Friday, Sept. 28, 2007: Thanks All Around but Defense Bill Will Wait 'til Monday

[13:00]
The Senate adjourned at 12:56. It will be back in session on Monday, Oct. 1 at 14:00 to resume consideration of the Defense Authorization Act FY 2008. I was under the impression that the Senate was going to take some votes today and perhaps knock out the Defense Authorization. My guess, though, is that the Senators are opposed to having any votes on Friday, especially the jet-set Presidential candidates. See you Monday!


[12:12]
Lots of thanks being traded around on the floor today. One senator starts speaking and then another one interrupts him merely to thank that senator "for his leadership on this issue." And then five minutes about how the senator has worked tirelessly on such and such an issue. Then, when those thanks are over, the interrupted senator takes five minutes to thank the senator who just thanked him. And then someone else interrupts and thanks both of the senators who are currently engaged in thanking each other and it's like, What are these people even talking about? What is the bill on the floor? Heck, I don't know, but I'd like to take a second to thank...

[10:52]
Edward Kennedy (MA) is talking about a couple of amendments to the Defense Authorization Act FY 2008. First, something about the U.S. taking a more active role in working with Iraq refugees. Then, something called the Fair Competition ___ Act, which strives to impact the government contracting process by prohibiting the gov't from taking into consideration benefits when awarding a contract to some private firm. Kennedy is arguing that there are times when two private firms offer the same basic bid on a service contract excluding benefits. But when the cost of benefits is added in, the gov't contract will go to the firm offering the fewest benefits, i.e. the lowest overall bid.

Precap:
The Senate will convene at 10:30 e.s.t. It will resume consideration of a bill prescribing spending in the Defense Dept. for FY 2008, a.k.a. H.R.1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. The bill will pass. Basically, the Senate has to pass a Levin Substitute Amdt. to the bill. Then it has to pass the bill itself. So, two votes today at least. Yesterday, the Senate voted for cloture on the Defense Authorization 89-6 with five no votes. Nay votes: Collins (R-ME), Dodd (D-CT), Feingold (D-WI), Leahy (D-VT), Sanders (I-VT), & Voinovich (R-OH). The presidential candidates did not vote.

Notes on S-CHIP

A few notes on the Children's Health Insurance Bill. The bill, which passed 67-29 yesterday, will renew but also expand an extant program. Under the program, the federal gov't disburses funds to the states for the purposes of providing medical coverage to children whose parents don't qualify for Medicaid. When the feds hand off the funds, they lose most say-so over how the money is used. Historically, the so-called S-CHIP program filled a gap for those children whose families were "just rich enough" to be disqualified from Medicaid coverage. However, the States have been increasingly willing to distribute funds to families at 200%, 300% of the poverty level. Question has arisen as to whether the federal or state government should be providing coverage to families at this income level. One of the Bush administration's main arguments against the S-CHIP expansion is that children whose parents could get private coverage will instead be gov't-insured. For instance, New York has floated the idea of providing some coverage to families at 400% of the poverty level. This concept is unacceptable to W, bringing about his veto threat. Under this extension of the bill, the program grows by $35 billion over five years. It also seems possible that some adults could get state aid through the plan, a possibility that conservatives fervently oppose because it seems to be a first step toward a socialized health care system. Regardless, the Senate has enough votes for S-CHIP to override W's veto. Sixty-seven senators voted for the bill on Thursday, a number which doesn't include the prospective yeas of Biden and Obama, who'd left town to attend a Presidential debate. Yet, it's unclear whether 2/3 of the House would vote for the plan, as is required to override the Bush veto. S-CHIP passed in the House earlier this week but it was about 22 votes short of 2/3 of the body. Pelosi will have some work to do.

Thurs., Sept. 27, 2007: Government Raises Its Own Debt Ceiling by $850 Billion

[18:27]
Now before the Senate is a resolution raising the ceiling on the government's debt limit. By $850 billion! Baucus (MT) says that the Senate has no choice but to approve it; that if the Senate does not raise the limit, the U.S. Treasury will default. This will be the fourth increase under W. The Treasury Debt is something like $10 trillion.

Baucus says that raising the debt ceiling is like paying our credit card bill. "The bill's due, you gotta pay it." Except most bills are paid with cash whereas this one is paid with debt (in the form of federal reserve notes, a.k.a. dollar bills).

[18:24]
Arguments against extending/expanding the children's health insurance bill:

• First, a slippery slope argument. Truly, the price of the program is going up under this legislation. It is not a simple renewal. Rather, this is the government moving into socialized medicine, if ever so slowly.

• Second, it affects immigration policy (somehow) because it expands coverage for low-income children.

• Three, the government spends too much money already.

[Precap]
Earlier today, the Senate voted for cloture on the Hate Crimes Amdt. to the FY 2008 Defense Spending Bill. Cloture limits further debate and more or less means that the measure itself will soon pass.

