John McCain, A Return to Order and NDAA 84-9 Vote

[mark kennedy]

When McCain cast the decisive vote ending the repeal of ACA he argued for a return to regular order in the Senate. Meanwhile behind the scenes the Senate has been working on a bipartisan bill to fund our military, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (NDAA).

“Today an overwhelming majority of Senators voted 84-9 to invoke cloture and advance the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (NDAA) toward final passage. The NDAA is the result of months of bipartisan work, and it is a product in which all Senators—and the American people—can take great pride. While there are many important aspects to this legislation, at its core, this is a bill that will provide our Armed Forces the resources, equipment, and support they need to do their jobs, fulfill their missions, and keep our nation safe.

“This week, as the bill has been on the floor, I have worked together with my colleague Senator Jack Reed to incorporate over 100 amendments from Senators on both sides of the aisle. Between now and final passage, it is my hope that we can agree on another package of amendments to strengthen this legislation even further. While I had hoped to debate and vote on a number of other amendments from Senators of both parties, especially the proposal to end sequestration, I am proud that we continued the strong tradition of moving the NDAA through the Senate in a bipartisan fashion and look forward to its final passage on Monday.” (Statement by SASC Chairman John McCain on Senate Vote to Advance the NDAA, Sept. 14, 2017)
​

Am I the only one tracking the budget process because I thought this one was greatly encouraging. McCain refused to vote for the repeal and replace legislation because hardly anyone had a chance to read it and regular order was being bypassed. That wasn't just a political catch phrase, that is the solution to the grid lock in Washington according to a distinguished veteran Senator who is walking the talk, and getting results.

There are so many things at issue, the Boarder wall funding, tax reform, DACA some nebulous tax cut. Any comments regarding the current budget process are welcome, I just think this is too important to be ignored.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Winken]

Can the quicksand in D.C. be replaced with a solid foundation, where all sections function in harmony? Wow. THAT would get me to vote Republican again, in 2018 and 2020. If the Dems win a majority in either case, I'll unplug my computer and turn off the TV. I'll suggest that our entire family do the same, even though they'll have to live through it.

 

[mark kennedy]

Can the quicksand in D.C. be replaced with a solid foundation, where all sections function in harmony? Wow. THAT would get me to vote Republican again, in 2018 and 2020. If the Dems win a majority in either case, I'll unplug my computer and turn off the TV. I'll suggest that our entire family do the same, even though they'll have to live through it.

Well in 2018 they can't get a majority in the Senate, in the House it's an unlikely possibility. I think the key to the whole thing is what they are doing right now in Congress. The GOP blew it on Health Care reform but regardless of partisan politics there is a need for compromise and consensus. I see some definite possibilities developing here.

 

[woobadooba]

McCain refused to vote for the repeal and replace legislation because hardly anyone had a chance to read it

Reminds me of something...

 

[mark kennedy]

Reminds me of something...

I'm sorry, did she say something there because I missed it if she did. If it's something exciting do share because listening to that statement I was wondering what she was talking about.

 

[woobadooba]

I'm sorry, did she say something there because I missed it if she did. If it's something exciting do share because listening to that statement I was wondering what she was talking about.

They couldn't read the bill concerning the rules and terms of Obamacare without passing it first. In other words, they passed the bill without reading it, so that they could read it. Of course, then it was too late, the bill was passed, and now we are stuck with a lot of problems it created for the people.

Do you think it is wise to pass a bill without knowing what is in it? That's exactly what they did. Foolishness.

 

[mark kennedy]

They couldn't read the bill concerning the rules and terms of Obamacare without passing it first. In other words, they passed the bill without reading it, so that they could read it. Of course, then it was too late, the bill was passed, and now we are stuck with a lot of problems it created for the people.

Do you think it is wise to pass a bill without knowing what is in it? That's exactly what they did. Foolishness.

Assuming that was the case I totally agree.

 

[woobadooba]

Assuming that was the case I totally agree.

Yes, that was the case. And a lot of people had an issue with it.

 

[Rion]

Assuming that was the case I totally agree.

Yes, yes it was.

 

[mark kennedy]

Yes, yes it was.

I wasn't tracking that, I was overseas at the time. When I got back I was in a hotel watching cspan and listening to Obama say if your not going to help clean up this mess then get out of the way. I saw some of the debate and I don't recall the Senate majority leader objecting to any discussion on the floor.

 

[Rion]

I wasn't tracking that, I was overseas at the time. When I got back I was in a hotel watching cspan and listening to Obama say if your not going to help clean up this mess then get out of the way. I saw some of the debate and I don't recall the Senate majority leader objecting to any discussion on the floor.

You should go back and read up on it. One of the primary reasons people still hate it today is how it was passed, and the deception used. That and how the people behind it acted afterwards:

 

[mark kennedy]

You should go back and read up on it. One of the primary reasons people still hate it today is how it was passed, and the deception used. That and how the people behind it acted afterwards:

Yea I like Trey Gowdy, his point appears to be an expert, supposed expert, was lying at a crucial time of the debate.

 

[Rion]

Yea I like Trey Gowdy, his point appears to be an expert, supposed expert, was lying at a crucial time of the debate.

Yep. Like I said, it is a big reason why people still hate it. The only reason it became half-way popular for a brief time was due to Paul Ryan being so incompetent his version was somehow worse.

 

[mark kennedy]

Yep. Like I said, it is a big reason why people still hate it. The only reason it became half-way popular for a brief time was due to Paul Ryan being so incompetent his version was somehow worse.

So in this session what do you think the Congress should do?

