Head over to John Boehner's Facebook page, tell him JUST VOTE 8OKT13

Go to john boehner's facebook page and post a message telling him to just vote, to allow a a vote on a clean continuing resolution in the House. Click the link to go to his page and leave your message....

The truth is that Speaker Boehner has enough votes -- from Republicans and Democrats -- to end the shutdown right now.

But he's refusing to hold a vote because he's still letting Tea Party Republicans call the shots.

Now is the time to make sure he's hearing -- constantly -- from the majority of Americans who want to see this shutdown end.

So we're trying something new. Head over to John Boehner's Facebook page and deliver him a message: Speaker Boehner, stand up to the Tea Party Republicans who are sabotaging the economy. Just vote. 


I'll be honest -- we don't know if this alone is going to change John Boehner's mind. But I can tell you this: His staffers, his supporters, and maybe even Speaker Boehner himself will see your notes.

Even if it raises the pressure just a little bit, it will be worth it. All this week, we're going to make sure the people responsible for this shutdown feel the frustration and urgency that the American people are feeling right now.

And since we all can't head to his office physically, today we're heading to his office's Facebook page to let him know what we think -- you should join in.

Tell John Boehner "enough already" -- just vote and stop sabotaging the economy:

http://my.barackobama.com/Enough-Already-Boehner-FB

Thanks,

Abby

Abby Witt
Deputy National Director of Issue Campaigns
Organizing for Action

P.S. -- If you're looking for ideas on what to share on John Boehner's Facebook page, here's a fun video we put together to call him out for saying he can't end the shutdown. He should see it -- just copy this link to share it and post it as a comment:

http://ofa.bo/JustVote

In Budget Negotiations, White House Throws A Curve Ball On Omnibus Bill 15DEZ11

IF the repiglicans and tea-baggers insist on riders in legislation, riders that have nothing to do with the actual bill and that a vast majority of Americans do not support (like cuts in funding for the EPA and wall street regulation) then the Democrats should defeat the legislation and institute a campaign to make sure the nation knows who is responsible for the government shutting down and why. Only a party serving the wanton greed of the rich and the corporate welfare queens would attach these riders to a bill to continue funding the federal government and only a party of spineless quislings will cave in and allow the bill to be passed. From HuffPost....
WASHINGTON -- In a move that could dramatically shake up late-stage budget negotiations in Congress, the White House on Wednesday night issued a public statement alerting lawmakers that the administration was not comfortable with the current contours of a deal.
White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer once again urged Congress to pass a short-term extension of the current federal budget so that negotiations over a long-term appropriations bill could continue. There were, Pfeiffer said, several unresolved issues with the long-term omnibus bill, chief among them policy riders that would alter previously passed legislation and compromise executive powers.
"The President continues to have significant concerns about a number of provisions that have been reported to be in the Republican agreement on the omnibus," the statement read. "This includes provisions that would undermine Wall Street reforms, enact extreme social and ideological riders, undercut environmental protections, and threaten the foreign policy prerogatives of the President. Given the magnitude of the legislation -- providing over $1 trillion dollars in funding -- coupled with the unresolved payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance extension, Congress should pass a short-term continuing resolution as it has seven times already this year so that all parties have an appropriate opportunity to consider and complete all of the critical budget and economic issues necessary to finish our responsibilities for the year."
Pressed for specifics, an administration official highlighted two examples of language in the omnibus bill that the White House found problematic. The official described these examples as "undermining Wall Street reform by not adequately funding [the Commodity Futures Trading Commission] and impinging on the President's power to conduct foreign policy in this case with regards to Cuba policy." (The omnibus, as currently envisioned, would reinstate restrictions on travel to Cuba that were loosened by the president in 2009).
In pushing Congress to give itself more time (a short-term continuing resolution could last several days or a week), the White House is very overtly letting it be known that the deal on the omnibus is far from closed.
"There has been all this reporting that somehow there is some deal on the omnibus," a senior administration official said on Tuesday. "There is not a deal on the omnibus. There is only a deal when the president is ready to sign a bill."
Republicans have insisted that negotiators have come to an agreement on a roughly $1 trillion measure to fund the government over the course of the next year. And they have called on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to bring the bill to the floor so that it can be passed into law.

