You don't need to look further than Iraq to see that the Bush administration's dangerous doctrine of preemption is a failure that we cannot afford to repeat with Iran. Congress has neglected its oversight of this failed policy, and we must force a debate on this issue. If our goal is to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, then that is what our policies should be designed to do. We need to drop the preconditions for diplomacy and remove regime change from the table.

The reason this legislation is constitutional is that Congress has the final say.  We have to have an up or down vote within a time frame on what the President sends back to us.

Congress retains the ultimate power, which is why the legal experts who have testified before the Budget Committee have maintained that this bill is constitutional.

I live in a state where the governor has had a line item veto.  I've seen Republican and Democratic Chief Executives use it responsibly.

That said, this is a much narrower application.  This process gives Congress its last say, since it has to act on expedited rescissions that the President would send.  I'm confident giving the executive that power.

The only thing we have left is the power of the purse. Vice President Cheney has even been openly saying how the executive has enhanced its legislative power, such that they can break the fist of the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act and no one challenges them.

Once they take away the power of the purse, I don't think we need a Congress.

Heard a presentation by Jim Gattuso of Heritage yesterday. He's the author of this backgrounder on the nearly-incomprehensible -- and incomprehensibly-named -- topic of net neutrality.

Here's what we gleaned from that session: "Net neutrality" = "net regulation." If you want to regulate the net, you'll love net neutrality. Net regulation will require a one-size/one price fits all approach to the net. Today, you can spend more to get a better car, house, iPod, whatever. Even the US Postal Service allows you to spend more to send a letter or a package faster. So why is it bad for companies to be able to charge more for faster and more complex Internet service? If you don't want that, you'd pay less. Makes sense, no? Remember the market?

Read more...

Government’s role in supporting the development of emerging technologies is to get out of the way. Imposing unnecessary regulations on the Internet is a sure way to discourage investment, limiting the deployment of new products. The marketplace has powerful incentives for private industry to continue the development of existing technologies, while at the same time providing safeguards to protect consumers. Furthermore, the most recent version of the Commerce Committee’s legislation includes an ‘Internet Consumer Bill of Rights,’ along with authority for the FCC to adjudicate complaints against providers. These provisions will help ensure that Internet users have unfettered access without stifling technological innovations that benefit consumers.

The Death Tax is one of the most regressive taxes ever included in our Tax Code. All too often, children and other family members have to give up their family business or the farm because the tax bill they are handed by the government is too high for them to pay. This legislation ends the double taxation of the Death Tax and enables individuals to keep the business or farm in family hands.

The debate on the House Floor today is a stark illustration of how different Democratic priorities are from Republicans'. While Republicans push through yet another tax cut for the wealthiest few among us, Democrats are fighting for the hardworking Americans who struggle to make ends meet on the minimum wage. The minimum wage has not been raised since 1997 and is at its lowest level in 50 years when adjusted for inflation. Some say that an increase in the minimum wage would only help teenagers but in fact 6.6 million Americans, the vast majority of whom are over 20 years old, would benefit from a minimum wage increase - including hundreds of thousands of parents. Opponents also claim that an increase would hurt job growth, but research shows the exact opposite effect. After Republicans push forward a virtual repeal of the estate tax, which will add hundreds of billions of dollars to our nation's deficits in the next ten years, they are contemplating playing games with the minimum wage so that they can get rid of this political liability. The American people will not be fooled and Democrats will not stop fighting until we have a fair vote on a real minimum wage increase.

I'm quite frankly disappointed that the Senate couldn't obtain cloture on a full repeal of the Death Tax. However, the bill we're debating today is a strong compromise - and it will certainly protect many more families, small businesses, and family farms from the double taxation of the Death Tax. The old adage here is true - we cannot let the perfect become the enemy of the good. And we have an opportunity today to take a substantial and permanent chunk out of the Death Tax with a bill that can pass the Senate. The Death Tax is one of the more exasperating taxes on the books. Death should not be a taxable event. And yet, we continue to hand grieving families a "payment due" bill upon the death of a loved one. This tax is hurting our economy and costing us jobs. So while I would rather see it permanently repealed, we have an opportunity today to substantially reduce its burden - for good.