Discuss the Politics, Economics, and Events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties)
The House may consider several veterans bills this week.
H.R. 3722 Daniel J. Harvey Jr. and Adam Lambert Improving Servicemember Transition to Reduce Veteran Suicide Act
This bill requires the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs to jointly carry out a five-year pilot program to assess the feasibility and advisability of providing certain services and a module comprised of specified elements as part of the pre-separation transition process for members of the Armed Forces for the purpose of reducing the incidence of suicide among veterans. (CRS Summary)
(Passed House on 4/29)
H.R. 3738 Veterans Economic Opportunity and Transition Administration Act
This bill establishes the Veterans Economic Opportunity and Transition Administration to administer economic opportunity assistance programs for veterans and their dependents and survivors. (CRS Summary)
H.R. 5914 Veterans Education Transparency and Training Act
This bill modifies the procedures by which the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reissues misused benefits to a beneficiary, including by requiring the VA to establish methods and timing with respect to determining whether an instance of misuse by a fiduciary is the result of negligence by the VA. (CRS Summary)
This bill provides that an individual’s Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) educational assistance benefits must not be charged for a course or program if the VA determines the individual could not complete the course or program because (1) it was suspended or terminated due to information collected as part of a VA risk-based survey, or (2) the Department of Education has determined the educational institution committed an actionable act or omission that had a detrimental effect on direct loan borrowers. (CRS Summary)
I don’t believe Rep. Langworthy has cosponsored of any of them.
Put simply, this bill fails American children and families. Its cruel cuts purposefully dismantle decades of progress in early childhood investments, education, maternal health and equity, public health, and more. It puts radical right-wing politics over the needs of the American people by eliminating consequential programs Americans rely on every day and instead seeks to forcibly inflict deeply unpopular policies with poison pill riders. And of the programs that do survive, many – even those with broad bipartisan support – are cut so dramatically that they would struggle to deliver for Americans. This bill is counter to everything America stands for; its 28 percent cut of $64 billion will rob our children of the quality education they deserve and eliminate present and future opportunities for Americans in all stages of life. It jeopardizes maternal, pediatric, and public health while purposefully undermining the safety, wellbeing, and prosperity of our Nation.— White House
Bill Overview H.R. 5894
Department of Education (ED).ED Major Rescissions. The Administration strongly opposes the bill’s rescissions of funding from programs designed to improve education for students across the Nation. The $8.7 billion rescission in the Title I program, combined with the $6 billion reduction to the program, would reduce Title I by 80 percent, stripping funding from schools in communities with concentrated poverty that have already made plans for this funding, for example, helping students recover academically from the learning disruptions of the pandemic and paying teachers and school staff a livable and competitive wage. The bill’s rescission of $1.7 billion, or 77 percent, from the Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants (Title II) formula program would undermine States’ and districts’ ability to reduce class sizes and provide high-quality professional development to support effective teaching and learning in the classroom. The bill also eliminates funding for critical programs that support high-quality teaching and learning. These programs are critically important to support student well-being and academic recovery. The Administration strongly opposes the bill’s elimination of the Teacher Quality Partnerships, Hawkins Centers of Excellence, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities , and Minority-Serving Institutions Research and Development Infrastructure grant programs.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)Elimination of the Title X Family Planning Program. The Administration strongly opposes the elimination of the Title X Family Planning Program in the bill, which plays a critical role in ensuring access to a broad range of family planning and preventive health services to 2.6 million low-income and uninsured individuals. The Title X family planning program is a critical part of the public health safety net and has served as a point of entry into care for nearly 195 million people over its more than 50-year history. This policy would further erode access to essential healthcare, from cancer screening to primary care, and is yet another unprecedented attack on women’s health, at a time when restrictions on reproductive healthcare have forced health clinics that provide contraception and other critical health services to close.
Department of Labor (DOL) Worker Protection.The Administration opposes the untenable reductions to DOL’s Worker Protection agencies, which the bill reduces by 18 percent below the FY 2023 enacted level. These reductions would necessitate furloughs in many cases, and would severely limit the Department’s ability to protect the health, safety, wages, rights, and benefits of America’s workers. Critically, the $75 million, or 29 percent, reduction to the Wage and Hour Division would hinder its ability to combat exploitative child labor, at a time when vulnerable children most need these protections.
