I’ve spilled a lot of e-ink about the fiscal cliff, that looming set of expiring measures at the end of the year that will have a serious impact on fiscal policy, spending and taxes going forward. But there are quite a few policies that either expire or are urgently needed well before the end of the year. And election-year politics being what they are, those measures are getting bottled up.
President Barack Obama asked Congress to pass bills to keep student loan interest rates from doubling, prevent domestic abuse and fund the nation’s highway system.
But never underestimate Congress’s ability to fumble a can’t-miss play.
Now, the slate of issues that lawmakers thought would be a cinch are stuck in a legislative morass, fitting perfectly into Obama’s election-year argument that Congress is a band of incompetents who can’t even agree on curbing domestic violence or shielding college students from ballooning loan payments.
Differing versions of the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act and the transportation funding bill have passed each house of Congress. But neither side has come up with a reconciliation for the differences in the bills, or even a process to get there. There’s currently a conference committee for the surface transportation bill, but nothing much has come of it. The VAWA reauthorization is mired in a technical fight over a “blue-slip” problem; Republicans say the Senate bill had a revenue-collection aspect, which violates the Constitutional provision over revenue-raising measures having to originate in the House.
A collection of student loan interest rate extension bills just failed in the Senate; lawmakers cannot decide on how to pay for it. A couple must-pass bills have made its way through the Congressional thicket: an extension of the Export-Import Bank, which the President signed yesterday, and an FDA user-fee bill, which just passed the House. But those bills had major industries behind them, and if you don’t have that, you just won’t get a lot of consensus in Congress. And even the FDA bill still has a way to go as the bills differ.
The bigger hurdle looks to be the appropriations measures for the next fiscal year. Current appropriations expire on September 30, before the election. House Republicans are pushing for a spending package that breaks last year’s debt limit deal by spending more on the military and less on overall operations. The White House has threatened to veto practically all the appropriations that the House has put on the floor. The smart money is that some stopgap spending bill will get the parties through the election, but there are major differences and the opportunity for hostage-taking on government funding still exists.
Gridlock wasn’t a huge problem earlier in the year, but now bills that will cause increases in student loan rates of up to $1,000 a year, highway funding worth hundreds of billions of dollars, domestic violence prevention, and even the smooth operations of the government are all at risk.
UPDATE: There was a bit of news today on the student loan interest rate front. CNN reported that John Boehner told his caucus that he didn’t expect a deal by July 1, the expiration date. Chuck Schumer was quick to exploit this, saying in a statement that “These overheard comments by Speaker Boehner confirm our suspicions that Republicans were never serious about wanting to stop rates from doubling on college students.” Boehner has now pushed back on this story, but only in a way confirming that he plans to blame Democrats for the rate increase rather than look for a solution.





12 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Soon Obama will have the Supreme Court to run against, also. The 5 horsemen of the apocalypse Scalia, Kennedy, Alito and Roberts will see to that. (Thomas doesn’t ride his own horse but sits side saddle behind Scalia.)
There you go.
Govt has promised more than it can deliver.
Gridlock is good.
There you have it. Shitter approves of domestic abuse and the destruction of American infrastructure, and doesn’t want Congress to pass laws about such things.
The bigger hurdle looks to be the appropriations measures for the next fiscal year. Current appropriations expire on September 30, before the election
I think the GOP will face down Obama’s veto they need an issue to run on they need to pick a fight with Obama.
My question is are they holding the National Debt hostage as leverage? If we miss a payment interest rates go up if it even seems like we might miss a payment America’s credit rating goes up and the cost of that debt goes up.
Banks and China that own that debt I presume would make more money then? I’m not sure.
The banks will make tons of cash if interest rates go up on student loans. Which I think are guaranteed by the government if they fail so in a sense the Banks want another bailout.
After the infamous NDAA signed in the middle of the night on New Year’s Eve, I don’t trust any of these legislators or signatories to obey the Constitution anymore. Since then I have realized that each and every on of them that participated in that travesty are operating outside of the bounds of legitimacy.
Gene Sharp said that legitimacy is the feeling among the people that they have a moral obligation to obey a government. Well congratulations criminals, that’s gone now.
My bet? They ain’t going to make jack. Why? These kids don’t have jobs. The last numbers I saw suggested that 1/3 to 1/2 of college graduates were not able to find work. You can’t collect non existent funding.
If it is government guaranteed then the GOP has a bunch of idiots running things. They couldn’t possibly not know that the government will end up having to come up with more money for those that can’t pay these loans(and they couldn’t possibly be missing the news reporting suggesting that these students are having problems finding jobs). So therefore failing to reduce the interest would definitely not be a deficit reducing measure.
Things are certainly getting bottled up, but then, that’s a pretty good description of practically all of the reform legislation that we so badly needed, for Obama’s three-and-a-half years. And the republicans didn’t have to break a sweat, for it to be bottled up. When he had all that clout, and those big margins, all they had to do was whisper “filibuster” and Obama started cramming corks into every bottle in sight.
And there’s this little problem: if anyone thinks this will change if Barack Obama gets re-elected, please tell us how? I don’t believe the repubs will lose the House, and they have a good chance of taking the Senate.
Of course, that scenario is probably very attractive to Obama, since he could talk-the-talk for another 4 years and never have to walk a step.
“Govt has promised more than it could deliver.”
No, that’s not accurate.
What happened is that Barack Obama promised more than he wanted to deliver. If, the first time the republicans threatened a filibuster (that would be more than three years ago, when Obama still had an Exxon-Valdez of political clout) Obama had, for example, just run a healthcare reform bill up to the hill with a REAL public option in it, and had dared them to filibuster it, and if they did, then repeat, they would have folded like a house of cards and he would have been Captain America, with an FDR mantle wrapped on his shoulders and a political cattle prod the size of a 4X4, to use on the republicans. The american people would have stood and cheered, in numbers that would have had the GOP shitting green nickels.
But, I think that the last thing this president wanted was the power to make real changes. We can debate the reason for this; that is, corruption or cowardice, but it’s been the hallmark of his presidency.
I believe that when the extent of the mid-term asswhipping that he led us into was apparent, the next day, in his heart of hearts, he was, content, if not outright happy.
“…the five horsemen of the apocalypse…” Not too shabby, Monty. :o)
And, let’s not forget Kagan. Early on, she recused herself from almost half of the first 100 or so cases on the SCOTUS docket, which effectively made it 5-3, and any slim chance of picking up Roberts or Kennedy as a “swing” vote on a given case, became irrelevant. I don’t know what she’s doing now, but if she was that…scrupulous…before, I doubt she’s changed much.
All of which leads me to ask, if, when Obama was considering her, her prior connections to the DOJ might have occurred to him and he was, again, too corrupt or too stupid to ask her about them.
Let’s not forget Kagan. Because she was earlier appointed Solicitor General by Obama, she recused herself from almost half of the first 24 cases that SCOTUS agreed to hear after her confirmation. Which meant that the court on those cases was voting 5-3, with any slim chance of picking up Kennedy or Roberts as a “swing” vote becoming irrelevant.
Which leads me to ask if Obama considered the implications before he nominated her, or if he was just too stupid to think of it. Either way, as usual, he looks like a man in way over his head.
Of some interest now, is the rising cacophony of calls from the right, for her to recuse herself from the vote on Obama’s healthcare reform bill. If she does, we should just cancel the session and let the republicans do anything they want.
They’ve pretty much been doing it, anyway.
sorry for the double post. I had the numbers wrong on Kagan’s recusals. Checking wiki, the second post is the correct one.