Democrats have declined to do so. Publicly, their line is that a deal on the omnibus is not yet final. And, indeed, the quibbling over riders doesn't seem done yet. Privately, there is concern that if the appropriations bill were to pass, House Republicans would simply get out of town, leaving Senate Democrats with an unenviable choice: pass the GOP version of the payroll tax cut extension or no version at all.

Senate rejects House spending bill, leaving open possibility of government shutdown 23SEP11

Dysfunctional government brought to us by the greed of the gop / tea-bagger House. Hey all you right wing anti federal government voters, hows that extreme tea-bagger thingy working out for you now???? From the Washington Post.....

By Felicia Sonmez, Rosalind S. Helderman and Paul Kane

The Senate on Friday, 59 to 36, defeated a GOP-authored short-term funding measure designed to keep the government running through mid-November, ratcheting up the pressure on party leaders to resolve an impasse on federal disaster relief funds ahead of a deadline at the end of next week.
It remained unclear Friday afternoon how leaders in both chambers would resolve the stalemate.
Shortly after Friday’s vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced that the chamber would return Monday afternoon to vote on its own funding measure, a move that cuts into an already-scheduled week-long recess.
The House is also scheduled to recess next week, and House Republican leaders declined to say Friday morning whether they would call lawmakers back into session to continue work on the funding dispute.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency could run out of funding as early as Monday, and the resolution currently keeping the federal government open is set to expire on Sept. 30.
At a Capitol news conference ahead of the Friday morning vote, House Republican leaders urged the Senate to take up the House-passed measure.
“With FEMA expected to run out of disaster funding as soon as Monday, the only path to getting assistance into the hands of American families immediately is for the Senate to approve the House bill,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said.
Hours earlier, the House had approved its version of the legislation by a 219-203 vote in an after-midnight roll call. But Democrats in both chambers have balked at the inclusion of more than $1 billion in cuts elsewhere in the budget in order to offset the additional disaster relief funding.
The vote in the upper chamber came after a midnight roll call, when House Republican leaders persuaded conservatives early Friday morning to support a stop-gap measure nearly identical to one they had rejected just 30 hours earlier. By a narrow margin, 213 Republicans supported the plan, along with six Democrats; 179 Democrats opposed it, joined by 24 Republicans.
Without a resolution, FEMA’s disaster relief fund will run out of money early next week and the rest of the government would be forced to shutdown Oct. 1.
FEMA said its Disaster Relief Fund had just $175 million as of Friday morning and would go broke by early next week, likely on Tuesday.
 An unprecedented depletion of the fund would trigger federal laws governing how agencies are supposed to operate in the absence of funds, and the agency said it is consulting with Obama administration lawyers to determine how to proceed.
 “The administration is committed to doing all it can under current legal authorities to continue vital operations, including assistance to individuals,” FEMA spokeswoman Rachel Racusen said in an e-mail. “ But there is no question this is a critical situation and one we are watching closely.” 
House leaders contend that the Senate is responsible for blocking desperately needed disaster dollars from flowing to FEMA.
“You saw the House act,” said House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) as he left the Capitol early Friday morning. “We are intending that the money gets to FEMA and to disaster victims as they need it.”
“I think Harry Reid’s political ploy is not going to work,” Cantor continued. “I guess Harry Reid will have to bear the burden of denying disaster victims the money they need.”
Friday’s House vote marked a reversal of fortunes for Boehner, who after losing the initial Wednesday vote on the House spending resolution found himself roaming the contours of a familiar dilemma — capitulate to fiscal hawks in his own party who want to spend less, or compromise with Democrats who want to spend more.
Instead, Boehner found another route: He huddled all day and night Thursday with his rank-and-file, warning them he would give them one more chance to approve the bill or he would be forced to agree to drop the offsetting cut, as Democrats had demanded.
