Oh, is congressional insider trading only possible for Nancy?
119th Congress or Red Wave In Adult Land
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
I’ll remind you later, but Congress has not been unkind to him:
acesfull86
Well-known member
acesfull86
Well-known member
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/congress-can-stop-the-tariff-madness-next-week/
Next week, Congress will have another chance to reassert its constitutional authority over tariffs. Paul and Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) have introduced a joint resolution that’s one sentence long. All it does is terminate the April 2 national emergency declaration that is being used to usurp Congress’s tariff powers.
Many members of Congress are uncomfortable and concerned about the impacts of tariffs in their districts and states. Trump’s economic-approval ratings have declined over the course of the month, and that decline is bleeding over into other issues such as immigration. The bond market continues to send troubling signals about investors’ confidence in the U.S., which is partly due to the massive uncertainty in the entire country’s trade rules.
Republicans in Congress can complain about all of this. They can continue to field calls from retirees in their districts about the value of their IRAs being depleted and from business owners in their districts about the jobs they’ll have to cut and prices they’ll have to raise because of tariffs. Republican lawmakers will then face the consequences when voters go to the polls next year, with Democrats now leading in the generic congressional ballot.
Or, they can vote for this resolution next week and end this sideshow. Republicans need to focus on cutting spending and extending the 2017 tax cuts, and all the political capital that is burned on this nonsensical tariff policy can’t be used for those vital tasks.
To get a veto-proof majority, assuming all Democrats vote in favor, 20 out of 53 Republicans in the Senate and 77 out of 218 Republicans in the House need to vote for the resolution. Not even a majority of Republicans need to do the right thing to get the right result.
------
I hope each and every "no" vote gets annihilated in their next election.
Next week, Congress will have another chance to reassert its constitutional authority over tariffs. Paul and Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) have introduced a joint resolution that’s one sentence long. All it does is terminate the April 2 national emergency declaration that is being used to usurp Congress’s tariff powers.
Many members of Congress are uncomfortable and concerned about the impacts of tariffs in their districts and states. Trump’s economic-approval ratings have declined over the course of the month, and that decline is bleeding over into other issues such as immigration. The bond market continues to send troubling signals about investors’ confidence in the U.S., which is partly due to the massive uncertainty in the entire country’s trade rules.
Republicans in Congress can complain about all of this. They can continue to field calls from retirees in their districts about the value of their IRAs being depleted and from business owners in their districts about the jobs they’ll have to cut and prices they’ll have to raise because of tariffs. Republican lawmakers will then face the consequences when voters go to the polls next year, with Democrats now leading in the generic congressional ballot.
Or, they can vote for this resolution next week and end this sideshow. Republicans need to focus on cutting spending and extending the 2017 tax cuts, and all the political capital that is burned on this nonsensical tariff policy can’t be used for those vital tasks.
To get a veto-proof majority, assuming all Democrats vote in favor, 20 out of 53 Republicans in the Senate and 77 out of 218 Republicans in the House need to vote for the resolution. Not even a majority of Republicans need to do the right thing to get the right result.
------
I hope each and every "no" vote gets annihilated in their next election.
Can Trump veto this? If so, what margin of vote would back him down from trying?
chop2chip
Well-known member
Woke right
Needing a supermajority to stop the President from having unilateral trade power seems like a startlingly dumb thing that we’ve set up here.