April 20, 2010 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink

There are conflicting reports as to whether Washington Democrats will remove a $50 billion bailout slush fund from their Wall Street bailout bill, but it’s a moot point.  With or without the fund, Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd’s (D-CT) 1,408-page regulatory reform bill would empower the federal government to provide Wall Street with permanent bailouts, courtesy of American taxpayers.

Under the Dodd bill, the nation’s largest financial firms – including Goldman Sachs, President Obama’s top Wall Street ally – would be eligible for special treatment at the highest levels of government, including resolution authorities and resources unavailable to smaller financial firms.  This includes exclusive access to a pre-existing bailout fund, a Treasury-backed line of credit, the ability to have debt guaranteed by the government, and much more.

To put it in perspective, the bailout resources this bill provides far surpass those that were available to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government mortgage companies that sparked the meltdown by giving high-risk loans to people who couldn’t afford it.  As Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, told Politico yesterday, “The Dodd bill has unlimited executive bailout authority. … The bill contains permanent, unlimited bailout authority.”

• A Pre-Existing $50 Billion Bailout Slush Fund. Sen. Dodd’s financial bailout bill would create a $50 billion ‘orderly resolution fund’ ($150 billion in Rep. Barney Frank’s bill) that could be repeatedly replenished from industry assessment. Despite its technical title, the fund’s purpose is not difficult to discern.  It is not needed for people who have FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) or SIPC (Securities Investor Protection Corporation) insurance or for people whose insurance policies are protected under state law, as they are covered by other funds and resources.  This would be bailout money for firms deemed ‘too big to fail,’ and investors will recognize it that way.

• A Treasury-Backed Credit Line. In addition to the $50 billion bailout fund, the FDIC would be authorized to borrow from Treasury up to the amount of cash left in the ‘resolution fund’ plus 90% of the value of the assets of any and all too-big-to-fail firms in its control. These borrowed funds, like the funds collected through assessments, would be available to bail out creditors.  This could include the exchange of cash and other liquid instruments for illiquid assets of a failing firm.

• Government-Guaranteed Debt. In addition to the funds and authority noted above, the FDIC would be given the authority to guarantee the debt of any solvent bank, bank holding company, or affiliate in any amount subject only to an aggregate debt limit set by the Treasury Department. It is reasonable to expect that the largest firms will be the primary beneficiaries of such a program.  The experience of the current FDIC’s debt guarantee program is instructive:  as of December 31, 2009, the cumulative debt of all banks under $10 billion in assets that was guaranteed comprised only approximately one-half of one percent of all the debt guaranteed.  Codifying the FDIC’s authority to provide additional debt guarantees thus will be just one more way in which the government will make it clear that the largest financial firms could be kept afloat during times of stress.

• Institutionalized, Unlimited Bailouts. The FDIC, as the resolution agency for too-big-to-fail firms, would be given wide latitude to use resources to make payments to anyone in any amounts, at their own discretion. For instance:

• Section 204(d) of the bill would give the FDIC broad authority to use the resolution fund in whatever way the FDIC determines, in its discretion, to be “necessary or appropriate.”
• This discretion would extend to the payment both of secured and unsecured creditors. Section 210(b)(4) would provide the FDIC with the discretion to treat unsecured creditors in a dissimilar manner – including making payments to some but not all – if the FDIC deems it necessary to do so.
• Section 210(d), after discussing the maximum amounts that may be paid to creditors, states that the FDIC “may make additional payments or credit additional amounts to or with respect to or for the account of any claimant or category of claimants of the covered financial company, if the Corporation determines that such payments or credits are necessary or appropriate to minimize losses to the Corporation as receiver from the orderly liquidation of the covered financial company under this section.”

• Bridge Bank Authority. The bill would authorize the FDIC to create a bridge institution as part of resolving a covered institution and would vest the FDIC with comparably broad authority to use the orderly resolution fund in connection with the bridge institution. Under section 210(h), assets and liabilities could be transferred to the bridge institution, the FDIC may pay creditors in whole or in part, and the bridge company may be sold to or merged with another company at the FDIC’s discretion.  The FDIC also could provide funding to facilitate the sale or merger of a bridge company.  Thus, creditors of firms that could be resolved through this bridge authority can do business with such firms confident that the government will make the creditors whole either directly (through payments) or indirectly (through facilitating a sale of the business to a stronger company.)