In addition, after a 90-minute meeting with the House GOP Conference on Thursday afternoon, the leadership agreed to an additional, largely symbolic cut by striking $100 million from a loan program that funded the bankrupt solar panel manufacturer Solyndra. That company, which received the loan guarantees through the Obama administration’s 2009 stimulus legislation, has become a favorite target for Republicans in their critique of the White House’s handling of the economy.
As for the swipe at the program that had funded Solyndra, Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.) told colleagues on the House floor late Thursday that the goal was to “ensure that hard-earned dollars of the American people are not wasted in the way that we have seen” with the company.
Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.) countered that the measure had hardly changed after a day of wrangling and still made “unacceptable cuts to an essential manufacturing jobs program to pay for equally essential disaster relief.”
The blow-up over what Boehner had once hoped would be a routine matter — a bill to merely keep government operating until Nov. 18 — illustrated what has become a central reality for the Republican speaker: He controls the House majority only on paper.
On any given vote, he must contend with a sizable bloc of his own members willing to buck his leadership in the name of shrinking government.
This leaves him in the uncomfortable position of having to consider alliances with Democrats — and facing negotiating those alliances from a position of weakness.
Despite the embarrassing loss on Wednesday’s vote, Republicans defended the decision to hold the vote even though they realized it was likely to fail. The GOP leadership wanted to demonstrate to the recalcitrant conservatives that their actions had real consequences. One senior Republican adviser called the process “an educational experience.”
“I’ve always believed in allowing the House to work its will. I understood what the risk was yesterday. But why not put the bill on the floor and let the members speak? And they did,” Boehner said Thursday morning at his weekly press briefing.
According to GOP lawmakers and aides, House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) had reported to Boehner and Cantor that a few dozen Republicans would oppose the legislation, mostly because they thought its spending levels were too far above those they voted for in the spring when they approved the 2012 budget originally proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Boehner’s leadership team knew that it would need Democratic votes to approve the plan, but only by Wednesday afternoon did they fully understand that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) were whipping their caucus to oppose the measure and make Boehner deliver nearly all Republican votes for passage. Rather than pulling the bill from the floor, Boehner told his deputies to hold the vote.
The extraordinary effort required to pass such a basic bill suggests even bigger battles later in the fall on potential blockbuster deficit-reduction plans.
The stopgap spending bill is necessary because the House and Senate have stalemated over how to fund government through the whole year. Without a stopgap in place to buy time for further negotiations, the government will shut down at month’s end.
House leaders had hoped to pass the short-term funding bill without the strife that had characterized recent debates, which they knew would erode financial markets’ confidence and spark further disgust among voters. They would do it by agreeing to set spending in the bill at a rate of $1.043 trillion for the year, the amount set in the rancorous August deal to raise the nation’s debt ceiling.
But that plan ran headlong into the political realities of their divided chamber — as well as a congressional calendar that provides for a week-long recess starting Friday so that Jewish lawmakers can observe their holidays next week.
Democrats, stung by accusations that they had made too many concessions in the debt fight during the summer, stood unified against the measure over a Republican decision to pair $3.65 billion in funding for disaster relief with a $1.5 billion spending cut to the the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program, which offers loans to car companies to encourage the production of energy-efficient cars. That particular cut was anathema to many Democrats, who argued that the loan program has generated tens of thousands of jobs.
Democrats relished the prospect that their unified opposition forced Boehner to publicly struggle.
“In the House, the majority controls all the mechanisms,” said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.). “You’d better be able to produce the votes. You just cant go willy-nilly to the floor and then say, ‘Well, oopsy.’ ”

