Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Md Troopers Assoc #20 & Westminster Md Fire Dept Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Showing posts with label US Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US Congress. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 04, 2015

Bibi Netanyahu's Speech to Congress March 3, 2015


Transcript of Netanyahu's Speech to Congress

Speaker of the House John Boehner,

President Pro Tem Senator Orrin Hatch,

Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell,

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi,

And House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy,
I also want to acknowledge Senator, Democratic Leader Harry Reid. Harry, it’s good to see you back on your feet. I guess it’s true what they say, you can’t keep a good man down.

My friends, I’m deeply humbled by the opportunity to speak for a third time before the most important legislative body in the world, the U.S. Congress. I want to thank you all for being here today. I know that my speech has been the subject of much controversy. I deeply regret that some perceive my being here as political. That was never my intention.

I want to thank you, Democrats and Republicans, for your common support for Israel, year after year, decade after decade. I know that no matter on which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with Israel. The remarkable alliance between Israel and the United States has always been above politics. It must always remain above politics. Because America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope. Israel is grateful for the support of America’s people and of America’s presidents, from Harry Truman to Barack Obama.

We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel. Now, some of that is widely known. Some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N.

Some of what the president has done for Israel is less well-known. I called him in 2010 when we had the Carmel forest fire, and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid. In 2011, we had our embassy in Cairo under siege, and again, he provided vital assistance at the crucial moment. Or his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on Hamas terrorists. In each of those moments, I called the president, and he was there.

And some of what the president has done for Israel might never be known, because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between an American president and an Israeli prime minister. But I know it, and I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.

And Israel is grateful to you, the American Congress, for your support, for supporting us in so many ways, especially in generous military assistance and missile defense, including Iron Dome. Last summer, millions of Israelis were protected from thousands of Hamas rockets because this capital dome helped build our Iron Dome.

Thank you, America. Thank you for everything you’ve done for Israel.

My friends, I’ve come here today because, as Prime Minister of Israel, I feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people: Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons.

We’re an ancient people. In our nearly 4,000 years of history, many have tried repeatedly to destroy the Jewish people. Tomorrow night, on the Jewish holiday of Purim, we’ll read the Book of Esther. We’ll read of a powerful Persian viceroy named Haman, who plotted to destroy the Jewish people some 2,500 years ago. But a courageous Jewish woman, Queen Esther, exposed the plot and gave for the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies. The plot was foiled. Our people were saved.

Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei spews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated – he tweets. You know, in Iran, there isn’t exactly free Internet. But he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed.

For those who believe that Iran threatens the Jewish state, but not the Jewish people, listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran’s chief terrorist proxy. He said: If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.

But Iran’s regime is not merely a Jewish problem, any more than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. The 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in World War II. So, too, Iran’s regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also the peace of the entire world. To understand just how dangerous Iran would be with nuclear weapons, we must fully understand the nature of the regime. The people of Iran are very talented people. They’re heirs to one of the world’s great civilizations. But in 1979, they were hijacked by religious zealots – religious zealots who imposed on them immediately a dark and brutal dictatorship.

That year, the zealots drafted a constitution, a new one for Iran. It directed the revolutionary guards not only to protect Iran’s borders, but also to fulfill the ideological mission of jihad. The regime’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, exhorted his followers to “export the revolution throughout the world.”

I’m standing here in Washington, D.C. and the difference is so stark. America’s founding document promises life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Iran’s founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad. And as states are collapsing across the Middle East, Iran is charging into the void to do just that.

Iran’s goons in Gaza, its lackeys in Lebanon, its revolutionary guards on the Golan Heights are clutching Israel with three tentacles of terror. Backed by Iran, Assad is slaughtering Syrians. Backed by Iran, Shiite militias are rampaging through Iraq. Backed by Iran, Houthis are seizing control of Yemen, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the Red Sea. Along with the Straits of Hormuz, that would give Iran a second choke-point on the world’s oil supply. Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That’s just last week, while they’re having nuclear talks with the United States. But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran’s attacks against the United States have been anything but mock. And the targets have been all too real.

Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, D.C.

In the Middle East, Iran now dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa. And if Iran’s aggression is left unchecked, more will surely follow.

So, at a time when many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations. We must all stand together to stop Iran’s march of conquest, subjugation and terror.

Now, two years ago, we were told to give President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif a chance to bring change and moderation to Iran. Some change! Some moderation! Rouhani’s government hangs gays, persecutes Christians, jails journalists and executes even more prisoners than before.