The danger … is that the far right could create a partial shutdown on Jan. 19 of agencies they don’t care about, which is the kind of bloody trophy many of them would be proud to carry home and wave around.— David Firestone
The Fights That Many House Republicans Really Want
David Firestone, in an article in The New York Times on November 16th, explains what to expect early next year:
Take the bill that pays for the Agriculture Department and the Food and Drug Administration, for example. The far right has been trying for weeks to insert in it a provision that would prohibit abortion pills from being distributed by mail.
A non-starter, this has the potential to stall the 2024 Farm Bill (H.R. 4368); the Farm Bill expires at the end of this year.
Another example is the bill to pay for the Justice, State and Commerce Departments. The extremists want huge spending cuts there and have demanded to slash the budget for the F.B.I., …
This isn’t going to happen, but might force Justice, State and Commerce Departments to shut down.
Firestone concludes:
These are the kinds of fights many House Republicans really want, and this week’s interim bill just kicks them down the road for a couple of months. Mr. Johnson gets a very temporary positive grade for not creating chaos before the holidays, but the bigger test is coming, and it could kick off a very contentious 2024.
House Republicans have proven that we are committed to finding a path forward that reduces spending, secures our borders, and restores fiscal responsibility in Washington. —Rep. Tenney
Yes, they found a path forward–a bill Democrats would support.
Congresswoman Tenney Votes to Avoid a Government Shutdown and Prevent Further Irresponsible Government Spending
Rep. Tenney’s press release explains her “talking points.” There are many facts Rep. Tenney doesn’t explain:
House Republicans barely avoided a disaster of their own making.
H.R. 6363 passed the House by a vote of 336-95. Ninety-three Republicans opposed it. The Senate is expected to pass it and President Biden to sign it.
The bill postpones a government shutdown rather than necessarily avoiding it.
The CR keeps current spending unchanged.
There was never an “irresponsible end-of-year Megabus spending bill” to avoid.
House Republicans proved they couldn’t agree among themselves to fund the government by the deadline.
“Regular order” means wasting time debating hundreds of irresponsible amendments.
The House has yet to pass the necessary appropriation bills or the Farm Bill, H.R. 4368.
Appropriation bills passed by the House are unlikely to pass the Senate or be signed by President Biden.
Another CR may be needed before the appropriations become law.
By passing this CR today, we are able to pass the remaining fiscally conservative appropriations bills to provide the relief that the American people need, reaffirm Congress’s power of the purse, and refocus our government to its core mission: to serve the American people and defend the Constitution. — Rep. Tenney
H.R. 6363 — “Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2024, and for other purposes.”
District
Representative
Vote
NY-17
Lawler
Yea
NY-19
Molinaro
Yea
NY-22
Williams
Yea
NY-23
Langworthy
Yea
NY-24
Tenney
Yea
On Passage
The CR passed: 336 to 95 – with 209 of the votes coming from Democrats. One NY Republican, Santos, voted NAY.
Democrats in favor
209
Republicans in favor
127
Total (2/3 required)
336-95 78%
The bill extends funding until January 19 for priorities including military construction, veterans’ affairs, among others. The rest of the government would be funded until February 2. The bill does not include additional aid for Israel or Ukraine.
Inflation is a tax on ALL Americans, and Joe Biden is to blame!–Rep. Tenney
Is inflation a tax? Certainly not. When politicians say that, they are trying to fool us.
Inflation is a rise in the cost of goods and services.
Government spending generally doesn’t cause inflation; “government spending causes inflation” is a platitude.
Regulating inflation is largely the responsibility of the Fed.
Taxes are enacted by legislatures; tax money goes to fund our government.
Moderate inflation is desirable; the Fed’s target is two percent. Some think that too low.
Low inflation generally goes with high unemployment.
Inflation benefits borrowers.
Rinsing costs are offset by rising wages.
Don’t be fooled: no President is responsible for inflation. The rate of inflation is influenced by interest rates set by the FED, legislation, market conditions, and consumer actions.
