HEALTHCARE:
ObamaCare Premium Increases Next Year May Shock You
“The top ObamaCare exchange insurers in six states where 2016 rate requests have already been filed are seeking to raise rates an average 18.6% next year. Early reports range from an alarming 36% hike sought by the dominant insurer in Tennessee, to a hefty 23% average increase requested by Oregon insurers, to a moderate 7.7% average rise proposed in Connecticut. Flyers promoting Blue Cross Blue Shield and ObamaCare are on display to attract Hispanic customers at a kiosk at Compare Foods in Winston-Salem, N.C…. Flyers promoting Blue Cross Blue Shield and ObamaCare are on display to attract Hispanic customers at a kiosk at Compare Foods in Winston-Salem, N.C…. View Enlarged Image The very limited data and the possibility that these initial requested rates might change, as they did in a significant way last year, make it hard to draw firm conclusions. But so far it appears that the Congressional Budget Office was on target in projecting a significantly bigger overall increase than in 2015. The CBO has said it expects ObamaCare exchange premiums to rise an average of 8.5% per year over the next three years. That’s partly due to the scheduled phasing-out of temporary government programs to protect insurer bottom lines from high-cost enrollees. BlueCross Tennessee Wants 36% Hike – BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee is seeking a 36.3% premium hike for its 165,000 members, comprising 70% of the market, the Tennessean reported. A check of HealthCare.gov shows that only Humana (NYSE:HUM), which is asking for a 15.8% increase, offers a silver plan in Memphis within 40% of the cheapest BCBS offering. For anyone who doesn’t get subsidies, these increases would deliver a shock. The vast majority who do get subsidies will be shielded from higher premiums because their contribution is a fixed percentage of income, leaving the government to pay the difference. On Friday, Maryland said that CareFirst is seeking premium hikes of close to 30% for the nearly 80% of exchange members it covers. The No. 2 insurer on the Maryland Health Connection, Kaiser Permanente, proposed a modest 4.8% increase.
In Michigan, where the individual market is dominated by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and its Blue Care HMO, insurers want an estimated 9.8% premium hike. He’s calculating the weighted average increase, which puts more emphasis on rate changes requested by plans with the most members. ACASignups includes in its totals the ObamaCare-compliant plans offered off the exchanges. Those members also are generally part of the same risk pool, meaning their costs also influence exchange premiums. Moda’s Costs Exceeded Premiums By 61.5% – ….”
http://news.investors.com/politics/051815-753015-obamacare-insurers-propose-big-2016-premium-hikes.htm
How Obamacare Could Be Squeezing Consumer Spending
“A bevy of recent data suggests American shoppers — long the buy-it-now drivers of global economic growth — have lost the spring in their step. It wasn’t supposed to be this way: Winter’s chill has faded, gas prices are well below last summer’s highs, the job market is strong, housing is steady and the stock market is at record highs. Something is wrong. As I’ll explain below, it could be Obamacare. On Friday, the University of Michigan’s consumer sentiment index fell from 95.9 in April to 88.6 in May. This was well below expectations and flies in the face of the current conventional wisdom — highlighted by the Federal Reserve in its latest policy statement — that consumers are feeling good. Measures of current conditions and future expectations both fell to the lowest levels since October and November respectively…”
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2015/05/18/How-Obamacare-Could-Be-Squeezing-Consumer-Spending
State-Run Obamacare Exchanges Careening Toward Disaster
“This year was supposed to be the first wherein Obamacare’s state-based insurance exchanges would be self-sufficient. By now, the law’s architects assured, the exchanges would be thriving, competitive marketplaces, where all Americans could secure affordable coverage. It hasn’t worked out that way. Two of the original 17 state exchanges have failed. Half of those that remain are struggling financially. After getting $5 billion in federal grants, most of the state exchanges have turned out to be a disastrous mix of runaway spending on technology, lower-than-expected enrollment, huge overhead costs, and looming bankruptcy. Take the Covered California exchange. Despite receiving $1.1 billion in federal money, the exchange faced severe technological problems in its first year. Investor’s Business Daily has reported that shoppers are complaining about long hold times and difficulty cancelling or making changes to health plans. It’s no wonder people are fleeing the exchange. Just two-thirds of those who bought coverage through Covered California in 2014 re-enrolled in 2015. The Golden State’s exchange also faces an $80 million deficit for the next fiscal year, after 300,000 fewer people enrolled than expected. Things are so bad that Covered California’s executive director, Peter Lee, recently admitted that the “long-term sustainability of the organization” remains an open question. New York’s exchange is also floundering. Gov. Andrew Cuomo tried to impose a $69 million fee on all insurance plans sold in the state to fund the state’s exchange. But even his allies in the legislature failed to back his plan — and shot it down in late March. As Democratic Assemblyman Richard Gottfried explained, “Insurers would simply pass the cost along to customers.” As federal grants run out, it’s unclear where funding for the Empire State’s exchange will come from in the future. Minnesota has become a textbook example of throwing good money after bad. In March, Gov. Mark Dayton announced plans to spend $500,000 on a special task force to determine if the state’s MNSure exchange had a financial future. Just two months earlier, the exchange got a $34 million infusion in federal tax grants to help keep it going, on top of the $41 million it received in late 2013. All told, federal taxpayers have dumped more than $189 million into MNSure. For all that, the Minnesota exchange has managed to sign up only 61,000 people. That’s 40 percent below what it had hoped to enroll…”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2015/05/18/state-run-obamacare-exchanges-careening-toward-disaster/
Hawaii Medical Service Association blames $57M Q1 loss on Affordable Care Act
“The Hawaii Medical Service Association reported a first-quarter loss of $57.2 million, compared to a loss of $30 million in the first quarter of 2014. The insurer blamed the loss on more than $62 million in fees associated with the Affordable Care Act, which must be recorded in the first quarter. HMSA collected $727.3 million in premiums from 726,889 members for the first quarter, compared to $707.9 million in the first quarter of 2014, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser reported. Some of the loss was attributed to members using more health care services and the rising cost of prescription drugs, HMSA Chief Financial and Services Officer and Treasurer Steve Van Ribbink said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the money that our members paid to cover their health care wasn’t enough to cover the total cost of their doctor visits, prescription drugs, and other health care services, and the cost of administering their benefits,” he said. “Health care is advancing at an astonishing rate. Innovative specialty drugs are providing new treatments and therapies. But these drugs come at a high cost, and we expect that cost to continue growing.”
