FedUpUSA

Archive for the ‘Senate’ Category

Unreal.

I am sitting here watching Senator Coburn on the floor of the Senate speaking the truth that I brought up yesterday with the Boehner bill (and Reid’s too) – that they’re scams.

That there are no cuts.

The claim of “cuts” is a lie.

This path will lead to a credit downgrade and ultimately bankruptcy.

He’s not pulling his punches – at all.  And Kerry is trying to argue against fixing the problem and that “we need more time.”

Well, no, we don’t.  We’ve had four years since the crisis became emergent.  Both House and Senate have refused to deal with the issues.  The Senate hasn’t even passed a budget for the last two years!

Sorry Kerry, your side has had the gavel and yet your answer is simply to print up more hot checks and lard up the debt.  It’s a scam and a fraud.

(Click to Play Video)

I didn’t think I’d heard someone speak the truth in the Senate or House – that they were all liars.

Well, thus far – all but one.

Thank you Senator Coburn.

THE BANKS ARE BANKRUPT!

From yesterday’s Foreclosuregate hearing… selected bits and pieces…. the really, really important ones.

– more than three years ago.

Of course, we do not intend that Zero Hedge should become a center of excellence for the review of obscure Senate rules, but, as a consequence of the full-court-press-rush to pass the health care bill, this was too interesting not to reprint:

Under Senate Rule XXII, “a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules… the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the Senators present and voting” to end debate. Yet there were only 60 votes for cloture on the Reid bill. So unless there is some basis for giving special treatment to rules changes that are buried into other legislation, it would seem that either a) cloture was not achieved, or b) the entrenchment provisions do not actually alter the Senate rules.

Woops.

I’m told that a fine point of distinction means that Reid’s entrenchment clauses were blessed by a Senate parliamentarian with respect to the 60 needed.  I suppose one needs to be far more versed in the minutia of Senate procedure than an honest citizen could claim to be.

UPDATE:

Here was DeMint on the topic yesterday:

The entire thing is worth watching, but here is our favorite part:

DEMINT: and so the language you see in this bill that specifically refers to a change in a rule is not a rule change, it’s a procedure change?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER: that is correct.

Either way the process continues:

Senate Democrats cleared the last 60-vote hurdle on U.S. President Barack Obama’s healthcare overhaul on Wednesday, virtually ensuring final passage of its version of the biggest health policy changes in four decades.

From Dow Jones:

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)–The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a short-term $290 billion extension in the nation’s debt ceiling, delaying a decision until February about a larger increase in the borrowing cap.

The vote comes less than a week after House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) said he intended to seek a $1.8 trillion increase in the ceiling to support federal government borrowing through 2010.

A decision was made to seek the more modest increase after it became clear the larger increase may have failed to win support in the Senate.

The Senate must still take up the two month increase, which it is expected to do next week.

House lawmakers voted by a razor thing margin of 218-214 to pass the borrowing increase. On most major pieces of legislation, 218 votes are required for approval in the House.

Not a single Republican lawmaker voted to support the hike. They argued that increasing the debt ceiling was giving the Democratic majority and the Obama administration a license to spend more money.

The increase in the debt limit raises the total debt the federal government can hold to $12.394 billion from $12.104 billion.

Treasury officials have warned the current cap will shortly be hit, requiring the ceiling to be increased.

Increasing the debt ceiling is largely symbolic as the public debt is the accumulation of past deficits, or money already spent.

But were the U.S. to breach its debt limit, it would default on its obligations, potentially lose its prized top-shelf credit rating and have to pay significantly higher interest to its creditors

Such a scenario, albeit an extremely unlikely one, would have tremendous ramifications for the wider financial markets.

The federal budget deficit reached historic levels of $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2009. Through the first two months of fiscal 2010, the government is on pace to surpass that level.

No sooner did Jeff Merkley announce his opposition to Bernanke ahead of tomorrow’s reconfirmation farce/hearing, than key Republican Senator John McCain said that he was leaning against voting for the the Chairman. McCain said he would favor either former Fed Chief (and apparently only sane economist in the Administration) Paul Volcker, or ex-Treasury official, and creator of negative implied interest rates, John Taylor.

Some more from Dow Jones:

McCain joins at least two other Republicans who plan to oppose Bernanke’s renomination. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) has also said he opposes Bernanke’s renomination.Despite this, Bernanke is widely expected to be approved by the Senate for a second term. The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to hold a confirmation vote on Bernanke Thursday morning.A spokeswoman for the panel said there is no way for a member to delay Thursday’s vote. Other Senate committees, like the Judiciary Committee, allow members to delay a vote by a week.

The logical political implications of this move are material: should Democrats be unable to maintain their majority hold after the upcoming mid-term elections, the populist tide against the Fed will be a substantial pent up force in 2011. How that would shape the org chart of the Fed subsequently is still unknown but it likely would not be in favor of the Man of the Year.

I guess we know who the ‘mystery’ Republican is that is joining with Bernie Sanders to block Bernanke’s re-confirmation.  You know when the far left and the far right agree on something so passionately, hell must’ve frozen over.  In reality, it is just that these two Senators seem to understand the giant fraud and the illegalities perpetrated by the Federal Reserve upon the American public. 

Take a minute to call Senator Bunning and Senator Sanders and tell them thank you for actually standing up for the rule of law and attempting to protect the American people.  

Senator Bunning:  202-224-4343 DC office

Senator Sander’s DC Office:  (202) 224-5141

And we now have another Senator, Jim DeMint, who also will join with Bunning and Sanders in placing Bernanke’s confirmation on hold – specifically, Senator DeMint wants no action taken until S604 is passed to audit the Federal Reserve in full (its sister Bill, HR 1207 appears to be poised to pass the house).

Senator DeMint’s DC Office:  202-224-6121

While you’re at it, you might want to call the members of the Senate Banking Committee and tell them to vote NO on re-confirming Bernanke.

Christopher J. Dodd Chairman (D-CT) 202-224-1083
Richard C. Shelby Ranking Member (R-AL) 202-224-3416
Tim Johnson (D-SD) 202-228-5765
Robert F. Bennett (R-UT) 202-228-1168
Jack Reed (D-RI) 202-224-4680
Jim Bunning (R-KY) 202-228-1373
Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) 202-228-3027
Mike Crapo (R-ID) 202-228-1375
Evan Bayh (D-IN) 202-228-1377
Bob Corker (R-TN) 202-228-0566
Robert Menendez (D-NJ) 202-228-2197
Jim DeMint (R-SC) 202-228-5143
Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) 202-224-2126
David Vitter (R-LA) 202-228-5061
Sherrod Brown (D-OH) 202-228-6321
Mike Johanns (R-NE) 202-228-0436
Jon Tester (D-MT) 202-224-8594
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) 202-224-0776
Herb Kohl (D-WI) 202-224-9787
Judd Gregg (R-NH) 202-224-4952
Mark Warner (D-VA) 202-224-6295
Jeff Merkley (D-OR) 202-228-3997
Michael Bennet (D-CO) 202-228-5036