Rep. Graves Calls GOP’s Billions In Oil Subsidies ‘Market Manipulation;’ Forgets That He Voted To Extend Them 2APR11

WHY weren't the tea-bagger protestors who showed up in D.C. this week protesting against the gop / tea-bagger vote for subsidies to the big oil companies? Probably because through the manipulation and propaganda of the tea-bagger caucus in the House they were not aware of it....after all to admit supporting these subsidies they would show whose interest they are actually representing, those of the corporations who paid for them in the last election. This from ThinkProgress....
In February and again in March, Republicans in the House of Representatives, on a largely party-line roll call, voted to extend tens of billions in taxpayer subsidies to big oil companies. At the sparsely attended “Continuing Revolution” Tea Party rally on Thursday calling for more budget cuts, we talked to a number of attendees about their thoughts on Republicans giving so much taxpayer money away to already ultra-profitable oil companies. Rep. Sam Graves (R-MO) was among the many lawmakers to vote twice to extend over $50 billion in taxpayer subsidies to the oil companies:

– House Vote 153 on H.J.Res.44: Graves voted to extend billions in oil subsidies.
– House Vote 109 on H.R.1: Graves voted to extend billions in oil subsidies.

However, when we caught up with Graves yesterday, he said he had no idea that the vote had taken place. He didn’t seem to remember voting for them. In fact, after pressing the congressman, Graves called the idea of giving oil companies taxpayer subsidies “a manipulation of the market place”:

FANG: Four billion dollars in oil subsidies that the Congress just passed to extend for the next ten years maybe forty billion for the next ten years to oil companies. Do you agree with that type of subsidy given the state our budget and deficit?
GRAVES: Uh, when was that passed? I’m not aware of what you’re speaking.
FANG: It was in the continuing resolution debate. I think the Democrats raised a point of order to vote on it and it passed.
GRAVES: Hm. Yeah as far as subsidies, I mean I believe in the free market system all together, the capitalism system one hundred percent. Let the markets determine who is going to succeed throughout the market place.
KEYES: Do you think those subsidies are an aberration of the free market?
GRAVES: I mean they definitely influence the market place. Its somewhat of a manipulation of the market place if products aren’t willing, aren’t able to succeed on their own because of consumer demand and likeness of that product then why should government get in there and manipulate it?

Watch it:


Republicans have convinced the media and the Tea Party movement that they are concerned about the deficit. Even as the GOP has voted in lockstep to balloon the deficit with billions in tax giveaways to millionaires and billionaires, they have used concerns about the deficit to justify cutting food stamps, Pell grants, the Weather Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and other consumer and middle class protections. The billions in oil subsidies Graves voted to protect — then forgot about — is part of the same ideology of soaking the poor to help the rich.

Will the White House agree to weaken EPA? Now everyone disputes the story, from CLIMATE PROGRESS. 31MAR11

WHAT  sad comment on the gop / tea-baggers that not one of them can committ to protecting the EPA, and so all of us.......their corporate masters just won't allow it!

34 Senators, enough to sustain veto, call for continued implementation of the Clean Air Act.

Is the White House, in the quest for a budget deal, quietly preparing to accept some aspects of a House GOP effort to roll back the regulatory power of the Environmental Protection Agency, which would represent a significant weakening of the Obama adminstration’s commitment to combat global warming? So reported the Associated Press, but in a statement sent my way, the White House is denying it….

UPDATE: Dem Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus (a member of which was the source on the AP story), has also released a statement denying it: “The anonymous source who contributed to the Associated Press story was inaccurate.”
UPDATE II: The Associated Press, which originally reported this story, did a subsequent version that watered down the original claims, so it seems like there’s no one out there on any side vouching for the original assertion.

That’s the WashPost’s Greg Sargent who blogs at “The Plum Line.”  When I first saw the story reported at places like Grist and then Alternet, it seem unlikely and incorrect to me and the folks I know who are familiar with these discussions.
Because I thought the story was wrong, I didn’t blog on it.  But enough readers have raised concerns that it’s clearly worth a post.
I should also note that the Senate vote on the amendments to limit EPA’s power to regulate CO2, which were supposed to be held this week, have been pushed back until next week.  At the end, I’ll post a release from the office of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that make clear The Senate has enough votes to sustain a veto of any bill on this issue.
As for the White House story, Sargent has done the heavy lifting, so I’ll excerpt his story, which continues:

There’s a nugget buried in an AP story on the budget wars that claims the following:

A Democratic lawmaker familiar with a meeting Wednesday between Obama and members of the Congressional Black Caucus said the administration made it clear that some House GOP proposals restricting the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulatory powers would have to make it into the final bill. In order to characterize the White House’s position, the lawmaker insisted on anonymity because the meeting was private.
It’s not clear which proposals the White House might accept, but those backed by Republicans would block the government from carrying out regulations on greenhouse gases, putting in place a plan to clean up the Chesapeake Bay and from shutting down mountaintop mines it believes will cause too much water pollution.

If true, this would be striking. It would mean the White House may part ways with Chuck Schumer, who has adamantly insisted that Dems will not support any budget deal containing “riders” on Planned Parenthood or weakening the EPA’s regulatory powers. And as Kevin Drum notes, this would also amount to major capitulation: “It would mean that Obama has essentially given up completely on anything other than token action to address global warming.”