http://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/blog/morning_call/2015/05/hawaii-medical-service-association-blames-57m-q1.html
Skyrocketing Medicaid signups stir Obamacare fights
Some GOP governors are saying: “I told you so.”
“Medicaid enrollment under Obamacare is skyrocketing past expectations, giving some GOP governors who oppose the program’s expansion under the health law an “I told you so” moment. More than 12 million people have signed up for Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act since January 2014, and in some states that embraced that piece of the law, enrollment is hundreds of thousands beyond initial projections. Seven states have seen particularly big surges, with their overruns totaling nearly 1.4 million low-income adults. The federal government is picking up 100 percent of the expansion costs through 2016, and then will gradually cut back to 90 percent. But some conservatives say the costs that will fall on the states are just too big a burden, and they see vindication in the signup numbers, proof that costs will be more than projected as they have warned all along. Obamacare originally expanded Medicaid — which traditionally served poor children, pregnant women and the disabled — to all childless low-income adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (about $16,250 for an individual) across the country. But the Supreme Court made expansion optional in 2012. And 21 states, mostly with GOP governors, have resisted…”
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/skyrocketing-medicaid-expansion-obamacare-republican-governors-118011.html
Doctors ‘reluctant’ to take Obamacare patients: Hospital CEO (May 15th)
“Obamacare has failed to deter emergency room visits because many patients have no choice when they can’t get an appointment with a primary-care physician, the founder of hospital operator Universal Health Services said Friday. While the millions more who have health insurance certainly play a part in the doctor shortage, Alan Miller told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that poor reimbursement rates for primary-care physicians is also a major factor. “They get a better reimbursement when they take care of people that have insurance from their employer,” the Universal Health chairman and CEO said. “The doctors are reluctant to schedule appointments” with patients who have government plans. “So people are still going to the emergency room, which is opposite of what Obamacare was supposed to do,” he added. Miller said the solution to reducing ER visits would be simple, but not without cost. “Raise the reimbursement to the primary-care people,” he said, then doctors “would be more likely to make appointments with people that have lower-priced insurance or being subsidized by the federal government.” Hospital operators such as Universal Health have profited from Obamacare, which has made medical insurance widely available. “It has helped us with regard to bad debt,” because now many more people who arrive at the ER for treatment can pay, said Miller, explaining that prior to the Affordable Care Act, hospitals incurred the costs of treating patients who had no ability to pay. “We had bad debt. All the hospitals had bad debt that was approaching between 15 percent and 25 percent in some cases,” he said. “Ours were a little under 20 percent. And that has gone down substantially because people have coverage. They can pay.” Miller is one of the longest-serving CEOs in America—37 years at the helm….”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102682553
How Obamacare Is Like Prohibition
Self-interest got dressed up as public interest and the consequences are still being sorted out.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2015/05/18/how-obamacare-is-like-prohibition
Senators press FDA to delay menu labeling rules
“Dozens of senators are calling for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to delay controversial menu labeling rules for restaurants and grocery stores. The FDA is pushing requirements that will force many restaurants, grocery stores, convenience stores and entertainment venues to list the number of calories in the foods they sell. The menu labeling requirements, a provision of ObamaCare, are scheduled to go into effect in December, but a bipartisan group of 32 senators is demanding the FDA clarify the rules and give businesses more time to comply with the changes. The top two senators on the health committee, Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.), are leading the effort to get the FDA to delay the rules by one year. “While we recognize the benefit of improved access to nutritional information for consumers, we are concerned that the lack of clear and consistent guidance from the agency will make it difficult, confusing, and burdensome for businesses, particularly smaller businesses,” the senators write in a letter to acting FDA Commissioner Stephen Ostroff. The senators say these food establishments “will need appropriate time to budget and plan accordingly to meet the rule’s requirements to provide nutrition information to consumers that is understandable and clear.” The menu labeling requirements will apply to business chains with 20 or more locations that sell “restaurant-like” prepared food. “It is important that the agency not only provide clear and consistent guidance, but also adequate time to understand and come into compliance with the regulations,” the senators write…”
http://thehill.com/regulation/healthcare/242365-fda-facing-blowback-from-lawmakers-over-menu-labeling-requirements
GOP lawmaker pressures House leaders on ObamaCare response
