Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Senate. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Senate. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Thứ Ba, 14 tháng 5, 2013

Senate panel approves US ambassador to Libya

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has approved President Barack Obama's nominee to serve as U.S. ambassador to Libya.

The panel on a voice vote Tuesday approved Deborah Kay Jones, a career diplomat who has served in Kuwait, Argentina, Syria, Iraq and Turkey. If confirmed by the full Senate, Jones would fill the post that has been vacant for nearly eight months since the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Insurgents attacked the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11 last year, killing Stevens and three other Americans.

The Obama administration's response to the attacks has been the subject of a long-running and bitter dispute with congressional Republicans. The GOP has accused the administration of trying to cover up details of the assault.


View the original article here

Thứ Tư, 8 tháng 5, 2013

Senate rejects firearms on more federal lands

The Senate has rejected an effort to expand the use of firearms on the heavily visited lands of the Army Corps of Engineers in a congressional victory for gun control supporters.

The vote for the proposal by Sen. Tom Coburn was 56-43 for the legislation, but that fell short of the 60 votes needed.

The measure would have let people carry guns onto Corps property for any legal purpose. They currently can only be used there for activities like hunting or target shooting.

The agency oversees nearly 12 million acres containing dams, lakes and trails used for recreation by 370 million visitors annually.

The Oklahoma Republican said the right to bear arms should be the same on Corps property as it already is in national parks. Opponents said the weapons could threaten critical facilities like dams and flood control projects.

The Senate killed an effort last month expanding background checks for more gun buyers.


View the original article here

Lawmakers split on impact of access to benefits for illegal immigrants in Senate bill

As the Senate prepares to take up comprehensive immigration legislation, one of the most pressing questions is how and when illegal immigrants who set out on the path to citizenship qualify for federal benefits. 

Lawmakers disagree sharply on this front, which could drive debate as they begin formal work on the bill Thursday. 

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., points out that the proposal says applicants would not qualify for at least 10-13 years -- and would not qualify for another five years after getting a green card, under current law. 

Further, Rubio argues that the proposal has "very specific" rules governing anyone who could be considered a "public charge," or someone who would live off the government dole. 

"If you are a public charge, you don't even qualify for renewal of that temporary status that you're getting," Rubio said. 

But Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., another Republican senator who has emerged as one of the chief critics of the bill, says the law does not properly enforce that provision. 

Sessions told Fox News that the so-called "public charge" law, as currently written, has been "totally ignored" to date. And he argued that many immigrants will be eligible for benefits much sooner than proponents claim -- including the so-called "dreamers," young illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. their parents. 

Sessions said 2-3 million illegal immigrants who claim that status will be able to have access to federal benefits in five years. 

And, he added, eventually "everyone who entered illegally will be able to accept any benefits this country offers." 

After the 15-year waiting period, the number accessing federal benefits could be an additional 10 or 11 million. 

Nevertheless, Rubio insists there will be checks at every stage of the process. 

"When you re-apply at the six-year mark, by the way you're not eligible for any public benefits at that point, you have to prove you're not a public charge," he said. 

A controversial report released earlier this week by the conservative Heritage Foundation estimated that, under the bill, the total cost of legalizing 11 million illegal immigrants could approach $6.3 trillion over the course of their lifetimes. The study factored in taxes those immigrants would pay, but also the services and other benefits that would be spent on them. 

It has come under heavy scrutiny from some conservative economists who say it ignored significant factors - like the possibility of some of these illegal immigrants moving up the income ladder after coming out of the shadows, while expanding the economy and boosting federal tax revenue.
Sessions and other critics are unconvinced. 

"We respect people who want to come to America. We believe that we should accept immigrants," Sessions said. "But we've got to be realistic about the impact." 

As the debate wages on, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on Wednesday offered an amendment to end the dispute -- by proposing to let illegal immigrants stay but deny them from ever receiving any "means-tested benefits," or welfare.


View the original article here

Chủ Nhật, 28 tháng 4, 2013

Manchin says he's working to get another Senate vote on gun background check

  • Toomey_Manchin.jpg

    FILE: April 10, 2013: Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., left, and Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., announce a deal on gun-control legislation, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, D.C.AP

West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin said Sunday he’s not finished with his effort to expand background checks for gun buyers, despite the proposal’s defeat and other key senators appearing to now move beyond the issue.

Manchin told “Fox News Sunday” that he’s going to rework the proposal to get it back to the Senate floor.

“We’re going to work this bill with all of our hearts,” he told Fox News.

Manchin was joined by Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey in crafting the background check proposal, in part to get bipartisan support for the largely Democratic gun-control plan, following a mass shooting in December 2012 in which 20 first-graders were killed.

However, the proposal to expand the check to online sales and gun shows was shelved earlier this month when it got just 54 of the required 60 Senate votes.

On Friday, Toomey said he had no plans to revive the proposal.

"My own view is very simple: The Senate has had its vote. We've seen the outcome of that vote. I am not aware of any reason to believe that if we had the vote again that we'd have a different outcome," he said, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Manchin told Fox: “I don’t think he’s done.”

He also said he has spoken with fellow gun owners who appear to support legislation that would keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the severe mentally ill.

Manchin said “law-abiding citizens” support background checks, and he urged Americans to read the proposal, then tell him what parts they don’t like.  

Senate Majority Harry Reid said days after the defeat of the Manchin-Toomey proposal that he has “hit pause” on efforts to pass comprehensive gun-control legislation. 

He said last week the proposal remains a work in progress but no action is being taken now.


View the original article here

Bombing shifts Mass. Senate race before primaries Tuesday

Even before the explosions, polling suggested that Massachusetts voters weren't excited about the looming special election to replace former U.S. Sen. John Kerry.

