JIMMY KIMMEL vs US SENATOR BILL CASSIDY ROUND 2 ("HE LIED TO MY FACE")

JIMMY KIMMEL vs US SENATOR BILL CASSIDY ROUND TWO ("HE LIED TO MY FACE"):

JIMMY SAYS SENATOR CASSIDY "LIED TO HIS FACE" ABOUT OBAMACARE REPLACEMENT BILL.

WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF REAL POLITICS.

ALL POLITICIANS LIE, THEY SHOULDN'T BUT THEY DO.


Sources: CNN, Eonline, NBC, Youtube


******* Jimmy Kimmel continues fight with Sen. Cassidy's new health care bill


Jimmy Kimmel was ready for the second round of his fight with U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, saying on Wednesday night that the senator "either doesn't understand his own bill or he lied to me."

"Last night on our show I took a senator from Louisiana, Bill Cassidy, I took him to task for promising to my face that he would oppose any health care plan that allowed insurance companies to turn people with pre-existing conditions away," Kimmel said opening his ABC broadcast on Wednesday night. "He said anything he supported would have to pass what he named the 'Jimmy Kimmel Test,' which was fine... but unfortunately, and puzzlingly, he proposed a bill that would allow states to do all the things he said he would not let them do."

Kimmel then said that Cassidy made "a total about face" and that meant that "he either doesn't understand his own bill, or he lied to me."

The comedian then showed a clip of Cassidy telling CNN's Chris Cuomo on "New Day" Wednesday morning that Kimmel "does not understand" the bill.

"Oh, I get it. I don't understand because I'm a talk show host, right?" the host said before breaking down the bill in detail. "Could it be, Senator Cassidy, that the problem is that I do understand, and you got caught with your GOPenis out?"

On Tuesday night's broadcast, Kimmel took on the senate's new health care bill and Cassidy, saying he lied "right to my face." The Tuesday night monologue went viral and got around-the-clock coverage on cable news networks.

On Wednesday night's show, Kimmel also used a skit called "Barista Theater" to help explain one of the more arcane parts of the Graham-Cassidy bill: block grants. In the proposed legislation, federal funding for Medicaid expansion and subsidies would be rolled into a block grant program. States would be given a lump sum of money and would have a lot of leeway over how to spend it.

In Kimmel's sketch, he showed a barista accepting money for coffee sold in faulty coffee cups. He used the sketch to critique the bill for allowing states to accept federal money intended to make healthcare more accessible, but then keep the money without making care more available.

Kimmel jokingly said that he didn't "want to turn this into a Kanye and Taylor Swift type situation" while also taking down others, like "Fox & Friends" host Brian Kilmeade, who called Kimmel a "Hollywood elite."

"The reason I found this comment to be particularly annoying is because this is a guy, Brian Kilmeade, who whenever I see him kisses my ass like a little boy meeting Batman," Kimmel said. "He is dying to be a member of the 'Hollywood elite.'"

Kimmel also made fun of Sen. Lindsay Graham, who is a co-sponser of the new health care bill with Cassidy, saying Graham "happens to look a lot like my Grandma Jane, who is now deceased."

Kimmel also called out President Trump, saying that there's "no way" the president read the bill and just wants to get rid of it "because Obama's name is on it."

"The Democrats should just rename it Ivankacare," Kimmel said, referencing the president's daughter. "Guaranteed he gets on board."

Kimmel then ended his ten-minute-long monologue by encouraging Americans to call their senators about the new health care bill.

"Please, stop texting for five seconds and make a phone call," Kimmel said. "It really does make a difference, and who knows maybe you'll meet somebody over the phone and fall in love?"

Representatives for Cassidy, Fox News and the White House could not be reached for comment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


******JIMMY KIMMEL SLAMS NEW HEALTHCARE BILL AND SAYS SEN. BILL CASSIDY "LIED TO MY FACE"

News flash to Jimmy Kimmel: Politicians are politicians.

The Jimmy Kimmel Live! host has used his show's monologues to speak out in favor of universal healthcare since he revealed in May in an emotional announcement on his show that his and wife Molly McNearney's second child together, son William "Billy" John Kimmel, had undergone emergency heart surgery to treat a congenital defect soon after he was born. He has also spoken out against President Donald Trump, who wants to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.

Soon after his announcement about his son's ailment, Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who is also a gastroenterologist, told CNN that any healthcare bill should "pass the Jimmy Kimmel Test," meaning it would cover a child with congenital heart disease. He then appeared on Jimmy Kimmel Live! and was asked by Kimmel if he thinks "every American, regardless of income should be able to get regular check-ups, maternity care, all of those things that people who have healthcare get and need?"

"Yep," he said, blinking.

Fast-forward to last week, when Cassidy and fellow Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced a new healthcare bill that waives regulations that require insurers to cover certain benefits, would allow states to opt out of Affordable Care Act protections for consumers, give block grants to states to run their own healthcare programs and end an expansion of Medicaid for lower-income patients and the disabled.

"This new bill actually does pass the Jimmy Kimmel Test," Kimmel said on Tuesday's episode of Jimmy Kimmel Live! "But a different Jimmy Kimmel Test. With this one, your child with a pre-existing condition will get the care he nees if, and only if his father is Jimmy Kimmel. Otherwise, you might be screwed."

JIMMY KIMMEL vs DR BILL CASSIDY, REPEAL OBAMACARE SHOWDOWN; WHAT'S IN THE CASSIDY - GRAHAM HEALTH CARE BILL??

JIMMY KIMMEL vs DR BILL CASSIDY - REPEALING OBAMACARE:

WHAT IS IN THE CASSIDY-GRAHAM HEALTH CARE BILL?

PLEASE TELL AMERICAN VOTERS TO WHOM YOU ARE ACCOUNTABLE.

FAMOUS COMEDIAN CHALLENGES GOP POLITICIAN WHO IS ALSO A DOCTOR, ON THE ISSUE OF AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE AND DRAFTING A VIABLE REPLACEMENT FOR OBAMACARE.

CASSIDY WASN'T PLEASED.


Sources: BBC News,


***** Jimmy Kimmel attacks Bill Cassidy over healthcare bill


Comedian Jimmy Kimmel has made a scathing attack on a Republican senator behind a new healthcare plan put forward to replace Obamacare.


The late-night TV host - whose son has a congenital heart defect - accused Senator Bill Cassidy of lying "right to my face" in an earlier interview.

Republicans want to abolish President Obama's law, which expanded insurance but did not curb rising medical costs.

Mr Cassidy said the host "does not understand" the coverage in his bill.


Kimmel became a prominent voice in the healthcare reform debate after delivering a heartfelt TV monologue in May describing his newborn son's near-fatal condition.

He said his son Billy would have died if not for the star's expensive healthcare plan, which most Americans are unable to afford.

Mr Cassidy - himself a doctor - pledged that any new healthcare act must "pass the Jimmy Kimmel test" by granting insurance coverage to any child with a pre-existing condition in their first year of life, and to families, regardless of their ability to pay.


But on his programme on Tuesday night after the Republican plan was unveiled, Mr Kimmel said: "This new bill actually does pass the Jimmy Kimmel test, but a different Jimmy Kimmel test.

"With this one, your child with a pre-existing condition will get the care he needs - if, and only if, his father is Jimmy Kimmel. Otherwise, you might be screwed."

He ended his monologue saying Mr Cassidy should "stop using my name", adding "there's a new Jimmy Kimmel test for you, and its called the lie detector test. You're welcome to stop by the studio and take it".

Mr Cassidy denied Mr Kimmel's characterisation of his bill, saying "what is being circulated is by those that wish to preserve Obamacare, and they're doing everything they can to discredit the alternative".


Despite their longstanding opposition to Obamacare, Republicans have so far been unable to agree on a replacement.


Since taking control of the White House, several attempts to rally around a new plan have collapsed.

Now they have only until the end of the month to pass this latest bill.


Under the plan drafted by Mr Cassidy and Senator Lindsey Graham, state governors would get federal money in block grants to run their own healthcare programmes.


It would also allow states to forgo some of the key mandates of Obamacare, like caps on premiums paid by people with chronic illnesses.

Senator Graham said on Tuesday the bill was the party's last chance to "stop the march to socialism".


But critics fear that when left to the states, the money going into the Medicaid programme for people on low incomes would diminish.


