections is the opportunity for all of us to shift the political landscape to our advantage. The current politicians are all less than trustworthy in one way or another. There are at least a dozen ways to say: “you can tell if a politician is lying because his mouth is moving”!

Please Donate

Please Donate


Our current situation in the White House is becoming increasingly unstable from  top to bottom. At the head of our country we have a used car salesman attempting to sell us a flood damaged car with a 30 day guarantee (that it fails). The quote recently that the White House is running like a well oiled machine is  restrained hyperbole at best. Even a well oiled machine requires maintenance and this has not even has an oil change! Our Congress is doing nothing but seeking re-election so they have no time to pay attention to the small minds in the White House. I see the following events occurring over the next 3 to 12 months:

  1. Our relationship with Mexico will worsen and affect our farmers who sell products to Mexico.
  2. Canada will pick up a share of our sales to other countries
  3. Russia will continue to stir the pot in the Middle East
  4. Our allies in the Middle East will stop or at least back off from assisting us in the fight against ISIS
  5. The people who voted for Trump will turn against him and he will lie saying it’s fake news
  6. His exaggerations will be the gist of all of his speeches from here on
  7. The military leaders will not have his back on several issues as he has not deemed it necessary to meet with them before making military moves.
  8. His staff will continue to issue press releases that say nothing (maybe more lies) and castigate the free Press.

Congress will have to make some moves that will keep us from a war or becoming a pariah in the world community. The tweet storm will doom his Presidency along with the truth about his taxes, his business connections along with the lack of separation between his Government service and his business interests. The vice President who is waiting by the door to the Oval office will step in and  assume the position of President under the rule of the Neer do well Congress. If you pay attention to the news, you will see some major members of Congress coming under fire by their constituents which does not bode well for them in the midterm elections. Consider that even Faux (FOX) news and  Glen Beck are looking at this administration with awestruck incredulity.

Please Donate

Please Donate


This post from Charlie Daniels offers a parallel to a time over 100 years ago when the US fell into internal turmoil.MA 

Posted on 02.13.2017

Over a century ago, the United States of America went through a divisive and bloody Civil War that separated the people of this nation bone from marrow. It split friends, families and eventually the nation itself as a line was drawn dividing the Union States of the North from the newly formed Confederacy of the Southern States.
Ostensibly, the war that followed was fought over the abolition of slavery, a devilish practice that never should have been allowed in the first place, and although it was the basic issue for the conflict – as is the case so much of the time – there were a myriad of other issues involved.
One – in my opinion – was just plain stubbornness and pride and the dogged determination that the South would not let itself by told what to do by the other half of the country, but trade, tariffs and different attitudes and beliefs about just how far a federal government could go in setting the tone and making laws to be obeyed by all the states could go were also involved.
The point I’m trying to make is that the feelings festered so long and ran so deep that men whose fathers had stood shoulder to shoulder in the war for independence faced off across fields of battle and killed each other.
The Civil War never should have happened, and had cooler heads prevailed on both sides, never would have. Southerners had to know that slavery was an abomination to the principles they had fought and died for in the Revolution.
No man has the right to own another man, to reap the fruits of his labor for nothing, to consider his children nothing more than commodities to be sold off or traded away on a whim, separating
families and breeding human beings like live stock.
But instead of acknowledging the very obvious evil of this situation, politicians from the South,
convinced that the economy of the Southern States was dependent on slavery, chose to become a separate nation and soon after over six hundred thousand Americans lost their lives in a senseless war that would set the Southern States back a half century.
Surely, had it been approached by fair, level-headed men on both sides of the issue, abolition could have been achieved without war. But the rhetoric grew ever hotter, brash young men on both sides who had never fired a gun in anger viewed a war as the pinnacle of romanticism and
implacable politicians refused to give an inch.
Is this not the same attitude we see on the streets of America today?
I see young people interviewed on television who can’t even articulate the reason they are protesting. Others bent on destruction who probably espouse no cause but chaos.
I’ve seen hysterical protestors screaming about First Amendment rights which they seem to think only protects them and those who think like them and that the opposition has no first amendment protection and ahold be shouted down at all costs.
The rhetoric is becoming hotter and more nonsensical, the radical element more apparent, the violence and destruction of property more common place.
The pot is boiling and it’s only a matter of time before there will be blood on the streets.
Americans have the right to civil disobedience, a right to gather and demonstrate against some policy they feel is unfair or harmful to the country at large, but they do not have the right to interrupt commerce, break windows, burn cars or do bodily harm to those who disagree with them.
People who won’t listen to reason, who ignore the law of the land, who try to stifle the opinions of others tend to forget that there is an element of violence on the other side as well, a side that, thankfully so far has not yet have not come forth.
But, should these conditions continue, someday soon the violent elements of both persuasions will find themselves on the same streets and, what will ensue will not be pretty.
Learn from history or repeat it.
What do you think?
Pray for our troops, our police and the peace of Jerusalem.
God Bless America
— Charlie Daniels

