ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Republican Obstruction

Health

Three Ways The GOP Will Still Try To Weaken Obamacare

After surviving a year-long battle in Congress, a Supreme Court challenge, and the presidential election, Obamacare is here to stay. Just yesterday, GOP House Speaker John Boehner admitted yesterday that Obamacare is, in fact, “the law of the land.”

But Boehner was quick to walk back his comments via Twitter, reasserting that the GOP’s wish is still to fully repeal or severely dismantle the law. Since the Senate and the presidency remains solidly in Democratic hands, the GOP has their work cut out for them. But that doesn’t mean they won’t try their best to beat back, sue, and defund Obamacare provisions in an effort to neuter the law at the cost of Americans’ health and financial security. Here are three ways that the GOP will likely attempt to attack and undermine Obamacare provisions:

1) Denying federal insurance subsidies to Americans under health exchanges. If states can’t make a decision by November 16th about whether to set up health insurance exchanges, the federal government will set up one for them. But House Republicans may try to throw a wrench into those plans. Republicans are claiming that a minor technicality in the health reform legislation restricts its health insurance subsidies to Americans living in states that set up their own exchanges, and doesn’t extend to the Americans in states where the federal government sets up an exchange. This is obviously not what the health reform law intends, and IRS Commissioner Doug Shumlin has already issued an IRS-rule setting aside subsidies for Americans in all states. But Republican leaders may pursue this line of obstruction for insurance subsidies, essentially leaving sick and needy Americans to fend for themselves by denying them the subsidies that would make it possible for them to afford health coverage.

2) Resisting the Medicaid expansion. ThinkProgress has consistently reported on how Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion will significantly lower state health care costs while extending insurance to as many as 30 million low-income Americans — but only if the states agree to take part in the expansion, which the Supreme Court ruled optional. Even after President Obama’s re-election, GOP governors in states such as Florida are digging in their heels against reform. Sadly, many of the expansion’s GOP detractors lead states with extremely large uninsured populations, and their refusals to implement Medicaid reform might leave millions of low-wage workers without the health coverage they depend on.

3) Undermining the medical device tax and Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). The device tax and IPAB are ways that Obamacare raises revenue for its vast coverage expansion and controls the rate of Medicare spending. Republicans are already eyeing the 2.3 percent medical device tax, calling it a burden on American businesses. But repealing the device tax risks grossly under-funding Obamacare’s insurance subsidies to Americans, meaning that Republicans are seeking to lower big manufacturers’ costs by shifting the burden onto Americans’ subsidized insurance premiums in 2014. Similarly, the independent, 15-member IPAB looks to keep American health spending at sustainable levels by finding ways to control Medicare spending growth without compromising on quality or benefits. While some of these cuts may be painful at first for hospitals and some physicians, the savings accrued will act as a firewall against seniors’ rising premiums and assure that providers, rather than everyday Americans, are bearing the burden of lowering medical spending.

Americans can expect continued battles over the proper funding and implementation of Obamacare in the coming months — for example, employer groups are almost certain to challenge the law’s provisions requiring that all large employers offer their workers health benefits. But now that the uncertainty over Obamacare’s future no longer exists, it isn’t too difficult to see what attempts to weaken the law really are: giveaways to large corporations, providers, and partisan politicking at the expense of real Americans’ health care and financial security.

LGBT

Strategist Admits Goal Of Minnesota Amendment Was Republican Voter Turnout

Michael Brodkorb

Michael Brodkorb was a powerful Republican insider within the Minnesota legislator until it came to light 10 months ago that he was having an affair with Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch (R). Koch resigned and Brodkorb was fired, but after keeping his silence in the interim, he’s now speaking out against the marriage inequality amendment. He explained to WCCO that the amendment had nothing to do with morality, but was passed to drive Republican voter turnout:

“It provided a turnout opportunity for Republicans,” he said.

Brodkorb was former Deputy Chairman of the State Republican Party and top Senate staffer, and says GOP Senators knew a driving force behind the gay marriage amendment wasn’t morality. It was political reality.

Top GOP leaders thought they couldn’t beat incumbent Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, and Republicans would stay home.

“The belief was, the United States senate race was not going to be close, and that Republicans needed and social conservatives needed a reason to get to the polls in November,” he said.

This revelation is troubling, but perhaps not so surprising. After all, it cannot be forgotten that the Minnesota state government had to shut down, because instead of passing a budget, Republican leadership dedicated excessive time to debating and passing the amendment banning same-sex marriage, then flying around the state to defend it.

