More Senate Dems Oppose Exec. Order On Gov't Contractors; House Dems Voting Progressive Agenda

Today in Washington, D.C. - May 12, 2011:
Yesterday, the Senate voted 96-0 to confirm Arenda L. Wright Allen, for US District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia. At 1 PM the Senate will consider the nomination of Michael Urbanski to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Virginia. Following up to an hour of debate, there will be a roll call vote on the nomination.

This morning, Senate Republicans went to the White House to explain to the president how something serious must be done with the debt if the debt ceiling is to be raised. Senate Democrats met at the White House yesterday.

Yesterday, every Republican and 28 Democrats in the U.S. House voted (235-163) to speed permitting of offshore oil and gas drilling by setting more stringent timelines for the Interior Department to respond to permit applications. The bill may have trouble in the Senate where Democrats are intent on shutting down access to oil and gas drilling in America.

The House Armed Services Committee voted (33-27) Wednesday to delay President Barack Obama's policy allowing gays to serve openly in the military. The amendment by Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr. (R-CA), a military veteran, would require all four service chiefs to certify that the change won't hurt readiness or undermine the military. The present repeal law only requires certification from the president, defense secretary and the Joint Chiefs chairman. Hunter said, "I want them to sign off on the repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell.' I, and others in this room, have more combat experience than the folks who sign off on 'don't ask, don't tell.'"

Other interesting amendments passed in the House Armed Services Committee were:
- An amendment (38-23) by Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) to prohibit the use of military facilities for same-sex marriage ceremonies and bar Defense Department employees from conducting such ceremonies.
- An amendment (39-22) by Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo) to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman for the purpose of military benefits, regulations and policy.
- An amendment (35-26) to prohibit money to take nuclear weapons out of operation unless the administration provides a report to Congress on how it plans to modernize the remaining weapons.

It is clear by the vote that the last election made a significant difference with Republicans voting to protect America and American clues and Democrats general voting to advance liberal progressive agenda.

Following on the visit of President Obama to El Paso, Texas and his mocking those concerned about securing our national borders, the democrats reintroduced the DREAM Act in both the US Senate and the US House. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) and Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced the bill in the Senate. In the House, the bill was reintroduced by long time supporter Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA). The DREAM Act is an "amnesty bill" seeking to provide citizenship to illegal aliens who were children of Illegal Alien parents.

Following House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer’s (D-MD) announcement of his opposition to a proposed executive order from the White House to force government contractors to disclose their personal political donations, more Democrats in Congress are declaring their opposition today.

Politico reports, “Two key members of the Senate Democratic Caucus are criticizing President Barack Obama's draft executive order calling on government contractors to disclose their political contributions. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, are joining Republicans who say that the order could inject politics into contracting decisions.”

This is the first bipartisan action in opposition to the anticipated Executive Order. In the letter to the President, Lieberman, McCaskill, along with Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), ranking Republican on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, wrote, “[W]e are concerned that requiring businesses to disclose their political activity when making an offer risks injecting politics into the contracting process. Federal contracting law already precludes the consideration of political activity in evaluating contract offers. . . .  The requirement that businesses disclose political expenditures as part of the offer process creates the appearance that this type of information could become a factor in the award of federal contracts.”

In addition, Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) told The Washington Post’s 2chambers blog (despite noting he opposes the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision), “I am concerned that, surely unintentionally, the administration’s desire to get at transparency and accountability may also look like it’s having – or will have – a chilling effect on the ability of people freely to participate in the political process and donate as they see fit.”

In an excellent editorial today, the Washington Examiner lays out why this proposed executive order should attract so much bipartisan opposition. “Awarding government contracts on bidder merits rather than as a reward for partisan political activity should not be controversial. . . . This proposed order is anything but benign. Not only does it require disclosure of individual contributions to partisan candidates, it also covers donations to any organization that might use the funds for ‘independent expenditures or electioneering communications,’ otherwise known as political speech protected by the First Amendment. So all firms hoping to do business with the federal government would have to investigate the personal political activities of their principals and report them to federal bureaucrats and their politically appointed overseers . . . .

“Liberal groups claim that these disclosure requirements are only meant to increase transparency, not chill political speech,” the Examiner writes. “But if that were true, consider this: In 2010, Obama's liberal allies, including unions, spent $95 million on independent expenditures like those funded by corporations. But unions that sign collective bargaining contracts with the federal government are exempt from the Obama order's ‘disclosure’ requirements. Clearly, the chill would only be felt among Obama opponents.”

As Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said yesterday, “The issuing of contracts by the federal government should be based on the contractor’s merits, bids, and capabilities. Under no condition should political contributions play a role in the decision. However, the White House’s draft Executive Order makes it crystal clear that if you want to do business with the government you can’t contribute to Republicans. As Senator Collins recently pointed out, this Executive Order would basically repeal the Hatch Act and inject politics back into the procurement process. This is simply unacceptable. . . . The White House still has an opportunity to not go forward with this and you can rest assure we will be watching very closely. Because the proposed effort would represent an outrageous and anti-democratic abuse of executive branch authority.”

---

Tags: US Senate, US House, disclose act, executive order, military, gays in the military, gay marriage, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!