But in the days after bombs ripped through the Boston Marathon's crowded streets, politics were all but forgotten as authorities launched an unprecedented manhunt and a region grappled with terror. It didn't matter that competitive primary contests were 15 days away; everything was put on hold.

"There are things that are more important than campaigning and that horrific event was clearly one of them," said U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, who is competing against U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch for the Democratic nomination to replace Kerry, now the secretary of state.

After suspending political activities for roughly a week, the candidates have been forced to walk a delicate balance as they engage voters ahead of Tuesday's Republican and Democratic primaries. They have largely avoided the site of the attack out of sensitivity for victims, but some have tweaked campaign advertising to address the bombing, highlighted their national security credentials and tried to use the sudden focus on terrorism to shift the direction of the race.

The general election, featuring the primary winners, is scheduled for June 25.

"It completely changed the landscape," Lynch aide Scott Ferson said of the bombing.

Indeed, a campaign once dominated by debates about the environment, health care and women's rights has become more focused on enemy combatants, Miranda rights and counterterrorism agencies. Some candidates welcomed the shift.

On the Democratic side, Lynch has seized on national security in recent days to attack Markey, thought to be the front-runner. One of the most memorable moments in last week's Democratic debate, just a week after the bombing, focused on support for federal security efforts

"Unlike my colleague Mr. Markey, I've actually voted for the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bills," Lynch charged.

Markey responded: "He's taking a page right out of the Karl Rove swift boat playbook, and it's very sad, especially just one week after what just happened in Boston, Cambridge and Watertown."

Through Tuesday's primary election, Markey outspent Lynch on television advertising $1.7 million to $1.2 million, according to advertising figures obtained by The Associated Press. But only Lynch focused on the bombings in a television ad that blanketed the state last week, while Markey focused on traditional Democratic priorities such as women's reproductive rights.

"We hold in our hearts those we lost, but we will get through this together and work toward a brighter day," Lynch says in the campaign ad.

But Lynch was forced to distance himself last week from a so-called robo-call made on his behalf by the leader of an ironworkers' union, who mentions the bombings while encouraging voters to support someone who "understands the day-to-day problems facing working families." It was an awkward moment for the Lynch campaign, which called on the group to stop the calls.

But it's unclear how many people were paying attention.

"The bombings basically sucked all the air out of the room," said Steve Koczela, president of MassINC Polling Group, which found last month that more than 40 percent of likely Democratic voters and nearly 50 percent of likely Republican voters hadn't settled on a candidate.

"It just doesn't seem like -- even as of the last poll -- people were really paying attention to who was running," Koczela continued. "There's room for any of the candidates to make a move."

On the Republican side in particular, the recent violence shifted the contours of the contest.

GOP candidate Gabriel Gomez, a former Navy SEAL, finished running the marathon minutes before the bombs exploded along the finish line, killing three and injuring more than 200.

Like other candidates, Gomez immediately pulled television ads off the air and suspended campaign activities. He said he was focused on being respectful as he eased back into campaigning the following weekend.

"We can't let the terrorists win and completely suspend what is fundamental right in the United States," Gomez said.

He charged that President Barack Obama's administration should have designated 19-year-old suspect Dzhohkar Tsarnaev an "enemy combatant" and tried him outside the traditional criminal justice system.

Another GOP candidate, Mike Sullivan, says the federal government should have denied Tsarnaev his Miranda rights, tried him as an enemy combatant and revoked his U.S. citizenship.

"Our first concern must always be preventing future terrorist acts against our people," said Sullivan, a former U.S. attorney whose campaign has been reminding people that he previously led the prosecution of shoe bomber Richard Reid.

Republican candidate Dan Winslow, a former judge and chief legal counsel under former Gov. Mitt Romney, said the entire GOP field has experience with national security.

"We've got a Navy SEAL, a former prosecutor and a former judge all in the field for Republicans," Winslow said. "I think we all have our own credentials. The key is, Who's got the better ideas? Who's got the better electability in June?"

The key may also be which candidate can convince his supporters to get to the polls as the bombing continues to dominate attention in Massachusetts. State officials were already predicting a low turnout, likely less than 20 percent of eligible voters, even before the attack.

Wendy Becker, 45, of Newton, was among the thousands who visited the bomb site in Copley Square late last week. A registered voter, she said she didn't know the primaries were happening so soon.

"I didn't even know it was Tuesday and haven't cared," she said, noting that her little brother and brother-in-law ran in the marathon. She's been glued to the television coverage of the aftermath even since.


View the original article here

Thứ Sáu, 26 tháng 4, 2013

Senate bill targets large pharmacies

Large specialty pharmacies like the one that triggered a deadly meningitis outbreak last year would be subject to federal safety inspections and manufacturing standards, under a new Senate proposal introduced Friday.

The draft bill is the first effort by Senate lawmakers to address the outbreak tied to contaminated compounded drugs that sickened more than 700 Americans and killed more than 50 others.

The wave of deadly fungal infections was identified in September and linked to a large Massachusetts compounding pharmacy, which regulators said was operating more like a manufacturer.

The new proposal would subject these large compounding operations to direct federal oversight by the Food and Drug Administration, rather than state pharmacy boards that have traditionally overseen such operations.


View the original article here

Senate delays action on Internet sales tax bill

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says senators have reached a deal to delay voting on a bill to tax Internet sales until after senators return from a weeklong vacation.

Reid says the Senate vote on passage of the bill would be May 6.

A handful of senators from states without sales taxes were blocking the bill, which has widespread bipartisan support in the Senate.

The bill would empower states to require online retailers to collect state and local sales taxes for purchases made over the Internet. Under the bill, the sales taxes would be sent to the states where a shopper lives.


