JOHN BOEHNER

As the Obama administration presses ahead with the health care law, officials are bracing for the possibility that a federal judge in Virginia will soon reject its central provision as unconstitutional and, in the worst case for the White House, halt its enforcement until higher courts can rule….Virginia’s attorney general, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, a Republican who filed the Richmond lawsuit, argues that if Judge Hudson rejects the insurance requirement he should instantly invalidate the entire act on a nationwide basis.

Mr. Cuccinelli and the plaintiffs in the Florida case, who include attorneys general or governors from 20 states, have emphasized that Congressional bill writers did not include a ‘severability clause’ that would explicitly protect other parts of the sprawling law if certain provisions were struck down.  An earlier version of the legislation, which passed the House last November, included severability language.  But that clause did not make it into the Senate version, which ultimately became law.  A Democratic aide who helped write the bill characterized the omission as an oversight.

Without such language, the Supreme Court, through its prior rulings, essentially requires judges to try to determine whether Congress would have enacted the rest of a law without the unconstitutional provisions....Lawyers for Virginia have sought to turn one of the federal government’s arguments on its head.  They note that the health law explicitly refers to the insurance requirement as ‘an essential part’ of the act’s regulatory scheme, and that Justice Department lawyers — in pressing their point that the law permissibly regulates commerce — have called it the ‘linchpin.’  If it is so essential, Virginia’s lawyers have asked, why should a judge believe that Congress intended for the rest of the act to stand without it?  

Any illusion that the cases are not highly politicized was lost when Republican leaders raced this month to file friend-of-the-court briefs in Pensacola, and Democrats responded with briefs from state legislators and supportive economists.  Among the Republicans intervening in the case are Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the future speaker; 32 United States senators; and Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a possible presidential candidate.

If the phrase ‘inside the beltway’ has ever been more of a way to disparage a Washington out-of-touch with the rest of the country, it's hard to remember when.  Which helps to explain why Republicans have made it a point to consistently emphasize that they're getting their ideas not from within the political hothouse of Washington, but from the grassroots, including the Tea Party movement.  They know voters don't like it when they think their politicians are ignoring them which in American history happens with regularity.  In that vein, House Speaker Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) is scheduled to host on Wednesday what his office is calling a summit for new Republican governors.

Boehner wants to harness ideas and reformist passions from GOP governors to reduce spending, weed out earmarks, and pick apart the health care law, as well as evaluate the effectiveness of stimulus spending and find ways to block or return obligated stimulus funds that haven't been spent.

Boehner's office says he envisions a collaborative effort with the Republican governors that will be similar to one that resulted in pushing through the 1996 welfare reforms. GOP governors played a big role in the Newt Gingrich-led 1995 Congress, fashioning a welfare reform compromise that President Clinton eventually signed….Of the governors who will attend, two were part of the GOP-led Congress that pressed a center-right reformist agenda in 1995-96 – Kasich and Brownback. Branstad was governor of Iowa at the time and also contributed to Republican reforms enacted by the 104th Congress.

It’s now been five days since White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs confirmed that President Obama supports “an outright ban on earmarks” after questions were raised as to whether that was in fact the case.  Unfortunately, the president has yet to call on Democratic Leaders to follow House and Senate Republicans in adopting an earmark ban in the 112^th Congress.  Of course, it’s not hard to decipher the president’s hesitation, what with Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) offering “no apologies” for his support of earmarking as we know it.  For her part, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has fallen silent on earmarks despite declaring in July 2006, “‘I’d get rid of all of them.  None of them is worth the skepticism, the cynicism the public has . … and the fiscal irresponsibility of it.”

Under the headline “Earmark foes pressure Obama,” The Washington Times reports on how “newly emboldened earmark foes are calling on President Obama to back up his opposition to pork-barrel spending with action”:

“‘The president really is the lynchpin in all of this,’ said Steve Ellis, vice president of government watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. ‘He can talk to the Senate Democrats and say, 'Hey, it's not like I'm telling you to do something I didn't do when I was in the Senate.' So he has a bit of the moral high ground there.’ … The president has been less interested in standing up to lawmakers when it comes to pork barrel spending projects - despite vowing to crack down on them during his 2008 campaign.”