Several Republican governors have criticised how rushed the process is and on Tuesday called on lawmakers to abandon this bill in favour of a slower, cross-party approach.

Former President Barack Obama expressed exasperation on Wednesday with the latest attempt to repeal his signature legislative accomplishment.


Speaking in New York at an event organised by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he said the Republican bill would deprive vulnerable Americans of coverage and further increase costs.
"It's certainly frustrating to have to mobilise every couple of months to keep our leaders from inflicting real human suffering on our constituents," he added.

DACA REPEAL EXPOSES BLACK LEADERS vs SELL-OUTS (“GET OUT BLACK VOTERS”)

#DACA


DACA REPEAL EXPOSES BLACK LEADERS vs BLACK SELL-OUTS:

IT'S OFFICIAL........CBC MEMBERS REPLACE BLACK VOTERS.

BLACK LEADERS THROW LEGAL BLACK VOTERS UNDER THE BUS FOR ILLEGAL HISPANIC IMMIGRANTS AND POLITICS.

BLACK LEADERS ARE NOW SAYING HISPANIC IMMIGRANTS BUILT AMERICA NOT BLACK SLAVES.

DEAR LORD IS BLACK AMERICA DOOMED FOREVER??


Sources: The Grio, CNN, Human Events, Universal Films, Youtube


**** Does rise of Latino population spell doom for the Congressional Black Caucus?



As a result of redistricting efforts in New York, and rapid growth in Harlem’s Latino population, which is now larger than the black population, this community’s black residents may no longer have a leading voice in their district.

Congressman Charles Rangel, who represents the district, was able to withstand an ethics scandal that threatened his seat. But a rising Latino population could mean the end to black power in Harlem.

Changing demographics throughout the nation, combined with retiring lawmakers and redistricting, have members of the Congressional Black Caucus concerned that they will lose long-held black seats.

While much attention has been paid to gentrification and its consequences for historically African-American enclaves, there has been little discussion of the impact of the nation’s Latino population, now the largest minority group in the U.S.

According to the 2010 census, Latinos increased from 12.5 percent of the U.S. population in 2000 to 16.3 percent in 2010.

Blacks only increased from 12.3 percent to 12.6 percent during the same time period. Now, 50.5 million Hispanic-Americans outnumber 38.9 million African-Americans.

And in the New York metropolitan area, blacks, Latinos and Asians now make up a majority of the more than 19 million people in the area.

For the first time, the Hispanic poverty rate (28.2 percent) has surpassed the black rate (23.4 percent) nationwide.

This turn of events is due to lower participation of immigrant groups and non-English speakers in government assistance programs.

Black urban areas are emptying out and impoverished Latino groups are moving in.

As a result of redistricting efforts in New York, and rapid growth in Harlem’s Latino population, which is now larger than the black population, this community’s black residents may no longer have a leading voice in their district.

Congressman Charles Rangel, who represents the district, was able to withstand an ethics scandal that threatened his seat. But a rising Latino population could mean the end to black power in Harlem.

Changing demographics throughout the nation, combined with retiring lawmakers and redistricting, have members of the Congressional Black Caucus concerned that they will lose long-held black seats.

While much attention has been paid to gentrification and its consequences for historically African-American enclaves, there has been little discussion of the impact of the nation’s Latino population, now the largest minority group in the U.S.

According to the 2010 census, Latinos increased from 12.5 percent of the U.S. population in 2000 to 16.3 percent in 2010.

Blacks only increased from 12.3 percent to 12.6 percent during the same time period. Now, 50.5 million Hispanic-Americans outnumber 38.9 million African-Americans.

And in the New York metropolitan area, blacks, Latinos and Asians now make up a majority of the more than 19 million people in the area.

For the first time, the Hispanic poverty rate (28.2 percent) has surpassed the black rate (23.4 percent) nationwide.

This turn of events is due to lower participation of immigrant groups and non-English speakers in government assistance programs. Black urban areas are emptying out and impoverished Latino groups are moving in.

According to the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, the “ghetto” as we know it is changing from black to Hispanic.

The population of 133 historically black communities fell 36 percent since 1970, while black population growth slowed down and blacks moved to new areas.

Only 7 percent of blacks live in traditional ghettos, down from 33 percent in 1970.

African-Americans are moving back to the South and out of the big cities into the predominantly white suburbs, in the dramatic fashion in which they migrated to the North from the late 1800s to the 1950s.

Atlanta, for example, increased its number of black people by half a million in 10 years.

This reverse migration represents a major demographic shift: As the South’s share of African-Americans (57 percent) is at its highest point in over half a century, the five counties with the highest proportion of blacks — Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Cook (Illinois), Wayne (Michigan) and Kings (New York) — all shed black folks in the past decade.

Far more dramatic that the black reverse migration, however, is the ascendancy of Latinos across the nation, including in the South and other areas where few to none existed a few decades ago.

Of the 12 states with the largest rise in their Latino population, nine were in the South, including top-ranked South Carolina, followed by Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, North Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia and Virginia.

The non-Southern states are Maryland, South Dakota and Delaware. And of the 12 states with the largest number of Hispanics, the Southern state of Georgia ranks 10th, and North Carolina is 11th. California ranks first, followed by Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Arizona and other states.

Latinos became a majority in 191 of the nation’s 366 metropolitan areas, which account for 83.7 percent of the population of the U.S. In 2000—when Hispanics were more typically found in the border states of the Southwest—the group was a majority in 159 metropolitan areas.

Some of these areas include Atlantic City, New Jersey, Chicago, and Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Further, Omaha, Nebraska, Oklahoma City, Lakeland, Florida and Madison Wisconsin, all experienced faster Latino growth compared to blacks. Cities with particularly sizable declines in blacks include St. Louis, Detroit, Cleveland and New York.

Whites declined in all metro areas, and Asians increased in all but five.

In the city of Chicago, where blacks, whites and Hispanics are roughly equal, black and Latino mayoral candidates were rejected in favor of a white candidate — Rahm Emanuel, former White House chief of staff under Obama.

Latinos in Georgia increased from 435,000 to 850,000 in a decade. North Carolina has doubled its Latino population in the past 10 years, and 63 of the state’s 100 counties are at least 5 percent Latino.

Texas, which is a majority-minority state of 25 million people and 45 percent white, is around 38 percent Latino.

The state grew 20.6 percent since 2000, adding 4.2 million new people.

Latinos were responsible for 65 percent of that growth, and 95 percent of the 1 million additional children. Texas’ white population grew by only 4.2 percent, and the black population by 22 percent.

Latino growth gave Texas four additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, more than any other state. Latinos will receive three new seats in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and Hidalgo and Starr Counties in the Rio Grande Valley.

The news came following complaints that Republican lawmakers were ignoring the Latino population and manipulating the redistricting process for political gain.

According to the census, most of California’s growth was due to Hispanics, who increased 28 percent to 14 million and achieved near population parity with whites, while Asians rose 28 percent to 14 million.

Whites dropped 5.4 percent to below 15 million, and black Californians fell 1 percent to 2.2 million people.

In the U.S., the Latino vote increased the most in California and Florida, with Latinos accounting for 23 percent and 34 percent of each state’s vote, respectively.

Latino voters are likely have an impact in key political battleground states such as Colorado, Florida, Nevada and New Mexico in 2012.

At the same time, conservative Republican backlash against Hispanic growth is evident in a number of Southern states.

Tough immigration laws in Georgia—with an undocumented population of about 425,000 — and Alabama — with around 125,000 undocumented immigrants and a 145 percent Latino growth rate since 2000—have scared away Latino migrant labor.

Alabama farmers are now considering using prison labor to replace the Latino agricultural workers that fled following the passage of that state’s immigration legislation.

In South Carolina, which leads the nation in Latino population growth, the state’s immigration law allows police to ask the immigration status of people during routine traffic stops if there is a “reasonable suspicion” they are undocumented.

That law was partially blocked by a federal judge in Charleston.
The court struck down the traffic stop provision of the law, and the ban on transporting or harboring an undocumented immigrant.

Federal courts have also blocked parts of immigration laws in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana and Utah.

In the South, Obama victories in the former Confederacy strongholds of Virginia, North Carolina and Florida in 2008 were attributed in part to black and Hispanic turnout, a factor which is poised to change race relations in the South.

Nationwide, blacks and Hispanics were a larger share of voters in that election year.

African-Americans are no longer the only minority group, and in some cases not even the dominant minority group in the South, which means that politicians will have to pay attention to the needs and concerns of Latinos.