“Another Republican lawmaker is warning House GOP leaders that they need to come up with a fully fledged plan in case the Supreme Court rules against ObamaCare next month. Without a plan, Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-Maine) argued consumers will face chaos from the market if the Supreme Court rules people cannot be given subsidies to buy ObamaCare if they are on the federal marketplace. “If [the subsidies] are ruled unlawful, it will be incumbent upon Congress to help create a thoughtful free market replacement for ObamaCare, and an off-ramp for the six million individuals who have in good faith purchased ObamaCare policies,” Poliquin wrote in a letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and other committee leaders. His stance on how to respond stands in contrast to some in the Republican party, who argue that the Obama administration should be left to singlehandledly pick up the pieces if they lose in court. It remains unclear how Congressional Republicans would prevent the potential healthcare meltdown in case billions of ObamaCare subsidies are gone overnight, which has many lawmakers worried about the short timeframe before the court case. Under Poliquin’s proposal, individuals would no longer be required to purchase insurance and they would no longer have to purchase plans that cover the same broad range of services and procedures. To cut overall costs, it would require doctors to provide cost estimates of services to allow patients to “shop around” and would allow people to buy insurance across state lines – two ideas that have been widely accepted among the GOP. It would keep at least one part of ObamaCare: requiring companies to provide coverage to people with pre-existing health conditions…”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/242375-pressure-builds-for-house-gop-to-craft-obamacare-response
GOP pressure builds for ObamaCare alternative
“Republicans are getting more and more anxious about what exactly House leaders are planning to do if the Supreme Court rules against ObamaCare next month. Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-Maine) wrote a letter to the three GOP chairmen leading the effort on Monday, warning that the chamber needs to have a plan to avert chaos in case millions of people lose their subsidies. “I wrote this letter to encourage them to move forward,” Poliquin said in an interview, adding that the leadership needs to act “sooner rather than later.” Poliquin’s letter – which falls short of an official proposal – asks that individuals no longer be required to purchase insurance or to purchase plans that cover certain services and procedures. “There’s a lot of commonality between what our leadership is working on and what a lot of what I’ve put in this letter,” Poliquin said. Specifically, he said most Republicans agree that insurance companies should cover people with pre-existing conditions, should allow people to carry their plans from job-to-job and to allow people to shop across state lines. As for the issue of extending ObamaCare subsidies? He says that’s for the leadership to decide. “We’ve got to first agree that there is a problem and we need a solution, and I think we’re there,” Poliquin said about the post-King v. Burwell planning. “Now I think [the debate] has become, what parts do we need to focus on?” Read more here…”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/overnights/242436-overnight-healthcare-gop-lawmaker-presses-house-leaders-for
Kitzhaber scrapped workable Oregon health exchange for political benefit
Emails suggest election concerns, not merits, led to shutdown that cost state $305 million
“Former Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber was told in early 2014 that the Obamacare state health care exchange his administration spent $305 million building could be made operational. But his administration chose instead to scrap the project and seek a scapegoat to keep the fiasco from harming his re-election, according to evidence turned over to congressional investigators. The materials, reviewed by The Washington Times, include emails and memos between state officials and campaign aides as well as a transcript of a conversation from a state official turned whistleblower that suggests federal tax dollars were sacrificed for political convenience. The memos show Mr. Kitzhaber’s election campaign aides took the unusual step of instructing state officials on how to handle the Cover Oregon exchange project, especially when the project was abandoned just before its launch. The campaign aides even sought to supervise the testimony of a state official appearing before the U.S. Congress…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/18/oregon-gov-john-kitzhaber-scrapped-workable-obamac/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Impact Of A King v Burwell Win: ‘The Rest Of The Story’
“ObamaCare supporters have produced study after study warning of the devastation to come if the Supreme Court decides that the IRS illegally extended health insurance subsidies to people in states operating under federal exchanges. But the American Action Forum (AAF), a dynamic think tank led by former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, has produced new research that provides balance to what has been a one-sided debate. He shows how people in 37 states will be helped if the petitioners prevail in King v Burwell. AAF estimates that more than 11 million people would be liberated from having to purchase expensive ObamaCare insurance and freed from the onerous penalties of the individual mandate, which cost those who don’t comply an average of $1,200 in fines this year. The study also finds that workers could earn nearly $1,000 more, and 1.2 million more people would join the workforce in federal exchange states if King prevails in the lawsuit. The employer mandate would be void in these states because employers no longer could be penalized if their workers went to the exchanges for insurance. No exchange subsidies equals no employer mandate penalties. AAF estimates that 262,000 businesses would be liberated from the employer mandate. This, in turn, would: -Permit the creation of up to 237,000 new jobs, -Bring 1,270,000 people into the labor force, -Increase pay by up to $940 per worker and up to $13.6 billion overall, -Offer the opportunity for more hours to up to 3.3 million part-time workers…”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gracemarieturner/2015/05/18/impact-of-a-king-v-burwell-win-the-rest-of-the-story/
IMMIGRATION:
The Bogus Legal Case for Obama’s Amnesty
Applicable precedent clearly shows that the president is going way beyond his constitutionally limited powers.