Meanwhile, support for an earmark ban continues to roll in from editorial boards around the country:

• Bismarck Tribune: “End the abuse of earmarks.  As a new leaf turns in our nation’s capital, let’s take politics out of earmarks and aggressively trim unnecessary federal spending, the kind that benefits limited numbers of people or entities. … Let’s begin the restoration of better ethics, better government.” (Editorial, 11/22/10) 
• Longmont (CO) Times-Call: “Listen to voters, ban the earmarks. … And whatever spending prerogatives they would lose with a ban is outweighed by what American citizens gain in a less corruptible and wasteful system of federal spending.  That’s part of what American voters said they wanted earlier this month. They deserve to have it.” (Editorial, 11/19/10) 
• Culpeper Star-Exponent: Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA “understands now is the time to work across party lines to restore fiscal sanity and forge a new direction.  A moratorium on earmarks, which Cantor has pushed for since 2006, is a promising start.” (Editorial, 11/21/10) 
• Appleton (WI) Post-Crescent: “The time has come for all of Congress to banish earmark spending from its legislation.  At least, that’s what the voters have said.” ( Editorial, 11/19/10) 
• Dallas Morning News: “Here’s a bit of good news for budget hawks.  Congress actually may be getting serious about restricting earmarks, spending measures that mysteriously turn up in bills for sometimes dubious projects.” (Editorial, 11/19/10) 

Republicans are listening to the people and standing firm on the need to take this and other critical steps to restore public trust.  Shortly after House Republicans adopted an earmark ban for the 112th Congress, Speaker-designate John Boehner said, “This earmark ban shows the American people we are listening and we are dead serious about ending business as usual in Washington.”  It’s now up to President Obama to prove his support for an earmark ban is serious, and not just post-election me-tooism designed to make up for nearly two years of runaway spending.   

Republicans are listening to the people and standing firm on the need to take this and other critical steps to restore public trust.  Shortly after House Republicans adopted an earmark ban for the 112th Congress, Speaker-designate John Boehner said, “This earmark ban shows the American people we are listening and we are dead serious about ending business as usual in Washington.”  It’s now up to President Obama to prove his support for an earmark ban is serious, and not just post-election me-tooism designed to make up for nearly two years of runaway spending.   

“Ms. Pelosi also spoke out against earmarking billions of dollars for home-state projects, a practice she calls a ‘monster’ that hurts Congress.  If she becomes speaker in the next Congress, she says, she would press to severely reduce earmarks. ‘Personally, myself, I'd get rid of all of them,’ she says.” (The Wall Street Journal, 7/13/06, A4)

Republicans in both the Senate and the House of Representatives have now forsworn earmarks as they eye large spending cuts in the coming year…Though earmarks account for less than one half of a percent of the federal budget, they have become a symbol of wasteful spending for many grassroots Tea Party activists who helped Republicans win big in the November 2 elections.  ‘I think it shows that this conference is serious about doing what it said we were going to be about -- limited government, spending reduction, dealing with the national debt,’ said newly elected Republican Senator Marco Rubio.

One day after Republicans challenged them to reject earmarks, Senate Democrats huddled behind closed doors Wednesday and held a ‘long discussion’ on the practice as part of a larger debate over how to balance the federal budget and erase mounting debt...But most Democrats defend the practice of funneling federal dollars to pet projects in their home states.

Q: And real quick on the earmarks, on the earmarks.  I know Obama has come out up front a lot on this, but does he want an outright ban on earmarks?

MR. GIBBS: Yes.

Q: He does?

MR. GIBBS: Yes.