Taking advantage of demographic shifts, a black-Latino coalition with moderate and liberal whites could provide a remedy to waning black political clout, and a counter to the white Republican political dominance of the South.

With Latinos as one of every 12 voters in Georgia (whose minority adult population is 41 percent), North Carolina and Virginia, a rising black and Asian population can alter the Southern political landscape.

JOHN MCCAIN KILLED GOP HEALTH CARE BILL & SMILED (IN CONCERT WITH DEMS?)

JOHN MCCAIN KILLED GOP HEALTH CARE BILL AND SMILED:

IS MCCAIN IN CONCERT WITH DEMS' STRATEGY OR IS HE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING GOP HEALTH CARE BILL RIGHT??

NO DISRESPECT, I'M JUST ASKING.


Sources: Washington Post, Youtube


*****The night John McCain killed the GOP’s health-care fight


It was the most dramatic night in the United States Senate in recent history. Just ask the senators who witnessed it.

A seven-year quest to undo the Affordable Care Act collapsed — at least for now — as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) kept his colleagues and the press corps in suspense over a little more than two hours late Thursday into early Friday.

Not since September 2008, when the House of Representatives rejected the Troubled Asset Relief Program — causing the Dow Jones industrial average to plunge nearly 800 points in a single afternoon — had such an unexpected vote caused such a striking twist.

The bold move by the nation’s most famous senator stunned his colleagues and possibly put the Senate on the verge of protracted bipartisan talks that McCain is unlikely to witness as he begins treatment for an aggressive form of brain cancer.

“I’ve stated time and time again that one of the major failures of Obamacare was that it was rammed through Congress by Democrats on a strict party-line basis without a single Republican vote,” he said in a statement explaining his vote. “We should not make the mistakes of the past.”

Rumors swirled late Thursday that the Arizona Republican, who had captured the nation’s sympathy this week after delaying his cancer treatment in order to return to Washington, might vote against the GOP’s “skinny repeal” plan — a watered-down version of earlier Republican proposals to repeal the 2010 health-care law.

McCain warned at a hastily arranged news conference Thursday afternoon that he was leaning against supporting the legislation unless House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) assured GOP senators that the House would not move to quickly approve the bill in its current form. McCain and Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) wanted Ryan to launch broad House-Senate negotiations for a wider rollback of the law. Two hours later, Ryan issued a statement signaling he would launch negotiations, and Graham and Johnson announced their support.

But not McCain.

Reporters spotted him around 11 p.m.

“Have you decided how you’ll vote?” they asked.

“Yes,” McCain replied.

“How?”

“Wait for the show,” he said.

McCain headed for the stage — the Senate floor — around midnight, emerging from his office in the Russell Senate Office Building for the subway ride to the U.S. Capitol.

When he arrived, he held a brief conversation with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer ( D-N.Y.), an exchange that left the New Yorker smiling.

“I knew it when he walked on the floor,” Schumer later recounted, explaining that McCain had already called to share his plans.

But few, if any, of his Republican colleagues realized what was about to transpire.

Two votes were called just after midnight. The first was on a Democratic proposal to refer the “skinny repeal” bill back to a committee. The second vote was to pass “skinny repeal,” which would have repealed the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate and rolled back a tax on medical devices.

“Let’s vote against skinny repeal,” Schumer told his colleagues before the votes as he once again derided the rushed nature of the health-care debate.

McCain stood on the Republican side of the room nodding in agreement.

With Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) already planning to vote against the plan, Republicans could not afford to lose McCain. Vice President Pence was already at the Capitol prepared to break a tie. Instead, he launched a last-ditch effort to win McCain’s support.

As the first vote began, McCain took his seat next to Graham, his closest friend in the Senate. The South Carolinian mostly nodded as McCain gesticulated, and signaled — through his body language — that he was likely to vote no. When Murkowski walked over to join the conversation, McCain winked and gave her a thumbs down — signaling his intentions.

Collins joined the group as another clutch of Republican senators formed in the well of the Senate Chamber. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who operates in McCain’s long shadow, stood next to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), who counts GOP votes, and Pence. Eventually, Flake was dispatched to talk to McCain.

He obliged, walked over to McCain and asked Graham to move over one seat. But McCain did not acknowledge Flake, focusing instead on Murkowski and Collins.

That left Flake, one of the most polite members of the Senate, leaning into the conversation uncomfortably with a pained look on his face, as if he had to tell his father that he had run over the family dog with his car.

Seeing that Flake was not making progress, Pence walked over at 12:44 a.m. McCain smiled, pointed at Collins and Murkowski, said something about “marching orders,” and stood up.

“Mr. Vice President,” he said, greeting Pence. For the next 21 minutes, the vice president cajoled McCain, Collins and Murkowski. Twice during the conversation, a Pence aide came to whisper in the vice president’s ear — other reporters learned it was the White House calling. Pence finally left to take a call, but later returned to speak with McCain.

By then, other senators around the room realized what was happening.

“You could see the body language in the entire chamber change in two hours,” Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) recalled. “One side was kind of ebullient, moving around and talking and the other side was subdued, and all of a sudden it began to change. There was an instinctive reaction that maybe this thing wasn’t going to pass. Nobody knew for sure.”

“It was pretty somber,” added Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

At 1:10 a.m., McCain crossed the Senate Chamber to talk to Schumer, Klobuchar and other Democrats, including Sens. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.). As he approached, McCain told them he worried that reporters watching from the gallery above could read his lips. When he realized that the press was indeed watching, he looked up at the ceiling and shouted, “No!” as senators and reporters laughed. Then, Democrats beamed when McCain shared his news. Feinstein gave him a hug.

Walking back to the Republican side of the room, McCain was stopped by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) who also offered a hug.

“I love John McCain. He’s one of the great heroes of this country,” Hatch explained later. “Whether we agree or not, I still love the guy.”

The vote on “skinny repeal” began at 1:24 a.m., but McCain was out in the lobby once again conferring with Pence. In his absence, Collins and Murkowski cast their “no” votes along with the 48 members of the Democratic caucus.

McCain returned at 1:29 a.m. without Pence, approached the Senate clerk and gave a thumbs down — the third “no” vote.

Several people gasped. Others applauded. Reporters dashed out to report the news.

McCain returned to his seat, walking past Cornyn and Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who stood grim-faced and despondent. Cassidy rubbed his face several times with his hands. Thune’s face contorted. The color in Cornyn’s face seemed to drain.

“Certainly Senator McCain knows how to improve the drama,” Cassidy recalled later.

The vote concluded, and the results were announced — the bill was voted down, 51 to 49. Just days before, McCain had fired a warning shot with a lengthy floor speech that criticized the rushed, secretive process that led to “skinny repeal.” Early Friday morning, McCain, Collins and Murkowski delivered the fatal blow.

McConnell, humiliated by the results, stood to address his colleagues. The color of his face now matched the pink in his necktie.

“This is clearly a disappointing moment,” he said.

JOHN MCCAIN'S REPEAL SENATE FLOOR SPEECH IS HYPOCRITICAL (CONGRESS IS NOT A ROBOT)

JOHN MCCAIN'S REPEAL SENATE FLOOR SPEECH IS HYPOCRITICAL:

MCCAIN ANGRILY CHASTISED HIS COLLEAGUES BUT FREQUENTLY CAUSES UNNECESSARY DISCORD VERSUS ENCOURAGING UNITY.

BUT SHOULD CONGRESS OPERATE LIKE A HUGE ROBOT?

NO.

EACH US SENATOR SHOULD PASSIONATELY FIGHT TO PROTECT AND REPRESENT THE LOYAL CONSTITUENTS WHO ELECTED THEM.


Sources: Fox News, TPM, USA Today, Washington Post, Youtube



**** Full text of John McCain's Senate floor speech: 'Let’s return to regular order'


Sen. John McCain, who returned to Washington on Tuesday after disclosing his brain cancer diagnosis last week, spoke on the Senate floor after casting a critical vote to proceed to debate on the Senate's Obamacare repeal legislation. Here are his remarks as prepared for delivery:

“Mr. President:

“I’ve stood in this place many times and addressed as president many presiding officers. I have been so addressed when I have sat in that chair, as close as I will ever be to a presidency.

“It is an honorific we’re almost indifferent to, isn’t it. In truth, presiding over the Senate can be a nuisance, a bit of a ceremonial bore, and it is usually relegated to the more junior members of the majority.