A continuing resolution that is at the fiscal year 2023 levels is the only way forward because that’s the status quo.–Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries
I implore Speaker Johnson and our House Republican colleagues and learn from the fiasco of a month ago. Hard-right proposals, hard-right slash and cuts, hard-right poison pills that have zero support from Democrats will only make a shutdown more likely.–Majority Leader Schumer
Laddered CR
Reportedly, a laddered CR would allow several of the spending bills needed to keep the government open to be put off until Jan. 19, while the remaining bills would be put off until Feb. 2. This is a risky proposal: it isn’t clear if it would pass the House or Senate. It is opposed by Democratic Party leaders of House and Senate and by President Biden. It would:
Allow Republican opponents of continuing resolutions to claim that this is different and better.
Replace one deadline with two–double trouble.
Government shutdowns have hurt Republicans, so they are anxious to avoid it. Anxious enough, that, one way or another, they just might do it.
(Dissenting views are found at the end of the report cited)
The Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) bill funds critical programs that impact the lives of every American in their capacity as consumers, as investors, and as taxpayers. The bill’s jurisdiction covers a diverse range of agencies including those that provide oversight and regulation of the financial and telecommunications industries, manage government buildings and infrastructure projects, and oversee the federal workforce. In addition, funding in this bill supports the operations of the White House, the Federal Judiciary, and the District of Columbia.
We appreciate Chairman Womack’s efforts in assembling the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 FSGG bill. We were pleased to cooperate with the Chairman to identify areas of common ground. However, the overwhelming share of funding decisions and policy provisions in this bill reflect an unprecedented degree of focus on partisan priorities from the Majority’s side.
The bill’s FY 2024 allocation is $11.3 billion, 58 percent below the 2023 level and 64 percent below the President’s budget request.
President Biden, Speaker McCarthy, and 314 House Members came together to enact a law to address the deficit. Now that agreement is not being honored because of a small but willful minority. The bill breaks this agreement by rescinding over $13 billion in funding from the Inflation Reduction Act.
Perhaps the most egregious cut in this bill targets the IRS and its enforcement abilities. For decades, the IRS has been severely under-funded. This funding supports IRS revenue agents with the expertise necessary to conduct complex, high-income audits. Less funding means fewer agents. Meanwhile, the number of tax returns filed, and the GDP have both increased. These reckless budget and staffing cuts have caused the number of IRS audits on the wealthiest Americans to plummet.
Instead of addressing this problem, this legislation exacerbates it with a cut to IRS enforcement, protecting high- earners and corporations. Such a drastic cut has severe consequences for our government to collect the owed taxes it needs to serve the people. Cutting enforcement funding reduces revenue and increases the debt. The result is the same as simply reducing taxes on wealthy Americans–a cause Republicans have also championed. Republicans claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility.
This legislation is a dereliction of that responsibility. Other Treasury Department functions that are key to national security–the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and the office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence are also irresponsibly cut. We hear a great deal from the other side of the aisle talk about wanting to be “tough on China” and yet, the bill includes no funding for the Administration’s efforts to restrict outbound investment in countries that threaten our national security.
This bill makes it harder to enforce the law by imposing irresponsible cuts on key regulatory agencies and resources. That includes the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Consumer Products Safety Commission, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and DC’s Emergency Planning and Security Costs account. In doing so, this bill leaves Americans vulnerable to a variety of threats–from fraud and scams to dangerous products that can harm and even kill adults and children.
Additionally, the bill doesn’t provide any funding for Election Assistance Commission Election Security Grants, making our elections more vulnerable to interference and tampering, about which Republicans have been so outspoken.
Another particularly irresponsible cut targets the General Services Administration (GSA), which functions as the Federal Government’s developer and landlord. This includes no funding for the Technology Modernization Fund or the Electric Vehicles Fund.
The bill provides no funding for a much-needed consolidation and modernization for the headquarters of the Federal Bureau Investigations (FBI). The current FBI headquarters is in such disrepair that it constitutes a national security threat by preventing FBI employees from having access to necessary and secure facilities to do their important work protecting our nation. This project has been years in the making, and this lack of funding stalls the nation in addressing this urgently needed infrastructure improvement. Each year that project is delayed costs taxpayers $268 million dollars and undermines FBI’s mission and the safety of its employees.
Cuts to the Small Business Administration would cut off assistance and resources that help small businesses start, grow, and compete. At a time when our economy is returning following pandemic business closures, this reduction is especially irresponsible.