Last year, the same Zarif who charms Western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh. Imad Mughniyeh is the terrorist mastermind who spilled more American blood than any other terrorist besides Osama bin Laden. I’d like to see someone ask him a question about that.

Iran’s regime is as radical as ever, its cries of “Death to America,” that same America that it calls the “Great Satan,” as loud as ever. Now, this shouldn’t be surprising, because the ideology of Iran’s revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that’s why this regime will always be an enemy of America.

Don’t be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America. Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the region and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire.

In this deadly game of thrones, there’s no place for America or for Israel, no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don’t share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone. So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy.

The difference is that ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember – I’ll say it one more time – the greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can’t let that happen.

But that, my friends, is exactly what could happen, if the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran. That deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. It would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons, lots of them.

Let me explain why. While the final deal has not yet been signed, certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record. You don’t need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. You can Google it. Absent a dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran.

The first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short breakout time to the bomb. Breakout time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb.

According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected, but not destroyed.
Because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largely intact, Iran’s breakout time would be very short – about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel’s.

And if Iran’s work on advanced centrifuges, faster and faster centrifuges, is not stopped, that breakout time could still be shorter, a lot shorter.

True, certain restrictions would be imposed on Iran’s nuclear program and Iran’s adherence to those restrictions would be supervised by international inspectors. But here’s the problem. You see, inspectors document violations; they don’t stop them.

Inspectors knew when North Korea broke to the bomb, but that didn’t stop anything. North Korea turned off the cameras, kicked out the inspectors. Within a few years, it got the bomb.

Now, we’re warned that within five years North Korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs.

Like North Korea, Iran, too, has defied international inspectors. It’s done that on at least three separate occasions – 2005, 2006, 2010. Like North Korea, Iran broke the locks, shut off the cameras. Now, I know this is not going to come as a shock to any of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, it also plays a pretty good game of hide-and-cheat with them.

The U.N.’s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught – caught twice, not once, twice – operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn’t even know existed.

Right now, Iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we don’t know about, the U.S. and Israel. As the former head of inspections for the IAEA said in 2013, he said, “If there’s no undeclared installation today in Iran, it will be the first time in 20 years that it doesn’t have one.” Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. And that’s why the first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. That concession creates a real danger that Iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal.

But the second major concession creates an even greater danger that Iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. Because virtually all the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade. Now, a decade may seem like a long time in political life, but it’s the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It’s a blink of an eye in the life of our children. We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran’s nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could produce many, many nuclear bombs.

Iran’s Supreme Leader says that openly. He says Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount – 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.

My long-time friend, John Kerry, Secretary of State, confirmed last week that Iran could legitimately possess that massive centrifuge capacity when the deal expires.

Now I want you to think about that. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy.

And by the way, if Iran’s intercontinental ballistic missile program is not part of the deal, and so far, Iran refuses to even put it on the negotiating table. Well, Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reaching corners of the Earth, including to every part of the United States. So you see, my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb; it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.

So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse?

Well, I disagree. I don’t believe that Iran’s radical regime will change for the better after this deal. This regime has been in power for 36 years, and its voracious appetite for aggression grows with each passing year. This deal would only whet Iran’s appetite for more.

Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it’s under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which to fund more terrorism?

Why should Iran’s radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both worlds: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?

This is a question that everyone asks in our region. Israel’s neighbors, Iran’s neighbors, know that Iran will become even more aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled and it’s been given a clear path to the bomb. And many of these neighbors say they’ll respond by racing to get nuclear weapons of their own. So this deal won’t change Iran for the better; it will only change the Middle East for the worse. A deal that’s supposed to prevent nuclear proliferation would instead spark a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the planet.

This deal won’t be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox.

If anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road, we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare.

Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve come here today to tell you we don’t have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don’t have to gamble with our future and with our children’s future.

We can insist that restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world. Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world. And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state.

If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires. If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn’t change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted. If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.

My friends, what about the argument that there’s no alternative to this deal, that Iran’s nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn’t get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can’t drive. A pilot without a plane can’t fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can’t make nuclear weapons.

Iran’s nuclear program can be rolled back well-beyond the current proposal by insisting on a better deal and keeping up the pressure on a very vulnerable regime, especially given the recent collapse in the price of oil.

Now, if Iran threatens to walk away from the table – and this often happens in a Persian bazaar – call their bluff. They’ll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do.

And by maintaining the pressure on Iran and on those who do business with Iran, you have the power to make them need it even more. My friends, for over a year, we’ve been told that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well, this is a bad deal. It’s a very bad deal. We’re better off without it.