“With the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals soon to decide on whether to keep the freeze on President Obama’s new and expanded amnesty programs, the Immigration Reform Law Institute — along with The Remembrance Project, The Federation for American Immigration Reform, and The National Sheriffs’ Association — has filed a friend-of-the-court brief outlining some of the weakest and most misleading legal arguments made by the Department of Justice. New research shows that the programs are even more in conflict with legal precedent and even farther outside the president’s constitutional powers than previously thought. The broadest claim DOJ makes is that the executive has unrestricted discretionary power in defining who is eligible for deportation deferrals. IRLI’s brief raises the wealth of Supreme Court commentary confirming Congress’s Article I, Section 8 power over immigration and naturalization. That the Constitution delegates almost all immigration-related power to Congress was confirmed in the 1952 Supreme Court decision of Harisiades v. Shaughnessy and again in 1983 with INS v. Chadha. In their briefs, DOJ attorneys don’t even bother trying to limit or qualify these fundamental rulings. If the executive truly believes it was acting within its constitutional powers when it instituted the DACA program, why did the president bother entertaining a congressional debate on the legislative version of DACA (a.k.a. the DREAM Act) in the first place? And if that authority is truly so widespread, why doesn’t the DHS secretary apply blanket amnesty to all 12 million illegal aliens in the country instead of the 1.8 million done under the DACA program and the 4.1 million covered under DAPA?…”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/418478/bogus-legal-case-obamas-amnesty-ian-smith
Obama seeks to end immigration enforcement by local, state police
Recommendation from task force set up in wake of Ferguson riots
“The administration issued a report Monday saying that in order to rebuild trust between police and their communities, the federal government should stop enlisting state and local police in most immigration enforcement, setting up another challenge as President Obama tries to please immigrant rights advocates while carrying out deportations. The recommendations were part of Mr. Obama’s policing task force, set up in the wake of riots last year in Ferguson, Missouri, to suggest ways federal officials can help local police do their jobs better. The heart of the report called for curtailing transfer of heavy weapons and tank-style vehicles to state and local authorities, but the report also delved into the thorny issue of immigration, saying government must “decouple” enforcement from local police. “The U.S. Department of Homeland Security should terminate the use of the state and local criminal justice system, including through detention, notification, and transfer requests, to enforce civil immigration laws against civil and nonserious criminal offenders,” the task force said. Task force officials also suggested that the government pay for any enforcement it asks of local authorities. The report angered proponents of an immigration crackdown, who said it was the latest effort by Mr. Obama and his aides to stop finding illegal immigrants to deport. “If you’re so worried about your legal status, or your illegal status, don’t put yourself in a place or a situation where you’re going to get picked up by the police,” said Rosemary Jenks, government relations manager at NumbersUSA, which lobbies for stricter immigration limits…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/18/obama-seeks-to-end-immigration-enforcement-by-loca/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Immigrants applying to enter US legally facing longer waits
“As illegal immigrants continue to seek legal status under President Obama’s executive actions, the waiting list to enter the United States legally grows longer, as does the waiting time for those in the pipeline. American born Jimmy Gugliotta, who currently lives in Santiago, Chile, with his Argentinian wife and their children, has been waiting more than a year and a half for visas to bring his family to the U.S. He doesn’t understand why going through the process legally puts him behind people who sneak into the U.S. illegally. “It’s really sad to see that we’ve been put in the back seat,” Gugliotta told Fox News via email. “What I found outrageous is people like me, a U.S. citizen, are actually being put at the back of the line, and that to me is a total outrage.” The waiting list for those trying to enter the U.S. legally now stands at 4.4 million, 100,000 more than last year. Some have been on the list for more than 15 years. Even though the spouses and children of U.S citizens are supposed to get priority, even their wait times have jumped from as little as two months to up 18 months as the administration deals with a surge of illegal immigrants given lawful status by president Obama. “I’ve had people tell me, ‘Why don’t you just show up at the border and try to get across?'” said Gugliotta. “I say, ‘No, we want to do this thing right.'” While the State Department handles the granting of visas for those overseas, their application first has to be processed by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. The agency has been deluged by more than 2,000 applications a day for green cards and work permits after President Obama offered to shield some 4 million illegal immigrant children and adults from deportation using his executive authority. “I think most Americans are upset that the legal immigration system that was set up by Congress has been completely dismemebered and distorted in this way to benefit people who came here originally illegally. “What message does this send to people who are trying to do it the right way?” says Jessica Vaughn, of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that favors stronger controls on illegal immigration….”
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/18/immigrants-applying-to-enter-us-legally-facing-longer-waits/
Immigration Reform News: Detained Immigrants ‘Not Entitled’ To First Amendment Protections, Argue Obama Justice Department Lawyers in Little-known Court Case
“While the Obama administration is famously fighting in court to use executive authority to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from being deported, in a lesser-known Texas immigration court case, the Department of Justice’s lawyers have argued those same immigrants have no First Amendment rights. The Texas immigration case in question, Pineda-Cruz v. Thompson, hasn’t gotten nearly as much attention as that other Texas immigration case, where 26 states are challenging President Obama’s authority to implement reform through executive action. But, judging from the fundamental principles at stake and the arguments being made, maybe it should. The Pineda-Cruz case concerns a petition created by detained mothers in an immigration detention center that alleges that authorities placed them in isolation and threatened to take their children away from them in retaliation for protesting against conditions at the lockup, according to Slate’s Michael Kagan….”