Precisely.  That’s why it seemed unlikely.

But White House spokesman Clark Stevens emails that the White House is still committed to opposing any EPA “riders”:

As the administration has made clear, the funding bill should not be used to further unrelated policy agendas, and we remain opposed to riders that do that, including as it relates to the environment.

It’s also worth noting that the original AP story said that it wasn’t clear which of the GOP proposals on the EPA the White House was supposedly prepared to support. The original story floated the possibility that the White House might only give on EPA plans to clean up Chesapeake Bay or shut down mountaintop mines — and not on the core GOP proposal of scuttling EPA’s power to regulate greenhouse gases.
As a side note, even Republicans I’ve spoken with privately concede that they’re well aware that it’s unlikely that the latter is a concession they could win, since it would be very hard for many Congressional Dems to support any budget deal containing it.

It is always possible that the Obama administration will do the wrong thing at the last minute, lord knows, but if they were to stand firm they can certainly block these amendments.  And given the the public’s strong support for EPA regulation of greenhouse gases, this is a winning issue if the Administration will do the kind of messaging on it that it has intermittently in the past (see 63% of Americans say “EPA needs to do more to hold polluters accountable and protect the air and water”).
Here’s the release from Sen. Sanders office:

Senators Stand up for Clean Air Act
WASHINGTON, March 31 – Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), John Kerry (D-Mass.) and 30 colleagues today introduced a resolution calling for continued implementation of the Clean Air Act.
In the face of efforts by House Republicans and some senators to weaken the nation’s clean air protections, the resolution which specifies the benefits of the Clean Air Act has 34 original cosponsors who and will continue to seek additional support from their colleagues.
The landmark law saves 160,000 Americans from premature death every year and helps avoid tens of thousands of cases of lung disease, heart attacks, and emergency room visits. The act also has reduced major air pollution by 41 percent over the last 20 years even as the economy grew by 64 percent.
Sanders said, “It is absolutely unconscionable that in the year 2011 the Congress is debating amendments to gut the Clean Air Act and I am going to fight back.  I also think that at a time when House Republicans might force a government shutdown unless the EPA backs down from protecting public health, we must not let the budget process be used to deregulate polluters.”
Whitehouse said, “Americans are expecting us to roll up our sleeves and get to work, solving today’s pressing issues – putting America back to work, and reducing the federal deficit.  Instead, radical Republicans are using the budget process to push for extreme policy positions that would gut the Clean Air Act and roll back important public health protections.  These same Republicans are literally demanding that we compromise our children’s health to get a short-term budget deal.”
Carper said, “For the last forty years, the EPA has use the Clean Air Act to foster economic growth and protect Americans from life threatening air pollution.  Since the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, the EPA has saved thousands of lives and saved billions of dollars in health care costs,  while keeping electricity rates – adjusted for inflation – constant.  At the same time American jobs in engineering and design, as well as in manufacturing, installing and operating pollution control and clean energy technology are being created to meet our clean air needs.   Put it another way, the Clean Air Act benefits outweigh the costs by a margin of 30 to 1. Talk about a return on investment. It just doesn’t get much better than that.”
Kerry said, “Ever since Richard Nixon signed it into law, the Clean Air Act has saved tens of thousands of lives by curbing air pollution and helped jumpstart new technologies that created millions of jobs in the process. But somehow our political environment has become so divorced from reality, facts, science and history that today even a commonsense law like the Clean Air Act can be used as a partisan punching bag. This Resolution showcases just some of the Clean Air Act’s many achievements, and I hope it will remind my colleagues that under this law we were able to grow our economy and cut harmful pollution that threatens our families.”
The Senate is expected to vote soon on up to four amendments that would strip the Environmental Protection Agency of its authority to reduce carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act. An amendment by the Senate Republican Leadership would overturn EPA’s scientific finding that greenhouse gas emissions are a public health threat and allow the biggest polluters to spew carbon pollution without restrictions. It also would undermine fuel economy standards that are projected to save drivers of new vehicles up to $2,800 at the gas pump, save more than 2 million barrels of oil per day (roughly as much as the U.S. imports from the Persian Gulf), and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs.
House Republicans are also reportedly pushing for riders attached to their budget bill, which would shut down Clean Air Act enforcement of big polluters’ greenhouse gas emissions, to be included in a congressional budget deal.
Sanders’ resolution is also sponsored by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Environment Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Democratic Policy Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Democrat Conference Secretary Patty Murray (D-Wash.), and Sens. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Joe Lieberman (I-Ct.), Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

Of course, 34 is the number of senators needed to block a veto override, if it should come to that (that is, if Obama vetoed a bill that had language restricting EPA).

