When GOP wins; we all lose

I know we all kind of expected it. But I think my coworker said it best, “Whose excited about elections results?” in the saddest voice ever with slumped shoulders. So the GOP took the House and Senate, which was pretty much expected, and in Maryland the GOP took back state Governor.

A few things, yes mom, I still have a job. Larry Hogan isn’t going to dissolve our contract with the state…he can’t. We are protected by the Legislature. Now, if they turned on us, we’d have to talk.

Second, time to show your colors, conservatives. My coworker and I were talking about how well, if they are going to win now they have to take a stance. Remember when I was bitching about how the GOP controlled House kept passing anti-choice legislation? Everyone kept telling me (and I’m looking at some of you specifically with narrow eyes and general disgust on my face) it will never pass the Senate. Well, now it will pass the Senate. See these GOP Senators are going to have to take a stance or risk not being reelected. So bring on the anti-choice legislation kids, because we’re about to watch the US Congress try to systematically take control of women’s lives and bodies and the disenfranchise people of color. Couple this with the Supreme Court shit show, we’re in for something alright.

The final count is 52 Republicans and 44 Democrats in the Senate with 243 Republicans and 174 Democrats in the House. John Kasich remains Ohio’s Governor, and Wendy Davis lost Texas.  On the good side of things, Baltimore City expanded collective bargaining, and voters fought back personhood amendments in a few states.

Republican women, largely way saner than their men counterparts

Last week several lawmakers were on the Capitol steps making small talk pretending they gave a damn about their jobs for what Sen. Rand Paul (the anti-woman zealot) called a bipartisan “coffee break.”  However, it was Sen. Susan Collins of Maine who pulled the senators, all men, into a huddle to actually talk about what matters. And what matters? Getting her colleagues to push Congress into deal-making.

Suzy Khimm and Jessica Taylor wrote about the Republican women who are trying to fix the government for MSNBC. I know I don’t go there much either. However, for six days no one heard anything from Sen. Collins, until Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Kelly Ayotte signed a six-month budget agreement to reopen the government while giving agencies more flexibility on sequestration and repeal Obamacare’s medical device tax. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and some Democrats think this is an idea worth considering.

Khimm and Taylor are quick to point out that this isn’t going to be the final bill we see if we ever get a solution, but it is a nice reminder that while the extremists are grabbing for power there are some moderates somewhere trying to work together. They also point out:

“Many senators say Collins’ moves reflect another dynamic as well: while male leaders of both parties have barely been speaking to each other, much less negotiating, Republican women have never stopped talking to their Democratic counterparts in the Senate.”

Actually, these women have continued to work on some serious issues like military sexual assault and mental health. Khimm and Taylor pose the question, “Would Washington be a different place it the tactics of women senators, who make up just 20% of the Senate, were the norm?”

The word on the Hill among the other women, yes, yes it would. Some Democrat women say that the only people who are talking to them are the Republican women, and they are trying to do something here. The women for example appear to be regularly getting together to talk informally. It is very reminiscent of years gone by. And interestingly enough, when these women were getting together for a dinner, Rep. Paul Ryan and seven of this male colleagues were sitting across the table from empty chairs in a feeble attempt to same Senate Democrats into meeting with them.

The article concludes with this from Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan when asked about women leading the way out of the fiscal mess, “We all used to balancing family budgets and dealing with children that are bullies and misbehave. And so sometimes that comes in handy.”

Now the article makes a lot of assumptions about the nature of women, some coming from quotes from the women lawmakers. That said, there is a lot of true to the socialization of women. We are taught to value compromise over victory, and to talk out problems oppose to yelling and shouting over one another. This doesn’t always work in our favor though, see the Wendy Davis filibuster. In the US government these skills are very valuable especially as the men in the House and Senate can’t seem to have any kind of discussions.

I’m not endorsing the plan that Sen. Collins came up with because I haven’t read it and I don’t think we should compromise too much because well, Speaker John Boehner is doing this and the House GOP need to learn a lesson. It does seem like a step in the right direction.