View the original article here

Thứ Năm, 25 tháng 4, 2013

Senate passes bill to end FAA furloughs

With flight delays mounting, White House officials and key members of the Senate reported significant progress Thursday night on legislation to end air traffic controller furloughs blamed for inconveniencing large numbers of travelers.

Under a draft compromise circulated among lawmakers, the Federal Aviation Administration would gain authority to transfer up to $253 million from accounts that are flush into other programs, to "prevent reduced operations and staffing" through the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year.

Officials said they hoped for passage later in the evening, after most members of the Senate already had left the Capitol to begin a 10-day vacation.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a participant in the talks, said the measure would "prevent what otherwise would have been intolerable delays in the air travel system, inconveniencing travelers and hurting the economy."

Earlier, lawmakers involved in the talks said there was general agreement that the FAA should be given additional flexibility in allocating its share of $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts that took effect last month at numerous federal agencies.

But consensus on the details was elusive, and without legislation, the furloughs and resulting flight delays were virtually certain to persist at least until Congress returns on May 6 after a weeklong vacation.

"I want to do it right now. There are other senators you'd have to ask what the hang-up is," said Sen. Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat who helped author one of several proposals under consideration.

Any measure that cleared the Senate would also have to be approved by the House. Officials there indicated earlier in the day they were willing to do so, depending on the details.

For the White House and Senate Democrats, the discussions on legislation relating to one relatively small slice of the $85 billion in spending cuts marked a shift in position in a long-running struggle with Republicans over budget issues. Similarly, the turn of events marked at least modest vindication of a decision by the House GOP last winter to finesse some budget struggles in order to focus public attention on the across-the-board cuts in hopes they would gain leverage over President Barack Obama.

The talks unfolded as the FAA said there had been at least 863 flights delayed on Wednesday "attributable to staffing reductions resulting from the furlough."

The Professional Aviation Safety Specialists, a union that represents FAA employees, reported a number of incidents it said were due to the furloughs.

In one case, it said several flights headed for Long Island MacArthur Airport in New York were diverted on Wednesday when a piece of equipment failed.  "While the policy for this equipment is immediate restoral, due to sequestration and furloughs it was changed to next-day restoral," the union said.

It added it was "learning of additional impacts nationwide, including open watches, increased restoration times, delays resulting from insufficient funding for parts and equipment, modernization delays, missed or deferred preventative maintenance, and reduced redundancy."

The airlines, too, were pressing Congress to restore the FAA to full staffing.

In an interview Wednesday, Robert Isom, chief operations officer of US Airways, likened the furloughs to a "wildcat regulatory action."

He added, "In the airline business, you try to eliminate uncertainty. Some factors you can't control, like weather. It (the FAA issue) is worse than the weather."

In a shift, first the White House and then senior Democratic lawmakers have signaled a willingness in the past two days to support legislation that alleviates the budget crunch at the FAA, while leaving the balance of the $85 billion to remain in effect.

Obama favors a comprehensive agreement that replaces the entire $85 billion in across-the-board cuts as part of a broader deficit-reduction deal that includes higher taxes and spending cuts.

One Senate Democrat, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, noted that without the type of comprehensive deficit deal that Obama favors, a bill that eases the spending crunch at the FAA would inevitably be followed by other single-issue measures. She listed funding at the National Institutes of Health as one example, and cuts that cause furloughs of civilians who work at military hospitals as a second.

At the same time, Democratic aides said resolve had crumbled under the weight of widespread delays for the traveling public and pressure from the airlines.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., involved in the discussions, said the issue was big enough so "most people want to find a solution as long as it doesn't spend any more money."

Officials estimate it would cost slightly more than $200 million to restore air traffic controllers to full staffing, and another $50 million to keep open smaller air traffic towers around the country that the FAA has proposed closing.

Across the Capitol, the chairman of the House Transportation Committee, Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., said, "We're willing to look at what the Senate's going to propose."

He said he believes the FAA has the authority it needs under existing law to shift funds and end the furloughs of air traffic controllers, and any legislation should be "very, very limited" and direct the agency to use the flexibility it already has.

In a reflection of the political undercurrents, another House Republican, Rep. James Lankford of Oklahoma, said FAA employees "are being used as pawns by this (Obama) administration to be able to implement the maximum amount of pain on the American people when it does not have to be this way."

The White House and congressional Democrats vociferously dispute such claims.


View the original article here

Thứ Tư, 17 tháng 4, 2013

Senate panels endorse Obama budget nominee Burwell

President Barack Obama's nominee to run the White House budget office appears heading toward easy Senate confirmation after back-to-back approval by two key panels.

A former deputy budget director and top White House aide during the Clinton administration, Sylvia Mathews Burwell, won voice vote approval by the Budget and Homeland Security and Government Reform panels on Wednesday.

If confirmed by the full Senate, Burwell would be thrust into Washington's roiling budget debate. At her confirmation hearing last week, she stressed the need to work in a bipartisan manner and her experience in helping craft bipartisan budget agreements in the late 1990s.

More recently, Burwell was president of the Wal-Mart Foundation and a top executive at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.


View the original article here

Background check plan defeated in Senate, Obama rips gun bill opponents

  • manchin_040913.jpg

    April 9, 2013: Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. is followed by reporters as he walks from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's, D-Nev., office on Capitol Hill in Washington.AP

Senate Democrats are trying desperately to round up a bipartisan coalition in advance of a critical round of gun-control votes Wednesday afternoon, as fence-sitting Republicans began to peel away and new polling showed ebbing public support for tightening gun laws. 

After days of backroom wrangling, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid lined up a vote on nine amendments for late Wednesday. The first, on a compromise proposal to loosen the firearms bill's background checks provision, is considered the most vital. 