Please Donate

Please Donate


The parallels to todays TOTUS are remarkable.MA

By Jeff Jacoby Globe Columnist February 19, 2017
HISTORY DOESN’T REPEAT itself. But it has an unnerving tendency to rhyme.
Consider, on this first Presidents’ Day under Donald Trump, another New Yorker
who occupied the highest office in the land.
When Millard Fillmore became the nation’s 13th president upon the death of
Zachary Taylor in 1850, he immediately plunged the White House and the Whig
Party — one of the nation’s two dominant political parties — into turmoil. On the
day he took the oath of office, Fillmore petulantly dismissed every member of
Taylor’s Cabinet, which he resented for having ignored him when he was vice
president. As a result, it took weeks — in one case, more than two months —
before the new president’s Cabinet members were approved. The Whigs, already
riven by patronage quarrels and North-South tensions, grew even more polarized
over Fillmore’s policies. He was off to a bad start.
To an American looking back from 2017, the disorder that followed Fillmore’s
accession might almost prefigure the pandemonium in the Trump White House.

There are other echoes.

John Tyler is a good reminder: Running mates matter
When President William Henry Harrison died in April 1841, Tyler took control by
declaring he was more than just a caretaker.
Fillmore presented himself as a loyal Whig, but his political career had begun with
the Anti-Masons, a political movement tied to a bizarre hostility toward
Freemasons. He was attracted, writes Paul Finkelman, a legal historian at Albany
Law School, “to oddball political movements, conspiracy theories, and ethnic
hatred.” Even after becoming a Whig, he trafficked easily with anti-Catholic and
anti-immigrant groups.
Fillmore served four terms in the House of Representatives, where he energetically
supported higher tariffs. When he ran for governor of New York in 1844, he kept
talking about tariffs — mostly, suggests Finkelman, to avoid talking about slavery.
Though antislavery sentiment was strong in New York, and though Fillmore, like
most Northern Whigs, was conventionally opposed to the practice, he shunned the
abolitionists. The most urgent moral issue of the day left him personally unmoved.
He seemed to believe that Whigs could avoid the controversial politics of slavery
altogether.
His unwillingness to condemn the spread of black servitude helped Fillmore lose
the governor’s race. So did his hostility to Irish immigrants and his coziness with
nativists. Nonetheless, Fillmore had a following, and at the Whig convention in
1848, he captured the vice presidential nomination. The ticket was headed by
Taylor, a hero of the Mexican War and a Southern planter, and Fillmore was seen
as an ideal ticket-balancer: He was from a key antislavery state, which would
appeal to Northerners, but had never been actively antislavery, which would
reassure Southerners.
Taylor was president for only 16 months; he died of cholera after eating tainted
food. During his brief administration, however, he turned firmly against the
Southern “fire-eaters” who had expected him, a fellow slaveholder, to sympathize
with their cause. The nation was being roiled by sectional bitterness, especially
over the extension of slavery to the vast territories that had been wrested from
Mexico. In Congress, Henry Clay proposed a series of bills that came to be called
the Compromise of 1850, but it was a lopsidedly pro-slavery package, and Taylor
refused to support it.
Vice President Fillmore, on the other hand, was in favor of appeasing Southern
interests. He backed Clay’s legislation; if it came to a tie in the Senate, he said, he
would vote against Taylor and in favor of the compromise.
With Taylor’s sudden death, pro-slavery forces thus found themselves with an
unlikely friend in the White House — a Northern Whig from an abolitionist state,
who was willing to open the Southwest to slavery. The Compromise of 1850,
passed by Congress and signed by Fillmore, undid the 30-year-old Missouri
Compromise, which had permanently barred slavery north of Missouri’s southern
border. Clay’s legislation did clear the way for California to enter the union as a
free state, and it shuttered the slave markets of Washington, D.C. But those sops to
Northern sentiment did nothing to halt the advance of slavery, or to restore
