If it were a national vote, Mitch would be a goner. The whole nation is begging us to get rid of the sweet old man.
But Mitch doesn’t look to be going anywhere. He raised over a million in the last quarter and has $3.4M on hand already for an election three years away.
Mitch is doing a fine job of leading the Republican Party in Congress, acting as some sort of pubescent sage to the infantile Tea Party House, steering a path between GOP mines to effectively squander America’s chances of escaping recession. Many of the Smart Guys in the Washington press corps keep suggesting Mitch is the one steering the ship, and they praise him for it. If they were scribes on the Titantic, you could imagine much the same.
All of which begs the question — can the Kentucky Democrat Party field a candidate to challenge him?
Who will it be now?
Will Steve Beshear leave the mansion for another run against his old nemesis? Could Chandler leave the House? Might Crit Luallen step up to the plate?
Who can do it… and could they even win?
Because America is going to turn it’s lonely eyes to us… and it’s unclear if we have anything to offer beyond condolences.
(Personally, I prefer to imagine a world in which Rand Paul tries to primary Mitch so that he can unseat the Minority Leader and call himself the Senior Senator from the Great State of Kentucky. But that’s mostly because I’ve gazed into Rand’s eyes and find him and his jellied hair simply dreamy. But enough about me. What do you contemplate while sipping red wine and staring into a crackling log fire? Who is the Fabio protecting you from reality?)
Roll Call examines the level of risk facing Mitch McConnell in anticipation of David Williams’ blowout loss in the Governor’s race. Ultimately, everyone says Mitch and David aren’t tied together so Mitch’s home-state reputation won’t tarnish so long as he keeps accomplishing absolutely nothing in DC. There’s a lot of hob-nobbies and muckety-mucks quoted (and some Team McConnell love for Steve Beshear) and toward the end, there’s news of Mitch’s born-again teabaggery:
While everyone seems to agree that McConnell won’t lose any political capital in the state this November, he made some tweaks after Grayson’s loss. Besides campaigning very hard for Paul and, by most accounts, working amicably with him in the Senate, McConnell has also increased outreach to tea party groups.
“He’s sending staffers to tea party events on a regular basis,” said David Adams, a Kentucky GOP strategist who served as Paul’s 2010 primary campaign manager.
“McConnell does have a representative at most of the tea party meetings,” said Hans Marsen, Kentucky state coordinator for Tea Party Patriots. “He’s making an effort to make sure he’s represented.”
Mitch McConnell’s Office, 771 Corporate Drive, Lexington-Fayette County, KY 40503 (MAP)
Wednesday, October 12th, 12:00 PM
The media is finally starting to pay attention to the tens of thousands of people demanding Wall Street pay to create jobs, not cuts. This is our chance to push for policies that work for the 99% of us who can’t afford lobbyists. Whether protesting banks not paying their fair share, rallying for jobs, or standing in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street, we’ll amplify our message for politicians: jobs now–make Wall Street pay!
Mitch McConnell got outmaneuvered last night in an odd and apparently fiery (for the Senate) battle with Harry Reid. Mitch, as usual, was playing games with the Senate rules — his favorite pastime — and Reid had enough of it.
It’s a confusing series of events based around parliamentary procedures and whatnot, but here’s a patchwork…
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid put the hammer down against the GOP today, setting a new precedent that clamps down on procedural motions after cloture has been reached.
The Nevada Democrat warned that allowing unchecked motions to suspend the rules could lead to unending debate, even after 60 Senators have voted to invoke cloture.
“The Republican Senators have filed nine motions to suspend the rules to consider further amendments but the same logic that allows for nine such motions could lead to the consideration of 99 such amendments,” Reid argued before springing his move.
Reid said Republicans could force an “endless vote-a-rama” after the Senate has voted to move to final passage.
He said this contradicts the rule the Senate adopted 32 years ago.
“This potential for filibuster by amendment is exactly the circumstance that the Senate sought to end by its 1979 amendments,” Reid said.
“The Senate must have the ability to move forward on legislation that has broad bipartisan support,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in a statement late Thursday explaining his move to change the chamber’s long-observed rules. “A small minority of senators cannot be allowed to bring bipartisan legislation, like a bill to end China’s job-killing, underhanded currency manipulation, to a grinding halt when 14 million Americans are out of work.”
Thursday night’s history-making vote followed more than seven hours of negotiations between the Senate Republican and Democratic leaders.
….Exasperated Democrats charged that Republicans at the last minute tried to introduce a non-related amendment by Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) regarding Environmental Protection Agency regulations on farm dust. Republicans, just as frustrated, shot back that Democrats were the ones who changed the agreed-to plan at the eleventh hour by trying to substitute the Johanns amendment with one offered by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) regarding the Federal Reserve.
