Don't Blame Boehner For Republican Majority Inaction

Since Speaker of the House John Boehner, announced his resignation and retirement, many in the media have said he had to go because of his inaction on a full range of issues.  The reality is that the inaction was not due to the House of Representatives and John Boehner, but Harry Reid's strength in the Senate.

Harry Reid is a strong defender of all things Obama.  In 2010, the House majority control shifted to the Republicans.  Over the next four years, under Boehner's Leadership, they passed hundreds of anti-Democrat and anti-Obama measures; primarily along Republican party lines. Then, those proposed bills went to the Senate where Harry Reid either sat on them or let them languish in the Democrat-controlled committees. 

In January 2015, the Republicans finally gained control of the Senate with a 54% party membership.  Republicans around the country thought that now, with control of both houses of congress, something could be done to reverse many of the measures that the Democrats and Obama had passed into law over the last 5 years.  But, they were wrong.  With only a simple 54% majority, they found themselves powerless against Senate rules that require a a 60 vote, in some cases, and a two-thirds vote (66% of the votes in most cases or, at least, 67% to override a Presidential veto) to get anything done.  So, as long as Harry Reid maintained solidarity among the Democrats and was able to prevent that, all of Boehner's House bills just kept dying in the Senate.

For example, the House under Boehner's control, even with a majority control in the Senate in 2014, had successfully voted 6 times to totally repeal ObamaCare and another 54 times to defund or repeal specific parts of ObamaCare. Yet, today, the law remains fully intact from the day it became law.

The simple fact is that the only way that any reversal of Obama and the Democrat's actions is to have someone in the White House that won't constantly threaten to veto those reversal bills. Also, the Senate control must be further strengthened to insure that things get done.

In my opinion, Boehner's resignation merely exposes how divided this country is along party lines, and how a minority in the Senate, along with a like-minded President, can block anything not supported by both parties.  Changing the Speaker of the House is not the answer to solving gridlock in Washington.

References:

The 4 Worst Things John Boehner Did As Speaker: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/09/25/3705592/4-things-john-boehner-did-as-speaker-that-make-us-cry/

Two Charts That Show How Boehner Had An Impossible Job: http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/09/27/443446996/two-charts-that-help-explain-boehners-resignation

House passes 50th bill to undo Obamacare: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/05/house-passes-50th-bill-to-undo-obamacare/

No, House Republicans haven't voted 50 times to repeal Obamacare: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no-house-republicans-havent-voted-50-times-to-repeal-obamacare/article/2545733

Obama's Weekly Address Gets Pinocchio'ed..But How Many Americans Knew It?

In this week's address, President Obama decided to hammer the Republicans over John Boehner's decision to sue him for the lawless actions of using executive orders to delay and change current laws without any Congressional involvement, approval, or legislative action.

In that address, there was a line that was almost exclusively reported by the national media. The President stated that:

"So far this year, Republicans in Congress have blocked every serious idea to strengthen the middle class. Lifting the minimum wage, fair pay, student loan reform - they've said no to all of it..." 

So, as in the case of a CBS report and many others, most American's got the "news driven" notion that the President was speaking the truth when he blamed the Republican House for inaction; never once alluding to the fact that he was perhaps stretching the truth when he claimed that "every serious idea" was blocked.

However, one main stream media giant, the Washington Post, did take the time to admonish Obama by showing that many "helping-the-middle-class" laws were passed by the House and were either signed into law or left to languish in the Senate where Harry Reid selectively brought votes to the floor only when they gave political advantage to the Democrats. For Obama's lying, the Washington Post gave the President "3" big Pinocchios.

The problem is that this was only seen by those who took the time to read the Washington Post's online blog, or to watch Fox News to see the coverage of the "3 Pinocchio" story.  As a result, most Americans probably believe that the middle class is now worse off, thanks to the GOP.

The media is doing a disservice to this country by allowing Obama to lie in his weekly address and not publicly admonishing him for it.  The Boehner lawsuit is what is needed to, once again, allow us to,  maintain the division of powers and to stop the lawless actions of the President.  A fact that was so eloquently testified to by the eminent liberal law professor Jonathan Turley in a recent hearing before Congress.

References:

CBS:  Obama to GOP: Instead of suing me, "do something": http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-to-gop-instead-of-suing-me-do-something/

Obama’s claim that the GOP has ‘blocked every serious idea’: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/07/15/obamas-claim-that-the-gop-has-blocked-every-serious-idea/

Jonathan Turley: Congress ‘Must Act’ Against Obama’s Overreach Or Face ‘Self-Destruction’: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/16/jonathan-turley-congress-must-act-against-obamas-overreach-or-face-self-destruction/

Why Obama Rejected Boehner's Tax On The Rich Proposal

When the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, offered a proposal to raise as much revenues on the rich by closing loopholes and by eliminating and capping certain tax deductions as would have been achieved by raising the tax rate, Obama flat out rejected it.  Certainly, any logical person would conclude that it doesn't matter how we get the increased revenues from the rich as long as those revenues are equal to or greater than the targeted amount.  But, Obama isn't thinking that way.

You see, the President's insistence on raising the "tax rates" on the rich is more about politics than any amount of money being collected.  He wants to be able to easily campaign on the fact that the rich are paying higher taxes by simply pointing to this or that rate being increased.   Boehner's salad bowl mix of tax increases is just too complex and too difficult to explain and prove and not conducive to Obama's continual need to give campaign speeches touting his achievements.  Simply, Obama's political left supporters would just find Boehner's tax increases too hard to understand. 

Once Again, Obama Puts Politics Above Jobs

For the President to enter the House chambers to give a major address to a joint session of Congress, it is normal protocol for the President and the Speaker of the House to negotiate, behind the scenes, the appropriate date and time. Only then is the date and time of the address to be announced.

Not the case with this president. Instead, he announces to the world that he will be giving his speech on jobs at a time when Obama's own campaign people must have calculated to have the greatest political impact: Directly opposite the Republican Debate to be aired on NBC. In doing so, he completely sidesteps the historical normal protocol to negotiate with Speaker Boehner.

This just show how in-your-face. petty, and partisan this President is. It also raises the specter that this whole "jobs" speech is another political show for the benefit of the President's 2012 campaign. How sad...