The Senate voted 96 to 3 Thursday to prohibit members of Congress from using non-public information for personal financial gain but beat back a slew of amendments to further limit congressional perks.

The Senate action puts pressure on House Republicans to pass similar legislation to quell allegations of congressional self-dealing at a time when Congress’s approval rating is at an all-time low.

(more…)

WASHINGTON (AP) – Aware that most Americans would like to dump them all, members of Congress hope to regain some sense of trust by subjecting themselves to tougher penalties for insider trading and requiring they disclose stock transactions within 30 days.

A procedural vote Monday would allow the Senate later this week to pass a bill prohibiting members of Congress from using nonpublic information for their own personal benefit or “tipping” others to inside information that they could trade on.

(more…)

As the Tea Party looks to codify and push its 2012 legislative and electoral agendas, a recent editorial by the Washington Examiner argues that the Tea Party would do well to make combating congressional insider trading its marquee legislative issue.

In a piece titled, “Tea Party ‘Outsiders’ Should Raise Hell About Insider Trading by Lawmakers,” the Washington Examiner’s editorial board argues that regardless of what happens with bills like the STOCK (Stop Trading On Congressional Knowledge) Act or the recently introduced RESTRICT (Restoring Ethical Standards, Transparency, and Responsibility in Congressional Trading) Act, Tea Party members of Congress can still take action by bringing complaints to the Ethics Committee.

From the Washington Examiner:

[Members of Congress] and members of their staffs are free to make millions on information they get by virtue of being in Congress, whether ordinary citizens like it or not.

That doesn’t mean, however, that complaints cannot be brought against them with the House and Senate ethics authorities for abusing the public trust or creating the appearance of conflicts of interest. And that raises an interesting question, particularly for Tea Party members of Congress: Why haven’t they filed such complaints, if for no other reason than to further highlight the hypocrisy of congressional ethics enforcement? Dozens of those Republicans who were elected in 2010, supposedly as “outsiders,” have been strangely quiet on this issue. What other issue more effectively illustrates the need to, as Schweizer pungently puts it, throw them all out and rid Congress of the stench of corruption?

Tea Party Republicans in Congress have also expressed frustration at their inability to reform federal spending, debt and entitlements. Their impatience is understandable, but the Constitution wisely forces reform movements like the Tea Party to win successive elections. Doing that requires continuously reminding voters of what must be done to fix things. Filing ethics complaints and publicizing them at every opportunity would serve that purpose admirably.

What’s more, writes the Examiner, the delays–some would say foot-dragging–over the complexities and intricacies of banning congressional insider trading are just that: dilatory tactics designed to muddle the issue and whisk it under the national carpet.

(more…)

Mitt Romney’s weekend interview in the Wall Street Journal seems to add weight to conservative doubts about his candidacy.

Romney doesn’t seem to get it: the 2012 election is about the size and cost of government.

We already have a “smart” president with ambitious plans who thinks he knows better. That hasn’t worked for our economy, and has damaged trust in our democracy.

Romney says “America doesn’t need a manager,” but his plans reflect what the Journal euphemistically calls “positive technocratic thinking.”

Though Romney may be more “sober” than his rival Newt Gingrich (or, less charitably, more timid than the former Speaker), he evidently shares with Gingrich an enthusiasm for what the federal government could do, if only he were put in control.

Given that Ron Paul’s radical foreign policy is a non-starter, and that several other candidates–however well-meaning–could not manage the mundane task of qualifying for the Virginia ballot, or withstand the media scrutiny of a long campaign, Republicans are feeling new doubts about the current field.

They are all better than Obama; the question is–are they the best Republicans can offer?

As Republicans have wrestled with that question, a few have floated the idea of a “brokered convention,” at which the party’s nominee would be chosen through back-room negotiations and contested ballots instead of the pro forma roll calls of recent decades.

Given Romney’s struggle to provide the clear alternative to Obama that Americans so desperately need, the party should consider whether a brokered convention is feasible as a fallback option.

Here, then, are the top ten Republicans who could be nominated at a brokered convention. Some declined to run earlier, and should reconsider; all would provide a stronger contrast to President Obama than Romney or Gingrich is providing at the moment.

***

10. Rep. Eric Cantor

The Whip united the caucus against the disastrous stimulus in 2009. In the debt ceiling debate, he reportedly held out against new taxes in any final agreement. Moreover, he has made clear that his vision for the country’s future is plainly different from Obama’s.