http://www.latinpost.com/articles/53858/20150517/immigration-reform-news-detained-immigrants-not-entitled-to-first-amendment-protections-argue-obama-justice-department-lawyers-in-lesser-known-court-case.htm
FORMER CONGRESSMAN: DEMS VIEW ILLEGAL ALIENS AS ‘UNDOCUMENTED DEMOCRATS,’ GOP SEES ‘CHEAP LABOR’
“Tom Tancredo, who served in Congress for a decade representing Colorado in the U.S. House of Representatives and a staunch advocate against illegal immigration, joined Breitbart News Sunday for an interview which aired on Sirius XM Patriot radio, channel 125. The former Republican congressman, who Breitbart senior political writer and guest host of BNS, Matt Boyle, characterized as “one of the strongest leaders on immigration policy in the country,” asserted that he is disappointed with his successor, Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO)66%
, for being in favor of granting citizenship to DACCA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) people in exchange for them joining the U.S. Military. “I am annoyed that he used the appropriations bill for the military for social program development,” Tancredo complained. “We should never do that.” After completing five terms in the U.S House of Representatives serving Colorado’s sixth district, Tancredo chose not to seek re-election in 2008. He ran for the Republican Party nomination for President in 2008, focusing his campaign on the issues of illegal immigration and terrorism. In 2010 Tancredo ran for Governor of Colorado on the American Constitution Party ticket and 2014 as a Republican, coming up short in both elections. Significantly, the Denver native said that he has never heard from anybody that the American military can’t fill its own ranks with American citizens. “Immigrants, by the way, who have come here the right way, gotten their citizenship, want to serve, that’s great,” Tancredo acknowleged. Host Boyle agreed with Tancredo and pointed out to Breitbart News Sunday listeners that, “it’s not like we need to let all these people, who broke all our immigration laws, into our military. There are people getting pink slips! Our troops are getting pink slips, when they are serving overseas. Why do we need to replace Americans with illegal aliens in the military. It doesn’t make any sense.”…”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/18/former-congressman-dems-view-illegal-aliens-as-undocumented-democrats-gop-sees-cheap-labor/
Cruz ties immigration to trade
“Presidential hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz wants to tie a fight over immigration to the fast-track trade legislation currently before the Senate. The Texas Republican has filed an amendment that would block any trade agreements that “alter or affect any law, regulation, or policy relating to immigration.” Cruz’s amendment could come up in the debate over fast-track, which if approved would prevent Congress from amending trade deals and force them to be considered in a majority vote. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hopes to finish the fast-track bill by the end of this week but is expected to have to deal with dozens of amendments to the legislation. Conservative lawmakers have repeatedly warned that Obama could use the Trans-Pacific Partnership to reform immigration. Cruz’s amendment would block any trade agreements that change immigration laws from being fast-tracked through Congress. Such trade deals could be amended and would be subject to Senate filibusters. Administration officials, as well as the House Ways and Means Committee, have denied that either fast-track or the Asia-Pacific trade deal would impact immigration laws. While Cruz said that although he agrees with those leaders, he wants to put those assurances in the legislation….”
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/242377-cruz-ties-immigration-to-trade
Candidates Win Evangelicals With Pro-American Worker Immigration Policy
“Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, an expected GOP presidential candidate, drew the ire of the political right and left recently over his comments on immigration. When it comes to the immigration issue, Republicans are expected to use the tried and true, consultant tested “secure the border” talking point and move on to other issues. Governor Walker, like former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, has taken things further than just a discussion of illegal immigration. They have dared to discuss the impact of legal immigration on American workers. Like most Republicans, I’m still undecided about the presidential field. But I have an enormous amount of respect for these guys and what they have done as they campaign. I applaud their statements on immigration and their willingness to go against the status quo on immigration. What radical proposal could have inspired attacks from liberal media outlets like MSNBC, Mother Jones and the Huffington Post as well as The Wall Street Journal and establishment Republicans such as Senators Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) ? “In terms of legal immigration, how we need to approach that going forward is saying — the next president and the next Congress need to make decisions about a legal immigration system that’s based on, first and foremost, on protecting American workers and American wages,” stated Governor Walker during an interview with Glenn Beck…”
http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/18/candidates-win-evangelicals-with-pro-american-worker-immigration-policy/
SPENDING/BUDGET/ECONOMY:
Debt limit deadline now seen at end of 2015
“A stronger than expected tax season will give policymakers more time to haggle over an increase to the debt limit, according to new analysis. An unexpected influx of revenue means that the nation is not expected to be at risk of a catastrophic default until November of December of 2015, after the Bipartisan Policy Center had previously pegged the deadline as sometime in the late summer or early fall. The 2015 tax season closed with the government bringing in roughly $40 billion more revenue than originally anticipated, which likely will buy the government a bit more time under the existing cap before the Treasury Department will no longer be able to pay all of Uncle Sam’s bills. Previously, the Congressional Budget Office had estimated that the U.S. would need a borrowing boost likely in October or November, but with the revenue boost, the Bipartisan Policy Center scrapped the earlier part of that window.
At the same time, the group noted that there still is “substantial uncertainty” over timing, and the potential deadline could move forward or back as time progresses and a clearer picture emerges. In March, the federal government was again subjected to an $18.1 trillion borrowing cap, forcing the Treasury Department to begin employing its set of “extraordinary measures” to free up room under that ceiling. Leaders from both parties have emphasized that there is no interest in putting the nation at the risk of a disastrous default, but the GOP-led Congress and the Obama administration still remain far apart on many fiscal issues, and in fact whether to include outside policy measures with a borrowing increase…”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/242404-debt-limit-deadline-now-seen-at-end-of-2015
Week ahead: Senate kicks off trade debate
“The Senate kicks off debate on fast-track legislation to boost President Obama’s powers to negotiate trade deals. The bill on Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) narrowly cleared a procedural hurdle in the upper chamber after a clash between the White House and progressives. Obama wants TPA so he can eventually pass the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a 12-nation economic agreement he says will help boost the U.S. economy, but progressives say is a bad deal for American workers. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wants to pass the legislation before Memorial Day, hopefully with strong bipartisan support. But Democrats want more time to attach amendments. Also in the Senate, Banking Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) will have a markup on his financial regulations bill — the most aggressive overhaul since the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform law. Progressives like Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), the top Democrat on the panel, have already attacked the legislation, saying it weakens Dodd-Frank. Shelby could struggle to attract moderate Democrats to obtain the 60 votes needed to move to a floor vote. At the markup, special interest will be given to centrist Democrats such as Sens. Mark Warner (Va.), Jon Tester (Mont.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) and Joe Donnelly (Ind.), whose support Shelby hopes to win. Off Capitol Hill, Federal Reserve officials release their minutes from their recent meeting on Wednesday. Fed-watchers will once again look for clues on when the central bank’s policymakers will raise interest rates. Most expect the rate hike sometime in September…”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/242241-week-ahead-senate-kicks-off-trade-debate
McConnell: Senate to finish trade this week
“Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) warned senators on Monday that they will finish “fast track” trade legislation this week, no matter how long that makes the week run.