“But as I stand here today – looking a little worse for wear I’m sure – I have a refreshed appreciation for the protocols and customs of this body, and for the other ninety-nine privileged souls who have been elected to this Senate.

“I have been a member of the United States Senate for thirty years. I had another long, if not as long, career before I arrived here, another profession that was profoundly rewarding, and in which I had experiences and friendships that I revere. But make no mistake, my service here is the most important job I have had in my life. And I am so grateful to the people of Arizona for the privilege – for the honor – of serving here and the opportunities it gives me to play a small role in the history of the country I love.

“I’ve known and admired men and women in the Senate who played much more than a small role in our history, true statesmen, giants of American politics. They came from both parties, and from various backgrounds. Their ambitions were frequently in conflict. They held different views on the issues of the day. And they often had very serious disagreements about how best to serve the national interest.

“But they knew that however sharp and heartfelt their disputes, however keen their ambitions, they had an obligation to work collaboratively to ensure the Senate discharged its constitutional responsibilities effectively. Our responsibilities are important, vitally important, to the continued success of our Republic. And our arcane rules and customs are deliberately intended to require broad cooperation to function well at all. The most revered members of this institution accepted the necessity of compromise in order to make incremental progress on solving America’s problems and to defend her from her adversaries.

“That principled mindset, and the service of our predecessors who possessed it, come to mind when I hear the Senate referred to as the world’s greatest deliberative body. I’m not sure we can claim that distinction with a straight face today.

“I’m sure it wasn’t always deserved in previous eras either. But I’m sure there have been times when it was, and I was privileged to witness some of those occasions.

“Our deliberations today – not just our debates, but the exercise of all our responsibilities – authorizing government policies, appropriating the funds to implement them, exercising our advice and consent role – are often lively and interesting. They can be sincere and principled. But they are more partisan, more tribal more of the time than any other time I remember. Our deliberations can still be important and useful, but I think we’d all agree they haven’t been overburdened by greatness lately. And right now they aren’t producing much for the American people.

“Both sides have let this happen. Let’s leave the history of who shot first to the historians. I suspect they’ll find we all conspired in our decline – either by deliberate actions or neglect. We’ve all played some role in it. Certainly I have. Sometimes, I’ve let my passion rule my reason. Sometimes, I made it harder to find common ground because of something harsh I said to a colleague. Sometimes, I wanted to win more for the sake of winning than to achieve a contested policy.

“Incremental progress, compromises that each side criticize but also accept, just plain muddling through to chip away at problems and keep our enemies from doing their worst isn’t glamorous or exciting. It doesn’t feel like a political triumph. But it’s usually the most we can expect from our system of government, operating in a country as diverse and quarrelsome and free as ours.

“Considering the injustice and cruelties inflicted by autocratic governments, and how corruptible human nature can be, the problem solving our system does make possible, the fitful progress it produces, and the liberty and justice it preserves, is a magnificent achievement.

“Our system doesn’t depend on our nobility. It accounts for our imperfections, and gives an order to our individual strivings that has helped make ours the most powerful and prosperous society on earth. It is our responsibility to preserve that, even when it requires us to do something less satisfying than ‘winning.’ Even when we must give a little to get a little. Even when our efforts manage just three yards and a cloud of dust, while critics on both sides denounce us for timidity, for our failure to ‘triumph.’

“I hope we can again rely on humility, on our need to cooperate, on our dependence on each other to learn how to trust each other again and by so doing better serve the people who elected us. Stop listening to the bombastic loudmouths on the radio and television and the Internet. To hell with them. They don’t want anything done for the public good. Our incapacity is their livelihood.

“Let’s trust each other. Let’s return to regular order. We’ve been spinning our wheels on too many important issues because we keep trying to find a way to win without help from across the aisle. That’s an approach that’s been employed by both sides, mandating legislation from the top down, without any support from the other side, with all the parliamentary maneuvers that requires.

“We’re getting nothing done. All we’ve really done this year is confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. Our healthcare insurance system is a mess. We all know it, those who support Obamacare and those who oppose it. Something has to be done. We Republicans have looked for a way to end it and replace it with something else without paying a terrible political price. We haven’t found it yet, and I’m not sure we will. All we’ve managed to do is make more popular a policy that wasn’t very popular when we started trying to get rid of it.

“I voted for the motion to proceed to allow debate to continue and amendments to be offered. I will not vote for the bill as it is today. It’s a shell of a bill right now. We all know that. I have changes urged by my state’s governor that will have to be included to earn my support for final passage of any bill. I know many of you will have to see the bill changed substantially for you to support it.

“We’ve tried to do this by coming up with a proposal behind closed doors in consultation with the administration, then springing it on skeptical members, trying to convince them it’s better than nothing, asking us to swallow our doubts and force it past a unified opposition. I don’t think that is going to work in the end. And it probably shouldn’t.

“The Obama administration and congressional Democrats shouldn’t have forced through Congress without any opposition support a social and economic change as massive as Obamacare. And we shouldn’t do the same with ours.

“Why don’t we try the old way of legislating in the Senate, the way our rules and customs encourage us to act. If this process ends in failure, which seem likely, then let’s return to regular order.

“Let the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee under Chairman Alexander and Ranking Member Murray hold hearings, try to report a bill out of committee with contributions from both sides. Then bring it to the floor for amendment and debate, and see if we can pass something that will be imperfect, full of compromises, and not very pleasing to implacable partisans on either side, but that might provide workable solutions to problems Americans are struggling with today.

“What have we to lose by trying to work together to find those solutions? We’re not getting much done apart. I don’t think any of us feels very proud of our incapacity. Merely preventing your political opponents from doing what they want isn’t the most inspiring work. There’s greater satisfaction in respecting our differences, but not letting them prevent agreements that don’t require abandonment of core principles, agreements made in good faith that help improve lives and protect the American people.

“The Senate is capable of that. We know that. We’ve seen it before. I’ve seen it happen many times. And the times when I was involved even in a modest way with working out a bipartisan response to a national problem or threat are the proudest moments of my career, and by far the most satisfying.

“This place is important. The work we do is important. Our strange rules and seemingly eccentric practices that slow our proceedings and insist on our cooperation are important. Our founders envisioned the Senate as the more deliberative, careful body that operates at a greater distance than the other body from the public passions of the hour.

“We are an important check on the powers of the Executive. Our consent is necessary for the President to appoint jurists and powerful government officials and in many respects to conduct foreign policy. Whether or not we are of the same party, we are not the President’s subordinates. We are his equal!

“As his responsibilities are onerous, many and powerful, so are ours. And we play a vital role in shaping and directing the judiciary, the military, and the cabinet, in planning and supporting foreign and domestic policies. Our success in meeting all these awesome constitutional obligations depends on cooperation among ourselves.

“The success of the Senate is important to the continued success of America. This country – this big, boisterous, brawling, intemperate, restless, striving, daring, beautiful, bountiful, brave, good and magnificent country – needs us to help it thrive. That responsibility is more important than any of our personal interests or political affiliations.

“We are the servants of a great nation, ‘a nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.’ More people have lived free and prosperous lives here than in any other nation. We have acquired unprecedented wealth and power because of our governing principles, and because our government defended those principles.

“America has made a greater contribution than any other nation to an international order that has liberated more people from tyranny and poverty than ever before in history. We have been the greatest example, the greatest supporter and the greatest defender of that order. We aren’t afraid. “We don’t covet other people’s land and wealth. We don’t hide behind walls. We breach them. We are a blessing to humanity.

“What greater cause could we hope to serve than helping keep America the strong, aspiring, inspirational beacon of liberty and defender of the dignity of all human beings and their right to freedom and equal justice? That is the cause that binds us and is so much more powerful and worthy than the small differences that divide us.

“What a great honor and extraordinary opportunity it is to serve in this body.

“It’s a privilege to serve with all of you. I mean it. Many of you have reached out in the last few days with your concern and your prayers, and it means a lot to me. It really does. I’ve had so many people say such nice things about me recently that I think some of you must have me confused with someone else. I appreciate it though, every word, even if much of it isn’t deserved.

“I’ll be here for a few days, I hope managing the floor debate on the defense authorization bill, which, I’m proud to say is again a product of bipartisan cooperation and trust among the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“After that, I’m going home for a while to treat my illness. I have every intention of returning here and giving many of you cause to regret all the nice things you said about me. And, I hope, to impress on you again that it is an honor to serve the American people in your company.

