The Political Bridge

The Senate Votes to Table an Amendment to CHIP, Requiring(some) Cost-Sharing by the States

Bunning and McConnell vote against tabling this Amdt.

nate Roll Call Votes 111^th Congress - 1^st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Motion to Table (Motion to Table Demint Amdt. No. 43 )
Vote Number:	16	Vote Date:	January 27, 2009, 05:47 PM
Required For Majority:	1/2	Vote Result:	Motion to Table Agreed to
Amendment Number:	S.Amdt. 43 to S.Amdt. 39 to H.R. 2 (Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009)
Statement of Purpose:	To require States to impose cost-sharing for any individual enrolled in a State child health plan whose income exceeds 200 percent of the poverty line.

Vote Counts:	YEAs	60
	NAYs	37
	Not Voting	2

Vote Summary

By Senator Name

By Vote Position

By Home State

Alphabetical by Senator Name

Akaka (D-HI), Yea Alexander (R-TN), Nay Barrasso (R-WY), Nay Baucus (D-MT), Yea Bayh (D-IN), Yea Begich (D-AK), Yea Bennet (D-CO), Yea Bennett (R-UT), Nay Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Bond (R-MO), Yea Boxer (D-CA), Yea Brown (D-OH), Yea Brownback (R-KS), Nay Bunning (R-KY), Nay Burr (R-NC), Nay Burris (D-IL), Yea Byrd (D-WV), Yea Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Cardin (D-MD), Yea Carper (D-DE), Yea Casey (D-PA), Yea Chambliss (R-GA), Not Voting Coburn (R-OK), Nay Cochran (R-MS), Nay Collins (R-ME), Yea Conrad (D-ND), Yea Corker (R-TN), Nay Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Crapo (R-ID), Nay DeMint (R-SC), Nay Dodd (D-CT), Yea Dorgan (D-ND), Yea Durbin (D-IL), Yea

Ensign (R-NV), Nay Enzi (R-WY), Nay Feingold (D-WI), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea Graham (R-SC), Nay Grassley (R-IA), Nay Gregg (R-NH), Nay Hagan (D-NC), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Nay Hutchison (R-TX), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Nay Johanns (R-NE), Nay Johnson (D-SD), Yea Kaufman (D-DE), Yea Kennedy (D-MA), Not Voting Kerry (D-MA), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea Kyl (R-AZ), Nay Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Leahy (D-VT), Yea Levin (D-MI), Yea Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea Lincoln (D-AR), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay Martinez (R-FL), Nay McCain (R-AZ), Nay McCaskill (D-MO), Nay

McConnell (R-KY), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Yea Merkley (D-OR), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Nay Murray (D-WA), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea Reed (D-RI), Yea Reid (D-NV), Yea Risch (R-ID), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea Sanders (I-VT), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shaheen (D-NH), Yea Shelby (R-AL), Nay Snowe (R-ME), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea Tester (D-MT), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay Udall (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-NM), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay Warner (D-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Yea Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea Wicker (R-MS), Nay Wyden (D-OR

DATA CHAT: JUST HOW WAS THE KENTUCKY DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S PERFORMANCE IN THE 2008 ELECTION?

 

Every political junkie thinks that s/he is an expert.  Every political junkie thinks that s /she can do better than those running the party and campaign, especially when the party or campaign loses. 

Put me in both of those categories.  

I was outraged by losses in the State Senate race in Kentucky.  I told my friends that I could have helped win those races, blah, blah, blah.

Then my wife  said:  Big guy, you’re the educational/psychological research dude.  Show me the data.

 I retorted: The data are pure and simple. The Democratic Party did poorer in Kentucky than most other states. Democrats lost 3 out of 3 hotly contested State Senate races,  lost a hotly competitive U.S. Senate race, and only picked one State House seat.” This was a big Democratic year, elsewhere.

My wife snapped back:  You always preach in your classes (after all, I read all your class handouts) that data are never pure and simple!”  “Dig some more before opening your mouth about Jennifer Moore and the Kentucky Democratic Party.  They did just fine.  

I sighed and said: I will dig further into election2008 and report my findings.  It will be fun.

After going through the Kentucky Secretary of State’s election, data and information that the Kentucky Democratic Party generously gave me (click here for that data), I reported to my wife.

Me: Once again, wifey dear, I must say that you are almost always right. The party did better in 8/10 State Senate races than was projected by the NCEC .