The proposal, rolled out by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., would expand background checks to gun shows and Internet sales while exempting personal transactions. The amendment is aimed at winning over reluctant conservatives -- if it fails, the overall bill stands little chance of passing. 

Democrats face a heavy lift, as they must round up a 60-vote majority. They did so last week on a procedural vote, but that coalition now appears to be eroding. Several sources tell Fox News that Democrats still do not have 60 supporters. 

Democratic leaders have given ever-changing assessments of where support stands. Vice President Biden said Tuesday that Democrats would get the 60 votes, but then said later in the day that it could come down to one or two senators. 

Manchin reportedly said he does not have 60 -- but then his office released a statement saying he "remains optimistic and hopeful that if Senators and the American people read the bill, they will support his commonsense approach to require criminal and mental background checks for advertised sales, including purchases at gun shows and online sales, without infringing on Americans' Second Amendment rights." 

The vote math depicts a steep uphill climb for Democrats. Opponents will need just 41 of the Senate's 100 votes to derail the Manchin-Toomey background check plan.  

Thirty-one senators voted last week to completely block debate on overall gun legislation. Just two were Democrats -- Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Mark Begich of Alaska. 

If all 31 oppose the Manchin-Toomey measure -- and that is not certain -- opponents would need just 10 more votes to prevail. 

So far, 11 of 16 Republicans who voted last week to let debate on the gun bill begin have said they will oppose Manchin-Toomey. That would give foes of expanded background checks 42 potential votes -- one more than they need to win. 

Among the latest to announce opposition was Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev. 

"I believe very strongly that our current background check system needs strengthening and improving, particularly in areas that could keep guns out of the hands of felons and the mentally ill. At the same time, I cannot support legislation that infringes upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms," Heller said in a statement. 

So far, just three Republican senators have committed to voting for the amendment. 

Still uncertain was support from some Democrats from GOP-heavy states, including Max Baucus of Montana, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota. Baucus and Landrieu face re-election next year. 

The Senate gun bill would extend background checks to nearly all gun purchases, toughen penalties against illegal gun trafficking and add small sums to school safety programs. 

Perhaps helping explain Democrats' problems, an AP-GfK poll this month showed that 49 percent of Americans support stricter gun laws. That was down from 58 percent who said so in January -- a month after the December killings of 20 children and six aides at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school propelled gun violence into a national issue. 

In a climactic day, the Senate planned to hold eight other votes Wednesday besides the one on background checks, all of them amendments to a broad gun control measure. 

They included Democratic proposals to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines, which are expected to lose; a Republican proposal requiring states to honor other states' permits allowing concealed weapons, which faces a close vote; and a GOP substitute for the overall gun measure. 

The concealed weapons amendment, seen by advocates as protecting gun rights, was vehemently opposed by gun control groups, who say it would allow more guns into states with stricter firearms laws. 

The votes were coming a day after former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, badly injured in a 2011 mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., and her husband, Mark Kelly, tried galvanizing gun control support by visiting Capitol Hill and attending a private lunch with Democratic senators. Reid, D-Nev., called the lunch -- senators said it included emotional speeches from lawmakers -- "as moving as any" he has attended. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 16 tháng 4, 2013

Senate passes Thatcher resolution, after alleged Dem efforts to water it down

The Senate on Tuesday passed a resolution honoring the late Margaret Thatcher, despite apparent efforts by Senate Democrats to water it down. 

A Senate Republican aide told Fox News that Democrats had been trying to take language out of the original version. But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell called up the Republican version on Tuesday anyway, effectively daring Democrats to oppose it. 

The resolution honoring the late British prime minister, who died last week, passed by unanimous consent, meaning nobody objected. The vote follows reports that Democrats were holding up the measure behind the scenes, though the House passed a resolution honoring Thatcher shortly after her death. 

McConnell, in a statement, referenced efforts to water down the resolution. Thatcher, a staunch ally of former President Ronald Reagan, was controversial among Democrats in the U.S. for her efforts to roll back the state in Britain, take on the unions and take other steps she touted as a means to invigorate the economy.   

"Let me just say that Margaret was one of the most influential and revolutionary figures of the 20th century, and failing to name her achievements would do her memory and her legacy a great disservice. It would be unheard of to commemorate Churchill for example and ignore his heroic role in steering his countrymen through the battle of Britain, nor would we think of honoring Lincoln without mentioning the Civil War," McConnell said. 

He added: "Let's acknowledge the enormity of what she accomplished. Let's mention her achievements by name and the resolution does that because we owe her a tribute equal to her legacy."


View the original article here

Thứ Hai, 15 tháng 4, 2013

Senate leaders: Too close to say if gun control bill has the votes to pass

The bipartisan deal on expanded background checks for gun buyers appeared Sunday to garner more Republican support, but Capitol Hill leaders could not say whether the overall gun-control bill will have enough votes as the full debate begins this week.

The legislation will need 60 votes to pass in the chamber, which means it will need Republican support for Senate Democrats facing re-election in gun-friendly districts.

"It's an open question as to whether or not we have the votes,” Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I think it's going to be close."

Toomey joined West Virginia Democratic Joe Manchin in crafting the background proposal, which would cover Internet and gun show purchases but would still exempt sales between family members.

Background checks currently apply only to transactions handled by the country's 55,000 licensed gun dealers.

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer -- who has worked since January on a larger plan to curb gun violence that could win bipartisan support -- told ABC’s “This Week” he has strong support from fellow Democrats.

“But … we're working really hard to maximize both the number of Democrats who will be the overwhelming majority of those who vote for it and a number of Republicans,” he said.