Brodkorb says the plan may now backfire, because strong opposition to the harmful amendment could cause some Republican state Senators to lose. Polls have shown a close race, but they indicate the amendment is set to lose, because Minnesota law requires a full 50 percent vote of approval — non-votes will count as no-votes. (HT: Truth Wins Out.)

Health

House Republicans To Boehner: If We Can’t Repeal Obamacare, Shut Down The Government

In the letter dated July 18, more than 100 GOP lawmakers asked House Speaker John Boehner (OH) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (VA) to stop “any legislation” from coming to the floor that would fund the implementation of the Affordable Care Act — potentially leading to a government shutdown. Congress must pass a funding measure before October 1 to keep the government running, yet a majority of Republicans are willing to risk a shutdown in order to take away coverage from more than 30 million Americans and increase the deficit by more than 100 billion.

Despite the possibility of a standoff with the Democrat-controlled Senate and a veto threat from President Obama, the Republicans called for defunding Obamacare while continuing attempts to repeal the heath care reform law:

Since much of the implementation of ObamaCare is a function of the discretionary appropriations process, and since most of the citizens we represent believe that ObamaCare should never go into effect, we urge you not to bring to the House floor in the 112th Congress any legislation that provides or allows funds to implement ObamaCare through the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Health and Human Services, or any other federal entity. We also urge you to take legislative steps necessary to immediately rescind all ObamaCare-implementation funds.

According to Talking Points Memo, Boehner suggested on Tuesday that he would reject the proposal. “I expect we’ll have an agreement with the Senate on a CR,” he said. “But our goal would be to make sure the government is funded and any political talk of a government shutdown is put to rest.”

House Republicans so far have wasted $50 million trying and failing to repeal Obamacare 31 times. The latest Congressional Budget Office report shows that eliminating the Affordable Care Act would add $109 billion to the nation’s deficit.

.

NEWS FLASH

GOP Congressman Wants To Amend Constitution To Stop Obamacare ‘Tax’ | After the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act, Republicans seized on the fact that the individual mandate was ruled as constitutional under Congress’ taxing power, falsely claiming that it is a “massive tax hike” on the middle class. But Rep. Ben Quayle (R-AZ) wants to fight against the ruling by amending the Constitution so that a law cannot be considered a tax unless Congress calls it a tax.

LGBT

Gay Son Of Colorado Rep. Who Killed Civil Unions Speaks Out

Colorado Rep. Don Coram (R)

When Colorado Rep. Don Coram (R) cast the deciding vote killing civil unions Monday night in committee, he oddly referenced that he has a gay son — perhaps trying to sugarcoat how anti-gay his decision was. Now, that son, Dee Coram, has spoken out about his father’s failure of leadership, noting that Rep. Coram previously supported letting the full House vote on the bill — where it would have passed:

DEE CORAM: He did say at that time if it goes to the floor, I will vote no. But at that time his stance was that the committee should send it and let the House vote on it. He was given an opportunity here to actually be a leader, and I guess he didn’t take that leadership role. And it’s disappointing to see that on something like this, he said it should have gone to the House floor for a vote. Essentially he prevented that from happening.

Listen to Coram’s comments and his father’s response:

Rep. Coram claimed that he thought it was “appropriate” to discuss his gay son, but he voted against the bill because his constituents don’t support it — though 62 percent of Coloradans do. Apparently, Coram even supports civil unions, but felt the word “spouse” appeared too many times in the bill’s language. As the Gill Foundation’s Leah Pryor-Lease noted on Twitter in the wake of Coram’s vote, “Wonder if Rep. Coram’s district will be coming to his house for Christmas instead of his gay son.”

LGBT

GOP Colorado House Speaker Ignores Majority, Moves To Kill Civil Unions Bill

Colorado House Speaker Frank McNulty (R)

Colorado House Speaker Frank McNulty (R) (credit: Out Front Colorado)

A huge majority of Colorado voters support a bill to allow same-sex civil unions. With at least six Colorado House Republicans and the House Democratic caucus reportedly all backing the legislation — it enjoys clear majority support. Three House committees have endorsed the measure. The Senate has already passed it multiple times and Gov. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) has promised to sign it.

But one man stands in the way of the bill’s passage: Romney-endorser and ALEC member Speaker Frank McNulty (R). After employing filibuster tactics last week to run out the clock on the bill without letting it have a floor vote, McNulty lamented reaching “an impasse” that required him sacrificing dozens of other bills. Incredibly, he blamed Senate Democrats for not getting the bill to the House early enough in the process — though that delay had come at the behest of a House Republican supporter. Gov. Hickenlooper called McNulty’s bluff last week, ordering a special session to give full consideration to civil unions and several other bills killed by McNulty’s parliamentary games.