Wifey: You may have told me before, but I forgot your political jargon s-t! What is the NCEC?

Me: A private organization formed by Eleanor Roosevelt...

Wifey: Love that woman!

Me: Let me finish!  You never let me finish. It’s called the National Committee for an Effective Congress.  This organization helps progressive candidates and grassroots activists to win elections…

Wifey: You’re making another one of your speeches! Get on with it.

Me:   Its…

Wife: It’s?

Me:  The NCEC projections for Kathy Groob, Denise Harper Angel, and Steve Newberry were low by more than 10%.

Wifey: Way to go, Denise and Kathy! 

Me: Don’t leave, there are much more data.

Wifey: I’m not leaving...Need to go to the next room to do the dishes, which you never do. I’m listening.

Me: Kentucky Democrats outperformed 10 of the 18 Red states that had state legislative  races in 2008.  Dems in KY gained one seat while they lost six seats in Tennessee.                       

Are you listening?

Wifey: I am!  Kentucky is better than Tennessee.

Me: The losing Democratic candidates in the State Senate races way outperformed the rest of the Democratic ticket in that area.  Kathy Groob lost in the 23^rd Senate District (Kenton County) by 2% while Obama lost that County by nearly 21% and Lunsford by nearly 25%.

Moreover, furthermore, and all that, the Republican candidates for federal office won big in the counties in the Newberry race.  These counties were Allen, Barren, Edmonson, Green, Metcalfe, and Simpson.

Newberg won two of those counties, Barren and Simpson counties. In fact, he won Barren County (Glasgow) by a substantial margin (around nine percent).

WITH THAT WATER RUNNING, DID YOU HEAR ANYTHING I SAID! $&%^^!

Wifey: Yea, I did.  I heard it all.

Me:  WHAT DID I SAY!

Wifey:  That the Kentucky Democratic did quite well in 2008. It outperformed most other Red States…And Democratic candidates for State Senate in KY outperformed their rest of   the ticket... Anything else, dear

 

THE GREY ZONE: THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION AND AN ECONOMIC “SEA CHANGE” by DrTed

The great Italian-Jewish writer, Primo Levi, put forth the notion of a “Grey Zone,” of morality.  This is the zone or moral ambiguity, which is somewhere between evil and good.

 

The Trilateral Commission might be an example of an organization in Levi’s “Grey Zone.” (David Rockefeller and others formed The Trilateral Commission, in 1973 to “foster closer cooperation among these (Europe, North America, and Japan) core democratic industrialized areas. This commission now includes participants from Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, The People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. )

 

Many people on America’s political right and the left believed that the Trilateral Commission is immoral because it has had undue influence upon the American government.  From 1976-2008, either the President (Carter, G.W.H. Bush, and Clinton) or the Vice-President (G.W.H Bush and Cheney) have been members of this Commission.

 

Members of this commission have held other very influential jobs in the U. S. Government and other world agencies. The two most influential Chiefs of the U.S. Federal Reserve Board (Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan) have been members of this commission; so have the last two Presidents of the World Bank—Paul Wolfowitz and Robert Zoellick. 

 

Twenty-six former members of the Trilateral Commission served in high-level governmental positions in the Carter administration. These positions included the National Security Advisor (Zbigniew Brzezinski) and the Ambassador to the United Nations (Andrew Young).

During Carter’s watch, the Trade Agreement Act of 1979 became law. The stated Congressional purpose of this Act was “to foster the growth and maintenance of an open world trading system.”  Sounds like free trade agreements to me.  (For more on President Carter’s love of free trade, click CAFTR-DR). By the way, President Carter was also a big advocate of deregulation (as are most members of the Commission), but that is another column.

 

Nobody would say that President Carter or the other members in the Trilateral Commission are evil people.  Nobody (except the John Birch Society) would say that this Commission wants world domination by destroying existing governments.

A few of their members have advocated the use of soft power (capacity to persuade others without force) in international affairs.  Joseph S. Nye, Jr. (chair of the Trilateral Commission’s, North American Group and former National Security Advisor to John Kerry) wrote a seminal paper in Foreign Affairs about the use of soft power in fighting terrorism.

 

So then, (to me) the Trilateral Commission is in the Grey Zone of morality, with both good and bad ideas coming from its members.  Yet, it is group with way too much influence on U.S. and world economic affairs.

 

This influence continues in the Obama administration. Nine former members of the Trilateral Commission have important positions in this administration (see the next column).   