Senate Democrats and others have been trying to fulfill President Obama’s second-term priority of curbing gun violence since the December 2012 shootings at a Connecticut elementary school in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed.

However, the effort has faced strong opposition on Capitol Hill and from such major gun lobby groups as the National Rifle Association.

Plan to ban high-capacity gun magazine clips and re-institute a ban on semi-automatic weapons have already been removed from the legislation, for lack of support. However, they could re-emerge as Senate amendments.

The full Senate debate is expected to begin Monday, after enough senators voted last week to stop a Republican-led effort to block the legislation from going forward.    

Among the Republicans to express support Sunday was Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine.

 The plan would "strengthen the background check system without in any way infringing on Second Amendment rights," she said in a statement.

However, "it is impossible to predict at this point" what will be in a final bill, she added.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who has a B+ rating from the NRA, told CNN that he said was "very favorably disposed" to the Manchin-Toomey proposal.

"I appreciate their work," he said. "And the American people want to do what we can to prevent these tragedies. And there's a lot more that needs to be done, particularly in the area of mental health."

It was in McCain's home state that a gunman with schizophrenia shot then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in the head during a 2011 rampage in Tucson that left six people dead.

Collins and Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois are the only two Republicans who are expected to vote for the compromise as of now.

On Sunday, Manchin urged lawmakers to read the 49-page proposal. He said it should dispel any misconceptions about infringing on the constitutional right to bear arms.

The proposal, in fact, expands firearms rights by easing some restrictions on transporting guns across state lines, protecting sellers from lawsuits if buyers passed a check but later used a gun in a crime and letting gun dealers conduct business in states where they don't live.

However, he also acknowledged the vote would be tight.

“We're close,” Manchin told CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “We need more."

The compromise, if successful, would be added to overall legislation to strengthen laws against illegal gun trafficking and to increase slightly school-security aid.  

Other additions to the legislation also are expected to be debated this week, including a measure that would allow concealed hand gun permits issued by one state to be accepted nationwide as a de facto background check.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Chủ Nhật, 14 tháng 4, 2013

Senate leaders: Too close to say if gun control bill has the votes to pass

  • Toomey_Manchin.jpg

    FILE: April 10, 2013: Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, of West Virginia, left, and Republican Sen. Patrick Toomey, of Pennsylvania, announce a deal on gun-control legislation, on Capitol Hill, in Washington.AP

The bipartisan deal on expanded background checks for gun buyers appeared Sunday to garner more Republican support, but Capitol Hill leaders could not say whether the overall gun-control bill will have enough votes as the full debate begins this week.

The legislation will need 60 votes to pass in the chamber, which means it will need Republican support as well as support from Senate Democrats facing re-election in districts with a strong tradition of gun rights.

"It's an open question as to whether or not we have the votes,” Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I think it's going to be close."

Toomey joined West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin in crafting the background proposal, which would cover Internet and gun show purchases but would still exempt sales between family members.

Background checks currently apply only to transactions handled by the country's 55,000 licensed gun dealers.

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer -- who has worked since January on a larger plan to curb gun violence that could win bipartisan support -- told ABC’s “This Week” he has strong support from fellow Democrats.

“But … we're working really hard to maximize both the number of Democrats who will be the overwhelming majority of those who vote for it and a number of Republicans,” he said.

Senate Democrats and others have been trying to fulfill President Obama’s second-term priority of curbing gun violence since the December 2012 shootings at a Connecticut elementary school in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed.

However, the effort has faced strong opposition on Capitol Hill and from such major gun lobby groups as the National Rifle Association.

Plan to ban high-capacity gun magazine clips and re-institute a ban on semi-automatic weapons have already been removed from the legislation, for lack of support. However, they could re-emerge as Senate amendments.

The full Senate debate is expected to begin Monday, after enough senators voted last week to stop a Republican-led effort to block the legislation from going forward.    

Among the Republicans to express support Sunday was Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine.

The plan would "strengthen the background check system without in any way infringing on Second Amendment rights," she said in a statement.

However, "it is impossible to predict at this point" what will be in a final bill, she added.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who has a B+ rating from the NRA, told CNN that he was "very favorably disposed" to the Manchin-Toomey proposal.

"I appreciate their work," he said. "And the American people want to do what we can to prevent these tragedies. And there's a lot more that needs to be done, particularly in the area of mental health."

It was in McCain's home state that a gunman with schizophrenia shot then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in the head during a 2011 rampage in Tucson that left six people dead.

Collins and Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois are the only two Republicans who are expected to vote for the compromise as of now.

On Sunday, Manchin urged lawmakers to read the 49-page proposal. He said it should dispel any misconceptions about infringing on the constitutional right to bear arms.

The proposal, in fact, expands firearms rights by easing some restrictions on transporting guns across state lines, protects sellers from lawsuits if buyers passed a check but later used a gun in a crime and lets gun dealers conduct business in states where they don't live.

However, Manchin also acknowledged the vote would be tight.

“We're close,” he told CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “We need more."

The compromise, if successful, would be added to overall legislation to strengthen laws against illegal gun trafficking and to increase slightly school-security aid.  

Other additions to the legislation also are expected to be debated this week, including a measure that would allow concealed hand gun permits issued by one state to be accepted nationwide as a de facto background check.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 9 tháng 4, 2013

Senate immigration plan could be ready by Thursday, followed by weeks of debate

The immigration reform legislation could be released in the Senate as early as Thursday, followed by a weeks of debate and amendments, a congressional aide told Fox News on Tuesday.

A bipartisan group of senators has been working on the legislation since early January.

Members had a major breakthrough last month when the AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce agreed on a plan for work visas for low-skilled laborers. However, the group still faces other hurdles before reaching an agreement, including determining to what extent U.S. borders must be secured before creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. There are roughly 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

The extended process, the aide said, was intended to win support from Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, a key member of the so-called Gang of Eight senators.