As we saw for decades with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, perceptions that the government can bail out a firm or its creditors will create significant unfair advantages for that firm, making it easier for the firm to attract more funding, at lower rates, than otherwise would be available.  This special treatment will make these large firms more attractive to investors than the smaller financial firms.  More broadly, it results in the mispricing of risk, which lays the foundation for later economic and financial problems.

Republicans believe any efforts to protect taxpayers should begin with reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government mortgage companies that sparked the meltdown by giving high-risk loans to people who couldn’t afford it.  For more information on the House Republican plan, click here.

###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement today on President Obama’s decision to sign an Executive Order on the federal funding of elective abortion:

“Everyone knows this Executive Order will have no effect whatsoever on taxpayer funding of abortion.  Even Democratic leaders have acknowledged that.  It is a transparent attempt to provide political cover to Washington Democrats who betrayed their constituents by voting to allow taxpayer-funded abortion in the United States for the first time in 30 years.

“It is telling that President Obama is signing this Executive Order behind closed doors, unwilling to face questions from reporters or the public.  He clearly hopes to sweep this issue under the rug.  But the American people will take notice, and they will not forget.”

#####

• $569.2 billion in tax increases
• $523.5 billion in Medicare cuts
• $48 billion more for Medicaid

1. 1. A Job-Killing Government Takeover of Health Care. No amount of changes or legislative tricks can hide the true destructive nature of this bill: $17 billion in new taxes on Americans who do not comply with the individual mandate, $52 billion in new taxes on employers that do not provide health coverage deemed “acceptable” or “affordable” by government bureaucrats, and new taxes on capital gains, dividends and interest that will further stifle economic growth and job creation.
2. 2. New Tax on Capital Formation and Job Creation. The Medicare tax on capital gains, dividends, and other investment income gets bigger, magnifying the destructive power of this new tax.  The bill increases the tax from 2.9 percent to 3.8 percent, pushing the top capital gains rate to 23.8 percent and the top rate for dividends to 43.4 percent in conjunction with tax relief expiring at the end of this year.  As The Wall Street Journal editorialized this week, this tax will “permanently skew the incentives to work, save and create jobs.”

1. 3. Democrats Continue to Say ‘I Do’ To Marriage Penalty. The bill leaves in place a massive marriage penalty, which will mean higher premiums for those that tie the knot.  As highlighted in January by The Wall Street Journal, “the disparity comes about in part because subsidies for purchasing health insurance … are pegged to federal poverty guidelines.”  The final bill leaves this unfair penalty on married couples in place.

1. 4. Lower Wages and More Unemployment. The final bill imposes $52 billion in new taxes on employers, including small businesses, that cannot afford to provide health coverage or that don’t offer coverage.  The effect of this type of tax, similar to a payroll tax increase, would ultimately fall squarely on workers in the form of lower wages or reduced employment.  In fact, the Tax Policy Center concluded that “economists generally believe that the burden of payroll taxes is borne by workers in the form of lower wages, regardless of whether the tax is levied on the employer or the employee.”  The tax proposed in this bill will likely have the same effect.

1. 5. Employers Targeted By Even Higher Taxes to Enforce Employer Mandate. The final bill incorporated President Obama’s suggestion to rake in a little more cash to pay for a massive government-takeover of health care by nearly tripling the job-killing mandate tax on employers who do not offer health coverage to $2,000 per employee.  Sure enough, the President’s suggestion raises an additional $25 billion on the backs of American employers, according to CBO.

1. 6. Individual Mandate Tax Reduced?  No, Not Really. Democrats are highlighting their generosity by lowering the amount of the tax for not complying with the mandate.  But just how generous are they?  Not very.  Democrats propose to reduce the individual mandate tax flat payment amount by a scant 14¢ a day.  And, while Democrats “reduce” the individual mandate tax flat payment amount, they actually raise $2 billion more by making other alterations to the individual mandate, according to CBO.

1. 7. The Power to Tax Our Health Care. The Democrats’ final bill doesn’t just tax individuals and employers if they don’t comply with the complex mandates in the bill.  The bill sends the IRS out to tax the very products Americans use to maintain and restore their own health.  New taxes on medical devices, on prescription drugs, and on health insurance itself are all targets of the bill.  And, with $10 billion in new enforcement resources, you can bet the IRS will be taking its full share out of the pockets of every American who uses any of these products or services.

