Dont ever miss an article again. New To You shows you everything posted since your last visit in a simple, scrollable list.
More Info →
Sahil Kapur is TPM's senior congressional reporter and Supreme Court correspondent. His articles have been published in the Huffington Post, The Guardian and The New Republic. Email him at firstname.lastname@example.org and follow him on Twitter at @sahilkapur.
Now that Obamacare has survived at the Supreme Court and the ballot box, proponents and opponents of the law agree it's here to stay. But Republicans remain committed to botching its implementation, which -- along with inherent complexities in implementing parts of the law -- leaves in place significant obstacles to achieving its key goals.
Although the GOP's efforts to repeal, invalidate and defund the law have not succeeded, here are the four biggest obstacles the law faces in meeting its key goals:
The Communications Workers of America, which helped lead the outside charge for weakening the filibuster, issued a statement after the GOP-led filibuster of Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense, saying the vote demonstrates the need for "real reform."
CWA's senior director George Kohl slammed Republicans for "breaking with tradition" to filibuster a cabinet nominee, before turning his attention to Democrats who "worked to scuttle more substantial reforms."
“A real Senate reform package would have made the obstructionists hold the floor and keep 41 of their colleagues with them over a holiday weekend. Yet, Senator Levin, who is point person for this nomination via his position at the helm of the Armed Services Committee, opposed Senate rules reform and claimed that the rules already existed to keep those wishing to filibuster to hold the floor.
“Regardless of the ultimate outcome of the Hagel nomination, the news of the impending filibuster is a reminder that the Senate rules still need real reform, that the Republicans in the Senate remain intent on breaking new ground in Senate obstruction, and that Senate Democrats who worked to scuttle more substantial reforms have forfeited their right to complain.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced Thursday on the floor that the chamber will hold a vote Friday on the confirmation of Chuck Hagel.
He fiercly attacked Republicans for holding up the nomination.
"In less than two hours, our country will be without a secretary of defense," he said. "The filibuster of Senator Hagel's confirmation is unprecedented. I repeat, not a single nominee for secretary of defense, ever in the history of our country, has been filibustered. Never, ever."
"There are serious consequences to this delay," Reid said. "It sends a terrible signal not only to our military personnel but to the world. ... For the sake of our national security it's time to put aside this political theater."
"This isn't a high school getting ready for a football game. We're trying to confirm somebody to run the defenses of our country -- the military of our country."
One day after the Senate voted overwhelmingly to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act with expanded provisions, a top aide to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said House GOP leaders intended to consider their own, yet-to-be unveiled version of the legislation in the coming weeks.
"The House will consider a strong Violence Against Women Act in the coming weeks so we can protect all women from acts of violence while prosecuting offenders to the fullest extent of the law," Doug Heye, Cantor's deputy chief of staff, told TPM on Wednesday.
House Republicans, who blocked the Senate's bipartisan reauthorization of VAWA last year, are under pressure not just from Democrats but Senate Republicans, too, to put this issue behind them, especially after the difficulties Republicans had with women voters in the 2012 elections. Cantor has taken the lead in trying to find a way forward, but House Republicans have yet to introduce a companion bill to what passed the Senate.
House Speaker John Boehner's (R-OH) swift rejection of President Obama's proposal during the State of the Union to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $9 has reignited a long running, contentious battle over the economic consequences of a price floor for labor. Perhaps predictably the latest skirmish has begun with a salvo of economic studies from each side.
"[W]hen you raise the price of employment, guess what happens? You get less of it," Boehner told reporters Wednesday morning during a Capitol Hill press conference with the House GOP leadership. "And what happens when you take away the first couple of rungs on the economic ladder? You make it harder for people to get on the ladder. Our goal is to get people on the ladder and help them climb that ladder so they can live the American dream."
The White House shot back against Boehner's claim that the policy would lead to job losses and particularly harm low-skilled workers.
"We have a lot of empirical evidence on this question, and the best studies consistently find that the minimum wage has no adverse effect on unemployment," a senior administration official told TPM on Wednesday afternoon.
