Lawmaker News

The message from Congress is clear: inconvenience trumps hunger.

Several weeks ago, Congress passed the Reducing Flight Delays Act of 2013, giving the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) the flexibility to spend up to $253 million of its current budget to ensure that more flights depart on time. As a frequent flyer, I certainly appreciate it when my flight takes off on schedule. However, as the president of Bread for the World, I find lawmakers’ swift action on air travel irresponsible, considering that people living in hunger still face drastic cuts to anti-poverty programs.

Read more...

Vice President Biden intoned, “On this vote, the yeas are 54, the nays are 46. Under the previous order requiring 60 votes, the amendment is not agreed to.” Moments later, from the gallery, Patricia Maisch, survivor of the horrific Tucson shooting, shouted at the senators below, “Shame on you!”

The Senate had defeated the bipartisan compromise background-check amendment worked out by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Patrick Toomey (R-Pa.), 54-46. Adoption of the amendment required 60 votes under a unanimous consent agreement. Proponents had agreed to set that threshold in order to avoid a threatened time-consuming filibuster.

This was not the Senate’s proudest moment.

Small businesses expect direct decisions and actions from Congress this year. We expect Congress to carry out the people’s business in an orderly fashion. On the surface this seems peripheral to business, and that specific bills or budgets should be the order of the day; however, those bills that come up to Congress that seem to be socially weighted dramatically effect small businesses. Should the government act on banning assault rifles? Maybe, but there is more than the gun industry that is affected by this decision. Many school districts are scrambling to find budgets for additional private security, and one issue facing them is imminent need, and with the assault rifle being viewed as a direct threat, you can bet local authorities are developing budgets and asking for federal assistance to hire companies.

Washington, D.C. – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offered a eulogy for the late Senator Daniel K. Inouye Friday at the Washington National Cathedral.
 
As the tragic events of recent days remind us, often when death visits, it comes too soon.
 
A plane crash takes a parent from us.
 
Cancer deprives us of a sibling or a friend.
 
An automobile accident steals away a child.
 
Lives are cut short. Dreams are denied.
 
Often death is troubling. We ask, “Why?”
 
Why him? Why her? Why now?
 
And although I wish I could answer those questions with authority, often the “why” of death is a mystery.
 
But in the case of Senator Daniel Inouye, there is no mystery. And although there is sadness, there is no regret.
 
Ecclesiastes 3:2 tells us, “To everything there is a season, a time to every purpose under heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die.”
 
It was Daniel Inouye’s time.

When CODEPINK, MoveOn and representatives of other organizations marched into Senator Harry Reid’s D.C. office on Tuesday, December 18, they wanted a simple answer to a simple question: Does the Senator support a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity clips, such as the legislation proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein and supported by President Obama and Vice President Biden? It would seem like a no-brainer for the Senate majority leader to fall in line with the leadership of his party in backing a modest bill that would ban the sale of weapons that are only good for mass murder. Unfortunately, Reid’s senior policy advisor Kasey Gillette was unable to give an answer.

As a longtime Senate staffer and, more recently, executive director of a legal services organization that advocated for repeal of “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” (DADT), I had the privilege of working with Senator Inouye for nearly forty years on several national policy issues -- telecommunications, maritime, tourism, transportation, and support for our troops, to name a few. He had a steady, steely hand and he invariably came through for Hawaii and for our country. After a win he might sometimes whisper to aides with satisfaction and just a twinkle in his eyes, "we got it done." But he was never one to gloat.

For him, it was about achieving the objective, rather than who was going to get credit for it.

It was more than 40 years ago when two young prosecutors, one from the biggest city in Pennsylvania and one from a smaller town in rural Vermont, came together at an annual meeting of the National District Attorneys Association in Philadelphia. Little did Arlen Specter and I know then that we would spend 30 years working together in the United States Senate, building on our bond as former prosecutors, seeking to bridge the partisan divide, and striving to find common ground on some of the most contentious issues of our time.  
 
Arlen Specter’s public service began during the Korean War. When elected to serve as Philadelphia’s District Attorney, he led landmark prosecutions against public corruption and to rid his city’s streets of some of the country’s most hardened criminals. He was a prosecutor’s prosecutor.

Arlen Specter dedicated nearly all his adult life to public service – first in the military, then as Philadelphia’s District Attorney, and last and most significantly, as a U.S. Senator representing the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. To each of these roles, he brought his remarkable intelligence, tenacity, and energy. In the end, Arlen faithfully served the people of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and the United States as a public servant for more than 40 years.
 
I had the pleasure of working with Arlen in Congress for 16 years, and I saw first-hand the dedication and intensity which characterized his service in the Senate. Arlen was a hard worker. Arlen never failed to get out front on any issue he thought was important to the voters of Pennsylvania, and he worked hard to represent his constituents and secure federal funding to address their local needs.

Arlen Specter was an important mentor and inspiration for me, and he was my friend. He was helpful to me and my family early in my career. And on one occasion, he provided a major boost for what I consider the signature achievement of my nine terms in Congress.

The long arc of Arlen Specter’s career in public service touches on most major moments in contemporary American history. Those moments required great leadership and Senator Specter always met the challenge.

You couldn’t help but be intimidated when you met Arlen Specter.

By the time I met him in the early 2000s, he was already a legend in Pennsylvania politics, the respected senior senator.

I was the mayor of Hazleton when Senator Specter came to talk about an economic development project of mine that required federal funding. Of course, I knew of his reputation as a smart, no-nonsense former prosecutor who struck fear in the hearts of certain Philadelphia Teamsters. I knew of his controversial magic bullet theory as part of the Warren Commission’s investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I knew of his reputation when it came to solving problems and finding solutions.

And he was coming to my office. I admit I was intimidated.