The bill contains numerous harmful riders on a wide range of topics. They prohibit the government from improving diversity and equality, limit our ability to combat climate change, further undermine FTC and SEC consumer protections, restrict reproductive health-care access, and interfere with the home rule authority of the District of Columbia.
The Committee adopted several additional outrageous amendments that would significantly further weaken the SEC, FTC, outbound investment review at Treasury, and home rule in the District of Columbia. One amendment adopted would permit concealed carry of firearms in the District of Columbia and on ublic transportation.
In an effort to improve the bill, Rep. Pocan offered an amendment to strike a provision that would prohibit the IRS from developing a free electronic filing software for all Americans.
Rep. Torres offered an amendment to strike these harmful provisions and protect a woman’s right to make legal and private health choices without government interference. By opposing adoption of this amendment, the Republican Majority continued its hypocritical allegiance to limited government, until it concerns a women’s right to choose.
Rep. Aguilar offered an amendment, which was not adopted, to make sure that Dreamers, certain non-criminal immigrants that entered the country as children and remain without U.S. citizenship, can lend their talents to the Federal workforce.
These poison-pill riders are utterly unnecessary and make completing the appropriations process much more difficult.
In a rare instance of bipartisanship, Committee Members on both sides of the aisle united to defeat an amendment which would have rescinded all the unobligated funding for the new consolidated FBI Headquarters.
All across the bill, these unwise cuts will reduce the ability of the government to effectively protect consumers and investors and investigate tax cheats and collect revenues. Overall, the proposed spending reductions are not fiscally responsible since they will actually increase costs in the future through reduced revenue and diminished enforcement. As a consequence, we are gravely concerned that the bill fails to make the necessary investments to confront the challenges facing this nation. Of equal concern are the reckless and ill- advised policy riders that do not belong on an appropriations bill. Many of these provisions threaten to impose even greater damage to the nation’s democratic principles and core financial infrastructure.
Minority View comes at the end of the document cited.
This bill represents a step in the wrong direction for America. The Republican majority’s Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations bill for the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies (T-HUD) cuts discretionary spending by $26 billion for critical transportation, housing, and community development programs- while cutting $25 billion from the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding used to ensure billionaires pay taxes. This year’s grossly short-sighted T-HUD allocation of $65 billion, combined with $25 billion in offsets from IRS funding that Democrats in neither chamber can support, is still insufficient to address our nation’s housing and infrastructure challenges. Not merely insufficient with respect to future investments, the bill goes even further by pulling back $564 million in previously appropriated funding to remediate health hazards, including leadbased paint, in low- income housing. This bill does not represent what our constituents have called on us to do, which is to maintain and upgrade our nation’s transportation and housing infrastructure and protect jobs.
Despite recently passing the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, a bipartisan debt deal that included a path forward on spending levels and a way to get us back to regular order, the majority has chosen to turn their back on those promises and proceed with a partisan bill. This bill demonstrates Republicans’ continued attempts to not just undermine the agreement, but also to double down on their broken promises by injecting unrealistic efforts to repeal prior funding agreements into already-partisan appropriations legislation. The majority’s bill has no chance to garner Democratic support as it is written now.Throughout America, we are seeing outdated infrastructure continue to impact the safety of our transportation workers and communities. Americans also experience constant congestion on our roads, delays at our airports, and bottlenecks at train stations. Yet, this bill cuts funding for the Department of Transportation by more than $7 billion, which means fewer workers improving our roads, bridges, and rail lines and longer delays. The American Society of Civil Engineers’ (ASCE) most recent report gave U.S. infrastructure an overall “C-minus”, with 43 percent of our public roadways in poor or mediocre condition. Yet, this is an improvement; it took this country more than 20 years just to get out of the “D” range. The Republican majority cannot honestly believe that either grade is satisfactory when it comes to safety. In order to bring our transportation into a state of good repair, ASCE estimates $2.59 trillion is required over 10 years. While the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides for historic investments in transportation, it is not without limitation. The backlog of capital improvements for our airport runways and terminals, subways, and railways cannot be transformed with those resources alone. The IIJA was never intended to replace the necessary investments we provide through this bill. Instead, this bill would expect governors and mayors to make impossible decisions on how to prioritize labor and local resources–as state and local budgets are still recovering from the effects of COVID–against the laundry list of must-do projects that span transportation modes and increase safety. If the Republican majority continues to neglect infrastructure that is crumbling before our very eyes, it will only get more expensive to address in the future and will become more dangerous for all Americans.