harmony to a Whig Party increasingly at war with itself.
But of all the components of the compromise, the worst was the Fugitive Slave
Act.
Rarely has there been a more repugnant law. For the first time in US history, the
Fugitive Slave Act created a national system of law enforcement. Its purpose:
hunting escaped slaves and returning them to bondage. Federal commissioners
were appointed nationwide, and empowered not only to adjudicate fugitive slave
claims, but to assemble local posses to capture slaves on the run. The law imposed
harsh penalties on anyone caught aiding a fugitive slave. And even free blacks
were at risk of being seized and charged as runaways, since the law, with grotesque
disregard for due process, forbade accused fugitives from testifying in their own
behalf.
Fillmore enforced the law with determination, and dispatched federal troops to
prevent opponents from interfering. He denounced Northern communities that
vowed to resist the law — “sanctuary cities” aren’t a 21st-century innovation —
and piously proclaimed that “without law there can be no real practical liberty.”
Scores of fugitives were captured and returned to the South during Fillmore’s
presidency. When antislavery activists in Boston rescued a captured slave from the
US marshals holding him, Fillmore repeatedly ordered that the rescuers be
prosecuted. In a Pennsylvania case, the administration went further, charging 41
Americans with treason for refusing to join a slave-catching posse.
Fillmore denounced Northern communities that vowed to resist the Fugitive Slave
Law. ‘Sanctuary cities’ aren’t a 21st-century innovation.
By the end of Fillmore’s term, the Whig Party was fractured beyond repair.
Democrats won the 1852 election in a landslide. The Whigs vanished from US
politics, supplanted by a new, unequivocally antislavery Republican Party.
Fillmore, however, turned elsewhere. He migrated to the anti-immigrant, anti-
Catholic “Know-Nothing” Party, running as its presidential nominee in 1856. His
slogan was “Americans Must Rule America.” Five years later, Americans were
ripping America apart in a ghastly Civil War that Fillmore had helped make
inevitable. As Abraham Lincoln labored to preserve the union and emancipate the
slaves, Fillmore watched from the sidelines, harshly criticizing.
Today, the 13th president is lost in obscurity. Fate has been kinder to him than he
deserved.
Jeff Jacoby can be reached at jacoby@globe.com

Please Donate

Please Donate


Ted Cruz is attempting to get a bill passed that will repeal or neuter the protections from predatory lending in banks. This is the same Ted Cruz who was running to be President. This appears to show that we have some real issues coming from existing members of Congress. This is the same Congress that blocked many of President Obama’s initiatives’ and is now saddled with Donald Trump whom they are not quite sure what to do with. In the background of this the Congress of themselves (instead of the people) are busily making disastrous changes in laws that protect us all while attempting to tell us that they are working for us. It is important that we the people pay close attention to these folks who have no good intentions for us but like most bunco artists try to persuade us that what they are doing is good for us as we choke on what we are being fed. The proposed bill below is just one example.MA

Legislation > 115th Congress > S.370

Text: S.370 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)All Bill Information

As of 02/20/2017 text has not been received for S.370 – A bill to eliminate the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by repealing title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly known as the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.

Bills are generally sent to the Library of Congress from GPO, the Government Publishing Office, a day or two after they are introduced on the floor of the House or Senate. Delays can occur when there are a large number of bills to prepare or when a very large bill has to be printed.

S.370 – A bill to eliminate the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by repealing title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly known as the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.