***

9. Sen. Jim DeMint

The conservative stalwart has provided key support to Tea Party candidates, and has challenged the compromise politics of the Republican establishment.

***

8. Gov. Bobby Jindal

Recently elected in a landslide to a second term, he has fought political corruption and brought competence and leadership to a state long lacking both. Despite a rocky national TV debut in 2009, Jindal is a ruthless and effective campaigner.

(more…)

WASHINGTON (AP) – Capping a full retreat by House GOP leaders, Congress will convene Friday in hopes of approving a stopgap measure renewing payroll tax cuts for every worker and unemployment benefits for millions—despite serious opposition among some tea party Republicans.

Friday’s unusual session, if all goes according to plan, will send a bill to President Barack Obama to become law for two months and put off until January a fight over how to pay for the 2 percentage point tax cut, extend jobless benefits averaging around $300 a week and prevent doctors from absorbing a big cut in Medicare payments through 2012.

(more…)

From The Hill:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) says Republicans will revive and expand a bill banning insider trading by members of Congress in the first months of 2012, after he slowed the bill’s progress earlier this month.

The legislation, known as the STOCK Act, had gained momentum after a “60 Minutes” report raised questions about whether lawmakers were personally profiting from the insider information they gleaned from their jobs in the Capitol.

(more…)

From BusinessInsider:

The House Financial Services Committee canceled a scheduled “mark-up” of a bill to ban congressional insider trading last night, amid concerns that the committee’s chairman, Spencer Bachus, was moving forward with the bill to take the heat off his personal political troubles.

Bachus’ trading habits during the financial crisis were featured in a ‘60 Minutes’ profile last month as an example of potential insider trading on the part of lawmakers. He’s denied those allegations, and seized upon the trading ban — called the STOCK Act — to rebuild his image.

(more…)

While President Obama’s recent pushback on the EPA’s proposed ozone standard raised hopes among businesses and consumers – three quarters of whom now think that America is overregulated – he seems to think that he should be able to solve all his problems by eliminating one.

But last time we counted, there were ten regulations on Eric Cantor’s list of top job-destroyers, and seven on the list of billion-dollar rules that Obama sent to Speaker Boehner.

Here’s a look at some of what’s still out there:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):

The EPA’s Utility Maximum Achievable Control Technology rule (MACT) rule requires coal-fired plants to reduce emissions of particular toxic air pollutants – namely mercury emissions. As is typical with these pie-in-the-sky EPA regulations, the MACT rule would require plants to achieve standards that are not economically feasible and/or install equipment that is not commercially available.

The Utility MACT rule could force the shut down of enough coal-fired power plants to equal about 30-70 gigawatts of electricity generation nationwide, resulting in double-digit rate hikes for consumers and costly upgrades to some power plants.

The EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) will regulate emissions from coal-fueled power plants in the name of preventing polluted air to cross over from state to state.  However, the unnecessarily stringent demands and unrealistic implementation timeline are forcing plants across the country to shut down or cut back, which is predicted to stress the power grid to the point of blackouts.  Texas-based energy company Luminant announced a first wave of shutdowns and layoffs as the rule’s compliance deadline moves closer.

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB):

The Obama-appointed NLRB is backing Big Labor by leading a crusade against Boeing for opening a new plant and creating jobs in South Carolina. This is all because South Carolina is a right-to-work state where workers aren’t forced to join a union if they don’t want to.

National Mediation Board (NMB):

The NMB is the federal body that oversees labor relations in two key transportation industries – railroads and airlines.  The NMB has enacted changes to the rules that govern union organizing of air and rail workers that allow a minority of workers to vote to unionize the entire body of a company workforce, when unionization has historically required a majority vote.

(more…)

In late August House Majority Leader Eric Cantor published an open memo announcing that House Republicans would seek to block ten regulations currently being considered by various federal administrative agencies. Most of these regulations involve the Environmental Protection Agency, including ozone protection, greenhouse gas regulation, coal ash and utility pollution standards. The National Labor Relations Board is also targeted for its proposed union election rules and its attempt to block Boeing from opening a new, non-union factory in right-to-work South Carolina.

Rep. Cantor has sound reasons to target these regulations. The economic impact of any one of these ten regulations on an economy already on the brink of a double-dip recession would be severe. Some, like new emission rules for utility plants are guaranteed to increase energy costs, which would have a cascade effect on all aspects of the economy. Others, like NLRB’s Boeing decision, are bald-faced pandering to the labor interests that shower so much support on Democrats in general and President Obama in particular. Put bluntly, the targeted regulations serve special interests like unions or environmentalists at the expense of the public interest.

