Other

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) once again attacked Republicans’ budget proposal on Wednesday, claiming its cuts target “little children” and “poor little boys and girls.”  

He added that the spending bill, which will face a vote in the Senate later on Wednesday afternoon, is “insulting” to the American people.

“H.R. 1 is a mean-spirited bill that would cut the heart out of the recovery that we have in America today,” said Reid. “It goes after little children, poor little boys and girls ... we want them to learn to read.”

Republicans’ budget proposal to slash $61 billion in government spending is a product of the Tea Party’s influence, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Monday afternoon.

“The plan we will vote on tomorrow is the same plan the Tea Party already pushed in the House of Representatives,” Reid said in a floor speech. “Now the same Tea Party is trying to push it through the Senate.”

“Do we want jobs?“ Reid asked later. “If we do, then we simply cannot pass the plan the Tea Party has already pushed through the House.”

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) stepped back from remarks he made on the Senate floor Thursday in which he associated Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Hosni Mubarak with Republicans who want to do away with unions. 

In a statement on Friday, Brown said he should not have mentioned the tyrants in the context of the fight over public service unions in Ohio, Wisconsin and other states.

“I am passionate about fighting for the middle class,” Brown said in the statement. “Ohio's teachers and nurses and police and firefighters are facing the loss of their collective bargaining rights, and I think that's wrong. But in speaking about this, I should not have mentioned the hostility of tyrants, like Hitler, to unions. I don't want my mistake to distract from the critical debate in Ohio, and I apologize for it.”

Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) on Thursday introduced the Marriage Protection Act, which would prevent federal courts from hearing cases involving same-sex marriage. The bill is a direct response to the Obama administration's decision not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

The Defense of Marriage Act, signed by President Clinton, allows states not to recognize same-sex marriages in other states, and prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. By preventing federal courts from taking cases related to this issue, Burton's bill would avoid a situation in which the Obama administration declines to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in federal court, and effectively leaves the matter to states.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) filed a motion to limit debate on the Patent Reform Act at 6:35 p.m. Thursday night.

The patent bill has been pending before the upper chamber since Monday, as senators have attempted to alter it with amendments. Controversy over a budget extension bill and other amendments that were not germane to the underlying bill have, in part, slowed progress on the legislation.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) tore into the federal government’s practice of diverting tens of millions of dollars annually from patent fees to other purposes as “immoral” and offered an amendment to right the wrong.

“It’s immoral to take money from a specific purpose and not apply it to the purpose it was intended under the statute,” said Coburn.

Coburn said it was this diverting that has clogged up the system leaving 713,000 patents untouched. He said the fee money was intended to be used to process patents. Coburn said it currently takes 26 months before a patent officer even touches a patent after it has been filed.

“If we want to stay on top of innovation we cannot allow that process to continue,” said Coburn. “Now we are actually going to spend the patent money on patents.”

Coburn touted his amendment as the perfect antidote to the current system. 

“This is a moral response to an immoral thing we have been doing,” said Coburn.

Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), the sixth-ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said the Obama administration's decision to no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act is a "dereliction of duty," and indicated that congressional oversight may be coming.

"It is beyond disappointment," Lungren said on the House floor Monday. "I believe it is a dereliction of duty. To somehow now find that there is no constitutional basis for defending that law is incredible, and I think regrettable, and I think we ought to look into it."

The Defense of Marriage Act prohibits the government from recognizing same-sex marriages, and was signed into law by former President Clinton. The Obama administration last week said it believes the law is unconstitutional, and Republicans said the decision smacked of politics.

On Monday Lungren echoed that charge, and said it is the Attorney General's job to defend all laws, regardless of their personal views, just as he did as California's Attorney General.

"Having served in that office in California, I can tell you I defended laws that I disagreed with," he said. "I defended laws that I had voted against, and I thought it was my solemn obligation to uphold the Constitution and the laws duly enacted in my state, just as I believe the Attorney General of the United States has that obligation on the federal level."

As of Monday morning, it appears that House Republicans, Senate Democrats and the Obama White House are prepared to work together to pass a two-week spending bill this week, leaving House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on the outside looking in and possibly leading what could end up as an unsuccessful opposition to the bill.

The White House on Monday morning indicated it would likely accept the two-week spending bill, which followed last week's supportive comments about the House Republican spending proposal from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Pelosi is so far the only significant Democrat to indicate outright opposition to the House GOP bill, and said its proposed cuts to education in particular are "not a good place to start."

President Obama on Friday signed into law a bill that extends three Patriot Act surveillance authorities until late May.

Obama signed the "FISA Sunsets Extension Act of 2011," which refers to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Surveillance authorities under that act were extended in part by amending the USA Patriot Improvement and Reauthorization Act.

With Obama's signature, the ability of the United States to access business records, conduct roving wiretaps and monitor individual terrorists is maintained until May 27. The administration has said it supports a longer extension, and the Senate next week will begin working on a three-year extension.

The House plans to vote next week on legislation that would allow for criminal penalties against anyone who trespasses on White House grounds, the vice president's residence or other buildings that are locked down for security reasons due to presidential or vice presidential visits.

Plans to take up the bill come just as it was reported that Tareq and Michaela Salahi are unlikely to face prosecution for crashing a White House reception in November 2009.

But staff for Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.), who sponsored the bill, say the legislation is not a reaction to the Salahi incident. Instead, it is a reaction to concerns raised by the Secret Service about limitations in current law that make it harder to prosecute people who unlawfully enter White House grounds or the vice president's residence and grounds.

In that way, the bill is targeted more at wall climbers and it's unclear if it would apply to the Salahis, who claim they were invited.