All the politics aside though, maybe it is time we start putting an emphasis on socializing boy identifying and male born children in the same ways we socialize the girl identified and female born children? Girls have their problems, see Mean Girls, but the value of compromise and working together to meet a goal does take priority over a lot of other things. And honestly, I’d rather my elected representation work together then play king of the mountain.

Women are still grossly underrepresented in the House and the Senate, but this is as good a reason as any to get more women elected.

Food Stamps still under fire

The GOP is still coming after SNAP. I’m about to lose my damn mind. Last week I screened the movie, A Place at the Table. It is pretty good. There are obviously issues with it, but I was pleased overall, and the Civil Wars made up a good portion of the soundtrack. One of the panel speakers after the film spoke to the House GOP’s interest in cutting an additional $40 billion from nutrition programs over ten years. 

The Washington Post has an article by Derek Wallbank entitled “GOP to vote on $40 billion in food-stamps cuts”. The House of Representatives will be voting on Thursday on a 5.2 percent reduction from the Congressional Budget Office estimates based in current policy. Obviously, this would result in people in need being pushed off the program. The assumption is that charities will fill in, but these charities are tapped too. They have very few funds left. About 48 million people are on Snap in the US, which is about 23 million households. Republican’s plan to cut spending through restrictions to eligibility requirements,

Supports of this measure claim it is going to curb abuse, but abuse isn’t much of a problem with SNAP. As mentioned on NPR on Monday by Michael Wilson, Director of Maryland’s Hunger Solutions, fraud is more of a problem at the Pentagon than with SNAP. Actual SNAP fraud is probably between 2 and 6 percent. Additionally, this line about all able bodies people who can work should doesn’t take into account a shitty economy where employers don’t have to pay a living wage. Am I the only one who can’t follow this kind of ridiculous logic? Their goal is to end benefits for more than 6 million low-income people.

It also offends me to my very core that the GOP is assuming everyone on SNAP is lazy and cheating the system. Yes, SNAP utilization is growing because the economy continues to blow. Yes, if it continues to grow at this rate we’re going to see it reach $764 billion over the next ten years. Improve the social safety net, it costs more upfront, but like most preventative measures it is cheaper in the long run.

Contact information for House Representatives from DC, Maryland, and Ohio can be found below. I know most of the Dems will vote against it, but the GOP will pass it. So work on the Republican reps.

DC

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton: 202-225-8050

Maryland

Rep: Andy Harris, 202-225-5311

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, 202-225-3061

Rep. John P. Sarbanes, 202-225-4016

Rep. Donna F. Edwards, 202-225-8699

Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, 202-225-4143

Rep. John Delaney, 202-225-2721

Rep. Elijah Cummings, 202-225-4741

Rep. Chris Ban Hollen, 202-225-5341

Ohio

Rep. Steve Chabot, 202-225-2216

Rep. Brad Wenstrup, 202-225-3164

Rep. Joyce Beatty, 202-225-4324

Rep. Jim Jordan, 202-225-2676

Rep. Robert E. Latta, 202-225-6405

Rep. Bill Johnson, 202-225-5705

Rep, Bob Gibbs, 202-225-6265 (Agriculture Committee)

Speaker John A. Boehner, 202-225-6205

Rep. Marcy Kaptur, 202-225-4146

Rep. Michael Turner, 202-225-6465

Rep. Marcia L. Fudge, 202-225-7032

Rep. Pat Tiberi, 202-225-5355

Rep. Tim Ryan, 202-225-5261

Rep. David Joyce, 202-225-5731

Rep. Steve Stivers, 202-225-2015

Rep. Jim Renacci, 202-225-3876

Hey Speaker Boehner, need a hug?

Much to my delight, Speaker John Boehner received another ass kicking on Thursday when the House of Representatives voted down the $940 billion farm bill. The vote was 234 nays to 195 yeas. Democrats felt the bill cut too much from SNAP, and Republicans thought it didn’t cut enough so the bill failed. Now they head back to the drawing board. You can’t see it, but I’m dancing in my chair a bit. Of course, I’m also worrying about the kind of cuts these bat-shit-crazy Republicans want.