While having the virtue of being good policy, and probably good politics, Rep. Cantor’s strategy has the vice of treating the symptoms while ignoring the underlying cause. The larger problem with these regulations is not that these agencies are abusing their rulemaking power; the problem is that these agencies possess rulemaking power in the first place. Administrative agencies are exercising authority which properly belongs to Congress.

The Constitution is unmistakably clear. Article I, Section 1 states that “All legislative Power herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States….” If the power is legislative, and if the power is granted to the federal government by the Constitution, then the power must be exercised by Congress, and only by Congress. Congress is nowhere authorized to transfer the power to make laws to any entity. Only Congress is constitutionally empowered to make laws.

Moreover, Article I, Section 7 mandates that any action of the federal government, which has the force of law, must be enacted according to the specific process enumerated therein. Both houses must approve, and the bill must be sent to the president for his signature. His veto may be overridden, but only by a supermajority in each house. The very act of enacting rules on the part of the EPA or any other agency is thus a violation of this provision of the Constitution, because it deviates from this process.

(more…)

A lead story in Wednesday’s trade press publication E&E Daily was “Energy, fighting EPA at the core of GOP jobs agenda”. This is true, but also reveals what may be the greatest gap between Obamanomics and an approach to governance that most Republicans claim to support:

• Obama treats the energy sector like a centrally planned jobs program, putting the boot on the neck of the stuff that works while ‘creating’ politically desired but economically unsustainable positions making politically desired but economically undesirable products. Republicans argue that if wind- and solar-powered electricity, pioneered in the 1890s, work then they will work but in the meantime creating jobs in the energy sector means getting your boot off the neck of the stuff that works.
• Obama and his team have long argued that their costly regulations will actually create jobs. Of course, every program, regulation and even hurricane “creates jobs”, just not on net. The administration either doesn’t get ‘net’, or thinks you will be persuaded by ‘the seen’ and imagine there is no unseen.

EPA administrator Lisa Jackson embarked upon a campaign to advance these absurd arguments in February, arguing that, e.g., if she adopts a rule requiring you to do something costly or even prematurely destroy capital, why, you’ll have to hire someone to do it!

The WSJ accurately characterized this philosophy: “In other words, the government should harm an industry and force it to ruin working assets so maybe other people can clean up the mess.”

Obama administration “green jobs” emissary Jackson also said these will require many more new environmental regulators. Yes, she said that, risible dogma that was repeated by administration apologists as recently as this week on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show. So they aren’t giving up on it.

Except… On the Friday before this past long holiday weekend, President Obama somewhat buried a rational decision if a decision, like Thursday’s speech announcing Son of Stimulus, rooted entirely in his own political needs.

(more…)

Tonight, President Barack Obama made good on his threat to Eric Cantor to take his case “to the American people.”

The people he’s counting on most, however, are not the general public, but the small core of left-wing activists planning nationwide protests at congressional offices tomorrow.

Former “green jobs” czar Van Jones let the proverbial cat out of the bag today in a column at the Huffington Post entitled: “Tuesday: Rallies Everywhere to Save the American Dream“:

Enough is enough.

Speaker Boehner’s decision last week to walk out in the middle of negotiations with President Obama was the last straw.

The time has come — at long last — for America’s super-majority to stand up against the extreme, hostage-taking tactics of the Tea Party minority in Congress.

Tea Party Republicans would rather shred America’s safety net and also risk tanking America’s economy than raise taxes one penny on their super-wealthy donors and corporate backers.

This Tuesday at noon, everyday Americans will finally have the chance to be heard, across America, at the local offices of every member of Congress. The American Dream movement — which includes dozens of organizations and thousands of individuals who are standing up for the middle class and working class families — is calling for emergency mobilizations across the country tomorrow.

Our only chance to move the Republicans is to make sure that the dire consequences of their actions are laid directly at their feet. So with other leaders of the American Dream movement, we’re putting out an urgent call for every patriotic American to show up outside Republican congressional offices on Tuesday at noon to deliver a crucial message: “Don’t destroy the American Dream.”

Sen. McConnell’s contingency plan on the debt ceiling is to pay $2.5T to topple Obama.  And if I were 100% SURE it would end IMPOTUS, I’d support it.  But since there is no guarantee, it’s better to gird our loins and prepare to fight Obama with a no new taxes plan.