Yesterday afternoon, Leader Boehner met with parents of students enrolled in the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program (DC OSP), which provides children in low-income families access to a quality education.  Boehner, a former chairman of the House Education & the Workforce Committee, reaffirmed his commitment to renewing the DC OSP despite concerted efforts by education reform opponents to end the program.  The parents and advocates thanked Leader Boehner for his faithful support and for standing by these children who have been given a second chance.

The meeting came more than a year after education reform opponents in Washington first tried to terminate this successful scholarship program.  A sustained outcry from D.C. parents and residents eventually prompted the Obama Administration to allow students already receiving scholarships to use them until they graduated from high school.  Still, the Obama Administration announced its intent to phase out the program. by denying any new participants, and 216 students who had been slated to receive scholarships for the 2009-10 school year had those awards taken away.

Throughout this Congress, Leader Boehner has worked with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Rep. John Kline (R-MN), the Education & Labor Committee’s senior Republican member, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the Ranking Member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and other supporters of the program to save it from termination.  These efforts will continue in the 112th Congress, and with good reason.  A congressionally-mandated evaluation of the DC OSP concluded that the program has been a success for children and parents alike.  Students who were offered a scholarship – whether they use it during some or all of their elementary and secondary years – are significantly more likely to graduate from high school.  Parents of scholarship recipients are more satisfied with their educational choices.  Injecting competition resulted in D.C. schools improving its outreach efforts to help families become more engaged in their children’s education.

Education reform opponents now have an important choice to make: will they continue to stand with their special interest allies, or will they join us in helping to ensure more of Washington, D.C.’s most vulnerable students can obtain a quality education?

(House Republican Leader John Boehner meets with parents of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program students and advocates of the program.  Official House Republican Conference photo by Ryan Howell)

Republicans might not pursue as many of the symbolic resolutions that traditionally dominate the congressional schedule, the No. 2 House Republican said Monday…. The elimination of many of the symbolic votes could significantly free up the House schedule.  Votes on those resolutions are fairly routine, and in the first day of the lame-duck Congress, the House has scheduled three such measures for a vote: ‘Recognizing Gail Abarbanel and the Rape Treatment Center,’ ‘Honoring the 30th Anniversary of the Bayh-Dole Act,’ and ‘Recognizing and honoring the 50th anniversary of Ruby Bridges desegregating a previously all-white public elementary school.’

Just as we've shielded members from tough votes, we've also enabled them to write bad bills.  With all the challenges facing our nation, it is absurd that Congress spends so much time on naming post offices, congratulating sports teams, and celebrating the birthdays of historical figures.  Now, I know the drill: members get good press opportunities back home and leaders get cover while stalling on the people's priorities.  But often these resolutions are poorly drafted, or duplicative of previously considered bills.  And under both parties they've received little or no oversight.  It's my view that we should consider taking all these commemorative moments and special honors, and handle them during special orders and one-minute speeches.  It's time to focus on doing what we were sent here to do.

Another thing Mr. Boehner seeks to do is loosen the rules that govern the debate of bills, and would allow more substantive amendments to be offered by members, which would Mr. Boehner argued would make for higher quality legislation and a more fair process. But adding scads of amendments to bills would almost certainly lengthen the already-not-terribly-expeditious bill-making process, a problem one of the guests at the well-attended speech raised.  ‘Yes, it takes more time,’ Mr. Boehner said, but added this would be offset if the House ’were not sitting around naming post offices’ during business hours.

• President Obama has yet to call on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) or Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to join Republicans in voting on an earmark ban for the 112th Congress.  (Note that the standard here is not even whether he supports an outright ban, but whether he supports holding simple up-or-down votes to determine whether to impose a ban.)
  
  
• The Obama Administration won’t commit to vetoing any spending measures this year that include earmarks, which the president said just hours ago “we can’t afford during these tough economic times.”