“Thank you, fellow senators.

“Mr. President, I yield the floor.”

51 - 50 JOHN MCCAIN RETURNS TO VOTE FOR REPEAL OF OBAMACARE (HISTORY)

51 - 50 JOHN MCCAIN RETURNS TO VOTE FOR REPEAL OF OBAMACARE (HISTORY):

US SENATE MAJORITY VOTES TO CLEAR TEST VOTE FOR FLOOR DEBATES.

AUTHENTIC AFFORDABLE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS POSSIBLE.

NOT TAXES AND POPULATION CONTROL DISGUISED AS UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BUT AUTHENTIC UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE.

GOP LEADERS MUST KEEP THEIR HEALTH CARE CAMPAIGN PROMISE TO AMERICAN VOTERS WHO GAVE THEM CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE.


Sources: Fox News, Euro News, Youtube


***** Senate health bill clears test vote, aided by McCain


Senate Republicans on Tuesday resuscitated their health care legislation for now, narrowly clearing it past a key hurdle with the help of Sen. John McCain’s dramatic return to the chamber for the first time since his brain cancer diagnosis.

The Senate voted 51-50 to start debate, with Vice President Pence casting the tie-breaker. The procedural vote once again brings the ObamaCare overhaul legislation back from the brink of collapse, after intense pressure from President Trump who had demanded senators skip recess until they act on health care.

The bill still faces a tough road ahead. But it was a heavy lift just to get to this point.

No Democrats supported the motion, leaving Republicans to corral the necessary 50 votes. They got exactly that, requiring Pence to break the tie, for the fifth time under the Trump administration.

The airtight vote made McCain’s return all the more significant, as the measure could not have advanced without him.

The result was kept in suspense for a while. Sens. Susan Collins, of Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska, voted no from the start. Several other Republican senators then delayed casting their vote, with no wiggle room left for additional defections on the GOP side.

Applause then broke out as McCain entered the chamber, pointing at his colleagues and shaking hands. As he joined, the last GOP holdout, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., voted with the Arizona senator to start debate.

Trump applauded the development in a statement, urging the Senate to follow through:

"I applaud the Senate for taking a giant step to end the Obamacare nightmare. As this vote shows, inaction is not an option, and now the legislative process can move forward as intended to produce a bill that lowers costs and increases options for all Americans. The Senate must now pass a bill and get it to my desk so we can finally end the Obamacare disaster once and for all."

Tuesday’s procedural vote kicks off what is likely to be another intense round of debate on health care, in which senators are sure to propose numerous changes to the plan – which could either boost or doom its chances. If a bill passes, it would still have to be reconciled with the House version.

McCain warned colleagues after the test vote that he would not support the bare-bones, “shell” bill in its current form as he urged lawmakers from both parties to reach across the aisle.

“We’re getting nothing done my friends,” McCain said from the floor, adding “something has to be done” on health care.

As the test vote began, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., urged his Republican colleagues to follow through on campaign promises to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

“We have a duty to act. … The president is ready with his pen,” he said. “We can’t let this moment slip by.”

Moments earlier, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., beseeched Republicans to “turn back.”

“We know the ACA is not perfect. But we also know what you’ve proposed is much worse,” he said.

A rowdy group of protesters also interrupted the start of proceedings, chanting, “kill the bill, don’t kill us” and “shame.”

For their part, Democrats uniformly oppose the effort to tear down President Barack Obama's signature legislative achievement. Republicans control the chamber 52-48, meaning they could afford to lose just two Republicans with McCain around.

Trump had kept up the pressure on GOP lawmakers, tweeting that "After 7 years of talking, we will soon see whether or not Republicans are willing to step up to the plate!" He added: "ObamaCare is torturing the American People. The Democrats have fooled the people long enough. Repeal or Repeal & Replace! I have pen in hand."

McConnell's original bill would abolish much of Obama's law, eliminating its tax penalties on people not buying policies, cutting Medicaid, eliminating its tax boosts on medical companies and providing less generous health care subsidies for consumers. But at least a dozen GOP senators have openly said they oppose or criticized the measure, which McConnell revised as he's hunted Republican support.

For the time being, he won over Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who backed starting debate. He said McConnell told him the Senate would debate Paul's proposal to scuttle much of Obama's law and give Congress two years to enact a replacement -- an amendment that seemed certain to lose.

Moderates also were seeking additional money for states that would be hurt by cuts in Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor, the disabled and nursing home patients. Conservatives wanted a vote on a proposal by Ted Cruz, R-Texas, letting insurers offer bare-bones policies with low premiums, which would be illegal under Obama's law.

With leaders still struggling to line up enough votes to approve a wide-ranging overhaul of Obama's law, there was talk of trying to pass a narrow bill -- details still unclear -- so House-Senate bargainers could craft a compromise.

REPEAL & REPLACE OBAMACARE vs LYING GOP SENATORS (BROKEN CAMPAIGN PROMISES)

REPEAL & REPLACE OBAMACARE vs LYING GOP SENATORS (BROKEN CAMPAIGN PROMISES):

GOP SENATORS PUSHED "REPEAL OBAMACARE" AGENDA TO WIN CONGRESS & WHITE HOUSE.

NOW THEY DON'T WANT TO KEEP THEIR VOWS.

REPLACING OBAMACARE WITH TRUE UNIVERSAL AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE.

IT JUST REQUIRES HARD WORK AND WORKING TOGETHER FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO ELECTED THEM.


Sources: AP, Fox News, The Hill, Youtube


**** Trump plays hardball on ObamaCare repeal


President Trump on Wednesday admonished Republican senators over their stalled healthcare push and demanded they resume work on a bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, setting up a last-ditch attempt to avoid an embarrassing defeat.

Trump invited Republican senators to the White House for lunch a day after their healthcare legislation appeared dead, telling lawmakers they should not leave Washington before reaching a solution, even if it means scrapping their already-delayed August recess.

"Frankly, I don't think we should leave town unless we have a health insurance plan," the president said at the start of the lunch in the State Dining Room. "Because we're close; we're very close."

The president's public tongue-lashing appeared to produce results. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said after the luncheon that he would forge ahead with the repeal-and-replace negotiations.

"Next week, we'll be voting on the motion to proceed, and I have every expectation that we'll be able to get on the bill," McConnell told reporters on the White House driveway.

But success is far from guaranteed. Following the meeting, it wasn't immediately clear whether McConnell would move to a straight repeal of ObamaCare - something the White House had urged earlier in the week - or the repeal-and-replace bill. As of Wednesday, both measures lacked the votes necessary to advance.

The initial collapse of the repeal-and-replace plan was a major failure for both Trump and McConnell and sparked mutual recriminations on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, including complaints from senators that the president did little to sell the initiative.

Trump on Wednesday appeared hell-bent on making up for lost time. As television cameras rolled, the president personally challenged GOP senators to get on board, reminding them of their campaign promises to overturn President Obama's signature healthcare law.

He seated himself next to Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.), a vulnerable incumbent who opposed the legislation, and ticked off what he said were the benefits of the plan, promising it would stabilize individual insurance markets and lower premiums by "60 and 70 percent."

Trump made it clear that he isn't afraid to use strong-arm tactics to persuade the holdouts.

"Look, he wants to remain a senator, doesn't he?" Trump said of Heller. "I think the people of your state, which I know very well, I think they're going to appreciate what you hopefully will do."

The president added, "Any senator who votes against starting debate is really telling America that you're fine with ObamaCare."

Heller appeared to take the ribbing in stride, tilting his head back and chuckling.

"That's just President Trump being President Trump," Heller told reporters at the Capitol following the lunch.
Trump also took a swipe at Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), the two conservatives who announced their opposition to the repeal-and-replace bill Monday night, stopping it dead in its tracks.

"The other night I was surprised when I heard a couple of my friends - my friends, they really were and are. They might not be very much longer, but that's OK," he said.

While the president seemed recommitted to using the bully pulpit to advance the healthcare effort, it's unclear whether it will be enough to get wavering senators behind a bill that is deeply unpopular with the public.

Only 17 percent of Americans approve of the Senate GOP legislation, while 55 percent disapprove, according to a late June NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed the measure had only 12 percent support in key counties won by Trump in 2016.