Please Donate

Please Donate

 


 

Given the actions of the current Presidency over the last 30 plus days, this is my expectations of the events that will occur in and for government going forward. It is clear that the President (TOTUS) has a need to be liked (loved?) and admired. It is an expectation of many of us however many do not make build their existence around that goal. This does not appear to be the case of Mr. trump. His recent press conference pointed that out with the incomplete sentences and the reluctance to address the questions in a knowledgeable way. Then the town hall (rally) in Florida. This was held in an airplane hangar to have a huge crowd in attendance. This type of rally is what drives Mr. trump but it does not translate into Governing. He repeated his election promises but so far in reality has not done as well as he states. It is my opinion that he will still in effect spend less time dealing with the Presidential side of things in a scholarly manner and more time Tweeting his way through. The Congress is acting in the background to pass their own versions of laws that do not benefit us at all for the most part. TOTUS has surrounded himself with “yes men” which has been his stock in trade for all of his business and personal life. It seems to me that Mr. Trump has not deemed it important enough to learn the job of President and throw away the Adored Entertainer cloak. I have attached the coverage of that recent Rally.MA

CATHERINE LUCEY and JULIE PACE, Associated Press 12 hours ago

 

Trump bashes media at Florida rally
Yahoo News Video

Is It possible many other Americans who feel the same way can take initiative to remove ineffective legislators?.MA

Kaz Weida, Contributor
Freelance Writer & Blogger
An Apology Letter To All Americans — From The Constituents Of Jason Chaffetz
Utah’s District 3 here. We’re super sorry. Let’s talk.
02/17/2017 05:16 pm ET | Updated 11 hours ago

Dear America,
I’m writing tonight because I’d like to apologize for Jason Chaffetz.
To be fair, it’s not really my fault. I didn’t vote for him. But he’s my representative in Congress and he has my power and my voice. So Jason Chaffetz is my mess to clean up.
I’m sorry you have to deal with him. It’s no picnic for me either. This is a man who seems to place party before people, ambition before country. It’s embarrassing to have to lay claim to him but there it is. He’s mine.

Last week, I attended the town hall where Chaffetz belittled and taunted his own constituents. I thought that was about as egregious as it could get. But I was wrong, friends. So wrong. Now I get to sit on the sidelines and watch as my representative in Congress uses my power to prop up a would-be dictator. Hurray!
I took exception when Jason Chaffetz raised my voice in Congress to gut regulation that would protect public lands. I was furious when he used my vote to sign onto a bill to abolish the Department of Education. But today? Today, I think Mr. Chaffetz horrifies us all.
We’ve been assuming that in the face of facts and clear, irrefutable evidence our Congressman would be forced to take action. And he has. Mr. Chaffetz has been clear exactly whose side he’s on. I always knew he didn’t have my best interests at heart and that he wasn’t going to be representative of my ideals. But I never imagined that Jason Chaffetz would betray us all, that he would fail to hold up even the basic tenets of our democracy.
You have my deepest regrets, America, for the disaster that is my representative, Mr. Jason Chaffetz. Please know that thousands of Utahns join me in extending our apologies. But as is often the case, sorry isn’t enough. Sorry won’t save our country and our government from corruption. And apparently, neither will Mr. Chaffetz. So the resistance in Utah is going to do what it always does. We’re going to roll up our sleeves and get to work.
This will be Mr. Chaffetz’s last term in Congress. Jason’s constituents can’t send flowers to make the injury he’s inflicting better, but we can make sure we don’t send him back to D.C. to do more damage.
Sorry, America. We’ll persist. And we’ll fix this.
In love and solidarity,
Utah’s 3rd Congressional District
This piece was originally published on Rantt.


Caligula (/kəˈlɪɡjᵿlə/),[1] properly Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus (31 August AD 12 – 24 January AD 41) was Roman emperor from AD 37–41. Born Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus (not to be confused with Julius Caesar), Caligula was a member of the house of rulers conventionally known as the Julio-Claudian dynasty. Caligula’s biological father was Germanicus, and he was the great-nephew and adopted son of Emperor Tiberius. The young Gaius earned the nickname “Caligula” (meaning “little soldier’s boot”, the diminutive form of caliga, hob-nailed military boot) from his father’s soldiers while accompanying him during his campaigns in Germania.
When Germanicus died at Antioch in AD 19, his wife Agrippina the Elder returned with her six children to Rome, where she became entangled in a bitter feud with Tiberius. The conflict eventually led to the destruction of her family, with Caligula as the sole male survivor. Untouched by the deadly intrigues, Caligula accepted the invitation to join the Emperor in AD 31 on the island of Capri, where Tiberius had withdrawn five years earlier. With the death of Tiberius in AD 37, Caligula succeeded his grand-uncle and adoptive grandfather as emperor.