As the negotiations remained deadlocked, Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) got into a rare, unscripted dispute on the Senate floor – with Reid ultimately announcing that the Senate would proceed with a history-making vote.
There’s some video of this back and forth at The Hill… but the best retelling takes us back to the Washington Post:
For much of the ninety-minute floor debate, Reid and McConnell debated the roles of the majority and the minority in the Senate, and even the purpose of the chamber itself.
“I feel very comfortable that what we’re doing and what we did today is the right thing to do,” Reid told the chamber, arguing that “cloture means ‘end.’ It’s over with.”
McConnell, pacing back and forth in front of his desk, shot back: “The majority doesn’t want to take votes.”
He then lobbed what many in the Senate might consider the ultimate insult: “We are fundamentally turning the Senate into the House.”
Reid countered: “The Senate should function like the Senate, and I acknowledge that, but we have major piece of legislation being bogged down.”
Later, in a dig at McConnell, he added: “Let’s get back to legislating as we did before the mantra around here was, ‘Defeat Obama.’”
Now, what’s true is we’ve also got to rein in our deficits and live within our means, which is why this jobs bill is fully paid for by asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share. Some see this as class warfare. I see it as a simple choice: We can either keep taxes exactly as they are for millionaires and billionaires, with loopholes that lead them to have lower tax rates in some cases than plumbers and teachers, or we can put teachers and construction workers and veterans back on the job.
We can fight to protect tax cuts for folks who don’t need them and weren’t asking for them, or we can cut taxes for virtually every worker and small business in America. But we can’t afford to do both. That’s the choice that’s going to be before the Senate.
There are too many people hurting in this country for us to do nothing and the economy is just too fragile for us to let politics get in the way of action.
We’ve got a responsibility to the people who sent us here. So I hope every senator thinks long and hard about what’s at stake when they cast their vote next week.
****ON REPUBLICANS PLAYING GAMES****
[W]ith respect to working with Congress, I think it’s fair to say that I have gone out of my way in every instance, sometimes at my own political peril and to the frustration of Democrats, to work with Republicans to find common ground to move this country forward — in every instance, whether it was during the lame duck session, when we were able to get an agreement on making sure that the payroll tax was cut in the first place, and making sure that unemployment insurance was extended, to my constant efforts during the debt ceiling to try to get what’s been called a grand bargain, in which we had a balanced approach to actually bringing down our deficit and debt in a way that wouldn’t hurt our recovery.
Each time, what we’ve seen is games-playing, a preference to try to score political points rather than actually get something done on the part of the other side. And that has been true not just over the last six months; that’s been true over the last two and a half years.
Now, the bottom line is this: Our doors are open. And what I’ve done over the last several weeks is to take the case to the American people so that they understand what’s at stake. It is now up to all the senators, and hopefully all the members of the House, to explain to their constituencies why they would be opposed to common-sense ideas that historically have been supported by Democrats and Republicans in the past. Why would you be opposed to tax cuts for small businesses and tax cuts for American workers?
My understanding is that for the last decade, they’ve been saying we need to lower taxes for folks. Well, why wouldn’t we want to do that through this jobs bill? We know that we’ve got roads and bridges and schools that need to be rebuilt. And historically, Republicans haven’t been opposed to rebuilding roads and bridges. Why would you be opposed now?
****ON MITCH McCONNELL****
So the bottom line is this, Ben: If next week senators have additional ideas that will put people back to work right now and meet the challenges of the current economy, we are happy to consider them. But every idea that we put forward are ones that traditionally have been supported by Democrats and Republicans alike. And I think it’s important for us to have a vote on those ideas, because I believe that it’s very hard to argue against them.
And if Mr. McConnell chooses to vote against it, or if members of his caucus choose to vote against it, I promise you we’re going to keep on going, and we will put forward maybe piece by piece each component of the bill. And each time they’re going to have to explain why it is that they’d be opposed to putting teachers back in the classroom, or rebuilding our schools, or giving tax cuts to middle-class folks, and giving tax cuts to small businesses.
****ON CONSUMER PROTECTION AND THE GOP’S PROTECTION OF WALL STREET****
[W]hat we’ve seen over the last year is not only did the financial sector — with the Republican Party in Congress — fight us every inch of the way, but now you’ve got these same folks suggesting that we should roll back all those reforms and go back to the way it was before the crisis. Today, my understanding is we’re going to have a hearing on Richard Cordray, who is my nominee to head up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He would be America’s chief consumer watchdog when it comes to financial products. This is a guy who is well regarded in his home state of Ohio, has been the treasurer of Ohio, the attorney general of Ohio. Republicans and Democrats in Ohio all say that he is a serious person who looks out for consumers. He has a good reputation. And Republicans have threatened not to confirm him not because of anything he’s done, but because they want to roll back the whole notion of having a consumer watchdog.