Trump's own approval rating has plummeted - down to only 36 percent in the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll - raising the possibility that vulnerable senators such as Heller will feel emboldened to ignore his pleas.

The president has offered mixed messages on healthcare, and his demand on Wednesday for a repeal-and-replace bill may have added even more confusion to the process.

Just one day earlier, he said that Republicans in Congress should simply abandon their legislative effort and "let Obamacare fail."

That came after a Monday tweet in which Trump appeared to endorse the repeal-without-replace option.

"Republicans should just REPEAL failing ObamaCare now & work on a new Healthcare Plan that will start from a clean slate. Dems will join in!" he wrote.

White House legislative director Marc Short denied that Trump's message has been inconsistent.

"I think the president has been clear that what he wants is repeal and replace," he said, adding that the president believes that if that doesn't work, "we should at least deliver on the promise to repeal."

Short said that during the lunch, "there was a general enthusiasm for recognizing that this is not something we can walk away from."

But senators acknowledged that they still face a heavy lift.

"It is ... sort of revived," Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said of the repeal-and-replace bill.

"I think we don't have any delusions about the fact that this is going to be very hard and we still have members who are not there yet."Three top Trump administration officials - Vice President Pence, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma - were scheduled to meet Wednesday evening on Capitol Hill with fence-sitting GOP senators to discuss a path forward.

McConnell repeatedly refused to say if he would cancel recess to continue work on healthcare.

HEALTH CARE BILL CUTS MANAGES MEDICAID SPENDING BUT DOESN'T KILL IT

HEALTH CARE BILL REDUCES MEDICAID SPENDING BUT DOESN'T KILL IT:

QUALITY CARE NOT WASTE AND ABUSE.

PROVIDES MORE HEALTHCARE JOBS & TRAINING.

GOP LEADERS MUST WORK TOGETHER FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED THEM.


Sources: Fox Business, Washington Times, Youtube


**** GOP Senator on Health Care Bill: Medicaid Spending Will Increase


Sen. John Thune, (R-SD), one of the senators who worked behind closed doors on the GOP health care bill, said that Medicaid spending will increase under the new bill.

"It will increase every year at the rate of inflation," Thune stated. He added that the bill aims to build upon the success of innovation already happening with respect to Medicaid.

Sen. John Thune, (R-SD), one of the senators who worked behind closed doors on the GOP health care bill, said that Medicaid spending will increase under the new bill.

"It will increase every year at the rate of inflation," Thune stated. He added that the bill aims to build upon the success of innovation already happening with respect to Medicaid.

House Speaker Paul Ryan also downplayed concerns, saying the bill must be written before it is presented.

"This shifts power, distributes power back to the states," Thune said.

The GOP bill will allow for more choices and competition, the South Dakota congressman promised.

"Too often these programs are driven out of Washington, D.C. in a one size fits all approach," Thune concluded.

Later on in the show, Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) pushed back on Thune's claims, saying the Medicaid cuts are deeper than in the House version.

He said the bill "shifts the burden" for covering Medicaid to states, rather than providing more money for the program.

OBAMACARE - TRUMP'S NEXT HUGE FIRST TERM ACHIEVEMENT (100 DAYS)

OBAMACARE - TRUMP'S NEXT HUGE FIRST TERM ACHIEVEMENT (100 DAYS):

OBAMACARE & IMMIGRATION IS GOP'S 2020 ELECTION VICTORY PLATFORM.

CAN THE GOP SUCCEED WITHOUT LETTING DEMS DISTRACT OR SABOTAGE THEM??


Sources: Fox News, Bloomberg News, USA Today, YouTube


***** Trump optimistic as government shutdown, ObamaCare replacement loom


Fresh from a two-week Easter break, Congress hits the ground running next week -- its legislative plate more than full, and its back against the wall with the government funding clock ticking down and the resurrection of a tuned-up ObamaCare replacement bill on its agenda.

Asked late Friday if he can get it all done, an optimistic President Trump told a reporter, "We'll see what happens. No particular rush, but we'll see what happens. A lot of good things are happening. "

Those upbeat remarks -- a week before the federal government runs out of money -- stand in stark contrast to growing fears in some quarters of another government shutdown.

A key House source told Fox News that negotiations on a new spending bill are, "ongoing and progressing" and that "a government shutdown is not on the table."

Trump's Budget Director Mick Mulvaney agrees, but on Thursday he threw a wrench in the works. He told the Associated Press that Democratic negotiators need to agree to fund some of the president's top priorities, including a down payment on a border wall and hiring of additional immigration agents.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's Communications Director, Matt House, fired back late Friday in an emailed statement: "If the administration would drop their 11th-hour demand for a wall that Democrats, and a good number of Republicans oppose, Congressional leaders could quickly reach a deal.

Asked Friday morning, after Mulvaney's remarks, whether the wall funding is a budget deal breaker, Counselor to the President Kelly Ann Conway played it safe. "I'll let the OMB [Office of Management and Budget] director and the president and others address that. We're confident that the government will not be shut down next week."

Conway’s circumspection may also stem from knowing Democrats are making their own budget demands, further risking a government shut-down.

"You have Democrats saying they want ObamaCare payments into this funding bill so Republicans are not going to like that," says Bob Cusack, managing editor of The Hill. "So there is certainly some brinksmanship going on and this is going to take some twists and turns but, at the end of the day, I think they'll get a deal done," he says.

"We boiled this thing down to something we want very badly and the democrats really don't want," Mulvaney said on Bloomberg TV. "We'd offer them $1 of CSR payments for $1 of wall payments. Right now that's the offer that we've given to our Democratic colleagues."

Adding another wrinkle to budget talks, the president wants the House to roll out the new American Health Care Act next week. It's a tuned-up version of the ObamaCare replacement that was pulled from the floor in late March, when it became clear Republicans didn’t have enough votes.

But voting on two complex pieces of legislation in a single week is extremely difficult. As an insurance policy against a government shutdown, Republicans will have a short-term continuing resolution at the ready, should it be

OBAMACARE EXPLODES IN DEMS' FACES; GOP CIVIL WAR KILLS REPLACEMENT

OBAMACARE EXPLODES IN DEMOCRATS' FACES; GOP INFIGHTING KILLS REPLACEMENT:

DEAR GOD HELP GOP LEADERS IF THEY BLOW ANOTHER GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO REBUILD THIS COUNTRY.


Sources: CBS News, Fox News, YouTube


**** Trump blames Democrats for GOP health care bill failure, says ObamaCare is 'imploding'


President Trump said Friday the White House “learned a lot about loyalty and the vote-getting process” following the dramatic failure of a Republican-backed bill that would have made good on a campaign promise to repeal and replace ObamaCare.

Trump said House Republicans were 10 to 15 votes shy of getting the bill passed and blamed the defeat on Democrats. House Speaker Paul Ryan pulled the bill minutes before a vote was to take place as it became apparent there was not enough support for passage. Democrats were united against it, and a conservative bloc of Republicans were unmoved by 11th-hour negotiations.

“We had no Democratic support,” Trump said from the Oval Office. “They weren’t going to give us a single vote.”

The president added that the “best thing we can do, politically speaking, is let ObamaCare explode. It’s exploding right now… Almost all states have big problems.”

Trump claimed he never said he would “repeal and replace [ObamaCare] within 64 days,” though he repeatedly promised during the campaign he’d do it on Day One.

Ryan, R-Wis., withdrew the legislation after Trump called and asked him to halt debate without a vote.

“We came really close today but we came up short,” Ryan said. He added that Friday’s developments were “not the end of the story” though he immediately pivoted to other items on the GOP agenda, including tax reform.

“We have big, ambitious plans to improve people’s lives,” he said.

Ryan made the walk to the White House shortly after noon to tell the president he lacked the votes to push the bill through. Friday marks the seventh anniversary of the signing of the Affordable Care Act by former President Barack Obama.

The GOP bill would have replaced ObamaCare, which mandated that almost every American have health insurance.

“This was a rejection of the repeal of the Affordable Care Act,” Democratic National Committee chair Tom Perez said in a written statement. “In the words of my friend Joe Biden: This is a BFD.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called the failed GOP health care bill a “victory for the American people.”

Republicans have spent seven years campaigning against Obama's signature health care law, and cast dozens of votes to repeal it in full or in part. But when they finally got the chance to pass a repeal bill that actually had a chance to get signed, they couldn't pull it off.

