Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is assuring the public that the Democrats' plan to end the war will involve a that the President must follow:
The Democratic leader said he will call for avote this month on several anti-war proposals, including one by Sen.Carl Levin that would insist President Bush end U.S. combat nextsummer. The proposals would be mandatory and not leave Bush wiggleroom, said Reid, D-Nev.
"There (are) no goals. It's all definite timelines," he told reporters of the planned legislation.
The Republicans will filibuster this legislation no matter what. And this comes from the same party that when the Democrats blocked judicial nominees when they were in the minority.
A number of military measures will be debate this week. One of which is a bill by Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and Jack Reed (D-RI) that would begin within 120 days:
The primary Democratic measure is being written by Armed ServicesChairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Jack Reed, D-R.I., a former Armyofficer and West Point graduate who serves on the committee. Theiramendment would require the administration to begin the drawdown of anunspecified number of U.S. forces in 120 days and shift the mission ofthose remaining from population protection to training Iraqi troops,targeting terrorists, protecting U.S. assets and guarding Iraq’sborders.
The measure would set a date for completing the withdrawal of mosttroops, but Reid and the measure’s authors have not yet decided whetherthat date would be a binding requirement or a non-binding goal. Makingit a goal could net more Republican votes. “They have not made a finaldecision as to how to proceed†on that question, said Jim Manley, aspokesman for Reid.
There are other bills being considered this week -- one of them is one designed to restore habeas corpus, thus repealing part of the .
Senator Jim Webb's (D-VA) amendment, which would require that all soldiers spend at least as much time at home as oversees, is just a few Senators away from reaching the 60 votes of support to force cloture.
Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) gave us an earlier today:
“Right now, Senator Webb’s amendment, I would guess, has at least 57votes, on a bipartisan basis,†said Reed on ABC’s This Week with GeorgeStephanopoulos. “We want to move and move forward, pick up thevotes. This process is sometimes too slow, but it’s a process that Ithink is going in the right direction. We’re picking up support. And Ithink on this issue, we can pick up sufficient votes -- 60, I hope 67.â€
I don't know about 67. Maybe 60 or 62. Remember, 60 is required to break a Republican filibuster. 67 is required to override a Bush veto.
More importantly, what this does is turn it into a showdown between George W. Bush and Jim Webb -- exactly what we want. Unlike some other Democrats, Webb is not a wimp. He stands up. He has courage. He is not afraid to give us the hard truth. Voters respect that. He should be out there, front and center, debating Bush, as opposed to Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid.
We have been taught over the years that all politics in local. In 2006, however, the midterm elections became a national referendum on the party responsible for the Iraq war, corruption and mismanagement. As political scientist notes, while the presidential election will be front and center, so too will be the race for majority in the US Senate. 22 of the 34 Senate seats up for grabs are Republican:
The National Republican Senatorial Committee starts out with threemigraines — New Hampshire and open seats in Colorado and Virginia. Bythe end of the year, Democratic candidates could be running ahead inballot tests in all three states.
Three other states whereRepublicans lead seem headed for tight races: Maine, Minnesota andOregon. All three states lean Democratic in presidential races, and theGOP’s weak national standing increases the risk for Sens. Susan Collins(Maine), Norm Coleman (Minn.) and Gordon Smith (Ore.), each of whomwould likely win re-election comfortably in a neutral politicalenvironment.
In addition, the uncertainty about Nebraska, whereSen. Chuck Hagel is less than even money to run for re-election, andquestions about New Mexico and Alaska, where incumbents long assumed tobe safe have ethics clouds hanging over their heads, make a Democraticgain of five to seven seats a serious possibility next year.
The Democrats will face tough challenges in Louisiana and South Dakota. If they can win those two, we are looking at the possibility of them picking up somewhere between three and nine Senate seats. Nine additional seats would give the Democrats 59 total, which pretty much assures their being able to force cloture on every measure. With a Democrat in the White House as well, so much could get done between 2009 and the end of 2010, when the next congressional elections are held.
It's official. The former Governor of Virginia, Mark Warner, also rumored as a possible vice presidential candidate, for John Warner's Senate seat. That means Clinton, Obama or Edwards had better consider someone else as their running mate. Most importantly, it means Democrats will have a great opportunity to pick up yet another Senate seat:
Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner intends to run for the Senate next year, Democratic officials saidWednesday, assuring his party a competitive race for a seat long inRepublican hands.
Warner scheduled an e-mail announcement of his plans for Thursday. The seat is currently held by Republican Sen. John Warner, who recently said he will retire at the end of his current term after 30 years in office.
The officials who discussed former Gov. Warner's intentions did soon condition of anonymity, saying they did not want to pre-empt hisannouncement.
Virginia has recently produced a number of strong Democrats, including Jim Webb and Tim Kaine.
Republicans who might run for the seat include Jim Gilmore and Tom Davis. According to a recent , Mark Warner leads both Republicans:
Former Democratic Gov. Mark Warner leads former Republican Gov. JimGilmore (54% to 34%) and leads Republican Rep. Tom Davis (57% to 30%)in hypothetical general election match-ups for U.S. Senate.