Rubio has called for an extended debate and amendment process after the legislation is introduced in the Senate Judiciary Committee to allow related parties to have their say.

The aide said the senators had a good discussion Tuesday with committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.

“We are optimistic that we will be able to introduce legislation soon,” the aide said. “Chairman Leahy has agreed to hold a hearing as soon as possible after the legislation is introduced and has promised to have unlimited debate and amendments during the committee mark-up.”

Rubio spokesman Alex Conant said the senator “has said from the outset that we will not rush this process, and that begins at the committee level. … It’s good that senators and the public will have weeks to study this proposal.”


View the original article here

Chủ Nhật, 7 tháng 4, 2013

Schumer hopes for bipartisan deal this week in Senate on immigration legislation

  • schumer_charles_050812.JPG

    May 8, 2012: Sen. Charles Schumer speaks to reporters following a weekly strategy luncheon.AP

Sen. Chuck Schumer said Sunday he's hoping for a bipartisan deal by the end of this week on a sweeping immigration bill to secure the border and allow eventual citizenship to the estimated 11 million people living here illegally.

"All of us have said that there will be no agreement until the eight of us agree to a big, specific bill, but hopefully we can get that done by the end of the week," said Schumer, D-N.Y., who's leading efforts by eight senators to craft the legislation. "That's what we're on track to do."

Schumer spoke on CBS' "Face the Nation" alongside Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., another leader of the immigration talks, who suggested there could be a tough road ahead for the contentious legislation.

"There will be a great deal of unhappiness about this proposal because everybody didn't get what they wanted," McCain said. "There are entrenched positions on both sides of this issue as far as business and labor."

A deal on immigration is a top second-term priority for President Barack Obama, and his senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said Sunday that the bill being developed in the Senate is completely consistent Obama's approach -- even though the Senate plan would tie border security to a path to citizenship in a manner Obama administration officials have criticized.

Pfeiffer didn't answer directly when asked on "Fox News Sunday" whether Obama would sign legislation making a path to citizenship contingent on first securing the border, as negotiators in the Senate are doing. But he suggested Obama was supportive of the Senate plan.

"What they are looking at and what has been talked about in the Gang of Eight proposal is 100 percent consistent with what the president is doing so we feel very good about it," Pfeiffer said. "And they are looking at it in the right way."

Obama has stressed that a path to citizenship should not have major hurdles in front of it, and some immigration advocates believe that's what a requirement for a secure border would amount to. Obama's Homeland Security secretary, Janet Napolitano, has rejected the argument that border security must be achieved before a comprehensive immigration package or any pathway to legalized status can be done.

But Republicans involved in the Senate negotiations have made clear that border security is a must for them before those living here illegally can be allowed to move toward citizenship.

"We are going to secure that border and it will be tied to a pathway to citizenship or there will be no deal," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., another negotiator on the bill, said Sunday.

Graham also suggested that disagreement over a new low-skilled worker program could still be hanging up an overall immigration deal -- even after an agreement a week ago between the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The hard-won deal between labor and business would ultimately allow up to 200,000 workers a year into the U.S. to fill jobs in construction, hospitality, nursing homes and other areas where employers now say they have a difficult time hiring Americans or legally bringing in foreign workers. Even after the deal was struck, some industries, such as construction, continued to voice complaints about the terms.

Without offering details, Graham said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that negotiators were revisiting the low-skilled worker deal. But he issued a statement a short time later saying he was confident the agreement would hold.

Graham sounded optimistic overall, predicting the bill would pass the 100-member Senate with 70 votes in favor. Senators believe an overwhelming bipartisan vote is needed in the Democratic-led Senate to ensure a chance of success in the Republican-controlled House. Floor action could start in the Senate in May, Schumer said.

Meanwhile two lawmakers involved in writing a bipartisan immigration bill in the House, Reps. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., sounded optimistic that they, too, would have a deal soon that could be reconciled with the Senate agreement.

"I am very, very optimistic that the House of Representatives is going to have a plan that is going to be able to go to a conference with the Senate in which we're going to be able to resolve this," Gutierrez said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union".


View the original article here

Thứ Tư, 3 tháng 4, 2013

Connecticut Senate approves gun control bills, sends to House

  • Connecticutguncontrol660371.jpg

    April 3, 2013: Paul Regish of East Hartford, Conn., holds signs as gun rights advocates enter the legislative office building at the Capitol in Hartford, Conn.AP

The state Senate on Wednesday approved wide-ranging legislation in response to last year's deadly school shooting in Newtown, including gun control measures that ban the sale of large-capacity ammunition magazines and 100 weapons that previously had been legal.

Following a respectful and at times somber debate, the Senate voted 26-10 in favor of the bill crafted by leaders from both major parties in the Democratic-controlled legislature.

The bill was to go to the House of Representatives, which was expected to pass it. It would then be sent to Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who has said he'll sign it.

The December massacre of 26 people inside Sandy Hook Elementary School, which reignited a national debate on gun control, set the stage for changes in Connecticut that may have been impossible elsewhere: The governor, who personally informed parents that their children had been killed that day, championed the cause, and legislative leaders, keenly aware of the attention on the state, struck a bipartisan agreement they want to serve as a national model.

"The tragedy in Newtown demands a powerful response, demands a response that transcends politics," said Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., a Democrat. "It is the strongest and most comprehensive bill in the country."

The legislation adds more than 100 firearms to the state's assault weapons ban and creates what officials have called the nation's first dangerous weapon offender registry as well as eligibility rules for buying ammunition. Some parts of the bill will take effect immediately, including background checks for all firearms sales

Connecticut will join states including California, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts in having the country's strongest gun control laws, said Brian Malte, director of mobilization for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington.