Now we’re being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That’s just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal: a better deal that doesn’t leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and such a short breakout time; a better deal that keeps the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in place until Iran’s aggression ends; a better deal that won’t give Iran an easy path to the bomb; a better deal that Israel and its neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally. And no country has a greater stake – no country has a greater stake than Israel in a good deal that peacefully removes this threat.

Ladies and gentlemen,

History has placed us at a fateful crossroads. We must now choose between two paths. One path leads to a bad deal that will at best curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions for a while, but it will inexorably lead to a nuclear-armed Iran whose unbridled aggression will inevitably lead to war. The second path, however difficult, could lead to a much better deal that would prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, a nuclearized Middle East and the horrific consequences of both to all of humanity.

You don’t have to read Robert Frost to know. You have to live life to know that the difficult path is usually the one less traveled, but it will make all the difference for the future of my country, the security of the Middle East and the peace of the world, the peace we all desire.

My friends, standing up to Iran is not easy. Standing up to dark and murderous regimes never is. With us today is Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel. Elie, your life and work inspires to give meaning to the words, “Never Again.” And I wish I could promise you, Elie, that the lessons of history have been learned. I can only urge the leaders of the world not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Not to sacrifice the future for the present; not to ignore aggression in the hopes of gaining an illusory peace.

But I can guarantee you this, the days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over. We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend our home have boundless courage. For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves.

This is why as Prime Minister of Israel, I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand. But I know that Israel does not stand alone. I know that America stands with Israel. I know that you stand with Israel. You stand with Israel because you know that the story of Israel is not only the story of the Jewish people but of the human spirit that refuses again and again to succumb to history’s horrors.

Facing me right up there in the gallery, overlooking all of us in this chamber is the image of Moses. Moses led our people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land. And before the people of Israel entered the Land of Israel, Moses gave us a message that has steeled our resolve for thousands of years. I leave you with his message today, “Be strong and resolute, neither fear nor dread them.”

My friends, may Israel and America always stand together, strong and resolute. May we neither fear nor dread the challenges ahead. May we face the future with confidence, strength and hope.


May God bless the State of Israel and may God bless the United States of America. Thank you. You’re wonderful. Thank you, America.
*****

Friday, November 28, 2014

The five worst places to drive in the US | TheHill

The five worst places to drive in the US | TheHill

By Keith Laing - 11/27/14 06:00 AM EST

http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/225464-the-five-worst-places-to-drive-in-the-united-states

Millions of people traveling for Thanksgiving will face daunting traffic problems that critics say have been magnified by Washington’s inability to move a long-term bill to pay for new highway projects.

With a nor’easter bearing down on the Eastern Seaboard this Thanksgiving, it’s expected to be an especially brutal few days on the road.

Congress hasn’t approved a long-term highway bill since 2005, and it’s become much more difficult to move legislation since then because of a variety of reasons, including the end of earmarks that directed money toward specific lawmaker-backed projects and a financial crisis and recession that made it tougher to move big-budget bills.

[...]

"5. Interstate 95 north and south of Washington, D.C.

Washington, D.C. has become closely associated with congressional inaction in recent years, but there has always also been gridlock on its highways.

Interstate 95 runs along the entire length of the East Coast, from Maine to Florida. But the portion of the heavily-traveled highway that circles around Washington on the perimeter highway that is known as the “Beltway” are always backed up around holidays with drivers who are either leaving town or passing through on their way to destinations that are further north or south.

Despite the fact that the Beltway has been entered in the nation’s political lexicon, the highway that allows I-95 to bypass Washington never crosses the cities borders with Maryland or Virginia."


http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/225464-the-five-worst-places-to-drive-in-the-united-states

'via Blog this'

++++++++++++
Kevin Dayhoff Art: http://www.kevindayhoff.com/
New Bedford Herald: http://kbetrue.livejournal.com/
Scribd Kevin Dayhoff: http://www.scribd.com/kdayhoff
Kevin Dayhoff's YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/kevindayhoff
Kevin Dayhoff Banana Stems: http://kevindayhoff.tumblr.com/ 

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

News from The Hill: The rise of the new veterans

The rise of the new veterans By Jonathan Easley


A new class of post-9/11 military veterans has begun making a name for itself on Capitol Hill.

The number of military veterans in the House and Senate has been on a steady decline for nearly three decades. In the current Congress, only about 20 percent of the members in each chamber as having military experience. 

[...]