The bigger issue with McConnell is that he didn’t run his plan past the Tea Party, Boehner, and Cantor first.   Since we run the House, that means the Senate should take its cues from our riotous freshmen, whether they like it or not.

Right now, Republican Senators are the weaker sex.

What is truly awesome is that there is an easy way for Rep. Cantor to prove his Tea Party bonafides and smack Obama right back after the challenge he received:

Yesterday, House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor used colored-coded spreadsheets to detail $2 trillion in spending cuts he asserts were agreed to by the Biden group. The President asked Cantor “if he wasn’t missing a page”, meaning the revenue aspect of the Biden talks. Cantor also proposed $350 billion in additional mandatory health care spending cuts. Obama pointed out that this $350 billion still isn’t enough to get the $2.4 trillion in savings necessary to solve the debt ceiling crisis through 2012.

OMB disputed Cantor’s numbers, citing, at most, only $1.7 trillion in potential spending cuts tentatively agreed to by the Biden group. By either side’s arithmetic, negotiators are left with a $400 – $700 billion gap – a huge amount by any standard.

Then, on July 13th, Obama sent Cantor back to  the drawing board again, by actually walking out on the debt ceiling meeting.

(more…)

Someone will have to explain to me how you can simultaneously be the only adult in the room, and yet storm out of such room like a petulant teenager:

“Don’t call my bluff,” the president said. “I am not afraid to veto and I will take it to the American people.”

If Moody’s downgrades the United States, “it will be a tax increase on every American,” he said.

There needs to be a long-term debt extension, the president argued.

“This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this,” he said.

Then he abruptly ended the meeting, saying, “see you tomorrow.”

Apparently the President’s outburst was in response to a suggestion by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor that a shorter-term extension be pursued, reflecting only the $1-1.5 trillion in spending cuts that both parties have more or less coalesced around. With an annual deficit running in the range of $1.5 trillion, this would be enough for an 8-10 month extension.

The President’s reaction is understandable, I suppose, given that this would result in the need for another increase in the debt ceiling during (gasp)…an election year. All things being equal, the GOP would probably prefer to avoid this scenario as well. But if the only other viable options are default, or agreeing to a deal with the President which includes tax increases, I can understand why Cantor would put this option on the table.

(more…)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson and Ben Domenech are joined by Francis Cianfrocca to discuss the possibility of QE3, Italy, and the latest on the debt ceiling negotiations.

We’re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Related Links:

Optimism Fades As Bernanke Pulls Back QE3 Talk
Ben Bernanke: QE3 Might Be On The Table
Raw audio: Cantor describes Obama walking out of debt talks
Even If He Hadn’t Said So, We’d Know the President Is Bluffing
GOP Debt Ceiling Ace in the Hole: Obama’s Birthday Bash
Mad Men – Did you enjoy the Fuhrer’s birthday?

Follow Brad on Twitter
Follow Ben on Twitter
Follow Francis on Twitter

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson and Ben Domenech are joined by Francis Cianfrocca to talk about the latest consumer spending and savings numbers that came out this morning. Then Congressman Sean Duffy discusses debt ceiling negotiations, Democrat calls for tax hikes, and Obama’s overreach on Libya.

We’re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Related Links:

Consumers Pulling Back on Spending as Inflation Builds
Obama Tries to Salvage Debt Talks as Party Leaders Bicker Over Meaning of ‘Tax Hike’
Debt Ceiling Negotiations Break Down Over Taxes
Medicare dominates Duffy’s town hall chat
Lawmakers send Obama message of discontent on Libya
Congressman Sean Duffy

Follow Brad on Twitter
Follow Ben on Twitter
Follow Francis on Twitter
Follow Congressman Duffy on Twitter

From the Associated Press:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor pulled out of talks with Vice President Joe Biden on a deficit reduction-debt ceiling deal, saying they had reached an impasse over Democratic demands for tax increases to be paired with spending cuts wanted by the GOP.

The Virginia Republican said in a statement that the Republican-dominated House simply won’t support tax increases, and that he wouldn’t participate in the budget meeting scheduled for Thursday. Cantor said that it’s time for President Barack Obama to weigh in directly on the budget because Democrats insist on negotiating some tax increases.

(more…)

From The Hill:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) on Thursday pressured Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) to “come clean” about his Twitter controversy.

Cantor said Weiner has a responsibility to his wife and constituents to get the facts straight.

“My advice would be to come clean and clear it up. Again, perhaps he’s trying, but I know there’s a lot of explaining going on but without a lot of clarity,” he said on Fox News.