"This would put Connecticut right at the top or near the top of the state with the strongest gun laws," Malte said.

Colorado and New York also passed new gun-control requirements in the wake of the Newtown shooting, in which a 20-year-old gunman used a military-style, semi-automatic rifle to kill 20 first-grade children and six educators.

Compared with Connecticut's legislation, which, for example, bans the sale or purchase of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds, New York restricted magazines to seven bullets and gave owners of higher-capacity magazines a year to sell them elsewhere. Colorado banned ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds.

"There are pieces that are stronger in other states, but in totality, this will be the strongest gun legislation passed in the United States," Betty Gallo, a lobbyist for Connecticut Against Gun Violence, said of the Connecticut bill.

The legislation was unveiled this week, and debate began Wednesday in the Senate.

Many senators spoke of balancing the rights of gun owners with addressing the horror of the Sandy Hook shooting. Lawmakers said they received thousands of emails and phone calls urging them to vote either for or against the bill, with veteran Sen. Joan Hartley, a Democrat, saying she's never seen a more polarizing issue at the state Capitol.

Gun rights advocates who greatly outnumbered gun-control supporters in demonstrations at the Capitol railed against the proposals as misguided and unconstitutional, occasionally chanting "No! No! No!" and "Read the bill!"

"We want them to write laws that are sensible," said Ron Pariseau, 66, of Pomfret, who was angry he'll be made a felon if he doesn't register his weapons that will no longer be sold in Connecticut. "What they're proposing will not stop anything."

In the legislature, where Democrats control both houses, leaders waited to unveil gun legislation until they struck a bipartisan deal that they say shows how the parties can work together elsewhere. They touted the package as a comprehensive response to Newtown that also addresses mental health and school security measures, including $15 million to help pay for school security infrastructure upgrades.

But momentum on federal legislation has stalled in Congress, and President Barack Obama has planned a trip to Connecticut on Monday to step up pressure to pass a bill.

A silent majority in favor of stronger gun control has emerged following the Newtown massacre, Gallo said.

Among gun control advocates are Dan and Lauren Garrett, of Hamden, wearing green shirts in honor of the Sandy Hook victims, who traveled to Hartford with their 10-month-old son, Robert, to watch the bill's passage.

Both hope lawmakers will build on the proposal.

"It's just the beginning of this bill. In six months from now, it's going to get stronger and stronger," said Dan Garrett. "I think they're watching us all over the country."

But gun rights advocates and some lawmakers questioned whether the legislation would have done anything to stop Adam Lanza, who blasted his way into Sandy Hook Elementary. State police say he fired 154 shots with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle inside the school, then killed himself with a handgun. He had also shot to death his mother, Nancy, before going to the school, and search warrants of the Lanzas' home showed it was packed with weapons and ammunition.

In a state where gun manufacturing dates back to the Revolutionary War, law-abiding gun owners are paying the price for the actions of a deranged young man, said a Republican state senator, Tony Guglielmo.

"The problem is I can't connect the dots between Adam Lanza and the good guys. So I think we need to do something, but I guess we should be doing something that does good, not something that just feels good," he said.


View the original article here

Thứ Năm, 28 tháng 3, 2013

Ashley Judd not running for Senate

  • AshleyJuddnotrunning.jpg

    March 18, 2013: Ashley Judd arrives at the LA premiere of "Olympus Has Fallen" at the ArcLight Theatre in Los Angeles.AP/Invision

Actress Ashley Judd announced Wednesday she won't run for U.S. Senate in Kentucky against Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, saying she had given serious thought to a campaign but decided her responsibilities and energy need to be focused on her family.

The former Kentucky resident tweeted her decision.

"Regretfully, I am currently unable to consider a campaign for the Senate. I have spoken to so many Kentuckians over these last few months who expressed their desire for a fighter for the people & new leader," Judd wrote.

"While that won't be me at this time, I will continue to work as hard as I can to ensure the needs of Kentucky families are met by returning this Senate seat to whom it rightfully belongs: the people & their needs, dreams, and great potential. Thanks for even considering me as that person & know how much I love our Commonwealth. Thank you!"

Her publicist Cara Tripicchio confirmed Judd's decision.

Judd had hinted last week that she was nearing a decision about the race.

Now living in suburban Nashville, Tenn., Judd has said little publicly about her intentions. However, she has been meeting with several Democratic leaders, including Gov. Steve Beshear, to discuss a possible run.

Defeating McConnell would be the Democrats' biggest prize of the 2014 election. His seat is one of 14 that Republicans are defending while Democrats try to hold onto 21, hoping to retain or add to their 55-45 edge.

Judd, known for liberal political views, would have been running in a largely conservative state where Republicans hold both Senate seats and five of the six seats in the U.S. House.

Former State Treasurer Jonathan Miller, a Judd supporter, said she would have been a strong candidate.

"As a Kentuckian and someone who was really enthusiastic about her as a candidate, this wasn't the news I was hoping for," Miller said. "But as her friend, from the first time we talked about the race last summer, I was very candid about the grueling nature of politics. It's become a very unpleasant business and running against Mitch McConnell would be an extraordinarily difficult and grueling experience."

McConnell had already been taunting would-be Democratic challengers in a comical online video intended to raise second thoughts about taking on a politician known as brawler. The video plays on the fact that Judd lives in Tennessee.

Republican-leaning group American Crossroads in its own online video also plays on the Tennessee angle and ties her closely to President Barack Obama, who is unpopular in Kentucky.


