The President's complete State of the Union policy agenda. We're especially looking forward to proposals for health care and spending reform.

[Link]

Posted at 2:40 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Mike Franc offers a preview of the President's State of the Union Address scheduled for next Tuesday. Actually, it's more of a scorecard for what conservatives should expect of the President. Entitlements and taxes are the big domestic issues on the table. Winning the long war on terrorism dominates foreign policy.

President Bush should focus his State of the Union speech on the two policy challenges that will define his legacy and the legacies of those now serving in Congress: winning the War on Terror and meeting the fiscal challenge posed by the looming retirements of the Baby Boom generation.

With respect to the Baby Boomer retirements, the question is how to meet the income and health-care needs of 77 million retired boomers without jeopardizing our prosperity or the security of our nation. To do this, the President must define very clearly just how dangerous it will be if we do nothing to alter the fiscal trajectory of the Big Three entitlement programs (Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security).

[Link]

Posted at 10:10 AM in Federal Spending, The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

The Democratic leaders’ effort to block the DeMint proposal was defeated by a vote of 51 to 46, surprising almost everyone in the Senate. The outcome reflected the keen desire of many lawmakers to appear to be on the side of openness and reform after an election that turned in part on Congressional corruption scandals.

[Link]

Posted at 1:10 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

In the event of a dispute? "��We decide what constitutes the 100 hours,"�� said Stacey Bernards, a Hoyer spokeswoman.

[Link]

Posted at 11:10 AM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Sen. McConnell, for one, is up that whole "division of power" thing. He should explain the concept to his colleagues in the weeks ahead.

But the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, said Congress could not supplant the authority of the president. "You can't run a war by a committee of 435 in the House and 100 in the Senate,"�� he said.

[Link]

Posted at 10:25 AM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

The earmarks move is good, though perhaps not very substantive: Democrats don't seek to reduce the number of earmarks made by any significant amount.

As for campaign contributions, that's where the real money is, not in bribes or some other form. If the Democrats seek to cut to the heart of the ethics problem--as it plays out repeatedly in Congress--they'll have to start with contributions by increasing transparency. But it would be no great surprise if that is a step they do not wish to take.

Another part of the Democrats'�� package called for detailed disclosure of pet projects or special-interest tax benefits that individual lawmakers insert into major bills....

But the ethics rules do not address the most valuable gifts that come from lobbyists and others interested in legislation: campaign donations. And the Democratic Party?s fund-raising machine ? revved up by the advantages of being in the majority ? continued apace this week with individual members inviting lobbyists and other contributors to a host of events.

[Link]

Posted at 2:09 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Just FYI.

Did you sell a few kilos of marijuana, take a bribe or steal a computer in 2006? Be sure to include that income on your tax return, unless you want to get in trouble with the Internal Revenue Service....

Bribes. If you receive a bribe, include it in your income.

Campaign contributions. These contributions are not income to a candidate unless they are diverted to his or her personal use. To be exempt from tax, the contributions must be spent for campaign purposes or kept in a fund for use in future campaigns. However, interest earned on bank deposits, dividends received on contributed securities and net gains realized on sales of contributed securities are taxable and must be reported on Form 1120-POL, U.S. Income Tax Return for Certain Political Organizations. Excess campaign funds transferred to an office account must be included in the officeholder's income on Form 1040, line 21, in the year transferred.

[Link]

Posted at 1:39 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

One more from the President's op-ed in the Journal. This sounds encouraging, no?

And the Constitution leaves it to the president to use his judgment whether they should be signed into law.

[Link]

Posted at 12:50 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Political security through obscurity--a Medicare provider number?!

In the final hours of the 109th Congress, the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, also got special treatment for a hospice in his state. The bill did not name the hospice, but specified the Medicare provider number for the intended beneficiary, the Nathan Adelson Hospice in rural Pahrump, Nev.

[Link]

Posted at 1:05 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

On the one hand, they've much policy to debate. On the other, ditto.

"I have bad news for you," Hoyer told reporters. "Those trips you had planned in January, forget 'em. We will be working almost every day in January, starting with the 4th."

The reporters groaned. "I know, it's awful, isn't it?" Hoyer empathized.

For lawmakers, it is awful, compared with what they have come to expect. For much of this election year, the legislative week started late Tuesday and ended by Thursday afternoon -- and that was during the relatively few weeks the House wasn't in recess.

Next year, members of the House will be expected in the Capitol for votes each week by 6:30 p.m. Monday and will finish their business about 2 p.m. Friday, Hoyer said.

[Link]

Posted at 10:34 AM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

A very popular op-ed by Heritage's Ron Utt.

Congress still has some legislating to do this year. Though most bills now in the legislative hopper will wither and die, some will -- indeed, must -- pass. Among the "must do" measures: nine appropriations bills yet to be passed by both chambers.

It is on these bills that Mrs. Pelosi can make her mark by demonstrating that henceforth the federal budget will be written in the U.S. Capitol -- not in the offices of the several thousand lobbyists who have hijacked the process by selling earmarks to paying clients.

[Link]

Posted at 6:34 PM in Federal Spending, The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Republicans vacating the Capitol are dumping a big spring cleaning job on Democrats moving in. GOP leaders have opted to leave behind almost a half-trillion-dollar clutter of unfinished spending bills...

Driving the decision to quit and go home rather than finish the remaining budget work is a determined effort by a group of conservative Republicans to prevent putting a GOP stamp on spending bills covering 13 Cabinet Departments - and loaded with thousands of homestate projects derided as "pork" by critics.

[Link]

Posted at 1:34 AM in Federal Spending, The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Rep. Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues won't formally assume control of the House of Representatives until January. But the speaker-in-waiting need not wait until then to set a tone and standard to define her leadership.

[Link]

Posted at 9:48 AM in Federal Spending, The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

In other words, the leading guys who just got booted out are suspending the rules to create a "fast track" for approving even more spending and more new federal programs.

[Link]

Posted at 1:03 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

A good year to be a conservative, less so a Republican, argues Newt Gingrich.

The elite media, liberal Democrats and establishment Republicans will do everything they can to portray this election as a repudiation of conservatism. Their game plan is to panic Republicans into selling out their grassroots base and adopting a series of really bad ideas which will -- in their words -- "salvage" the Bush Administration.

In fact, such a strategy would be an absolute disaster for the Republican Party, guaranteeing a division within the Republican ranks by sparking a revolt by the conservatives.

[Link]

Posted at 1:03 PM in The Hill by Andrew Grossman [?] | Permalink

Page: 1 2 3 next>>