What happens next is unclear, but the path ahead on other priorities, such as overhauling the tax code, could grow more daunting.

The development came on the afternoon of a day when the bill, which had been delayed a day earlier, was supposed to come to a vote, come what may. President Trump's top aides had told Ryan to call a vote - and possibly call the bluff of balky Republicans in the House Freedom Caucus.

But instead of picking up support as Friday wore on, the bill went the other direction, with some key lawmakers coming out in opposition.

Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee, said the bill would raise costs unacceptably on his constituents. Rep. Barbara Comstock of Virginia, a key moderate Republican, and GOP Rep. David Joyce of Ohio also announced "no" votes.

The defections raised the possibility that the bill would not only lose on the floor, but lose big.

In the face of that evidence, and despite insistences from White House officials and Ryan that Friday was the day to vote, leadership pulled back from the brink.

The GOP bill would have eliminated the Obama statute's unpopular fines on people who do not obtain coverage and would also have removed the often-generous subsidies for those who purchase insurance.

Republican tax credits would have been based on age, not income like Obama's, and the tax boosts Obama imposed on higher-earning people and health care companies would have been repealed. The bill would have ended Obama's Medicaid expansion and trimmed future federal financing for the federal-state program, letting states impose work requirements on some of the 70 million beneficiaries.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the Republican bill would have resulted in 24 million additional uninsured people in a decade and lead to higher out-of-pocket medical costs for many lower-income and people just shy of age 65 when they would become eligible for Medicare. The bill would have blocked federal payments for a year to Planned Parenthood.

Democrats were uniformly opposed. "This bill is pure greed, and real people will suffer and die from it," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state.

MCCORY TO REPEAL HB2 AFTER CHARLOTTE LEADERS REPEAL LGBT BATHROOM SHARING ORDINANCE

GOV MCCORY TO REPEAL HB2 AFTER CHARLOTTE LEADERS REPEAL LGBT BATHROOM SHARING ORDINANCE:

CHARLOTTE'S MAYOR JENNIFER ROBERTS WANTED TO HELP HILLARY BUT IT BACKFIRED.

CHARLOTTE'S POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED LGBT BATHROOM ORDINANCE WAS ONLY FORCED ON PRIVATE BUSINESSES & PRIVATE SCHOOLS NOT PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

THUS THE REASON WHY GOV MCCRORY SIGNED HB2 INTO LAW IN THE FIRST PLACE.

CHARLOTTE'S BATHROOM SHARING ORDINANCE WAS ABOUT 2016 POLITICS NOT DISCRIMINATION.


Sources: CBS News, Charlotte Observer, YouTube


****** Gov. Pat McCrory calls for special legislative session Wednesday to repeal HB2


Following a surprise move by Charlotte City Council on Monday, Republican Gov. Pat McCrory has called for a special session Wednesday to consider repeal of House Bill 2.

The governor’s statement came in a series of rapidly unfolding events that could signal an end to the nine-month drama that has catapulted North Carolina into national headlines. HB2, seen by critics as an anti-LGBT measure, prompted boycotts and cost the state millions of dollars as well as lost jobs.

Monday’s events also underscored the continuing tensions between Republican lawmakers and Democratic Gov.-elect Roy Cooper.

McCrory’s call came hours after Charlotte City Council voted 10-0, with the support of Cooper and Democratic Mayor Jennifer Roberts, to rescind the LGBT ordinance that prompted HB2.

“This sudden reversal, with little notice after the gubernatorial election has ended, sadly proves this entire issue, originated by the political left, was all about politics at the expense of Charlotte and the entire state of North Carolina,” McCrory said in a video statement.

Cooper, who lobbied for the council action, announced earlier that GOP legislative leaders had promised to repeal HB2.

“Senate Leader Phil Berger and House Speaker Tim Moore assured me that as a result of Charlotte’s vote, a special session will be called for Tuesday to repeal HB2 in full,” Cooper said in a statement. “I hope they will keep their word to me and with the help of Democrats in the legislature, HB2 will be repealed in full.”

In a joint statement of their own, Berger and Moore said politics was behind the council vote.

“Today Roy Cooper and Jennifer Roberts proved what we said was the case all along: their efforts to force men into women’s bathrooms and shower facilities was a political stunt to drive out-of-state money into the governor’s race,” the Republican leaders said. “For months, we’ve said if Charlotte would repeal its bathroom ordinance that created the problem, we would take up the repeal of HB2.”.



This is the third time such an offer has been floated.

First in May and then in September there were efforts to get the council to rescind the ordinance that extended anti-discrimination protection to the LGBT community and allowed transgender people to use the public bathroom of the gender with which they identify.

Most council members never went along with the deal.

Since then Cooper defeated McCrory in a hard-fought race that wasn’t settled until McCrory conceded Dec. 5 as a recount entered its final hours.



Late-night lobbying

Council’s Monday morning vote came after late-night lobbying by Cooper himself. He called Democratic Mayor Pro Tem Vi Lyles at 10 p.m. Sunday and Democrat Julie Eiselt a half-hour later.

He said “if we cleaned up our books, that the General Assembly was motivated to call a special session to repeal (the law), and we felt this was our best opportunity,” Eiselt told the Observer.

Cooper and others believe that the best chance to repeal HB2 is this month before new legislators take office in January.

Roberts and council members had considered a similar deal earlier in the year but had rejected it.

Roberts on Monday was in the difficult position of defending the repeal. The vote “should in no way be viewed as a compromise of our principles or commitment to nondiscrimination,” she said.

But earlier this year, and as recently as last week, the mayor said that LGBT rights weren’t negotiable. Local and national gay rights organizations had adamantly opposed a symbolic repeal vote. The Human Rights Campaign said earlier this month that there should be no compromise between the city and the state.

But Monday they applauded the city’s move.

“HB2 is precisely why North Carolinians went to the polls and ousted Gov. McCrory last month,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “It’s time for state lawmakers to repeal HB2 and begin repairing the harm this bill has done to people and the damage it has done to North Carolina’s reputation and economy.”

State Rep. Chris Sgro, a Guilford County Democrat who is president of Equality NC, said earlier this month that he opposed any compromise.

“I firmly believe that Roy Cooper, Jennifer Roberts and the majority of City Council are committed to winning the full complement (of rights) for LGBT people both in Charlotte and across the state,” he said Monday. “All eyes …are on Raleigh watching for the General Assembly to do the right thing.”

Republican council member Kenny Smith, who is considering running for mayor, said the Democratic-controlled council was “playing politics” with the decision. He said the same deal has been available for months, but that council members waited until McCrory lost the election.

State GOP Chairman Robin Hayes agreed. He said the Charlotte ordinance was “never more than a nakedly partisan political weapon aimed at sabotaging Gov. McCrory’s re-election bid, while inflicting economic suffering on the people of North Carolina.”

It’s unclear how a vote to repeal HB2 would go. Democratic votes are virtually assured. Many Republicans remain in support of the bill.

“Lawmakers shouldn’t now betray those who supported them and compromise common sense principles, like privacy, dignity, and freedom for all citizens,” Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the N.C. Values Coalition, said. “To do so would be to advance the Obama administration’s agenda, not freedom and common sense.”

A ‘reset’

The city’s repeal includes language that says its nondiscrimination ordinance will be revived if the General Assembly doesn’t repeal HB2 by Dec. 31.

Republican council member Ed Driggs said he’s worried legislators will see that deadline as Charlotte dictating to Raleigh. He proposed that the Dec. 31 deadline be removed, but his motion failed.

Some business leaders were surprised but happy at the news. Maxwell Hanks, a broker with Spectrum Properties leasing the new 300 South Tryon office building, said HB2 has been hurting business recruitment in the state

“Rescinding HB2 will be a great way to close out 2016 and start 2017,” said Hanks. He said the move would be a “reset,” and that it would help him and other brokers lure companies to move to the state.

There was no advance notice that the ordinance would be discussed at the City Council meeting. The city charter allows the manager or mayor to place any item on the agenda – even without public notice first. Democrat James Mitchell made the motion to vote on the matter and Smith seconded.

Roberts said voters’ feelings about the issue have been known and voiced. But when the issue was last discussed, many in the LGBT community urged the city not to repeal the ordinance.

“The community always has a chance to weigh in,” Roberts said. “There will be much more conversations about equality.”

Lyles said council members would try in 2017 to pass some LGBT protections, though it’s unclear what they would be.