You’ve got Republican presidential candidates whose main economic policy proposals is, we’ll get rid of the financial reforms that are designed to prevent the abuses that got us into this mess in the first place. That does not make sense to the American people. They are frustrated by it. And they will continue to be frustrated by it until they get a sense that everybody is playing by the same set of rules, and that you’re rewarded for responsibility and doing the right thing as opposed to gaining the system.
So I’m going to be fighting every inch of the way here in Washington to make sure that we have a consumer watchdog that is preventing abusive practices by the financial sector.
****ON THE GOP “Jobs Plan”****
[W]hat I’ve tried to do is say, here are the best ideas I’ve heard. Not just from partisans, but from independent economists. These are the ideas most likely to create jobs now and strengthen the economy right now. And that’s what the American people are looking for. And the response from Republicans has been: No. Although they haven’t given a good reason why they’re opposed to putting construction workers back on the job, or teachers back in the classroom.
If you ask them, well, okay, if you’re not for that, what are you for? Trade has already been done; patent reform has been done. What else? The answer we’re getting right now is, well, we’re going to roll back all these Obama regulations. So their big economic plan to put people back to work right now is to roll back financial protections and allow banks to charge hidden fees on credit cards again or weaken consumer watchdogs, or alternatively they’ve said we’ll roll back regulations that make sure we’ve got clean air and clean water, eliminate the EPA. Does anybody really think that that is going to create jobs right now and meet the challenges of a global economy that are — that is weakening with all these forces coming into play?
****ON THE “DO-NOTHING CONGRESS”****
And so, Bill, the question, then, is, will Congress do something? If Congress does something, then I can’t run against a do-nothing Congress. If Congress does nothing, then it’s not a matter of me running against them; I think the American people will run them out of town, because they are frustrated, and they know we need to do something big and something bold.
In a closed-door meeting with Republican lobbyists late last week, senior policy advisers representing both Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his chief deputy, Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who sits on the special deficit panel, said the issue of tax increases may be an insurmountable obstacle in the secretive talks.
The two top Senate Republicans don’t think such a grand bargain style plan — in the range of $3 trillion to $4 trillion in cuts over 10 years coupled with tax and entitlement reform, similar to the proposal that was under consideration by House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and President Barack Obama during the summer — could succeed because all of the existing proposals contain tax increases they consider “significant” and are, therefore, politically untenable, officials say.
….The only way that a grand bargain could pass muster with the GOP, the Senate Republican aides say, is if it were tied to an overhaul of Social Security or the controversial proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to turn Medicare into a voucher-based system for future recipients. And neither plan could pass this Congress, they believe.
No taxes on the superwealthy, no deal without dismantling the safety net… those are two really, really solid bargaining chips.
The new congressional committee on deficit reduction (the so-called “supercommittee”) not only can consider revenue increases, but must consider them — as well as spending cuts — if it’s going to produce a balanced plan.
There are five main reasons why.
Spending cuts alone can’t do the job. The key fiscal policy goal is to reduce deficits sufficiently to stabilize the debt relative to the size of the economy. The only way to accomplish this without severe cuts that would hit low- and middle-income Americans hard — in areas ranging from Medicare, Medicaid, and possibly Social Security to basic assistance for the poor — and weaken core government functions like education, scientific research, and ensuring safe food and water, is through revenue increases.
The 2001-2003 tax cuts are a significant contributor to projected deficits. Letting some or all of those tax cuts expire would make a significant contribution to reducing the deficit.
Higher-income people can and should share in the sacrifices needed to reduce long-term deficits. Low- and moderate-income households shouldn’t be forced to bear a disproportionate share of the burden through cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and programs targeted on people who are poor or near-poor.
Taxes are low both in historical terms and in comparison with other countries. By either standard, the United States has significant room for increasing tax revenues.
Higher taxes are not an inherent barrier to economic growth. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has said that tax increases used to reduce budget deficits can improve long-term economic growth and job creation. The experience of the 1990s shows that claims that reasonable revenue increases will sink the economy largely reflect politics and ideology, not solid analysis.
After repeated attempts to cut infrastructure spending, Rand Paul says he has a plan for the Sherman Minton Bridge
BY JOE SONKA
As President Barack Obama stood next to the Ohio River in Cincinnati — with the “functionally obsolete” Brent Spence Bridge carefully framed behind him for the cameras — he began his pitch for the American Jobs Act, a bill that would pump $50 billion into the economy to repair crumbling bridges and other aging infrastructure around the country.
“Sen. Rand Paul is here,” Obama said to a chorus of boos from the partisan crowd that closely resembled a campaign rally.
Obama held out his hand to stop the crowd.