McNulty announced he wanted the special session — which began today — to last just three days. Even though the bill has already cleared three committees, McNulty declared this afternoon that he would send civil unions to yet a fourth committee — the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee, which has no jurisdiction over the matter. McNulty chose this committee as the apparent burial ground for the bill; none of the members of the Republican majority on the committee are supporters.

Even worse, he released a statement blasting Gov. Hickenlooper’s decision to allow the House the time McNulty had earlier lamented it needed to consider civil unions and other bills.

Make no mistake about it. Gov. Hickenlooper has called this Legislature into an expensive special session for the sole purpose of dividing Coloradans. Instead of using his authority and his bully pulpit to unify Coloradans behind a pro-growth agenda of economic recovery and job creation, he is using his authority to tear Colorado apart. Again. That’s where his priority is.

What had been a regular legislative session defined by remarkable bipartisan progress turned bitter and cold when Democrats brought the work of the state House of Representatives to a grinding halt by demanding that a bill creating same sex marriage [sic] in Colorado be prioritized and forced to the front of the line. It is unfortunate it happened, but it did.

Gov. Hickenlooper’s special session will not result in one more job being created, or making gasoline any cheaper.

Unlike President Obama, Gov. Hickenlooper and their campaign operatives, Colorado families aren’t preoccupied with promoting a divisive social agenda – because they have more pressing concerns.

After obstructing civil unions and other legislature, McNulty shows considerable gall, blaming others for his obstruction, and considerable ignorance, suggesting voters do not care about expanding civil rights for all Coloradans.

The House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee meets later today — seemingly to kill the civil unions bill. The voters of Colorado meet in November and observers expect they will likely respond by killing his one-seat GOP House majority and ending his reign as Speaker.

NEWS FLASH

Colorado Governor Calls Special Session For Civil Unions Consideration | Last night, the Republican leadership in the Colorado House sacrificed more than 30 bills to stonewall civil unions from coming up for a vote. Today, Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) announced he would call the legislature back for a special session starting this Friday to address the unfinished business, including the civil unions bill. In his remarks, Hickenlooper said that sexual orientation is not a choice, “everyone deserves the same legal rights in this country,” and that “this is a circumstance where we’re depriving people of civil rights for no reason.” Though he admitted he can’t force the bill’s passage, he said that “we’re going to continue to push for an open discussion” in hopes that it allows people to begin to “moderate their positions.” The special session could begin as soon as Friday and last for several days, and the governor made it clear that it would be paid for out of escrow, not taxpayer funds.

LGBT

Colorado Republican Leadership Kills Civil Unions And 30 Other Bills With Epic Obstruction And Dishonesty

Colorado House Speaker Frank McNulty (R) deserves particular credit for killing civil unions and 30 other bills.

Civil unions are dead for this year in Colorado and Republican obstruction is to blame after an unprecedented night of antics on the House floor. The civil unions bill passed out of its final committee yesterday evening and needed to reach a floor vote by midnight. Republicans instead chose to intentionally run out the clock with hour-long debates on noncontroversial legislation about historic license plates and trans-fats in school lunchrooms, with Rep. David Balmer (R) filibustering, “Not a one of you has the courage to vote against chocolate!”

Rep. B.J. Nikkel (R), one of several Republicans who supported civil unions in committee, offered to help Democrats regain control to force a vote. The presiding officer declared a recess as an attempted coup ensued. In this exclusive behind-the-scenes clip from OutFront Colorado, it’s obvious that House Speaker Frank McNulty (R) is seen holding the civil unions bill hostage, refusing to guarantee that he would bring it up to a vote. In fact, he dishonestly rejected the notion that any sort of stalling tactic was underway. Meanwhile, Rep. Mark Waller (R) attempted to play damage control on the floor, evoking uproarious laughter from the press when he claimed, “The Democrats in the State House right now are playing procedural games to have one bill heard over every other bill.”

Ultimately, the House never came out of recess. Not only did the civil unions bill die, but so did 30 other pieces of legislation, including $20 million worth of water projects statewide and a controversial bill that would set a standard for driving while stoned. Upon news the bills were dying, people in the gallery started booing and chanting, “Shame on you! Shame on you!” Watch how McNulty tried to blame the failure on an “impasse,” disingenuously suggesting “it is unfortunate that there will be items that do not receive consideration by the House tonight”:

But of course, McNulty is fully responsible for that impasse. He tried to pass the buck by blaming Senate Democrats for delaying introduction of the bill, but left out one important detail. Sen. Pat Steadman (D), the bill’s sponsor, explained that he brought the bill up late specifically because the speaker pro tem, Rep. Kevin Priola (R), was considering sponsoring the bill but wanted to wait until after the GOP state convention in mid-April. Priola supports the bill, but never bothered to sign on as the House sponsor, despite the delay at his request.