“The Senate will finish its work on trade this week, and we will remain in session as long as it takes to do so,” the Kentucky Republican said Monday. “I would advise against making any sort of travel arrangements until the path forward becomes clear.” McConnell wants to pass the “fast-track” bill, which would allow the president to get his trade deals passed through Congress by a simple majority vote, before senators leave at the end of the week for the Memorial Day recess. McConnell has pledged an open amendment process for the trade fight, but he’s under a tight deadline to pass the legislation, as well as surveillance and highway measures, before the Senate leaves. He said that the quickest way to get all three bills passed would be “to cooperate across the aisle so we can pass the trade bill in a thoughtful but efficient manner.” McConnell said that he “encouraged” senators to offer trade amendments, but slammed Democrats suggesting they had slowed down the process….”
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/242414-mcconnell-senate-finishing-trade-this-week
McConnell: Senate will vote this week on trade, other bills
“Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is vowing to postpone the Senate’s scheduled Memorial Day recess until lawmakers pass a trade bill that President Barack Obama wants, vote on renewing the Patriot Act and keep highway construction funds flowing. Both the Patriot Act and contracting authority for federal highway funds expire on June 1. The trade bill is a top priority for Obama. All three bills are contentious, and the Kentucky Republican on Monday challenged Democrats to cooperate. He’ll need cooperation on his side of the aisle, as well. Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky has said he will try and block renewal of the Patriot Act, which passed in the wake of the terror attacks of 2001. The Memorial Day break is scheduled to begin at week’s end…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/18/mcconnell-senate-will-vote-this-week-on-trade-othe/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Paul Ryan says ‘we will have the votes’ for fast track
“Rep. Paul Ryan predicts there will be enough votes in the House to pass “fast track” trade authority. “We will have the votes,” Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who leads the House Ways and Means Committee, said Sunday. “We’re gaining a lot of steam and momentum,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” As the Hill writes, the Senate is expected to vote on the agreement soon. Republican leaders in the House, meanwhile, have struggled to get the votes needed to pass the fast-track legislation, which would speed trade agreements through Congress. The authority allows lawmakers an up-or-down vote on trade deals, but not the ability to amend them. The legislation is a priority of both Republicans and President Barack Obama. Ryan said “we’re doing very well” at rounding up votes…”
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/paul-ryan-says-we-will-have-the-votes-for-fast-track-2015-05-18
Senate rejects more aid for workers who lose jobs to trade
“The Senate rejected a liberal-led move Monday to increase aid for workers who lose their jobs to imports, pushing for passage by week’s end of major trade legislation sought by President Barack Obama. The 45-41 vote was well short of the 60 needed, and reflected the unusual political forces at work on a bill to strengthen Obama’s hand in negotiating global trade deals. In remarks on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the trade legislation and two other bills — one to renew the Patriot Act, the other to keep federal highway funds flowing — would receive final votes by week’s end or senators would have to delay a scheduled Memorial Day recess. “I know we became used to hearing these types of statements in the past, but senators should know I’m quite serious,” he said. He referred to frequent threats from Nevada’s Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, the former majority leader, who frequently threatened to cancel vacations if bills weren’t passed, but rarely if ever followed through. The anti-terrorism Patriot Act and the highway measure are both controversial in their own right. But the trade measure has dominated the Senate’s agenda for several days, with Republicans nearly unanimous in working to give a Democratic president new authority and union-backed Democrats opposed. Sen. Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat who opposes the legislation, led the effort to increase the amount of retraining assistance in the bill from $450 million a year to $575 million. He said Congress had agreed to the higher figure the last time it voted on the program, and added it was the level contained in Obama’s budget. A large majority of workers who receive retraining are able to find and keep new jobs, he said, helping them “compete in the global economy.” But Sen. Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, said increasing the amount of money could make it harder to pass the overall trade bill because it could increase Republican resistance…”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/senate-rejects-more-aid-workers-who-lose-jobs-trade
Some administration officials defend trade pact as national security policy
“The Democratic Party’s civil war on trade has taken a sudden national security turn. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter called President Obama’s Pacific trade deal as important to the military as a new aircraft carrier. Former top State Department official Kurt Campbell warned that U.S. diplomacy in Asia will earn a failing grade if the trade pact perishes in Congress. Michèle Flournoy, a former No. 3 at the Pentagon, wrote in a recent newspaper editorial: “America’s prestige, influence and leadership [is] on the line.” As Capitol Hill progressives fan fears of domestic job losses in the rancorous debate over trade, Washington’s Democratic foreign policy elite has mounted a fierce defense of the pact as crucial to the Obama administration’s national security strategy. Behind their warnings lies the uncomfortable truth that some inside the administration view the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a broad 12-nation accord, as a policy aimed foremost at China. On Tuesday, on his way home from meetings in Beijing focused on maritime disputes in the region, Secretary of State John F. Kerry will stop in Seattle to deliver remarks about the strategic importance of the trade pact. China is not among the Asia Pacific nations negotiating the TPP with the United States. But its rise, economically and militarily, over the past decade has cast a long shadow over Asia and prompted the Obama White House to pursue new alliances and partnerships. The trade accord has emerged as the primary symbol of that effort as the administration seeks to convince allies and rivals alike that the United States is determined to establish primacy in a region that China also is seeking to shape….”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/some-in-administration-consider-tpp-aimed-mostly-at-china/2015/05/18/599ccc78-fb2e-11e4-9ef4-1bb7ce3b3fb7_story.html?wprss=rss_national