1. 8. Even More Subsidies, Even Greater Threat to the Economy. The bill increases the subsidies provided under the bill from those provided in the Senate bill by $65 billion, a significant and unsustainable increase.  In fact, the Associated Press reported a warning from Massachusetts’ state treasurer, who stated that Congress will “threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years” if it adopts a health care overhaul modeled after the Bay State’s.

1. 9. Taxpayer-Funded Abortion Coverage. The final bill does not include the Stupak amendment language that would prohibit federal funds from being used to fund elective abortions.  Instead, states are given the option to opt-out of providing insurance coverage of abortions.  Still, taxpayers in a state that opts-out would still see their federal tax dollars fund elective abortions in other states.  Additionally, each state through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) can provide access to two multi-state plans, and only one of them will exclude abortions. OPM’s current health care program – the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) – does not include any plans that cover elective abortion.  For the first time, a federally funded and managed health care plan will cover elective abortions.

10. Medicaid Rolls And Waiting Lines to Swell Even More. CBO estimates that as a result of the Democrats’ bill, one million more Americans will get their coverage from Medcaid, which is plagued with financial woes and wreaks all kinds of budgetary havoc on cash-strapped states.  The Democrats’ bill, as the New York Times highlighted, will push even more Americans into a program where they will have trouble finding doctors and have to wait for potentially months to receive care.  That’s not meaningful reform by any measure.

BONUS: Republicans have proposed a health care bill based on common-sense reforms that, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, would reduce premiums for families and small businesses by up to 10 percent. It is not too late to start over.

WASHINGTON, DC – At a press conference this morning with House & Senate GOP leaders, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) dismissed President Obama’s sales pitch to rank-and-file Democrats that “the fate of his presidency” is on the line with the upcoming health care vote and also discussed the House vote expected today on the resolution offered by Rep. Parker Griffith (R-AL) to block the “Slaughter Solution”:

“Well, it’s pretty clear that Democrat leaders here in Congress and the President aren’t listening to the American people.  Because the American people are saying, ‘stop!’ and they’re screaming at the top of their lungs.  The President’s latest ploy as he’s dealing with Members trying to convince them to vote against their constituents and to vote with him, is to make the point that his presidency is on the line.  Well, I’m sorry Mr. President, this isn’t about you.  It’s not about the office you hold and it’s not about the Speaker.  This is about the American people and the health care system that they want for our country.  We’ve made clear that it’s time to scrap this bill and start over on commonsense reforms to make our current health care system better.  But no, they are going to continue to ram, ram, ram this bill through the Congress.  Every kind of scheme known to man to try and get it through the Congress without a vote.

“We’re going to have an opportunity for the Members today to vote on a straight up-or-down resolution, about requiring a straight up-or-down vote on this bill.  It’ll be part of our Previous Question when we get a Rule bill up, and Members will have a chance to vote on that.  But I can tell you this, that Republicans in the House and Senate have worked closely together or the last year, and we’re going to continue to work closely together to do everything that we can do to make sure that this bill never, ever, ever passes.”

#####

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) announced that House Republicans will force a vote tomorrow on a resolution requiring a clean, up-or-down vote on the Senate-passed health care bill.  If adopted by the House, the resolution would prohibit Speaker Pelosi and Democratic Leaders from implementing the “Slaughter Solution,” the controversial scheme by which the Senate health care bill would be deemed as passed by the House without an actual up-or-down vote.

“The ‘Slaughter Solution’ has sparked widespread outrage because it’s designed to protect Washington politicians when it’s American taxpayers we should be looking out for,” Boehner said. “Speaker Pelosi and Democratic Leaders, who promised to lead the ‘most open’ Congress in history, thought they could pull a fast one on the American people, but they were wrong. This vote will give Democrats an opportunity to demonstrate whether they share Republicans’ commitment to ensuring the American people get what they deserve: a clean, up-or-down vote on the Senate health care bill.  The stakes are too high, and this bill is too controversial, for anything less than total accountability.”

House Republicans will offer the text of the resolution as the “PQ” (“previous question”) for the suspension authority rule that is expected to be considered on the floor Thursday.  The text of the resolution, introduced by Rep. Parker Griffith (R-AL) – a former Democrat who switched to the GOP in December out of disgust with Washington Democrats’ government takeover of health care –  is available here.