“Rand’s going to be supporting the bridges,” cautioned Obama, a defense he did not bother giving in response to the crowd’s even rougher treatment of House Speaker John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leadership whose states are connected by the bridge and currently serve as the major obstacles to the passage of his jobs bill.
The president’s defense of the junior senator from Kentucky capped off a peculiar journey for the D.C. odd couple — who agree on almost nothing policy-wise — as Paul hitched a ride on Air Force One with him into the Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky Airport last Thursday.
On the flight from D.C., Sen. Paul pitched to the president his own proposal to fix defective bridges around the country, particularly the still-closed Sherman Minton Bridge just down Interstate 71 in Louisville.
The next day, Paul would again advocate for his proposal — the Emergency Transportation Safety Fund Act — in a press conference on the Sherman Minton.
Paul presents his idea as a common sense solution to free up the federal funds needed to repair bridges like the Sherman Minton, a bipartisan fix that even the Democrats flanking him last Thursday and Friday can get behind.
Regardless of whether that turns out to be true, it marks a rather interesting turn for the Kentucky senator, who has spent most of his first year in office advocating for a massive de-funding of the federal department ultimately responsible for financing the task.
Ezra Klein previews the coming government shutdown threat — two months away when Congress has to authorize the 2012 Budget in full. The previous budget fights may pale in comparison, Klein argues, for several reasons with one hitting particularly close to home:
#4: There could be big fights over policy riders: This is what tripped up the budget negotiations the last time around. Back in April, Republicans pushed to restrict funding for Planned Parenthood and abortion in the District of Columbia through “riders” that placed conditions on the money. Congress could deadlock over riders again, but it’s not just abortion that could be at issue.
In July, the House Energy and Commerce Committee passed an appropriations bill that would cut EPA funding by 20 percent and impose a slew of policy riders rolling back regulations on coal ash, carbon pollution and toxic emissions from power plants, among others. The House GOP has since doubled down on the issue: On Friday, it passed a bill to place unprecedented restrictions on the EPA’s air-pollution rules. A Republican aide confirmed on Monday that House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers “will fight hard for the bills that have passed the House” in the next round of 2012 budget negotiations. And that’s just one of the hot-button regulatory issues that could draw battle lines in November.
This one is like a gift from the state of Kentucky back to the other 49 States that keep us funded. Not only is Hal Rogers holding the reins, but the riders he’s demanding are proposed by and/or supported by Ed Whitfield, Ben Chandler, Brett Guthrie, Geofferson Davis and our two nutty Senators.
So America, this November, remember to thank Kentucky.
At his speech yesterday, The President gave some props to Rand Paul:
THE PRESIDENT: We’ve got some folks I just want to make sure are acknowledged here today. First of all, the Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, is in the house. Give him a round of applause. (Applause.) We’ve got the mayor of the great city of Cincinnati — Mark Mallory is here. (Applause.) We’ve got the mayor of Covington, Mayor Denny Bowman. (Applause.) Senator Rand Paul is here.
AUDIENCE: Booo –
THE PRESIDENT: Rand is going to be supporting bridges, so we’ve got to — (applause.) And we’ve got Congressman John Yarmuth in the house. (Applause.)
But no such treatment for Mitch McConnell:
THE PRESIDENT: It’s time to build an economy that creates good, middle-class jobs in this country. It’s time to build an economy that honors the values of hard work and responsibility. It’s time to build an economy that lasts. And, Cincinnati, that starts right now. That starts with your help. (Applause.) Maybe some of the people in Congress would rather settle their differences at the ballot box than work together right now. In fact, a while back, Senator McConnell said that his “top priority” — number-one priority — was “to defeat the President.” That was his top priority.
AUDIENCE:Booo –
THE PRESIDENT:Not jobs, not putting people back to work, not rebuilding America. Beating me.
Both Mitch and Rand were invited on the trip… but only Rand took the President up on the offer, because Rand has some big ideas about infrastructure and because Mitch just has big ideas about letting America drown in a shitter.
From the WH Pool comes some details of what President Obama and Rand “The Best Thing to Happen to the Republican Party” Paul chatted about:
“There is a bill I am trying to get the president interested in,” he said. He said that in the national transportation bill, 10 percent of funds are set aside for things like beautification. Paul would like to reprogram that money for emergency work on bridges. “He seemed receptive,” said Paul of Obama. “This is something I think I can get Republican support for.”
[As a side note, you'll note that the Mayors of Cincinnati and Covington were both on hand. They -- along with Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear -- met the President at the airport. But somehow... only the two mayors made the trip from the airport to the event site and Steve Beshear got left behind. Was it something he said?]
SHE WON'T GO!
KentuckyElection.org
BONNIE PRINCE BILLY