The Denver Post has called on Gov. John Hickenlooper to call a special session of the legislature so that civil unions can pass. Unfortunately, even in a special session, McNulty could reshuffle committee membership to prevent the bill from advancing to the floor.

There is no way to spin the absurd obstruction that took place last night. Despite ample support for civil unions from Republicans, it was the Republican House leadership that sacrificed 30 other bills to prevent same-sex couples from obtaining legal rights. It’s an historically sad day for Colorado politics.

Justice

Richard Mourdock Wins, Or Why Senate Democrats No Longer Have A Choice On Filibuster Reform

In 2009, when President Obama was close to the height of his popularity and political capital, only nine Republican senators voted to confirm Justice Sotomayor: Lamar Alexander, Kit Bond, Susan Collins, Lindsay Graham, Judd Gregg, Dick Lugar, Mel Martinez, Olympia Snowe, and George Voinovich. Of these four (Bond, Gregg, Martinez and Voinovich) are now retired. One (Snowe) recently announced her voluntary retirement. And one, Dick Lugar of Indiana, was just involuntarily retired by Tea Party challenger Richard Mourdock.

Lugar is an Indiana institution. He ran virtually unopposed during his last reelection race, and won by more than 30 points the last time a major party candidate tried to challenge him. Had he won yesterday’s primary, he would have been the prohibitive favorite in November (Mourdock, by contrast, could lose in November as easily as he could win). Nor was Lugar particularly moderate. Among other things, Lugar voted for Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) infamous plan to phase out Medicare.

In the age of the Tea Party, however, even the most occasional departures from conservative orthodoxy are enough for the GOP electorate to declare a public official an apostate. Mourdock made Lugar’s votes for Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, in addition to a handful of other breaks with America’s far right, the focus of his campaign — and that was enough to defeat a 36 year Senate veteran. In light of this incident, it is unlikely that any of the few remaining Republicans who backed an Obama Supreme Court appointee will be willing to risk their careers by doing the same again.

Lest there be any doubt, there is probably no one President Obama could nominate for the high Court who would satisfy the newly radicalized Republican Party. Mourdock, for his part, recently promised to oppose any nominee who did not fit his personal constitutional philosophy — and he twice cited failed Supreme Court nominee and Romney legal advisor Robert Bork as his model nominee. As recently as last October, Bork mocked the very idea that women sometimes face discrimination as “silly,” and he infamously described the federal ban on whites-only lunch counters as “unsurpassed ugliness” early in his career. Obama would never, ever nominate such a man to the Supreme Court.

In other words, if President Obama has the opportunity to nominate a new justice during a second presidential term, it is tough to imagine any set of circumstances that allows that nominee to receive the 60 votes necessary to break a filibuster. The parties are too far apart. The Republicans are too eager to obstruct, and the handful of GOPers with a history of bipartisanship will be too spooked to reach across the aisle. America could go years with one or more Supreme Court seats vacant.

There could be, however, a way out of this trap. In his most recent State of the Union Address, President Obama called on the Senate to “pass a simple rule that all judicial and public servant nominations receive an up or down vote within 90 days” — effectively eliminating the filibuster for Senate-confirmed jobs. Moreover, when the newly-elected Senate reconvenes next January, it opens a very brief window where Obama’s proposed rule could be implemented with just 51 votes.

Should the Democrats manage to hold the Senate next year, an outcome that is much more likely than appeared possible just one year ago, they no longer have the option to maintain the status quo. Keeping the current rules means stripping Obama of his power to nominate Supreme Court justices, and potentially turning the Court over to Mourdock’s fellow ideologues for years to come.

Update

Jonathan Chait expresses similar concerns here.

NEWS FLASH

Colorado Civil Unions Pass Final Committee, Floor Vote Expected Tonight | The Colorado Civil Unions Act has passed its final committee hurdle, the House Appropriations Committee, with a 7-6 vote. There were concerns that the committee was wasting time on bills that won’t make it to the Senate this session and are essentially dead, but it does seem there is enough time for civil unions to proceed. The bill will have to get a House floor vote yet tonight so that it can have its final reading tomorrow, and there’s no guarantee that the controlling Republican leadership will allow it. Stay tuned.

Update

During the committee discussion, Rep. Marsha Looper (R) advanced two amendments to create extra exceptions for church-based schools and therapists to not recognize (discriminate) against civil unions. There will have to be enough Republican support to strip these amendments during tonight’s floor debate so that the bill remains identical to the Senate version, because there is not enough time in the session for the Senate to reconsider it as amended.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up