“There is a healthy disrespect among veterans who served on the front lines for people who walk around telling war stories,’’ Moulton said at the time... Rep.-elect Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) http://kevindayhoff.blogspot.com/2014/11/news-from-hill-rise-of-new-veterans.html

*****

Saturday, April 05, 2014

News from The Hill Michigan's waning congressional clout By Russell Berman

News from The Hill

Michigan's waning congressional clout By Russell Berman

Michigan's unlikely dominance in congressional clout is about to take a hit.

Though the state is the country's ninth-largest by population, it is tops along with California with six committee chairmen – four Republicans in the House and two Democrats in the Senate. And the two longest-serving members of the House, Reps. John Dingell (D) and John Conyers (D), hail from Michigan and carry more than a century of congressional seniority between them.

But that will change in 2015 with the retirement of Dingell, the dean of the House, and three of the men wielding gavels in the Capitol: Reps. Dave Camp (R) and Mike Rogers (R), and Sen. Carl Levin (D). Read the story here.
*****

Saturday, March 22, 2014

News from The Hill: Wall Street’s warning shot to Ryan - By Peter Schroeder and Bernie Becker

News from The Hill: Wall Street’s warning shot to Ryan - By Peter Schroeder and Bernie Becker

The banking industry's vigorous pushback against Rep. Dave Camp's tax reform plan is a warning shot for his likely successor, Rep. Paul Ryan.

Like most industries, Wall Street isn’t worried that Camp’s (R-Mich.) plan could move through Congress in an election year. Plus, Camp is scheduled to be in his last year with the gavel of the powerful Ways and Means Committee.

But the financial industry fears that Camp’s proposal to tax the nation’s biggest banks could someday make a comeback when lawmakers seek revenue generators for legislation.

Read the story here.

March 22, 2014: The Hill's E-news
The Hill: Why not run? The pluses and pitfalls for 2016 GOP hopefuls
By Alexandra Jaffe
Many Republicans with an eye on the White House in 2016 may be asking themselves “Why not run?” when pondering a presidential bid.
The Hill: Leveling the playing field Obama's way
By Mike Lillis
President Obama intensified pressure on Congress to bolster economic opportunities for women in his much touted "year of action."
The Hill: GOP governors leading economic comeback?
By Rebecca Shabad
Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) touted the economic successes Republican governors have achieved in their states during the party’s weekly address Saturday.
The Hill: Marco Rubio's Reagan moment?
By Cameron Joseph
If the Cold War is back, Marco Rubio wants to be Ronald Reagan.
The Hill: House to consider Ryan budget in April
By Russell Berman
House Republicans in April will consider a budget authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that sticks to a bipartisan spending level for 2015 but balances within a decade, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told lawmakers on Friday.
The Hill: Obama signs flood insurance bill
By Erik Wasson
President Obama on Friday signed a bill that rolls back flood insurance rate increases on coastal properties called for in a 2012 reform of the trouble National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
The Hill: Michigan gay marriage ban overturned
By Rebecca Shabad
A federal judge on Friday struck down Michigan’s 2004 ban on same-sex marriage.
The Hill: House offers new Ukraine bill
By Erik Wasson
House lawmakers on Friday introduced a new Ukraine aid and Russia sanctions bill that does not contain controversial International Monetary Fund (IMF) reforms opposed by GOP leaders.
The Hill: ObamaCare drug savings touted
By Elise Viebeck
The Obama administration is out with new numbers touting consumer savings under the healthcare law, a move that will help boost Democrats' effort to go on offense on ObamaCare.
The Hill: GOP wishes Dems an unhappy O-Care anniversary
By Cameron Joseph
Republicans are wishing Democrats an unhappy fourth anniversary on ObamaCare.
The Hill: ‘Hip-hop’ caucus tries to excite blacks
By Tim Devaney
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus are trying to get young African-Americans excited about fighting climate change.
The Hill: Obama's move to relieve snooping fears
By Justin Sink
President Obama and senior administration officials huddled with top technology executives Friday to discuss progress on the president's proposed reforms to electronic government surveillance program, amid growing concerns voiced by some of Silicon Valley's biggest names over government surveillance.
The Hill: Sen. Feinstein 'open to changes' on NSA spying
By Kate Tummarello
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Friday she will consider forthcoming recommendations to change the National Security Agency's (NSA) controversial phone surveillance program.
Bloomberg: Caterpillar said to be focus of Senate overseas tax probe
By Richard Rubin and Jesse Drucker
A U.S. Senate investigative panel is examining Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) and whether the company improperly avoided U.S. taxes by moving profits outside the country, said three people familiar with the inquiry.
Reuters: Rhode Island House speaker's home, office searched in federal probe
By Fausto Giovanny Pinto
U.S. federal law-enforcement officials searched the office and home of the speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives, Gordon Fox, on Friday, according to his spokesman.
*****