The Senate also voted for cloture on a reauthorization/expansion of a children's health insurance program administered and paid in part by the federal gov't. Some Republicans oppose this reauthorization because the price of the program is hereby going up. Nonetheless, the program has serious bipartisan support and the Senate will pass it tonight. However, Bush appears rime to veto the bill. Therefore, it is highly likely that we are about to see if Congress can override a presidential veto for the first time during W's tenure. This takes 67 senators (as well as two-thirds of the House). The alternative is passing a simple renewal of the current program. Are there 67 votes for the bill? We'll find out later tonight.

Looking ahead, the Senate must pass what's called a Continuing Budget Resolution (CBR) to fund gov't departments at current levels until a proper budget bill is passed. The government's fiscal year begins each year on Oct. 1. Without an FY 2008 budget bill for a given department, that department can't operate without the CBR.

Wed., Sept. 26, 2007: Hate Crimes & A Children's Health Care Bill (S-CHIP)

[19:44]
Wrapping up. Majority Leader Reid (NV). Tomorrow: begin at 9:00. Then cloture votes on: Kennedy Hate Crimes Amendment and a Hatch alternative to the Kennedy Amendment. These cloture votes will take 60 yeas to pass. From there, perhaps a vote on the Children's Health Insurance legislation. Looking a week ahead, Reid says he wanted to have appropriations bills passed for the Defense Dept. and a collection of depts. including the DEA.

The Senate passed two resolutions today. The Biden Iraqi Federalism resolution and the Kyl/Lieberman resolution urging the administration to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to be a terrorist organization.

[18:30]
Orrin Hatch (UT) rises in opposition to the Kennedy Hate Crimes Amendment. This amendment would give the feds jurisdiction over crimes motivated by race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexuality, etc. The sticking points are the gender identity language and the law's constitutionality. Hatch right now is wondering what "gender identity" really means. What crimes could be classified as motivated by gender identity (and therefore carry a stiffer penalty)?

Hatch says that this amendment should not be attached to the Defense Bill. Moreover, Hatch says that the states are handling hate crimes adequately and, hey, the states can issue death sentences for such crimes while Kennedy's hate crimes amendment does not include death penalties.

Finally, Hatch says that the amendment is probably unconstitutional. The amendment seeks to bring all hate crimes within the jurisdiction of the feds. Hatch says that this will federalize basic criminal law. The unconstitutional argument involves the question of whether the federal gov't has jurisdiction over such crimes. Recall the Violence Against Women Act from the nineties, which was held unconstitutional because Congress did not have the authority to pass the legislation. Congress relies on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to justify its jurisdiction over many matters. To use the Commerce Clause as justification, the regulated activity must be "interstate" in nature. Hate crimes are arguably not interstate in nature (as opposed to mail fraud or wire fraud, etc.)

[18:16]
Chuck Grassley(IA) and Orrin Hatch (UT) are sponsors of the reauthorization of the children's health insurance legislation, a.k.a. S-CHIP. I want to make it clear that S-CHIP is its own bill, while much of the other debate going on right now concerns (amendments to) the Defense Bill.

Bernie Sanders (VT) is speaking. He wonders why it is that, when it comes to funding wars, when it comes to giving no-bid contracts to Halliburton, the U.S. has a seemingly endless supply of money. But when it comes to health care for children, the President threatens to veto legislation because it is too costly.


[16:45]
Votes on S-CHIP and Kennedy's Hate Crimes Amendment tomorrow morning.

Precap:
I haven't caught much of today's debate but going into today the two primary measures under debate were (1) a Kyl/Lieberman Resolution declaring that Iran's Revolutionary Guard to be a terrorist organization; and, (2) a Biden et al. resolution supporting the divsion of Iraq into federalist states along Shia/Sunni/Kurdi lines overlaid with a weak federal government.

As for the Revolutionary Guard resolution. Those favoring it say that the IRG is supplying arms, ranging from rockets to roadside bombs, in an effort to fight a proxy war against the U.S. and to kill U.S. soldiers. Those opposed to the resolution, including Kerry and Webb, are fearful that the resolution seems similar to the legislation Congress passed which granted Bush the authority to invade Iraq.

As for the Iraqi Federalism, it has a surprisingly bipartisan cast of support ranging from Brownback (KS) to Hutchison (TX) to Biden (DE). The resolution, according to Biden, introduces no new ideas. The Iraqi constitution, passed a couple of years ago, allows for the division of Iraq into three states based on geography/ethnicity, i.e. Shia/Sunni/Kurdi states. These states would be under the umbrella of a weak federal government. Federalism means strong states, weak central government. As I understand it, all the Senators are saying is this: we think we should go ahead and divide Iraq into these states sooner rather than later. There is some opposition to this resolution because there is a set of politicians that believes that any drastic change in Iraq right now, while THE SURGE is still ongoing, represents some kind of surrender or pull-out.

In any event, the Dems wanted to bring both to a vote last night but there was a filibuster, more or less, on the Biden federalism resolution, meaning Repubs were blocking it from coming to a vote. So the Dem leadership responded by saying, Fine, then no vote on Kyl/Lieberman.