(more…)

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor turned the policy temperature down on austerity this week by rolling out a strong economic-growth agenda. Headlined by a 25 percent top tax rate for individuals and business, the Cantor package includes regulatory relief, free trade, and patent protection for entrepreneurs. It’s job creation and the economy, stupid.

Sounds Reaganesque? Well, Eric Cantor has a lot of Reagan blood in him. Back in 1980, while Cantor was still in high school, his father was the Virginia state treasurer of the Ronald Reagan presidential campaign. So the apple never falls far from the tree.

In fact, it looks like Cantor is restoring the supply-side incentive model of economic growth. Forget tax-the-rich class warfare. Throw out wild-eyed government-spending stimulus and dollar-depreciating Fed money-pumping. Make it pay more after tax to work, produce, and invest. Go for a growth spurt, something the economy badly needs. And — my thought — crown such a growth strategy with a stable King Dollar re-linked to gold.

When I interviewed Cantor this week, he made it clear that faster economic growth was crucial to holding down spending, deficits, and debt. As scored by the CBO, every 1 percent of faster growth lowers the budget gap by nearly $3 trillion from lower spending and higher revenues. “Grow the economy,” Cantor said. “It will help us manage-down the deficit and it will help get people back to work.”

This is not to say that spending cuts and structural entitlement reforms aren’t necessary. They are. But it is to argue that lately the GOP has forgotten the growth component that is so essential to spending restraint and deficit reduction.

(more…)

The Democratic Party should be ashamed of itself. Today its members proved themselves to be nothing but partisan hacks who care more about party politics than doing the right thing. While President Obama’s speech regarding Middle East generated much criticism from Republicans, on the Democratic side, even amongst supporters of the Jewish State, there was either positive spin or total silence.

As you know by now the President today gave an address to the nation that for all intents and purposes threw one of our closest allies, Israel, under the proverbial bus.  His public call for Israel to retreat to the 1949 armistice lines, broke existing agreements that the United States had made with Israel, probably hurt the quest for an Israeli/Palestinian deal and quite possibly moved the region closer to a new Middle East war.

That 1949 armistice line was created solely because that’s Israeli and Arab forces stopped fighting at the end of the War of Independence (with some added adjustments in certain sectors). It was if the whistle blew and everyone dropped their gear. The line people call 1967 border, is really only a military line. It was never intended for the Armistice lines to mark final borders, and there is plenty of documentation to that fact.

There is not much doubt that at the end of a deal, the two parties will exist with borders somewhere near that armistice border. In fact Israel has offered specific maps of final borders along the lines of what the President said publicly today, once under the Premierships of Ehud Barak the other under Ehud Olmert (in both of those cases the Palestinian leadership rejected the offer).

The difference is that in both of those cases, The return to those”1967 borders” was  the end point of negotiations, yesterday Obama severely damaged Israel’s negotiating position by making it the staring point.

(more…)

I recently had the opportunity to ask Michigan’s 1st District Freshman Rep. Dan Benishek a few questions about the state of affairs in Congress in the wake of the battle between Speaker Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Reid, and President Obama over what to do with the budget for the remainder of the fiscal year. What follows are his responses, and a brief wrap at the close.

[Lead in to Rep. Benishek]
The debate over the budget for the remainder of this year was very contentious. There’s been a tremendous amount of pressure; from the media, to the President and the Democrats (including a great deal of rancor within the Republican caucus itself), the Continuing Resolution (H.R. 1473) to fund the Government through September 30 had the attention of the entire country.

Many people have been very critical of Speaker Boehner and the process that got this deal done as well as what it actually contains. A great deal of attention has been paid to this fight by Tea Party folks and many others. A lot of Americans, both left AND right, believe they were “played” by Leadership on both sides of the aisle – sold a bill of goods filled with what we once called “fuzzy math” – and they are not happy. But the vote is done now, the bill has passed, and we’re moving ahead.

Q: In 2010 Americans sent a lot of new faces to Washington to change the direction of the country. Right now, people are feeling they’ve been sold out. Were they?

Congressman Benishek: People should not feel sold out. They can be frustrated. I am frustrated that the cuts were not bigger, but we have to remember Democrats still control the Senate and White House. I believe the Speaker did the best he could with the resources he had. I was not directly involved in negotiating with President Obama and Senator Reid, but I can tell you that as long as I am given the opportunity to vote for significant reductions in spending, I will be a “Yea” vote every time.

Q: What happened, how are you going to handle negotiations differently going forward, and what do we all need to be paying closer attention to?

(more…)