 

[Rion]

At this point, move on to tax reform. Obamacare will collapse on its own soon enough.

 

[mark kennedy]

At this point, move on to tax reform. Obamacare will collapse on its own soon enough.

Tax reform will depend on getting a budget through:

Kevin Brady, the head of the tax-writing committee in the House, warned his colleagues on Wednesday that they had to overcome their differences. “No budget, no tax reform,” he reportedly said. A senior White House official told me recently, “What can screw up reconciliation is not getting a budget.” (Who Knew That Tax Reform Could Be So Complicated? The New Yorker)
​

They have a nifty trick of bypassing a filibuster from the Democrats by calling it reconciliation. The problem is that the clock is ticking and they dare not screw up the budget. Next year they will be in reelection mode so Trump will be at a lot of rallies along with the Representatives who are clinging to their seats.

 

[hedrick]

What Pelosi said was "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." From context, what she meant was that lots of crazy predictions about disasters it would cause would be proven false when we saw how it actually worked out.

This is an unfortunate property of lots of legislation. We know what it's claimed to do and what it's intended to do (which isn't always the same thing). But we often don't know what it will actually do until it's in place.

That's particularly the case with the latest repeal and replace, since it's dependent upon actions of the states. However we can make reasonable predictions, as people made reasonable predictions before Obamacare was passed. The problem is that people are making lots of unreasonable predictions, and they were then too.

For the full context of Pelosi's remarks, see FACT CHECK: Did Nancy Pelosi Say Obamacare Must be Passed to 'Find Out What Is in It'?

 

[mark kennedy]

What Pelosi said was "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." From context, what she meant was that lots of crazy predictions about disasters it would cause would be proven false when we saw how it actually worked out.

This is an unfortunate property of lots of legislation. We know what it's claimed to do and what it's intended to do (which isn't always the same thing). But we often don't know what it will actually do until it's in place.

That's particularly the case with the latest repeal and replace, since it's dependent upon actions of the states. However we can make reasonable predictions, as people made reasonable predictions before Obamacare was passed. The problem is that people are making lots of unreasonable predictions, and they were then too.

For the full context of Pelosi's remarks, see FACT CHECK: Did Nancy Pelosi Say Obamacare Must be Passed to 'Find Out What Is in It'?

So far, the GOP repeal efforts have been subject to zero public hearings.​

In contrast, the ACA was debated in three House committees and two Senate committees, and subject to hours of bipartisan debate that allowed for the introduction of amendments. Peterson told us in an e-mail that he “can’t recall any major piece of legislation that was completely devoid of public forums of any kind, and that were crafted outside of the normal committee and subcommittee structure to this extent”. (Was the Passage of Obamacare Just as Secretive as GOP Efforts to Repeal It?)
​

That's what McCain was talking about when he insisted on a return to order and demonstrated with the NDAA. This was a bipartisan effort over months and they managed to work it out just like they could with Health Care. But the House passed a repeal and replace measure that went into a closed committee of thirteen men with no debate and nothing contained in the completely revised bill even discussed, let alone disclosed:

The legislation is being written by 13 Republican senators — all of them men — in secret. No one has seen a draft of it. No public hearings have happened, and none are scheduled. Republicans briefly considered banning cameras from the halls of the Senate so they couldn’t be asked about the bill on television. Various Senate Republicans have condemned the process. (Was the Passage of Obamacare Just as Secretive as GOP Efforts to Repeal It?)
​

This is going to be key in the 2018 interim elections and the GOP did it to themselves. This one falls on Mitch McConnell, if they had the good sense to replace McConnell with McCain they would have successfully passed Health Care Reform. But then again the GOP elected Trump as President so their choices has revealed they want someone standing in a bully pulpit. That is why they can't get anything done with Health Care and personally, I think tax reform and deregulation will be DOA as well.

If the people of the United States miss this lesson they are simply not paying attention.

 

[hedrick]

I think the people of the US are paying attention. It's too early to predict elections. My estimate is that voters won't care that much about the process, but they will care if they lose the protections of Obamacare.

Unfortunately the latest bill is complex enough that it's going to come down to who you believe. 2018 is too close to see actual results. You can argue that the bill doesn't remove anything good, because the states will miraculously do things more efficiently, not use the block grants for other things, and supplement the money during recessions when more people are out of work and need help.

(The thing about entitlements is that appropriations expand as need expands. Unfortunately taxes don't. But a Federal entitlement program is more likely to find a way to handle it than states.)

It's very unlikely that this will all happen. Indeed the welfare "reform" that turned entitlements into block grants gives a good model for what will happen. But because the text of the legislation doesn't actually remove protections, it will come down to whose analysis of impact you believe. Unfortunately people believe in people that they like rather than people whose analyses are accurate.

By the time results are visible, it will be a few years after the legislation. So voters will have to believe analysis that traces results to that cause. Again, I'm not convinced that people will necessarily believe in accurate analysis.

The GOP leadership didn't nominate Trump. Their members did. It's very hard to predict what's going to happen either to the GOP or the Democrats. If the voters recoil in horror from what the GOP is doing, things will change. But in my opinion the same forces that elected Trump are still present, and will be for a while.

Will key Republicans reject an ideological tax cut? I'm not so sure. I think they may manage to get a budget through. It may actually be easier for Democrats to hang them on that, as it will be easier to document impacts.

 

[hedrick]

One more thing to note: the main reason the health debate is rushed is the need to use budget reconciliation. But that depends upon Senate rules. Those can be changed by a majority. I think there's a reasonable chance they could get it. I happen to think requiring 60 votes is a good idea. Making major changes based on 51% invites instability.