There are few surviving sources about the reign of Emperor Caligula, although he is described as a noble and moderate ruler during the first six months of his reign. After this, the sources focus upon his cruelty, sadism, extravagance, and sexual perversity, presenting him as an insane tyrant. While the reliability of these sources is questionable, it is known that during his brief reign, Caligula worked to increase the unconstrained personal power of the emperor, as opposed to countervailing powers within the principate. He directed much of his attention to ambitious construction projects and luxurious dwellings for himself, and initiated the construction of two aqueducts in Rome: the Aqua Claudia and the Anio Novus. During his reign, the empire annexed the Kingdom of Mauretania as a province.
In early AD 41, Caligula was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy by officers of the Praetorian Guard, senators, and courtiers. The conspirators’ attempt to use the opportunity to restore the Roman Republic was thwarted: on the day of the assassination of Caligula, the Praetorian Guard declared Caligula’s uncle, Claudius, the next Roman emperor. 

The above excerpt regarding the Roman emperor commonly known as Caligula bears some resemblances to our current President. Taking note of the second part of the excerpt highlighted in yellow. Given the runaway tactics of this administration and the forbearance of the Neer do well Congress, we could see a Pence Presidency (much like  Caligula’s successor Claudius) installed by the Praetorian Guard aka Congress. As the American people who are often quoted as a source of their actions, Congress is busily taking care of their own as they have done for past 10 to 15 years. The only way to stop them is that American people pay attention to what they do, that means stop looking at Faux news and believing everything you see online. Essentially I am saying to all- one source of information is the wrong way to get information.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


The Neer do well Congress is using the “Boy King” to roll back regulations that were designed to keep us safe. This roll back is not about us, its about what “they consider Overreach”. Read article below.MA
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed two of the three pieces of legislation this week passed by Congress that roll back Obama-era regulations.
Republicans are repealing the regulations through the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The president’s signature on such legislation Tuesday is the first time the CRA has been used to repeal regulation in 16 years, when Trump signed legislation to roll back a Securities and Exchange Commission rule that would mandate energy companies to show their payments to foreign governments.
The coal industry cheered on another CRA piece of legislation Thursday that came to Trump’s desk for his signature that repealed an Obama-era Department of the Interior rule on coal mine discharge into nearby streams.
The CRA allows for Congress to review and repeal federal government department regulation within a 60-day window after the rule has been established. Legislation under the CRA cannot be filibustered in the Senate.
Congress initially proposed 37 resolutions under the CRA as a means to repeal the Obama-era rules.
“Congressional Review Act legislation provides relief for Americans hurt by regulations rushed through at the last minute by the Obama administration. This means freeing up American entrepreneurs, creating jobs, and jump-starting our economy,” House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement of the numerous bills passed under CRA.
One piece of legislation waiting for Trump’s signature that passed the Senate Wednesday under the CRA repealed a Social Security Administration rule established in December. The regulation mandated that the agency would submit Social Security recipients’ information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) with the intent of showing those who may not be eligible to purchase a firearm.
Democrats say the rule would keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, but Republicans argue the rule cast way too large of a net around social security recipients.
“Over the last several weeks we’ve been using a Congressional Review Act or what is known as CRA’s to take action on the explosion of Obamacare regulations. Hundreds and hundreds of pages of regulations that we’ve seen hurting families destroying jobs all across the country and here’s why our work is so historic. Up until now only six of those bills have ever reached the president’s desk in 21 years and only one was ever signed into law by the end of this week. We will have passed 13 in the last three weeks,” House Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers said at a press conference Thursday.
The Senate is expected to take up two more resolutions passed by the House in the coming days, one of which repeals a regulation established by the Bureau of Land Management as well as a rule put forth by the Department of Labor.
The House passed three resolutions under the CRA last week and by the end of Friday, the Senate will be on track to consider 10 resolutions that repeal Obama administration regulations in the next legislative period.
Follow Kerry on Twitter

%d bloggers like this: