New NY 23rd

Rep. Capuano (D-MA) writes:

Insurance Industry Regulation

On Wednesday (Dec 7, 2016) the House considered H.R. 5143, the Transparent Insurance Standards Act of 2016. This legislation, like last week’s Systemic Risk Designation Improvement Act of 2016 is yet another attempt to weaken the Dodd Frank Financial Regulatory Reform Act. H.R. 5143 targets reforms implemented for the insurance industry. You may recall that during the financial crisis in 2008, the insurance company American International Group (AIG) practically fell apart. This was a key factor in the economic crisis that ensued. The Dodd Frank Act increased oversight of the insurance industry by establishing a framework to identify insurance industry risks. It created the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) to coordinate some of this activity and develop appropriate policies relative to international insurance matters. The FIO is also responsible for working with state insurance regulators so their views are taken into account, particularly when it comes to international insurance policies. H.R. 5143 weakens the Dodd Frank Act by essentially requiring that the Treasury Department have support from all state and territory insurance commissioners when entering into international insurance agreements. This is simply an impossible standard to meet, weakening the authority of the Treasury Department and the FIO.  The Administration has stated that this legislation will be vetoed.

H.R. 5143 passed 239/170. Rep. Reed voted AYE.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll613.xml

Continuing Resolution

Yesterday the House considered the Fiscal Year 2017 Continuing Resolution (CR) which funds the federal government through April 28, 2017. At that time, a third extension will be necessary for the rest of the fiscal year. This simply delays important spending decisions and makes it difficult for federal agencies to engage in long term planning.

Because the CR extends last year’s budget, it doesn’t include funding provided through the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST) which passed earlier this year. This includes money to implement Positive Train Control (PTC) on commuter railroads as well as funds for highways and transit projects. The legislation contains a waiver for General James Mattis, President-elect Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense. A waiver is necessary because Defense Secretaries must be out of the military for seven years and this is not the case with General Mattis. The waiver clears the way for the Senate to consider this nomination. A continuing resolution is not the appropriate vehicle for such a serious matter. It was done only once before in our history, when President Truman asked General George C. Marshall, who had already served as Secretary of State, to take over the Department of Defense in the early days of the Korean War. General Mattis may well be a good choice, but there should have been a debate about an issue that affects civilian control over the military.

The legislation passed 326/96. Rep. Reed voted AYE.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll620.xml

Water Infrastructure

Yesterday the House considered S. 612, the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act. This is a compromise version of the reauthorization of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). S. 612 supports water resources development projects under the direction of the Army Corps of Engineers. This legislation contains a provision I’ve advanced that increases the federal share of deeper dredging projects from 50 to 75%. This applies to the Boston Harbor dredging work already authorized, reducing local cost by at least $14 million.

Unfortunately the legislation contained several troubling provisions, including dozens of pages added at the last minute directing water use in Southern California. This will have an environmental as well as economic impact, placing fisheries at risk and endangering fishery jobs. S. 612 also exempts “forest management” projects from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which will allow thousands of acres of National Forest to be cut down. This bill even approves funds for a development project in Texas so that a waterfront park and sports fields can be built. The bill passed by the House ensured that funds in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund be used specifically for dredging projects. S. 612 doesn’t address this issue at all so that money can’t be accessed.

S. 612 passed 360/61. Rep. Reed voted AYE.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll622.xml

Tom Reed seldom explains his votes. Most likely, he votes as the party whip suggests.

Susan J. Douglas, writing in The New York Times, reminds us of the Gray Panthers of the 1970s. The leader was Maggie Kuhn.

Infuriated by being forced out of her job at 65 (and even more irked that her parting gift was a sewing machine), and outraged by what gerontologists in the 1970s championed as “disengagement theory” — the notion that it was normal and natural for older people to simply withdraw from society — she took on what was then, and still is, one of the most socially acceptable biases in our country: ageism.

The idea that seniors should disengage from politics after retiring seems totally wrong to me. Working people might well avoid social media and political conflict. There is less reason for seniors to do so.

This entry was posted in Seniors, Social Security. Bookmark the permalink.

On April 19 we will have the  opportunity to have our voices effect the Presidential races in the New York State Federal Primary.  In an October article, NYS Presidential Primary Info, the NewNY23rd predicted:

“By the time our primaries are held, there is a good chance that one of the candidates in each party would have  a large enough lead in delegates that the race would realistically be over.”

It looks like this is one of those rare years that our primary will play a pivotal part in the outcome of both parties’ campaigns. Even though both parties will have their primary on the same date, there are enough differences between their processes and the politics each party will be discussed in separate articles.

Procedures:

There will be four candidates on the GOP ballot. Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, and Ben Carson. Carson has suspended his campaign, but his name remains on the ballot. Cruz and Kasich are trying to keep Trump from sewing up the nomination by receiving 1,237 delegate votes at the July 18-21 Cleveland Convention.

According to The Green Papers website: New York Primaries are “Closed”, meaning that only registered Republicans can vote it, (and only registered Democrats can vote in their primary). There are 95 GOP delegates available. Eighty-one delegates are chosen by Congressional Districts. Each of the 27 districts have will have 3 delegates for the candidates to battle over.

• If one of the candidates receive more that 50% of the poplar vote in a district he will receive all three district delegates.
• If no one receives a majority of the district’s votes the delegates will be divided among  the candidates who received at least 20% of the votes.
• If three candidates receive 20% or more often votes, each one will receive one delegate.
• If only two candidates receive more than 20% of the district’s votes, the candidate who received the most votes will receive two delegates, and the other candidate will receive one.
• If only one candidate receives more than 20% of the votes, he will receive all three delegates.

There are also 14 At-Large delegates:

• If a candidate receives more than 50% of the total vote, that candidate receives all 14 delegates
• Otherwise, the delegates are distributed proportionally to those candidates receiving 20% or more of the vote.

The main kink in this primary process is that last year the NYS Republican Committee changed the procedure on how the delegates are chosen. In previous years each presidential candidate would choose who would be their delegate(s) to the convention. Last year it was changed so the State Committee will now decide. According to  reports the delegates will be party loyalists. The delegates are bound for the 1st ballot to vote for their assigned candidate. They are not bound after the first ballot and can vote for who they choose. An article, “How New York’s new GOP delegate rules could help derail Donald Trump” from Syracuse.com explains the process well.

Politics:

Let’s get realistic. The drama in this primary swirls around the GOP’s leaders trying to stop Trump from earning the 1237 delegates needed to guarantee his nomination.

Trump will help his chances by winning 50% of the vote in as many districts possible. Cruz and Kasich will try to stop him.  There is a lot of noise about Trump, but serious conservatives quietly talk about Cruz. When I ask “moderate” republican friends, “Trump or Cruz?” I often don’t get a straight answer. Usually Benghazi and emails somehow get in the discussion, then it switches to Socialism and Communism. Others just shake their heads and say they might stay home.

That doesn’t mean that things won’t change by April 19.  We are the first primary after the Wisconsin’s  April 5 contest, and the only one being held on April 19. We will get the candidates’ undivided attention for two whole weeks. During that time we will be bombarded by political ads and robo calls up the yin-yang.

Although most of the state’s votes come from the NYC/Long Island area, the candidates will have plenty of time to visit upstate districts for rallies, local interviews and photo-ops. That brings up some questions:

• Will Trump, Cruz and Kasich make it to every congressional district? (I would think they would want to and it really wouldn’t be too difficult to do in two weeks.)

• How many Trump rallies will Tom Reed attend? Will he speak at the rallies? How will this affect his June 28 primary against conservative Gary Perry and his race against John Plumb in November?

• Will there be protesters at the rallies?

• Will there be a debate during the two weeks before the primary?

• The important question will be how many republican voters will turn out to vote against the front-running Trump? How many districts will he get more than 50% of the vote? Will Cruz get 50% of the vote in any district? Will Kasich receive 20% of the vote in any district?

The closeness of each party’s race shows that each vote is critical. Cast it wisely.

This entry was posted in Congress, Constituents, Economics, Education, Ethics, President and tagged Ben Carson, Donald Trump, GOP Primary. Delegates, John Kasich, NYS Primary, Rep. Tom Reed, Ted Cruz. Bookmark the permalink.

What they’re really interested in is chaos.… They want to throw sand in the gears of the hated federal government until it fails and they’ve finally proved that it’s beyond saving.” And they are tied tightly to right-wing media: “Every time they vote down a bill, they get another invitation to go on Fox News or talk radio,” he said. “Its a narcissistic—and dangerous—feedback loop.–Former Speaker John Boehner

• Conservative Policies
• Federalism
• Originalism
• Regular Order
• Term Limits
• Balanced Budgets
• Laissez-faire
• Trickle Down
• Supply Side

Pro-growth tax reform will establish the U.S. as a 21st century magnet for new business investment and job creation.

Tax reform will increase U.S. competitiveness and prevent American jobs from moving overseas.

Pro-growth tax reform will provide a healthier economy for the long run, strengthening our communities, encouraging Main Street job creation and investment, and improving the lives of all Americans.

Pro-growth tax reform will result in bigger paychecks to bring home to your family.

Pro-growth tax reform will bring more job opportunities to your community.

Tax reform will grow our economy and create jobs across America.

This entry was posted in Reed’s Views, Taxes and tagged Tax reform, Ways and Means. Bookmark the permalink.

The Trump Administration reports: “It’s the Right Time to Pass Criminal Justice Reform”

“With President Trump leading the way, the push is on to get serious criminal justice reform done by Christmas. Resisters on the left and right would be fools to stand in the way,” the New York Post editorial board writes.
 
Earlier this week, President Trump called on Congress to pass the FIRST STEP Act, which would fund educational and vocational training programs in U.S. prisons while easing certain mandatory-minimum sentencing rules. “Trump has it right: “We’re all better off when former inmates can receive [a second chance] and re-enter society as law-abiding, productive citizens,” the Post’s editors write.

Interestingly, when NY Gov. Cuomo proposed to expand a successful educational program for prisoners, he was met with a chorus of outrage. Will Trump’s proposal fly?

https://nypost.com/2018/11/15/its-the-right-time-to-pass-criminal-justice-reform/

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5682

This entry was posted in Trump and tagged Criminal justice reform, First Step Act. Bookmark the permalink.

Andrew McCarthy: Our founders knew our First Amendment right to freedom of speech could not be protected without our Second Amendment right to bear arms. Our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is non-negotiable. Period. I won’t budge on the Left’s communist agenda to leave our families and communities defenseless and reliant on government protection. I oppose efforts to create a national gun registry and any other anti-gun legislation aimed at disarming the populace.

Rich Moon: Rich Moon is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. He will work to protect you and your family’s right to bear arms and defend against tyranny. The left wants to take away our guns and control our lives. It’s time for leaders who stand up to protect all of our freedoms before it’s too late. 

Joe Sempolinski: Joe is pro-2nd amendment. Joe is a SCOPE and NRA member and a gun owner. The right to bear arms is a fundamental, individual, human and Constitutional right. Joe supports interstate reciprocity for gun permits. At the state level, the NY SAFE ACT should never have become law.

I can’t recall a time when guns were needed to protect free speech; I can’t foresee a time when guns would be used to protect against tyranny; I can think of no reason that the NYS Safe Act should not have become law.

This entry was posted in Campaigning, Congress, Political and tagged 2022, guns. Bookmark the permalink.

… the substantial reduction in the complexity of the tax code will benefit even those who do not see direct cuts to their income taxes.–Rep. Amash (facebook, Nov. 16, 2017)

This bill (H.R.1) ensures families across the Southern Tier, Finger Lakes, and Western New York will be able to keep $1600 more of their hard earned dollars. Rep. Tom Reed (facebook, Nov. 16, 2017)

Under a “territorial tax system,” U.S.-based multinational corporations wouldn’t pay U.S. corporate taxes on their foreign profits. That is, they would face a zero U.S. corporate tax rate, and such a massive, permanent tax advantage for foreign profits over domestic profits …–Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) explains his vote for H.R.1:

I voted yes on #HR1, Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

This bill is the House’s effort to significantly reform the tax code. For individuals’ income taxes, it changes some tax rates, doubles the standard deduction, eliminates or limits many deductions and credits, and repeals the estate tax (or “death tax”). For corporate taxes, it lowers the rate, eliminates or limits many deductions and loopholes, and changes our international tax system to a territorial tax system, allowing American companies that earn profits overseas to bring that money into the United States without facing an additional tax on it.

The major benefits of this bill come from the fact that it lowers taxes and reduces the complexity of the tax code.

Lowering rates and eliminating deductions and credits will likely result in less time and money spent on filing taxes, fewer resources wasted on designing and executing strategies to avoid taxes, less social engineering through the tax code, and a fairer tax code overall.

For individuals, the increase in the standard deduction will allow many taxpayers to avoid needing to itemize their deductions. This means many taxpayers will no longer need to spend the time and money to find and claim each of their deductions and, coupled with some of the lower rates and the elimination of deductions and credits, also reduces the relative advantage for those who have the resources to afford better tax advice. This will also result in fewer people being subject to the coercive incentives of itemized deductions, which encourage people to make choices they otherwise would not make.

For corporations, the elimination of deductions and loopholes, and the change to a territorial system, will reduce the opportunities and incentives to avoid taxation and may help to limit corporations’ massive efforts to do so. Billions of dollars are wasted each year when corporations hire tax attorneys and accountants to find contrived ways to structure transactions to avoid taxes. Our current tax code gives large companies an advantage over smaller competitors who do not have the resources to use those strategies. This bill simplifies the corporate tax code, reducing the opportunities to manipulate it.

I believe firmly in limited, constitutional government. That means, among other things, support for less government spending and lower, fairer taxes.
This bill will probably result in additional borrowing in the short run—but only because my Republican and Democratic colleagues continue to vote for higher spending. Republicans and Democrats recently voted along party lines for separate budgets (both of which I opposed) that increase spending and grow our debt by many trillions of dollars. Since entering Congress, I have voted for the least spending of any member of Congress:

https://spendingtracker.org/rankings?sort=spending-asc&name=&chamber=house&year=10&congress=&status=enacted&state=&zip=&years_in_office%5B%5D=7-12&page=1

The tax cuts in H R 1 won’t directly benefit every taxpayer, and it’s likely some people will even see tax increases. This is not the bill I would have written, but the cuts in this bill are very broad, and the substantial reduction in the complexity of the tax code will benefit even those who do not see direct cuts to their income taxes. (emphasis added)

https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/territorial-tax-is-a-zero-rate-on-us-multinationals-foreign-profits-threatens

This entry was posted in Reed’s Views, Taxes and tagged H.R.1, Rep. Amash. Bookmark the permalink.

We were able to move forward in a bipartisan way on bills that will help bring generic drugs to market faster, which will make medications more affordable,” said Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-New Jersey.

The (House Energy and Commerce) committee  also approved a set of relatively small-scale bills aimed at reducing drug prices by increasing competition from generic drugs. It hopes to increase the sharing of information and to combat the steps brand-name drug makers take to slow the development and marketing of lower-cost generic alternatives.

One more notable bill, titled the CREATES Act, would make it easier for manufacturers of generics to get the brand name samples they need for testing. This legislation, which had been stalled, passed unanimously after the two parties reached an agreement.

One infers that brand name owners have been making life difficult for manufacturers of generics, and that Congress has been complicit in that.

“This will make a real difference for many Americans and this just goes to show that when we work together, we can achieve real results,” said Oregon Republican Rep. Greg Walden, the committee’s ranking member, and Texas Rep. Michael C. Burgess, the top Republican on the health subcommittee.

With bipartisan support, there may be a chance that these bills will become law

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/04/politics/house-obamacare-drug-prices/index.html

This entry was posted in Drugs, Health Care and tagged drug prices, generic drugs. Bookmark the permalink.

I refused to support the Democrats’ big government funding bill that will make America’s problems even worse.–Rep. Tenney

• Whatever isn’t universally liked is Joe Biden’s fault.
• Government should resolve one particular issue before considering or acting on anything else.
• A bill which appropriates $1.7 trillion should be brief.
• An appropriations bill pointedly, repeatedly and negatively described as a “spending bill as if all spending were unwarranted.”
• The government should cease operation while Congress struggles over appropriations.
• Senators who vote to fund the government singled out for criticism.
• Every loyal Republican (or Democrat) should have the same opinion on every issue.
• Our Federal budget is the cause of worldwide inflation.
• We would be better off without a Federal Government.
• Whatever we don’t like is unconstitutional.