 

So does the beat of Free-Trade and dergulation continue?  Or can President Obama use these fine minds to insittute an econmic sea change of global proportions?

 

An interesting foonote to this column, President Rooselvelt used the free market people and stock manipulators(like Joseph Kennedy) to initiate major changes to the American and world economies.

THE GREY ZONE: A LIST OF TRILATERAL COMMISSION MEMBERS from Sue Ellen Parrott of The Trilateral Commission

 

Despite of what you may heard about the Trilaterial Commission, it is a very open organizations.  All its task force papers are on-line.  If you ask the Commision for a list of members, it quickly sends you one. 

Former Members of the Trilaterial Commission in the Obama Administration

Adm. Dennis B. Blair, U.S. Director-designate of National Intelligence

Timothy F. Geithner, U.S. Secretary-designate of Treasury

Thomas E. Donilon, U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor

Richard Holbrooke, U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan

Gen. James L. Jones, U.S. National Security Advisor

Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations

Anne-Marie Slaughter, Director of Policy Planning, U. S. Department of State

James B. Steinberg, U.S. Deputy Secretary-designate of State

Lawrence H. Summers, Director, U.S National Economic Council

(Zbigniew Brzezinsk was advising President Obama during the presidential campaign.)

 For a complete list of current Commision members click:  Download TC Membership January 23 2009 (2)

POLITICAL TIDBITS: SENATE RUMOR MILL; U.S. ATTORNEYS; ADAM EDELIN

 

 As you know by know, the LT Governor (Dr. Dan) announced his intentions to run for the U.S. Senate, which could be a rematch of the 2004 senatorial race.   This news has been big news on the national political blogs (The Hill, Real Clear Politics, and The Daily Kos).  Looks like Kentucky will be a senatorial battleground in 2010.

 

Today’s rumor mill also is spinning a story that another A- list candidate for that position met with the DSCC last week.  This candidate brought along key political advisors.  Hmmmmmmmmm!

Maybe this person was just visiting old friends during Inauguration Week 2008.

 

Back to a more supportable tidbit:

Benham Sims told me that he was not interested in becoming the U.S. Attorney for the Western Kentucky District.  He was flattered by the press attention on this matter.

 

I have also been told the David Kaplan plans to go back to work for Brown, Frost, and Todd.  He might not then want to be the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern Kentucky District.

 

Adam Edelen has seemingly weathered the political storm.  Bluegrass Politics reported that Edelen can sell his condominium to a lobbyist.  I’m happy to see that Adam is out of trouble.  He is a good person.

           

FACT CHECK: DID PRESIDENT OBAMA’S INAUGURATION COST FOUR TIMES MORE THAN BUSH’S DID IN 2005? from FactCheck.org(copied in whole and with permission from FactCheck.org)

There seems to be a lot of sloppy reporting about the total cost of the Obama inauguration vs. the Bush inauguration that is being used for partisan attacks. I've heard $160 million for Obama vs. 40 million + for Bush. I've also heard Bush's 2005 inauguration was really $157 million. What are the facts?

A:  Claims of a huge disparity are untrue. Actually, an apples-to-apples comparison shows that the two inaugurations likely cost about the same.

For much of the past week, several right-leaning news sites have compared an estimated $160 million price tag for Barack Obama's 2009 inauguration to a $42 million tally for George W. Bush's 2005 inauguration. For example, Newsmax reported that Obama's inauguration "will be the most expensive ever" with a cost "nearly four times what George Bush's inauguration cost four years ago." And Fox News' Sean Hannity told viewers that "the cost of Obama's inaugural will dwarf past celebrations and make those of President Bush's look like budget bashes."

They're wrong. They've misinterpreted mainstream news accounts from the Associated Press, ABC News and the New York Times, among others. The AP and ABC News both report that Obama's inauguration could cost between $160 and $170 million, while Bush raised a net total of $42.3 million to cover the costs of his inauguration, according the New York Times and others, based on the report Bush's committee filed with the Federal Election Commission a few months after the event.  But those aren't direct comparisons; the Obama estimates include the cost of security, while the figure for Bush's inauguration does not.