Warren strikes back at Obama with scathing report on trade deals
“Sen. Elizabeth Warren Monday issued a report slamming U.S. trade deals, citing “decades of broken promises,” about enforcing fair labor standards. Warren, D-Mass., has been one of the more outspoken Democratic critics of international trade deals and the report comes as the Senate prepares to vote on a bill that would give President Obama “fast track” authority to sign off on new trade deals. The 15-page report, which includes three pages of citations, takes apart claims and promises by the Obama administration and proponents of trade deals that the agreements bring about increased enforcement of labor standards. “This analysis reveals that the rhetoric has not matched the reality,” the report concludes. “There have been widespread enforcement problems and flaws that prevent enforcement of the labor provisions of these free trade agreements.”…”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/warren-strikes-back-at-obama-with-scathing-report-on-trade-deals/article/2564666?custom_click=rss
Warren disputes Obama’s promises on trade deal
“Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is taking another swing at President Obama on trade, this time arguing the president’s promises to protect workers are mostly talk. The liberal lawmaker issued a staff report on Monday morning contending that while policymakers frequently argue that trade agreements come packed with robust worker protections, the reality does not live up to the rhetoric. The criticism comes amid an aggressive push by the president and his Cabinet to sell congressional lawmakers, especially wary liberal Democrats, on the far-reaching importance of a sweeping Pacific Rim trade deal. The president has been touting the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as the “most progressive trade deal in history,” while Warren argues that, despite similar claims from Democratic and Republican administrations over the years, enforcement of labor standards has been lax, driving down working conditions across the globe and dragging American workers down as well. “Again and again, proponents of free trade agreements claim that this time, a new trade agreement has strong and meaningful protections,” the Warren report states. “Again and again, those protections prove unable to stop the worst abuses.” The report marks the latest rally as Obama and Warren go publicly and bitingly back and forth on the issue of trade…”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/trade/242363-warren-disputes-obamas-promises-on-trade-deal
Elizabeth Warren fires new shot in trade battle with President Obama
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/elizabeth-warren-barack-obama-trade-battle-tpp-118057.html
Elizabeth Warren: You Can’t Trust Barack Obama’s Promises
“After President Barack Obama called out Elizabeth Warren for being a politician “like everybody else,” the Massachusetts senator is calling out the president, suggesting you can’t trust his promises. Warren released a 15-page report Monday saying the United States had failed to enforce labor and environmental standards for two decades in previous trade agreements. A statement from her office noted Obama recently promised the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will be “the most progressive trade bill in history” and will have “higher labor standards, higher environmental standards,” and “new tools to hold countries accountable.” Warren’s rebuttal amounts to: That’s what they always say. “Supporters of past trade agreements have said again and again that these deals would include strong protections for workers, but assurances without strong enforcement are just empty promises,” she said in a statement. “The facts show that, despite all the promises, these trade deals were just another tool to tilt the playing field in favor of multinational corporations and against working families.” Warren’s salvo comes as the Senate debates whether to give this president — and the next — fast-track trade authority to get up-or-down votes on trade agreements, with Asia and Europe on deck…”
http://blogs.rollcall.com/white-house/elizabeth-warren-cant-trust-barack-obamas-promises/?dcz=
AFL-CIO president: Bad trade deal is worse than no deal
“National AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka says a bad deal is worse than no deal, and he urged Congress not to support fast-track legislation that would let President Barack Obama pursue a trade deal between a dozen Pacific Rim nations. Trumka spoke Monday at a news conference about 10 miles from Nike Inc. headquarters in Oregon, the spot where Obama recently defended the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trumka said he’s in the state for an organizing summit, and it’s only a coincidence he was speaking near Nike. He jabbed Obama for his choice of venue. “If I were somebody who was advocating or supporting TPP or fast track, the last place I would have gone is Nike, for the number of jobs they’ve offshored, for what they’ve done to drive down the wages of every Oregonian and everybody else.” Besides the United States, the accord would include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. Most business interests support the Pacific Rim deal while labor groups have said it will cost American jobs and suppress wages. The details of the partnership have not been made public. The Obama administration says such a disclosure would hurt complicated negotiations with 11 other countries. Trumka said that if the agreement is better for workers than NAFTA, as supporters claim, then let the public see it. He added that the AFL-CIO, the largest federation of unions in the United States, knows many of the details…”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/afl-cio-president-bad-trade-deal-worse-no-deal
Barack Obama’s shocking TPP paradox: Why the gargantuan trade deal undermines everything he says he cares about
The president isn’t just at odds with liberal Democrats over the trade deal. He’s also at odds with himself.