On the floor Wednesday morning, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said Democrats will introduce a sequester replacement plan later this week and called on Republicans to stop ruling out new revenues from affluent Americans as part of the deal.
From Reid's remarks:
Democrats believe we should replace this harsh austerity with a balanced approach that targets wasteful spending and tax loopholes, and asks the wealthiest among us to contribute a little more to reduce the deficit. The American people know we can’t cut our way to prosperity. They agree we cannot ask the middle class to bear the entire burden of deficit reduction.
Later this week, Democrats will introduce a plan to avert the so-called sequester.
Republicans say they agree the deep cuts they voted for would be damaging to our economy and to national security. But they would rather cut Medicare, education and medical research than close a single wasteful tax loophole or ask a single millionaire to contribute more. They should stop protecting millionaires, billionaires and wealthy corporations, and start working with us to pass an alternative to these terrible cuts that protects the middle class.
"I've been deadling with the minimum wage issue for the last 28 years that I've been in elected office," he told reporters. "And when you raise the price of employment, guess what happens? You get less of it. At a time when Americans are still asking the question 'Where are the jobs?' why would we want to make it harder for small employers to hire people?"
He argued that raising the minimum wage makes it harder for low-skilled workers to enter the workforce and acquire skills to advance up the ladder.
"Listen, I've got 11 brothers and sisters on every rung of the economic ladder. I know about this issue as much as anybody in this town. And what happens when you take away the first couple of rungs on the economic ladder -- you make it harder for people to get on the ladder," Boehner said. "Our goal is to get people on the ladder and help them climb that ladder so they can live the American dream. And a lot of people who are being the paid minimum wage are being paid that because they come to the workforce with no skills. And this makes it harder for them to acquire the skills they need in order to climb that ladder successfully."
Moments later, White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer responded to Boehner on Twitter:
If the GOP is opposed to raising the minimum wage, what is their plan to ensure people who work full time don't live in poverty?
Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said Wednesday morning that the House does not intend to pass a sequester replacement plan before the Senate acts.
"Listen we've played our cards. We've laid out our hand," Boehner told reporters. "We've passed a bill and sent it to the Senate. It's time for the Senate to do their job."
House Republicans point to legislation they passed last year to replace the sequester with targeted cuts to domestic programs. Now that the new Congress has been sworn in, that legislation is inactive. Passed a margin of 215-209, it's not clear House Republicans could pass it again because they have lost eight seats since then.
Asked Wednesday if House GOP leaders intend to wait for the Senate to act, Boehner said, "We do. We do. We do."
Sen. Linsdey Graham (R-SC) said Tuesday night that he was very disappointed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) threat not to honor his "hold" on the confirmation of Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense.
"I'm very disappointed," Graham told a small group of reporters after the president's State of the Union speech. "I'm very upset about it and I'm going to fight back."
Graham said he will demand a cloture vote and hopes all Republicans will filibuster Hagel's nomination until the Obama administration provides the answers he wants.
"It gives double-standard a bad name. They really did go hard after [President] Bush when he -- his interrogation policies," Graham said. "They held up [John] Bolton for information. They're trying to jam Hagel through. We need more information about where he got his money and what speeches he gave."
"Chuck Hagel's a good man but they're stonewalling us on Benghazi."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters Tuesday night after the State of the Union that President Obama's impassioned plea to strengthen gun safety laws amount to "political theater."
"I think it's more political theater than anything else," Graham said. "And I'm sad for the families but he didn't mention all the families that were saved from rape and murder by owning a gun."
"So I just think there's going to be bipartisan opposition to an assault weapons ban."
As for background checks, Graham said, "When you're prosecuting 44 people out of 80,000 who fail a background check, you don't need to expand background checks, you need to enforce the law that we have. Nobody is going to be deterred when you only prosecute 44 people out of 80,000 who fail a background check. That to me is absolutely ridiculous and an embarrassment. You've got a better chance of getting hit by a meteor than you do getting caught relying on background checks."