View the original article here

Thứ Sáu, 22 tháng 3, 2013

Bipartisan push to repeal medical device tax gains traction in Senate

  • meddevicetax12.jpg

    June 15, 2007: A patient is put through a cat scan machine in Kingston, N.Y.AP

The Senate gave sweeping bipartisan approval Thursday to a proposal by Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., to put senators on record in favor of repealing a tax on medical devices – a key part of President Obama’s controversial health care law.

The Hatch-Klobuchar amendment to the GOP budget plan is the latest effort to roll back the tax that applies to a range of medical products, from surgical tools to heart devices. It’s among several taxes in Obama’s 2010 health care overhaul.

The amendment passed the Senate by a vote of 79 to 20.

“Today, bipartisan members of the Senate spoke loudly and clearly that this tax on medical devices simply must go.  It is a drain on innovation, on job creation and on our ability to provide ground breaking medical technologies to patients,” Hatch said in a statement.

The Affordable Care Act levies a 2.3 percent tax on medical devices with the goal of raising nearly $30 billion over the next decade.

Manufacturers say the impact of the tax is far greater than meets the eye -- the 2.3 percent tax is on gross sales, meaning it's a much greater percentage of net income. 

The Obama administration has defended the medical device tax, saying companies actually stand to benefit from the law. Though the 2.3 percent tax hits the industry, the department argues that the millions of new health care customers insured as a result of the law will increase the demand in hospitals to order more equipment -- in turn boosting medical device companies' profits. 

Last year the White House threatened to veto a House bill that would have repealed the tax, citing concerns that the House proposal would offset the lost revenue from the tax by cutting down on subsidies for some families. 

This, they said, would effectively "raise taxes on middle-class and low-income families." 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


View the original article here

Senate Gang of 8 finalizing immigration deal

A bipartisan group of senators is nearing agreement on a comprehensive immigration bill that would put illegal immigrants on a 13-year path to citizenship, officials with outside groups keeping up with the talks said Thursday.

The legislation also would install new criteria for border security, allow more high- and low-skilled workers to come to the U.S. and hold businesses to tougher standards on verifying their workers are in the country legally, according to outside groups and lawmakers involved. Together, the measures represent the most sweeping changes in immigration law in decades.

The senators in the so-called Gang of Eight were meeting for hours at a time daily this week trying to complete a deal. There were still big disagreements on some issues, but they hoped to resolve most of them before Congress began a two-week recess at week's end. That would allow them to meet a self-imposed deadline to present their legislation next month.

"About 90 percent of the issues, including the path to citizenship, are settled," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told Hispanic media Thursday, according to his office. He said he was putting "more time into this than any other single issue."

The group was under pressure to speed up its work. Protesters converged Thursday on Schumer's office to accuse him of breaking his initial promise to have the bill done in March. Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., whose panel would take up the legislation, complained this week that the group was taking too long. As a result, Leahy said, his committee won't be able to complete writing the bill itself in April, as he had hoped.

Several officials with outside groups said the biggest remaining areas of disagreement dealt with legal rather than illegal immigration. Top among them was a proposed program to bring in tens of thousands of new immigrants to fill low-skilled jobs. It had been the subject of difficult negotiations between the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO.

The two sides made substantial progress, including agreeing on a cap of 200,000 visas in the new program, but they continued to disagree on wages for the new workers, according to one official. Senators were mediating offers and counteroffers.

The officials described the status of the discussions on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about them.

As senators struggled with the legal immigration question, Schumer and others said consensus had formed on details of a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country, even though that issue tended to cause the most public consternation.

The new bill would contemplate a 10-year wait for illegal immigrants already in the U.S. before they could get a green card allowing them permanent residency, senators have said. During that time they would be in a provisional legal status and would not have to return to their home countries as current law requires.

Once they got the green card, they would have to wait three years to be able to apply for citizenship, compared to the five-year wait that most green-card holders currently have to abide, outside officials say they've been told. The new three-year wait was first reported by The New York Times.

That added up to 13 years, which would put the Senate bill in line with immigration legislation drafted by President Barack Obama, which he has said he would offer only if the Gang of Eight process stalls.

There's also said to be substantial consensus among the senators on border security issues. The bill would require that the border be secured before illegal immigrants could embark on the path to citizenship and would put in place new border security criteria including a commission of border state officials to advise on the issue. The border security piece was critical to support from Republicans in the group including John McCain of Arizona and Marco Rubio of Florida.

The bill will be lengthy and cover numerous other thorny issues, including mandating a currently voluntary program called E-Verify that helps businesses check their workers' papers, as much as doubling visas that go to high-tech workers, and limiting family-based immigration to put a greater emphasis on skills and employment ties instead.

So far pro-immigrant groups have often been more visible in public than opponents of the bill, but that could change once it becomes public next month. A fierce backlash helped sink the last attempt at reform in 2007, and the unveiling of the bill will open volatile months of debate and votes in the Judiciary Committee and on the Senate floor over the spring and summer, with success far from assured. The House also must act before the legislation could become law, and prospects there were cloudier still.


View the original article here

Thứ Năm, 21 tháng 3, 2013

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to include background checks in gun bill

Gun control advocates are pressing Democrats to broaden background checks for firearms purchases in the gun bill the Senate debates next month, saying it is the strongest step lawmakers can take to produce meaningful legislation.

With a proposed assault weapons ban looking all but dead, groups favoring restrictions say expanded background checks are needed following December's school massacre in Newtown, Conn.

Senate aides and lobbyists expect Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to include wider background checks in the bill, but say he hasn't made a final decision.

The Democratic bill is also expected to stiffen penalties for illegal gun trafficking and expand school safety aid.

Details of the background check language remain unresolved as senators seek bipartisan compromise on expanding the system, which now covers sales by licensed gun dealers.


View the original article here