Senate Democrats Meet To Find More Cuts For Long-Term Funding Deal With GOP 24FEB11

SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN! The cuts being proposed by democrats, tea-baggers and the gop are immoral, and if they are intent on breaking the backs of the poor and working class then let everyone experience the pain. This is a wake up call America! These politicians are representing the military-industrial complex and corporate America, NOT the needs of the people. If anything needs to be cut it is the bloated, wasteful, destructive Pentagon budget and the tax loopholes for corporate America allowing them not to pay their fair share. As the Rev martin Luther King Jr said 
"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?, 1967.
WASHINGTON - Democratic leadership and Appropriations Committee staffers are meeting Thursday afternoon to find ways to cut social spending from the remainder of the fiscal year 2011 budget, a Senate Democratic aide told HuffPost. The object of the gathering is to identify cuts that will satisfy House Republicans' demands for drastic spending reductions despite the flagging economy.
Multiple leadership aides, however, said that the cuts will be made to a long-term budget resolution, rather than a short-term spending bill, as Republicans insist. That the two parties are now arguing merely over how quickly to make cuts indicates that their positions may be drawing close enough to avoid a government shutdown - without the GOP giving much up yet.
"It sounds like Senate Democrats are making progress towards our goal of cutting government spending to help the private sector create jobs," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). "Hopefully, that means they will support the short-term CR with spending cuts that we will pass next week, rather than shutting down the government."
Boehner is traveling on a fundraising tour.
House Republicans have proposed a measure that would keep the government funded for two more weeks past the March 4th deadline -- when money runs out--asking for $4 billion in cuts. Democrats have not budged in insisting any stopgap be drawn along the lines of current funding levels.
The compromise offered to the GOP on Thursday would not change that. "This is not about a short-term CR," said a leadership aide. "We are planning to make a serious offer to the House Republicans on a long-term CR that contains deeper cuts than were originally proposed. And if the Republicans will meet us in the middle of this offer we might be able to avert the need for a short-term CR."
Senate Democrats are hoping that by offering the first concession, House GOPers will either respond in kind or take the blame for a shutdown. Yet each Democratic negotiating tactic has led to additional cuts. As the talks drag on, Republicans get closer and closer to their full goal. Meanwhile, the wrangling over a stopgap measure to temporarily avert a shutdown has the capacity to confuse the debate.

Story continues below

"Someone should pressure them and say 'Why are you so focused on the short term CR when it is it long term CR that matters?" said a top Senate Democratic aide.
The long-term goal would be reached by cutting $8.5 billion in earmarked projects. An additional roughly $25 billion could be cut, said Democratic aides, by moving up reductions that Obama had proposed for the next year so that they take effect sooner. During Thursday afternoon's meeting, lawmakers will discuss what specific programs will be set aside for targeting.

Pro-choice senators: Filibuster the House's all-out attack on women! from CREDO 19FEB11

THE gop and tea-bagger attacks on women's health, on children's health is beyond comprehension. There is nothing resembling a pro-life position in the legislation passed by the House. To propose to redefine rape to limit abortion (H.R.3) is so disgusting it is difficult to even understand the "logic" behind such a proposal. And how can someone claiming to be pro-life support legislation that would allow a hospital to deny an abortion to a woman if her life depends on it (H.R. 358)? Cutting all funding for Planned Parenthood under Title X leaves millions of poor women without access to birth control, mammograms, pap smears, HIV testing and other non abortion medical care...how can this be pro life? THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION, THE PENCE AMENDMENT, H.R. 3 AND H.R. 358 MUST NOT BE INCLUDED IN ANY LEGISLATION PASSED BY THE SENATE. Please click the link or header and sign on to the petition calling on the Senate to block these bills and amendments...The nation will be better off if the government is forced to shut down rather than accept these attacks on the health and welfare of women and children. We can not let these bills and amendments become law.