It’s possible the state might allow Charlotte to pass legal protections for gay and lesbian individuals in places of public accommodation, but any new ordinance that allowed transgender people to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity would likely be rejected again by legislators.

Some Democratic council members have long said they don’t want to “leave the transgender community behind.” But if there are future protections, the city will likely be forced to do just that.

Democratic council member John Autry said Monday’s vote turned his stomach. But he said he decided to support the compromise after talking with one of his daughters, who is gay.

He said she told him that the city’s vote was the best thing to do “in the long run.”

Democratic council member Patsy Kinsey didn’t attend the meeting.

A special session on Wednesday would come five days after lawmakers completed another special session in which they passed measures taking away many of the new governor’s appointment powers.

By itself, Charlotte’s move will not have any immediate impact on the status of lawsuits against HB2 by the federal government and the American Civil Liberties Union, among other groups.

UNC law professor Maxine Eichner, an expert in LGBT matters, said if the General Assembly follows through with the removal of HB2, the opposing sides in the court fights could both ask that the cases be dropped. Or the courts could rule that the lawsuits are now moot.

DONALD TRUMP OPPOSES HB2 BUT I STILL SUPPORT HIM & MCCRORY

DONALD TRUMP OPPOSES HB2 BUT I STILL ENDORSE HIM:

IN MY OPINION TRUMP IS THE BEST 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE FOR AMERICA.

MY SUPPORT FOR GOV MCCRORY ON HB2 REMAINS THE SAME.

Sources:  NY Magazine, NBC, YouTube

***** Donald Trump Comes Out Against North Carolina’s ‘Very Strong’ Bathroom Bill

Donald Trump says transgender people should be able to "use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate." On NBC's Today show Thursday morning, the GOP front-runner said he opposes North Carolina's "very strong" bathroom bill, which allows businesses to prohibit transgender people from doing just that.

"North Carolina did something that was very strong and they're paying a big price. And there's a lot of problems." Trump said. "Leave it the way it is. North Carolina, what they're going through, with all of the business and all of the strife — and that's on both sides — you leave it the way it is. There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go, they use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble. And the problem with what happened in North Carolina is the strife and the economic punishment they're taking."

Trump went on to say that he opposes the idea of creating a new, third bathroom specifically for transgender people because "that would be discriminatory, in a certain way," and because "it would be unbelievably expensive for businesses and for the country."

North Carolina governor Pat McCrory's office issued a statement in response to Trump's remarks:

"Governor McCrory has always said that North Carolina was getting along fine before the Charlotte city council passed its unneeded and overreaching ordinance. Now that it has been overturned, businesses can adopt their own policies - like Target has - instead of being mandated to allow men into women's restrooms by government."

Ted Cruz, Trump’s closest rival for the Republican nod, is a staunch defender of the legislation, arguing, “Men should not be going to the bathroom with little girls.” Ohio governor (and imaginary presidential contender) John Kasich has said he would not have signed the bill.

PAT MCCROY vs THE MEDIA (NC HOUSE BILL 2 MYTHS & FACTS)

HOUSE BILL 2 - GOV PAT MCCROY vs THE MEDIA (MYTHS & FACTS):

NC REP DAN BISHOP EXPLAINS THE BILL & REVEALS HOW MEDIA IS LYING.

Sources:  Governor.nc.gov, News Observer, YouTube

*****What New York Times, Huffington Post and other media outlets aren't saying about common-sense privacy law (HB 2)

1. Does the new bill limit or prohibit private sector companies from adopting their own nondiscrimination policies or practices?

• Answer: No. Businesses are not limited by this bill. Private individuals, companies and universities can adopt new or keep existing nondiscrimination policies.

2. Does this bill take away existing protections for individuals in North Carolina?

• Answer: No. In fact, for the first time in state history, this law establishes a statewide anti-discrimination policy in North Carolina which is tougher than the federal government’s. This also means that the law in North Carolina is not different when you go city to city. 

3. Can businesses and private facilities still offer reasonable accommodations for transgender people, like single occupancy bathrooms for instance?

• Answer: Yes. This bill allows and does nothing to prevent businesses, and public or private facilities from providing single use bathrooms. 

4. Can private businesses, if they choose, continue to allow transgender individuals to use the bathroom, locker room or other facilities of the gender they identify with, or provide other accommodations? 

• Answer: Yes. That is the prerogative of private businesses under this new law. For instance, if a privately-owned sporting facility wants allow attendees of sporting events to use the restroom of their choice, or install unisex bathrooms, they can. The law neither requires nor prohibits them from doing so.

5. Does this law prohibit towns, cities or counties in North Carolina from setting their own nondiscrimination policies in employment that go beyond state law?

• Answer: No. Town, cities and counties in North Carolina are still allowed to set stricter non-discrimination policies for their own employees if they choose.

6. Does this bill mean transgender people will always have to use the restroom of the sex of their birth, even if they have undergone a sex change? 

• Answer: No. This law simply says people must use the bathroom of the sex listed on their birth certificate. Anyone who has undergone a sex change can change their sex on their birth certificate.

7. I’m worried about how this new law affects transgender children or students in North Carolina. Does this bill allow bullying against transgender children in schools?

• Answer: Absolutely not. North Carolina law specifically prohibits bullying and harassing behavior against children on the basis of sexual identity. 

8. Does this bill affect people with disabilities?

• Answer: No. Statewide law also bans discrimination based on disability.

9. Why did North Carolina pass this law in the first place?

• Answer: The bill was passed after the Charlotte City Council voted to impose a regulation requiring businesses to allow a man into a women’s restroom, shower, or locker room if they choose. This ordinance would have eliminated the basic expectations of privacy people have when using the rest room by allowing people to use the restroom of their choice. This new local regulation brought up serious privacy concerns by parents, businesses and others across the state, as well as safety concerns that this new local rule could be used by people who would take advantage of this to do harm to others.

In fact, the Charlotte City Council tried to pass this ordinance before but failed, and passed the same ordinance in February of 2016 despite serious concerns from state officials, business leaders and other concerned citizens.

 10. What about parents or caregivers bringing children into the restroom?

• Answer: The law provides exceptions to young children accompanied by parents or care givers.

11. Will this bill threaten federal funding for public schools under Title IX?

• Answer: No, according to a federal court which has looked at a similar issue.

12. Will this bill prevent people from receiving medical attention in an emergency.

• Answer: Absolutely not. Nothing will prevent people from receiving medical attention in public or private accommodations. 

13. Will this bill affect North Carolina’s ability to create or recruit jobs?

• Answer: This bill does not affect companies in North Carolina. North Carolina was one of the top states to do business in the country before this law was passed, and preventing Charlotte’s bathroom ordinance from going into effect on April 1 won’t change that.

14. Why is the state telling cities and towns what it can and can’t do by repealing an ordinance the elected members of the Charlotte City Council passed?

• Answer: North Carolina is one of at least 37 states like Virginia where cities and towns cannot pass rules or regulations that exceed the authority given to them by the state. In passing the bathroom ordinance, Charlotte was exceeding its authority and setting rules that had ramifications beyond the City of Charlotte. The legislature acted to address privacy and safety concerns if this ordinance was allowed to go into effect on April 1. 

15. Do any other regulations in North Carolina cities, towns or counties come close to what Charlotte was recommending?

• Answer: No. Not that we are aware of. Therefore, nothing changes in North Carolina cities, towns and counties, including in Charlotte, regarding discrimination practices and protections now that this law has passed.

16. Did only Republicans vote for this bill?

• Answer: No. 11 Democrats voted for this bill in the N.C. House of Representatives and no Democratic Senators voted against it. In fact, Democratic Senators walked out to avoid voting on the issue at all because many were going to vote for it and they did not want show their division. 

17. Why did the Legislature call a special session to overturn the bathroom ordinance?

• Answer: The new Charlotte ordinance, which would have required all businesses to change their restroom policies and take away the expectation of privacy people have when using the restroom, was going to go into effect on April 1 if no action was taken.

18. Is North Carolina at a disadvantage when it comes to recruiting jobs because it does not have ordinances like the one Charlotte was proposing? 

• Answer: No. In fact in the last 3 years without an ordinance like this, North Carolina has created the 6th most jobs in the country – over 260,000 net new jobs. We know of no examples of companies being recruited to North Carolina that have asked if the state has an ordinance like the one Charlotte was proposing