I’m not going to rehash everything about this bill because I’ve written about it enough. I will note that President Obama did threaten to veto the House version of the bill, and the Senate passed one with $20.5 billion in cuts. The House bill wanted to cut $743.9 billion from SNAP. Take a minute. Yep, everyone involved goes to the special hell. Now, this will be back, and probably with deeper cuts to SNAP, and probably something crazy thrown in for good measure. But (with an act of god) maybe Obama can hold the line with a veto threat (doubt it though), and we know the Senate will push back a little. I’m predicting no less than $25 billion cut from SNAP.

On the political side of things, Boehner can’t get a break. You have to wonder if this guy has any pull left with his party. The only thing worse than incompetent GOP leadership is ineffective and incompetent GOP leadership. Boehner, go home, retire. Descent in the ranks is nothing but good news for us, but with the emphasis on targeting women, the poor, and people of color it makes me nervous. Last thing we want is Rep. Franks ascending in the ranks. Fingers-crossed the GOP impales themselves on immigration reform and lose a ton of seats next go round. 

Boehner ran right back to the debt ceiling by yesterday afternoon. Making threats and the like, but can all the Democrats lean in  and pay attention? He's weak. He's very weak. He's going to be in a tight spot on immigration reform, and maybe just maybe if you pretend you know how to perform politics we can get somewhere. Boehner may have to rely in Democrats to pass immigration reform, which could cost Boehner his speaker ship eventually. 

This week in stupid shit our representatives do: House will vote on a national abortion ban

Tara Culp-Ressler had an article for ThinkProgress on this waste of time. The House is going to vote on a national abortion ban that is obviously going to be defeated in the Senate. All these people should lose their jobs. The House is going to vote on the 20-week abortion ban next week; this is the same kind of ban that was struck down by the courts last month in Arizona. 

 

This is being pushed the hardest by Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) and of course is endorsed by the National Right to Life Committee. The bill would criminalize abortion services after 20 weeks of pregnancy—this is based on disputed “science” that says fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks. However, Roe v. Wade gives women a constitutional right to abortion services until the point of viability, generally understood to occur around 24 weeks of pregnancy. 

 

Now, this will probably pass the House because we elect people who hate women at an overwhelming majority, but the Senate (controlled by Dems) aren’t going to let it pass. Apparently, they are frustrated that they have to waste their time with a doomed bill anyway. Last time this happened, even moderate Republicans complained they would rather spend their time on other priorities, like jobs. This year, maybe they could focus on the sequester, but let’s make sure these anti-women zealots get their chance to talk about things they have no understanding of in some symbolic vote on abortion. 

 

Franks has been trying to make restricting women’s rights a priority for a while. First this bill was supposed to only apply to women in DC, but he decided why just restrict DC women’s rights? With this kind of stupid idea, let’s do this thing nationwide. Of course, he was inspired by the Gosnell case…I guess he wants to make more women suffer through horrific conditions because they can’t receive affordable, legal abortion services. This idea that Gosnell was allowed to happen because of legalized abortion is idiocy and a straight up delusion that ignores systemic racism and classism in health care. Gosnell happened because poor women don’t have access to safe reproductive care. 

 

20 week bans are attempts to backdoor Roe v. Wade. They also haven’t held up in court as previously mentioned. We really have nothing else to do in Congress than make symbolic gestures to legislate hate against women? I hate everything. 

 

 ***Update, after I wrote this, Rep. Franks decided to talk about things he doesn't know, "The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low." Oh really? I guess someone wasn't paying attention during the Susan B. Anthony speakers, or maybe the gentlemen of the GOP just stop listening when the womenfolk are talking. Franks dismissed the estimate that 32,101 women become pregnant after a rape. He walked this statement back after some backlash. ThinkProgress noted that at least one study found that 32.4% of rape victims didn't find out they were pregnant until their second trimesters (after Franks' 20 week restriction). Half of those victims choose to undergo an abortion rather than keep the fetus or up it up for adoption. Other research suggests that rape victims are more likely to become pregnant, which puts the number of women who become pregnant from rape in one year around 83,000.