#####

March 16, 2010 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink

Not exactly a banner day for Democratic leaders’ final push to force a job-killing government takeover of health care through Congress.  Democrats have come under heavy criticism for again resorting to underhanded tactics after Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) first announced yesterday she would implement the controversial “Slaughter Solution” to force a health care bill through the House without actually voting on it.  Speaker Pelosi now faces the prospect of a vote in the House forced by Republicans on whether the American people should get an up-or-down vote on the Senate health care bill.  With Democrats firmly on the defensive, the top four House Democratic leaders disagree with one another on whether they have the votes to pass a bill, and when such a vote would take place.  The text of the bill itself has yet to materialize, along with a CBO score, despite the fact that Democratic leaders claimed both would be available yesterday.  Now Speaker Pelosi is saying she really hasn’t decided on whether to use the “Slaughter Solution.”  And Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) says Americans should be “unconcerned” about how this job-killing monstrosity gets passed?  Go on, tell us another joke.

Democrats clearly aren’t listening to each other or the American people, who want this job-killing government takeover of health care scrapped.  All of this chaos and uncertainty makes the case for doing the right thing – the responsible thing – and starting over on common-sense reforms that would actually lower costs for families and small businesses.

Democrats are taking a pummeling over their controversial “Slaughter Solution” to force a job-killing government takeover of health care through Congress, and to think that this is the one thing they agree on right now:

Then again, to use a process to force a bill through over the objection of the American people, you need to schedule a vote and have the votes to pass the bill.  The top four Democratic leaders in the House all disagree on those finer points:

Of course, you can’t get votes or schedule a vote without a bill text or a CBO score.  Nope, don’t have those either:

“House Democratic leaders are still struggling to produce a final health care overhaul bill at an acceptable official cost estimate, but Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer said Tuesday they continue to plan a final vote this week.  There were reports they are having trouble drafting a bill that meets their budgetary targets. … Rank-and-file Democrats did not talk about the details, but said that the CBO scores had come up short. There were reports they are having trouble drafting a bill that meets their budgetary targets.” (CQ, 3/16/10)

###

EDITORIAL BOARDS SLAM TOXIC CONCOCTION

March 16, 2010 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink

As if a government takeover of health care was not controversial enough already, Democrats are looking to add fuel to the fire of America’s disgust by passing the plan without an actual “vote.”

It’s bad enough to overturn the will of the people by passing a government takeover of health care that is overwhelmingly rejected by Americans.  But the so-called “Slaughter Solution” – passing the massive Senate bill without an up or down vote – takes shame to a whole new level.

Any member of Congress who believes in the Democrats’ health care plan – one that raises taxes $500 billion, slashes Medicare by another $500 billion, forces taxpayers to fund abortions, and gives bureaucrats power to make medical decisions – should be willing to stand up and be counted.  And editorial boards across the country have begun to speak out about the “disgusting process”:

Yet the Slaughter Solution seems to be the play of the day for Democrats leaders who will do anything to get a government takeover of health care. And of all people, this all should come as a disappointment to President Obama, who made greater transparency and accountability a cornerstone of his new presidency.  Despite that pledge, he once again took to the podium yesterday to call on Democrats to vote yes.  His message was simple:

But rather than demonstrating any “courage” whatsoever, senior Democrats are preparing their “controversial procedure” to pass the infamous Senate health care bill (political payoffs and all) without the usual up or down vote that Americans would expect – and frankly demand – with such a sweeping proposal.

But it’s going to take more than a little smoke and mirrors from the Speaker to pull one over the eyes of the American people. At the end of the day, a vote for the “Slaughter Solution” is all at once a vote for a government takeover of health care and for the Washington games that Americans are so tired of.

###

THE SPEAKER’S JUSTIFICATION:  “NO ONE WANTS TO VOTE FOR THE SENATE BILL.”

March 15, 2010 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink

Laced with political payoffs, taxpayer funding for abortions, job-killing tax hikes, and huge Medicare cuts, the American people strongly oppose the President’s plan for a government takeover of health care.

Nonetheless, senior Democrats are preparing a pathway to ram the bill through the House without an actual “vote”: the Slaughter Solution.  Under this scheme, concocted by the chairwoman of the powerful Rules committee, Louise Slaughter (D-NY), a procedural gimmick would be employed to “deem” the Senate bill passed without ever having a straight up or down vote.

Republicans believe that if the Democrats are willing to have the government takeover our health care system, they should be willing to vote for it – without any gimmicks. And yesterday, even the President’s senior advisor expressed the same opinion:

Republican leaders agree and that’s why they’ve expressed outrage over the use of the Slaughter Solution.  But today, in a rare moment of clarity, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) admitted why such an outrageous move is being planned: “no one wants to vote for the Senate bill,” she told a group of liberal bloggers.