“The Democratic Party’s era of good feelings is over. After more than six years of Obama-era party discipline and general accord, Democrats are finally suffering a measure of intra-party strife as the president appeals to congress for “fast-track” authority to more or less unilaterally negotiate the still-secret terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, one of the largest trade pacts in history. A bloc of Congressional Democrats have so far stymied the president and balked at his request, and leaders of the liberal wing of the party have engaged in fairly unprecedented public dispute with President Obama. The party’s quarrel has presented Hillary Clinton with her campaign’s first big dilemma, as the former secretary of state does an ugly political dance, trying to reconcile her previously full-throated advocacy of the now-nettlesome trade agreement with the progressive revolt of the party base to whom she’s appealing in the primaries. I could now list for you the play-by-play of the party’s internecine conflict: Sen. Warren and Obama sparring, with Sen. Sherrod Brown leaping in as Warren’s tag-team partner; Blue Dogs battling their progressive party mates; and Sen. Bernie Sanders’ challenge to Clinton on the matter. But that’d be about as exciting a blow-by-blow as the Mayweather/Pacquiao fight. (Read: not very exciting at all.) No, instead we’ll look the most interesting internal battle of all: Barack Obama versus himself…”
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/18/barack_obamas_shocking_tpp_paradox_why_the_gargantuan_trade_deal_undermines_everything_he_says_he_cares_about/
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS AGAIN FIRES BACK AT WSJ ATTACKS: ‘LOOK AT TRADE RESULTS, NOT IDEOLOGY’
“Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) 80% is firing back at The Wall Street Journal for a second time this month. On this occasion, the Alabamian is responding to a WSJ editorial accusing him of “scare mongering” the fast-track trade deal before Congress and hurting the Republican cause. According to Sessions, the WSJ editors have opinions, but have failed to offer the evidence to back them up. “Your editorial ‘No-Growth Republicanism‘ (May 11) urging the adoption of fast-track trade makes many assurances of economic gains but provides no data to back them up,” Sessions wrote in a letter to the editor published Monday titled “Look at Trade Results, Not Ideology.” The editorial to which Sessions is responding attacks his reasons for opposing the trade deals and attacks the senator as anti-growth. “This wing of the party opposes immigration and thus turns away thousands of the world’s brains who want to be American. It opposes trade because it fears the U.S. can’t compete. And it wants to use tax policy not to promote faster growth but to tilt the tax code to help Republican constituencies,” the WSJ editorial read. “This is no way to rebuild a conservative majority.” Sessions fired back Monday, stressing that the effect of recent trade deals on Americans require greater skepticism of future deals. “Years of rising trade deficits and job losses demand greater scrutiny of new trade deals, not less. Fast track will dramatically reduce Congress’s power over the new Trans-Pacific Partnership, as well as any other yet-unseen trade agreements over the next six years. No lawmaker can amend any provision, enforce any violation or apply the 60-vote threshold used for significant legislative matters (let alone the 67 votes for treaties),” Sessions wrote Monday…”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/18/sen-jeff-sessions-again-fires-back-at-wsj-attacks-look-at-trade-results-not-ideology/
SANTORUM SLAMS TRADE DEAL: OBAMA ‘BETRAYED AMERICANS, NOT WORTHY OF OUR TRUST’
“Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum told senior political writer for Breitbart News Mathew Boyle that he plans on making an announcement on May 27 in a small town just north of Pittsburgh, a few miles away from where he grew up. Presumably, the announcement, scheduled at a manufacturing facility–a cherished symbol of the blue collar conservatism that the two term senator champions—will be that Santorum is running for president of the United States in 2016. In 2012, Santorum ran for president as a social conservative. Although he won eleven states, including the Iowa caucus, and came in second overall, he eventually lost the primary election to Mitt Romney, who was looked on as a man of the wealthy rather than a man of the workers. Santorum, appearing on Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot radio, channel 125, told guest host Boyle that he believes America can get back manufacturing jobs. He outlined a five point strategy to resuscitate manufacturing in America: First, cutting corporate tax rates. Second, limiting regulations on business that he contends are “onerous” thanks to the Obama administration. Third, America needs to keep its energy costs low, especially when it comes to natural gas. Fourth, Santorum explained we need our trade laws to open up opportunities for America to ship its products unencumbered by tariffs. Also, we must guarantee foreign countries are complying with our trade laws. Finally, America needs those who don’t go to college to receive specialized training so that manufacturers get the workforce they need…”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/18/santorum-slams-trade-deal-obama-betrayed-americans-not-worthy-of-our-trust/
REP. DAVE BRAT: TRADE DEAL, AMNESTY ATTEMPT IN NDAA: ‘A SLAP IN THE FACE’
“Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA) says he’ll oppose giving President Obama fast track trade authority. On The John Fredericks’ Show, Brat said Obama’s push for fast-track trade authority is similar to the efforts Obama used to pass through immigration amnesty, calling them rushed processes that occur behind closed doors without public debate. “Debate is a very healthy thing… We need to debate and show where the pressure points are on these arguments, [but] we can’t do that. [Instead] I have to go down to a security bunker– and I have been in there to read the bill– and it’s 400 pages,” Brat said. “What am I going to do? Memorize that and then arrange the key points in my head? And then part of it’s classified and you don’t know what you can even mention to your fellow members or not that haven’t read it yet beca