Conservative columnist that Republicans could lose between 5 and 8 Senate seats in 2008. Imagine a Democratic presidency, and a Senate in which Democrats hold 58 seats. That means Democrats would need just two Republican votes to force cloture on anything they wanted. So much could get done!
When you subtract the Democrats' half-hearted effort to end this war, they actually have accomplished a lot in other areas. In the two years Democrats have to accomplish their , it took just nine months for the half of them:
The passage of the student loan bill on Friday is the fourth measureheaded to President Bush’s desk from the Democrats’ “Six in ’06â€campaign pledge. If Bush signs the education bill as expected, three ofthe Democrats’ high-profile legislative promises will have become lawless than nine months into their majority.
So in all, here are the six major promises that the Democrats made during last year's campaign season:
Minimum Wage -- Passed and signed
9/11 Commission Recommendations - Passed and signed
One of the to hold true to his conservative principles during the Iraq war is retiring:
Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, a persistent Republican critic of theIraq war, intends to announce on Monday he will not seek a third term,according to Republican officials.
The officials also said Hagel does not plan to run for the White House in 2008, despite earlier flirting with a candidacy.
The60-year-old senator arranged a news conference for Monday in Omaha,Neb., to make his formal announcement. The officials spoke on conditionof anonymity to avoid pre-empting the event.
Weeks ago, it was that Democrat Bob Kerrey would seek the Nebraska Senate seat if Hagel retired. This is yet another seat that the Democrats could pick up. Of the seats up for grabs in 2008, 22 of them are Republican. Democrats have a shot to end up with 55 Senate seats, more House seats and a Democrat in the White House.
You cannot say this would ever happen under a Republican Congress. On Friday, the Democratic Senate and House passed legislation that would :
Congress on Friday approved the largest overhaul of education fundingin more than 60 years, a $20.9-billion program that would boostfinancial aid to students and reduce interest payments on their loans.
Students who enter certain public sector jobs would have their debtserased under the plan, the total cost of which would be offset byslashing government subsidies to lenders. It also calls for a$510-million investment in minority colleges.
The program would have particular impact in California, which has morerecipients of low-income student grants than any other state. Thebill's increases to those Pell Grants are expected to benefit about 5.5million needy students nationwide.
As a recent college graduate who had to deal with student loans, this legislation is incredibly good news. In many cases what we have happening are people even as old as 28 still paying off college debt, mostly due to all the interest. The average student graduates with .
Specifically, here are the key :
Maximum Pell Grant increased from $4,050 to $5,400.
Interest rates cut from 6.8% to 3.4%.
All of the changes would take affect by the year 2012.
The Senate passed it by a vote of 79-12, and in the House it was 292-97. Bush is expected to sign the bill.
This isn't done deal yet. But it looks like the number two-ranked Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin (D-IL), is putting his foot down and will unless the money is tied to a withdrawal strategy:
Durbin’s commitment--and a forceful speech he delivered against newfunding for Bush’s war strategy--positions an influential Senate leaderin favor of a hard line at a moment when some Democrats are signaling awillingness to compromise on war funding.
“This Congress can’t give President Bush another blank check for hiswar in Iraq,†Durbin said. Later, he added, “The Consitution givesCongress a means to force the President to change course: the power ofthe purse. For the sake of our long-term national security interests,Congress needs to use that authority now.â€
Durbin had better realize that if he puts his foot down on this issue and then lifts it back up, there will be lots of angry progressives and calls for him to give up his leadership post.
This is just in the nick of time. Remember, the White House is asking for :
The White House is expected to ask for some $200 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for the fiscal year that starts on October 1.
Pretty much all progressives agree that the only money allotted for Iraq should be funds that pay for redeployment from the country. Like with other blogs, Democrats who vote for funding without a plan for complete withdrawal will be outed on this web site. Enough is enough.
Two years after the mortgage company Countrywide to help Katrina victims by suspending their mortgage payments, the company is to its word:
According to a class-action lawsuit filed in Louisiana today,homeowners say the mortgage giant is now demanding any deferredpayments be paid up immediately, often with interest and penaltiesattached. Plaintiffs' attorneys say that as a result, many strugglinghomeowners have been sent into foreclosure.
In a goodwill gesture after Katrina hit two years ago, Countrywideannounced it would suspend mortgage payments for hurricane victims forup to 90 days. Homeowners say they were told by Countrywide agents thatany deferred payments would be added to the back end of the loan term,and that no lump sum, interest or penalties would be imposed.
According to the lawsuit, however, homeowners have been notified byCountrywide that they have to either pay the entire deferred amountimmediately or restructure their loan in a way that would cost themthousands of additional dollars.
We write all the time about war profiteering. This is flood profiteering. If these Katrina victims don't pay back their loans, Countrywide stands to rake in huge profits off all the interest. Also, for this to happen on the two-year anniversary of Katrina is insulting.
Please or Countrywide and tell them how you feel about their indifference towards Gulf Coast residents, many of which are still trying to put their lives back together.
Also, email your and , and urge them to investigate these despicable tactics by the mortgage industry.
Recent Comments