Inauguration costs are divided up into two categories. In one category is all the fun stuff: the inaugural balls, luncheons and Springsteen appearances. That's also the category for things like the 20 JumboTrons placed around the National Mall and the special payment to keep the Smithsonian Institution open for the day. The fun events don't cost taxpayers a dime. Presidential inauguration committees raise money from private donors for all the fun stuff. A spokesperson for Obama's inaugural committee told ABC News that the committee raised about $45 million to cover the costs of events in the fun category. (A full accounting will eventually be filed with the FEC, probably in April.) Adjusting for inflation, Obama's estimated total is about $41.4 million in 2005 dollars — or slightly less than the $42.3 million Bush raised for his second inauguration.

But the cost of all the fun stuff is actually less than the cost of providing security for the various events. Taxpayers are on the hook for that bill, and while we won't know for several weeks just how big that tally will be, there's every reason to expect that it'll be hefty. The Times reports that in 2005 the District of Columbia and the federal government spent a combined $115.5 million, mainly on security. ABC News reports higher numbers for this time, with the federal government estimating a $49 million cost and Virginia, Maryland and D.C. requesting a combined $75 million more to cover their inauguration-related expenses. If those estimates hold up, that would work out to around $114 million in inflation-adjusted figures.

It's possible that the security costs could end up being higher. Roughly 400,000 people attended George Bush's 2005 inaugural festivities, according to estimates at the time. CNN estimates that 1.5 million attended the 2009 version, and other estimates range from over 1 million to 1.8 million.

All the bills for Obama's event won't be in for several more weeks, but it appears likely that his inauguration will not cost significantly more than Bush's second inauguration, and could conceivably cost less after adjusting for inflation.

-Joe Miller

Update Jan. 23: We updated this article with quotes from Newsmax and Fox New's Hannity, to give specific examples of the kind of inaccurate reporting we are criticizing.

Sources

Apuzzo, Matt. "Obama Hosting Pricey Party in a Dicey Economy." 17 January 2009. Associated Press. Accessed 21 January 2009.

Bureau of Labor Statistice. "Inflation Calculator." Accessed 21 January 2009.

CNN.com. "Security Tight, Movement Slow on Inauguration Day." 20 January 2009. Accessed 21 January 2009.

Dwyer, Timothy. "Snow and Crowds Descend on Capital." 20 January 2005. Washington Post. Accessed 21 January 2009.

Mayerowitz, Scott, "What Recession? The $170 Million Inauguration." 19 January 2009. ABC News. Accessed 21 January 2009.

Seelye, Katherine Q. "Obama's Inauguration Fund-Raising Tops $24 Million." 5 January 2009. New York Times. Accessed 21 January 2009

YARMUTH CALLS FOR SWIFT PASSAGE OF STIMULUS PACKAGE AS COMMITTEE COMPLETES BILL: WAYS & MEANS PACKAGE TO PROVIDE TAX RELIEF, SPUR JOB CREATION, INVEST IN CLEAN ENERGY from Stuart Perelmuter of Congressman Yarmuth’s staff

 

( Washington , DC ) Congressman John Yarmuth (KY-3) and the Committee on Ways & Means have completed work on the $275 billion tax portion of a stimulus package that is aimed at jumpstarting America ’s stalled economy.     “This is the bold action necessary for working families to make it through these difficult times, and it will strengthen our foundation to ensure America ’s economy thrives in the long term,” Yarmuth said.    The Ways & Means bill will be combined with a spending section recently completed by the Appropriations Committee and could come to a vote on the House floor as early as next week.  The bill contains the following provisions:   ¨      Investment in education: providing tens of millions of dollars to Louisville schools for construction and instruction over two years. ¨        “Making Work Pay”: Tax Credit will cut taxes for more than 95% of working families in the US . ¨       Extension and expansion of unemployment insurance benefits through the end of 2009 and increasing the benefit by $25/week.  ¨       Greater eligibility of the child tax credit to millions of additional. ¨       Assistance for Low-Income Elderly and Disabled with a one-time additional payment for recipients of Supplemental Security Income (SSI). ¨       Tax incentives to help small businesses grow. ¨       Higher education tax credit of up to $2,500 of the cost of college per year.  ¨       Strengthened housing market with incentives for first-time buyers to purchase homes by removing the repayment requirement on the existing $7,500 first-time home buyer credit for homes purchased between January 1, 2009 – June 30, 2009.  ¨       Lower healthcare costs by investing technology to cut through time-consuming red tape. ¨       Long-term Investments in Renewable Energy Production with tax credits for renewable energy sources to help create green jobs and reduce our dependency on foreign oil.  ¨       Investment in new technologies and expand our capacity to produce renewable energy: Creates new bonds for renewable energy to help finance facilities that generate electricity from the following: wind, closed-loop biomass; open-loop biomass; geothermal; small irrigation; hydropower; landfill gas; marine renewable; and trash combustion. ¨       Assistance to State and Local Governments: Provides direct assistance to governments to help them free up funding for local infrastructure projects to improve our roads, schools and bridges while also creating good-paying jobs.  “In Louisville where families are struggling to keep their heads above water, the assistance cannot co\me soon enough.  Congress needs to move swiftly in working with President Obama to enact this legislation and provide the American people with some much needed relief,” Yarmuth added.