September 25, 2007: Iran and S-CHIP

[18:21]
Unclear whether there will be any votes tonight. The next two votes will be on: (1) a Kyl/Lieberman Amendment to the Defense Authorization bill, in the form of a resolution, declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to be a terrorist organization; and, (2) a Biden et al. Amendment, also in the form of a resolution, urging that the federalism guidelines laid out in the Iraqi Constitution be put into effect, namely some sort of division of Iraq into Shia, Sunni, and Kurdi federal regions, overlaid by a weak federal government. There is opposition to both Amendments, and the Senators are currently trying to arrive at acceptable language on each.


[15:01]
Kennedy goes on to speak in support of a "Hate Crimes" amendment he is offering. The bill is named after Matthew Shepard, who was killed because of his sexual persuasion. The bill aims to make hate crimes more easy to prosecute federally, including crimes targeting homosexuals (which is not currently the case, apparently).

The house has passed the bill. The same legislation has passed both houses in the past, only to be stripped out in conference. Bush has threatened to veto this legislation; however, if it is successfully attached to the Defense Authorization bill, Bush would have to veto the entire bill to get rid of the Hate Crimes amendment. I would be interested to hear someone speak in opposition to the Amendment because Kennedy was not real clear on what his legislation does.

[14:52]
Edward Kennedy (MA) is presenting on behalf of the S-CHIP program that Congress appears willing to pass in bipartisan fashion. This is the State Children's Health Insurance Program. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation because its cost to the federal government will increase under this renewal.

Congress plans to pay for any increased cost by raising cigarette taxes. Bush appears to be the only player opposed to the legislation. State governors love it because the States get money; Congressmen love it because they are bringing home money and helping kids. The House appears ready to pass it today. It would come to the Senate shortly thereafter for passage in advance of the October 1 recess. The bill costs $7b/year, benefiting as many as 4m children, according to Sherrod Brown (OH).


[13:02]
The Senate is at lunch....


[10:57]
Sam Brownback (KS, Pres. Candidate). Thinks the Ahmadinejad appearance at Columbia U. was disgraceful. Also, it appears that Brownback is a co-sponsor of the Biden resolution voicing support for a partitioning of Iraq along Sunni/Shia/Kurd lines. Brownback refers to it as a federalist plan for Iraq—erecting powerful "states" within the umbrella of a weak(er) federal government. Brownback lists the reasons to consider Iran a threat: holocaust denial, association w/ Hezbollah, supply of weapons to terrorists in Iraq. He supports the resolution labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization.


[10:50]
Sherrod Brown (OH). Can't believe the President would veto the S-CHIP bill that Congress is poised to pass (see below). Brown is big on trade policy. He is questioning U.S. trade policy w/ China. They are selling us unsafe products, he says. He says that Mattel and the rest of them can't be surprised by lead paint because companies like Mattel keep pushing for China to cut costs. Our trade policy invites these problems, says Brown, instead of preventing them. Brown warns against upcoming "free trade" treaties with Peru, Panama, South Korea, etc. Seafood could be a big part of these agreements. The FDA has found contaminated seafood from Peru and Panama but under the proposed "free trade" agreements, inspection of seafood from these countries would be reduced AND would be conducted, in part, by foreign inspectors. Yikes.


[10:28]
Judd Gregg (NH). Gregg is an alumnus of Columbia U. He is wondering why Columbia U. allowed/invited Iranian President Ahmadinejad to speak yesterday on campus. Gregg says that Columbia never would have invited Donald Rumsfeld, or George W. Bush, and certainly not Dick Cheney. So why Ahmadinejad? He is in charge of a government that is sending arms to Iraq for the purpose of killing American soldiers.

The Senate Republicans are launching a full frontal on Iran in light of Ahmadinejad's U.S. and Columbia U. visit.

Gregg continues. The Columbia U. president (Lee Bollinger, a First Amendment scholar btw) exhibited poor taste when he gave Ahmadinejad a forum but then proceeded to lambaste Ahmadinejad, almost making Ahmadinejad look like the good guy. I was embarassed, says Gregg. It would have been much more effective to allow Ahmadinejad indict himself, which he did. It was not a good day for Columbia, imho. Not the behavior of an elite university.

And, here you go, "conservative thought would not have given Ahmadinejad such a forum." Why, why did Columbia pursue this course? He yields the floor.


[10:22]
Lindsay Graham (SC).  We are in a proxy war with Iran.  Kyl's resolution (below) should be easy to pass.

Biden (DE) has a resolution expressing that it is the sense of the Senate that Iraq should undergo a partitioning based on ethincity/geography.  Graham is skeptical that all of a sudden a partition along Shia/Sunni/Kurd lines will bring peace to Iraq.


[10:15]
Jon Kyl (AZ) introduced a resolution designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization.  Kyl said that the Revolutionary Guard is responsible for smuggling arms into Iraq for the purpose of killing U.S. soldiers.