Sunday, January 05, 2014

News from The Hill: Battle over unemployment benefits will consume start of 2014 By Alexander Bolton

News from The Hill:

Battle over unemployment benefits will consume start of 2014

By Alexander Bolton

Senate Democratic leaders feel cautiously optimistic they have the 60 votes they need to advance unemployment benefits legislation on Monday, but that marks only the start of the congressional battle.
Even if the legislation passes the Senate, it faces an uphill road in the House. Advocates for extended benefits say the fight could play out between the chambers for weeks.


Read the story here.
*****

Monday, December 30, 2013

News from The Hill: Five Senate races to watch By Alexandra Jaffe

News from The Hill: Five Senate races to watch By Alexandra Jaffe 

Read the story here.

Democrats and Republicans are amassing enormous war chests for a midterm battle that will decide who controls the Senate for the remainder of President Obama’s term.

Republicans need a net gain of six seats to reclaim the Senate majority, and are gunning for Democratic incumbents in conservative-leaning states like Arkansas, Alaska, North Carolina, West Virginia and Louisiana.

Democrats are mostly playing defense, but see a few opportunities to peel away seats from the GOP column. Read the story here.
*****

Sunday, September 15, 2013

News from The Hill: Angry House Republicans demand better communication By Molly K. Hooper

News from The Hill:

Angry House Republicans demand better communication 


By Molly K. Hooper

Republican lawmakers are growing increasingly frustrated with what they say is a lack of communication from their leaders.

Both centrist and conservative members in the House believe that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his lieutenants could have done more earlier this year to counter the Tea Party's effort to defund ObamaCare. 

Some Republicans on Capitol Hill say such an effort is politically impossible with a Democratic-controlled Senate and a Democrat in the White House. Regardless, the rift on what to do on ObamaCare has opened up a civil war within the GOP.

That deep division is flaring at a time when fiscal showdowns are front and center following the August recess.


Read the story here.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/322305-angry-house-republicans-say-gop-leaders-need-to-communicate-better


For all the latest news:
Visit TheHill.com 
Follow @TheHill on Twitter
Like The Hill on Facebook
Connect with The Hill on Google+

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

The August Congressional recess - 1970 Legislative Reorganization Act

Photo of Vice President Charles Curtis
The August Recess - Legislative Reorganization Act

The August Congressional recess - 1970 Legislative Reorganization Act


By tradition and by law, Congress recesses for the month of August. During the Senate's early years, members attempted to adjourn in the spring, before the summer's heat and oppressive humidity overwhelmed them and their small staff. 

When the Senate moved to its current chamber in 1859, senators were optimistic about its "modern" ventilation system, but they soon found the new system ineffective. Long sessions were plagued by hot and stormy weather. 

The 1920s brought  "manufactured weather" to the Senate chamber, but even modern climate control could not cope with the hottest days, forcing 20th-century senators to escape the summer heat.

In 1970, finally facing the reality of long sessions, Congress mandated a summer break as part of the Legislative Reorganization Act. Today, the August recess continues to be a regular feature of the Senate schedule--a chance for senators to spend time with family, meet with constituents in their home states, and catch up on summer reading.





*****

Wednesday, March 06, 2013

The Tentacle: How I learned to love the sequester by Kevin E. Dayhoff Mar 6, 2013 http://tinyurl.com/a4s5zu8


The Tentacle: How I learned to love the sequester by Kevin E. Dayhoff Mar 6, 2013 


Last Friday, March 1, the much ballyhooed and overhyped “sequester” of the federal budget began. A key and critical provision of the Budget Control Act of 2011, sequestration was signed into law on August 2, 2011 by President Barack Obama.

In August 2011 “bipartisan majorities in both the House of Representatives and Senate voted for sequestration as a mechanism to compel the Congress to act on deficit reduction,” according to a March 1, 2013 Office of Management and Budget memo to Speaker of the House, John A. Boehner (R., OH).

The letter further detailed that “As a result of the Congress's failure to act, the law requires the President to issue a sequestration order today canceling $85 billion in budgetary resources across the Federal Government for FY 2013…”

This latest artificial governance-by-crisis has been unfolding for a number of weeks – err, months… http://www.thetentacle.com/ShowArticle.cfm?mydocid=5658

*****