That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement for a plan that will remake one-sixth of the American economy.  Yet with the Speaker’s blessing, a bill that Americans don’t want, and no one in Congress wants to vote for is somehow still headed for a high profile vote; and Democrats wonder why people are so upset with Washington.

Still, Democrats appear intent on barreling through the wishes of the American public with the Slaughter Solution driving the train. Speaker Pelosi pledged to operate the most open and honest Congress in history. Does she believe passing such an enormous and costly bill without even voting on it represents the highest standard of integrity and openness?

Gimmicks and sleight of hand cannot change the fact in passing the Senate plan, House Democrats will be endorsing the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, Gator-Aid, taxpayer-funded abortion, $500 billion in job-killing tax increases, and $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, and increases in premiums as high as 13 percent.  Rank-and-file Democrats must make a choice: do they stand with President Obama and Speaker Pelosi, or do they stand with their constituents?

###

By Justin Williams

Updated: 3:35PM.

January 6^th, 2010, Fairfax, VA – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has “strongly endors[ed]” a request by C-SPAN to televise House-Senate health care negotiations, saying House Republicans unanimously support the television network’s proposal.

In a letter dated December 30^th to Congress, C-SPAN Chairman and CEO Brian P. Lamb asked “that [Congress] opens all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings, to electronic media coverage.”

Democrats have denied the request, and Jim Manley, the spokesman for the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said “The drafting of this health insurance reform bill has set new standards for transparency.”

Manley called the Republicans’ endorsement a “shameless… strategy to stop reform at all costs by relying on misinformation and myths.” Boehner today said that “skipping a real, open conference committee would shut out the American people and break one of President Obama’s signature campaign promises.”

In 2008, during the presidential campaign, then-candidate Barack Obama promised to make health care talks transparent: “That’s what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN.”

Obama has also pledged that he would make “meetings where laws will be written … more open to the public” including a pledge “not [to] sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.”

Fueling the controversy, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “threw a rare rhetorical elbow” at Obama when a reporter asked her feelings on Obama’s campaign promise and Congress’ action. Pelosi stated, “There are a number of things he was for on the campaign trail,” as reported by Politico.

So far, the House and Senate have passed their own versions of the health care bill and now, once again, are meeting behind closed doors to hash out the differences.

Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson stated today that “This bill is so unpopular that this is actually the eighth version presented to the American people, which does not inspire confidence at all.”

Wilson said the eight versions of what he dubbed “ObamaCare” were: 1-3) three House committee versions; 4) HR 3200, the House passed version of “public option”; 5) Baucus co-ops, the Senate Finance Committee version; 6) the Senate “public option,” which Senator Joe Lieberman and other lawmakers objected to; 7) the Reid substitute that the Senate passed, and 8 ) the current House-Senate version that Congressional Democrats are now meeting on to discuss.

According to the latest Rasmussen Reports poll, 52 percent of Americans currently oppose the bill.  At least 50 percent have opposed the bill since September 14^th, with support never rising above 47 percent since then.  Currently, only 42 percent support the bill.

“Barack Obama promised to bring all parties to the table,” Wilson said, adding, “Instead, it’s just one party, the Democrat Party, at the table. ”

“That’s not transparency,” Wilson said, concluding, “it’s a sham.”

Justin Williams is a contributing editor to the Washington News Alert.

###

“Something as critical as the Democrats’ health care bill, with its Medicare cuts and tax hikes, shouldn’t be slapped together in a shady backroom deal. The American people simply won’t stand for it. And President Obama knows that, which is why he pledged during last year’s campaign that such negotiations would take place in public, on C-SPAN. In the same spirit, Rep. Vern Buchanan has introduced a resolution requiring the negotiations be public.

“But now it seems that Washington Democrats plan to ignore the President’s commitment, and Speaker Pelosi is even laughing about it. Let’s be clear: skipping a real, open Conference would shut out the American people and break one of President Obama’s signature campaign promises. It would be a disgrace – to the Democratic Leaders if they do it, and to the President who broke his word. That’s no laughing matter.”

NOTE: Yesterday, House Republican Leader Boehner sent a letter to C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb, accepting Lamb’s offer to televise the health care Conference on his network. You can read that letter here.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 6, 2010 | PERMALINK
CONTACT: Michael Steel, Antonia Ferrier, Kevin Smith – (202) 225-4000

####