We are going to do everything we can to repeal and replace the health care bill.  This is a job-killing law.  We know that from the Congressional Budget Office, we know that from Suffolk University, both of whom said 780,000 jobs can be lost.  Let’s get health care reform that doesn’t cost jobs and can bend down the cost curve.  This new law does neither of that.

One of the most fundamental ideas in the new health law is that employers should offer health insurance to their workers, or else they would have to pay a penalty, beginning in 2014.  The fear has been that many businesses would opt for ‘or else,’ leaving their workers searching for coverage....Twenty percent [of small businesses] - one-fifth - told Mercer they are ‘likely’ to stop offering health plans once people have the option of buying insurance from state-run exchanges, virtual marketplaces.

From the moment last week’s election results were in, it was clear that Democrats – rendered tone deaf by denial – did not receive the message sent by millions of Americans.  And in an op-ed in today’s USA Today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) confirms that Democrats still aren’t listening to the American people who are demanding a smaller, less costly and more accountable government focused on helping our economy create jobs.   While Speaker Pelosi claims credit for Democrats’ many “accomplishments” over the past four years, the facts show that Democrats’ policies have destroyed jobs, failed to lower health care costs, and failed to stop Washington Democrats’ out-of-control spending spree:

SPEAKER PELOSI: “President Obama and this Congress were job creators from Day One, saving the country from the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression.” 

• FACT: The most recent Department of Labor jobs report shows that the unemployment rate remains stuck at a woefully high 9.6 percent – marking the 15th straight month in which the unemployment rate was at or above 9.5 percent, the longest stretch since the Great Depression.  

SPEAKER PELOSI: “Our Democratic members took tough votes to support America’s working families.” 

• FACT:  Before Congress adjourned for the fall, House Democrats “refused to vote on the tax cuts…fear[ing] they would endure Republicans’ charge that they had voted to raise taxes on some small businesses.”  (The New York Times, 11/9/10).  And now, Democrats’ failure to stop the tax hikes has left America’s small businesses hamstrung – unable to plan for the future or hire new workers.  “[U]ncertainty over  where taxes rates will fall has some business owners stalled, said Mike Sullivan, president and co-owner of Southeast Sealing Inc. … ‘How do you budget for something you don’t know’ Sullivan asked. ‘You can't. The easiest thing to do for a guy who doesn’t know what to do is to not do anything different.’ That means not hiring. Sullivan, for one, said he’s not budging off his 20-employee workforce... ‘It’s taking away from what you could do,’ he said. ‘You’re almost afraid to hire people.’” (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11/10/10)

SPEAKER PELOSI: “We are proud to have passed historic health insurance reform that includes a Patient’s Bill of Rights to lower health costs and improve quality.” 

• FACT: Last week, AARP, one of the most prominent backers of ObamaCare, notified its employees that their “health care premiums will increase by eight percent to 13 percent next year” in part because of the law, adding that “it’s changing copayments and deductibles to avoid a 40 percent tax on high-cost health plans” that will take effect under ObamaCare. (The Associated Press, 11/4/10)  Last month, Boeing also announced that it would raise health care costs for its employees, citing ObamaCare “as part of the reason it is asking some 90,000 nonunion workers to pay significantly more for their health plan next year.” (The Associated Press, 10/18/10) Major U.S. employer 3M has had to shut retirees out of its health care program as a result of ObamaCare, and several other employers, including McDonalds, required waivers from the law to be able to continue offering coverage to part-time and low-wage workers. 

SPEAKER PELOSI: “We did all of this while restoring fiscal discipline to the Congress by making the pay-as-you-go rules the law of the land.” 

• FACT: Under President Obama’s watch, Democrats have added more than $3 trillion to the nation’s debt, in part by skirting their own phony pay-as-you-go rules by declaring billions of dollars in government spending an “emergency.”  Earlier this year, ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported that Democrats had spent $230 billion in “emergency” spending after the pay-go rule was instituted, including $20 billion for highway construction and $15 million in aid to the Congo.