Meanwhile, more than 580,000 people experience homelessness on any given day and millions of families struggle to pay rent as incomes struggle to keep pace with rising housing costs. Yet, the allocation for this bill diminishes investments in the HOME program, which funds the construction of new affordable housing for renters and those seeking homeownership, cutting it by $1 billion. The bill also makes housing less safe for low- income children and families, cutting resources for mold, carbon monoxide, lead, and radon exposures, which would devastate our young families dealing with lead exposure and cause harmful effects on our local health care and education systems. We should be investing in programs that put people to work to build more affordable housing, repair and make more accessible aging housing, and create healthy environments that help communities thrive.
During full Committee consideration of this bill, Democrats offered amendments to remove harmful riders that would reverse progress to address climate change, unnecessarily attack high speed rail, roll back transportation safety protections for the traveling public, and reverse progress on meaningful efforts to advance civil rights and equity in this country. Republicans rejected these amendments.
The austerity of the prejudice and discrimination in the Republican majority’s policies became even more evident when an amendment was offered by Chairman Cole to intentionally eliminate funding to support brick and mortar projects for organizations that provide critical housing and services for the LGBTQI+ and ally communities. Eligible projects that met the House rules, statutory requirements, and published Republican guidance were intentionally targeted and singled out because of the inclusion of “LGBTQI+” or related terms in their intended recipients’ names and subsequently eliminated upon adoption of the amendment. These projects include the “Senior Affordable Housing” project for LGBTQ Senior Housing, Inc. sponsored by Rep. Pressley (MA-07); the “William Way Renovation and Expansion Project” for the Gay Community Center of Philadelphia d/b/a William Way LGBT Center sponsored by Rep.Boyle (PA-02); and the “Center of Greater Reading– Transitional Housing Program Berks County” project for the LGBT Center of Greater Reading sponsored by Rep. Houlahan (PA- 06).
This discriminatory amendment removed a combined $3.62 million for these projects that were favorably reported out of Subcommittee by Republican Representatives Cole (OK-04), Diaz- Balart (FL-26), Womack (AR-03), Rutherford (FL-05), Gonzales (TX-23), Valadao (CA-22), Cline (VA-06), Zinke (MT-01), and Ciscomani (AZ-06), when they voted by voice to advance these projects. Ranking Member Quigley offered an amendment during full Committee markup to restore funding for these projects which was supported by all 27 Democrats on the Committee and rejected by all 30 Republican majority members present, and ultimately not adopted.
The T-HUD bill impacts the day-to-day lives of every person in our country in a positive way, but this measure does the opposite. To date, Republicans have chosen to close ranks around a partisan effort to cut spending and target already marginalized communities, which will be to the detriment of millions of Americans, even though the Republican majority knows it will precipitate another forced crisis that will lead to a government shutdown. We all know thatDemocratic votes will be needed to reach a spending agreement that can be enacted. When Republicans get serious about meeting the true needs of most Americans, we will be ready and willing to work with our colleagues to make sure this bill better funds initiatives that Americans rely on to pursue the American dream.
A discrepancy of this order of magnitude, by a real estate developer sizing up his own living space of decades, can only be considered fraud. — Judge Engoron
Interesting questions
Does it matter if a judge is said to lean left or right?
Does a defendant have a right to a sympathetic judge?
Can it be wise for a lawyer antagonize the judge?
If a lawyer succeeds in antagonizing the judge, is that grounds for appeal?
Can a woman be a misogynist?
Can a married man with a daughter be a misogynist?
Can a judge consult openly with a female clerk?
Does it matter if a law clerk is known to be a Democrat or a Republican?
If a company officer doesn’t remember signing a document, is he or she absolved of responsibility.
Is a busy executive responsible for the work of subordinates, particularly if he or she certifies the work to be correct?
Can a company commit crimes for which no employee or owner is responsible, even those signing off on it?
Can real estate business practices, however shady, be crimes?
Can defendants use social media to attack judges?
Can defendants use social media to influence witnesses and juries?
Will gag orders on defense lawyers stand on appeal?
Some of these questions may be answered by trial courts or appeals courts in the near future.
New NY 23rd 