AMERICANS UNITED FOR CHANGE ASKS: WHAT DOES SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL HAVE AGAINST WORKING WOMEN?

 

 

IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                 Contact: Lauren Weiner , 202-470-5870

January 23, 2009                                                              Jeremy Funk, 202-470-5878

 

 Washington, D.C. – Americans United for Change called on Sen. Mitch McConnell to explain his vote against giving Kentucky women, who have been discriminated against, the right to fight for equal wages in these tough times. McConnell voted against the Fair Pay Act last night, legislation that represents a major step forward to ensure equal pay for equal work. 

 

            “This is 2009.  It’s about time women receive credit for their significant contribution to the workforce. It’s especially important during this economic crisis, when workers are clinging to every dollar in their paycheck.  So now, more than ever, it’s important that women have the ability to fight against inequality in the workforce,” said Lauren Weiner of Americans United for Change. “Thanks to quick action by the House and Senate, in a matter of days President Obama will sign this critical legislation which will give them the tools to do just that. However, by voting against this bill, Sen. McConnell sent a disturbing message to those women lucky enough to still have a job in this terrible economy: ‘Your work doesn’t matter as much as mine’.

 

“But this goes beyond income.  The Fair Pay Act means women will not have to stand for discrimination because of gender.  This is about basic justice in and outside the workplace.”   

 

Statistically, across the nation, women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes; African American women earn just 63 cents for every dollar a man makes, and Hispanic American women make 52 cents for every dollar a man makes.  Americans United for Change, which is leading the Jobs and Economic Recovery Campaign to pass President Elect Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, has supported passage of the House version of the bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and ran ads in support of the legislation during the 110^th Congress

THE 2010 ELECTION CYCLE HAS BEGUN: SEE HOW ROTHENBERG RATES KY’S 2010 U.S. SENATE RACE

Toss-Up (4 R, 0 D)

·Bunning (R-KY)

·FL Open (Martinez, R)

·MO Open (Bond, R)

·OH Open (Voinovich, R)

Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (4 R, 2 D)

·Burr (R-NC)

·Gregg (R-NH)

·Specter (R-PA)

·Vitter (R-LA)

·Bennet (D-CO)

·Reid (D-NV)

Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 2 D)

·Grassley (R-IA)

·KS Open (Brownback, R)

·Dorgan (D-ND)

·Feingold (D-WI)

Currently Safe (9 R, 13 D)

·Bennett (R-UT)

·Coburn (R-OK)

·Crapo (R-ID)

·DeMint (R-SC)

·Isakson (R-GA)

·McCain (R-AZ)

·Murkowski (R-AK)

·Shelby (R-AL)

·Thune (R-SD)

·Bayh (D-IN)

·Boxer (D-CA)

·Burris (D-IL)

·Dodd (D-CT)

·Gillibrand (D-NY)

·Inouye (D-HI)

·Kaufman (D-DE)

·Leahy (D-VT)

·Lincoln (D-AR)

·Mikulski (D-MD)

·Murray (D-WA)

·Schumer (D-NY)

·Wyden (D-OR)

RANKINGS OF KENTUCKY’S FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES ON THEIR PROGRESSIVE VOTING RECORDS from ProgressivePunch.Com(reprinted with permission from ProgressivePunch.com)

The higher the score, the more progressive the representative’s voting record is.  

      

                                          Lifetime Scores   Ranking

Senator Bunning         3.09       95/98(Senators)

Senator McConnell             4.14              91/98

Rep. Chandler                   82.97             196/434(Congress persons)

Rep. Davis                          5.19              346/434

Rep Rodgers                       7.00             341/434

Rep Whitfield                      9.11              304/434

Rep Yarmuth                    95.32                 33/434

Information through the 1997 Congressional session. See Progressive Punch.com for more information on these scores and rankings.)