Every pro-choice senator must draw a line in the sand. Clicking here will add your name to this petition to pro-choice senators: "Pledge to filibuster any bill that introduces new restrictions on abortion or defunds Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest provider of reproductive health care to women." Click here to add your name

If you think we have a solid pro-choice majority in the Senate, think again.

It's up to the Senate to stop the attacks on women now that the House has passed a budget bill to defund family planning services — shamefully wiping out federal funding for Planned Parenthood's non-abortion health care for women. And not only that but the redefinition of rape is still on the table and anti-choice Republicans are pushing a legislation that would allow hospitals to let pregnant women die rather than perform life-saving abortions.

We cannot take for granted our ability to stop these bills in the Senate. Anti-choice forces in the Senate now out number pro-choice senators 46-40.¹ We need 41 votes to sustain a filibuster of the anti-woman, anti-choice bills coming out of the House. And what's more, we need 41 pro-choice senators who are willing to go toe-to-toe with the extreme, hard right majority. At the end of this fight one side will have to blink.

Tell pro-choice senators: Filibuster any bill that introduces new restrictions on abortion or defunds Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest provider of reproductive health care to women. Click here to automatically add your name to the petition.

What's more, there will be enormous pressure on pro-choice members of the Senate to pass the Continuing Resolution on the Budget without stripping provisions to defund Planned Parenthood. In the health care reform fight, this is exactly how the Stupak Amendment was able to pass the House — women were thrown under the bus in order to get a majority vote for what was considered a "must pass" bill. Back then, conservatives in the Senate prevailed practically without a fight. And now, post-election, we are left with a shrinking pro-choice caucus in the Senate and facing a much bigger threat to women's health and the right to choose. It's scary.

If recent history is our guide, it will most likely be the rightwing, anti-choice forces in the Senate who at the defining moment will refuse to back down. But it doesn't have to be that way. If there is a massive show of support we can help pro-choice senators draw a line in the sand and stop the attacks on women.

Now is the time for pro-choice senators to use hardball tactics to stop Republicans and anti-choice Democrats from making the House's extremist attack on women into the law of the land. We failed to stop Republicans along with conservative Democrats in the House from advancing radical bills to dramatically restrict women's access to abortion and other forms of reproductive healthcare. The Senate can be our firewall. But we need at least 41 pro-choice senators to refuse to cave, and filibuster.

Tell pro-choice senators: Draw a line in the stand and do whatever it takes to block any bill that introduces new restrictions on abortion or defunds Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest provider of reproductive health care to women. Click here to automatically add your name to the petition.

Here are the three extremist bills that the pro-choice senators must be prepared to filibuster.

Defund Planned Parenthood: The FY11 Continuing Resolution and the Pence Amendment
The House just passed the Pence Amendment that would specifically prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving Title X family planning funding. Perhaps even more dangerous is the attack on Planned Parenthood in the Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Resolution that will allow government funding to continue while the Congress argues over the budget. Both the Pence Amendment and the Continuing Resolution take away the Title X funding that currently enables millions of women to obtain birth control, cancer screenings, HIV tests, and other lifesaving care. Planned Parenthood serves over one third of all Title X patients — and this bill effectively defunds the operation of Planned Parenthood's non-abortion reproductive health care services for women.

Stop Taxpayer Funded Abortions Act: H.R. 3
H.R. 3, the "Stop Taxpayer Funded Abortions Act," in its current form still contains language that would redefine rape and block some women who have been drugged then raped, date raped or were victims of statutory rape from gaining access to reproductive health care that includes abortion. Not only that, but the bill's most devastating provision would still sharply reduce access to safe, legal abortions for women in this country by virtually eliminating private insurance coverage for abortions. The bill accomplishes this by essentially levying a massive tax increase on employers who offer private health care plans that cover abortion as a part of women's reproductive health care.

Protect Life Act: H.R. 358
H.R. 358 or the "Protect Life Act," would allow hospitals to let women die instead of providing a life-saving abortion. If this bill, introduced by Rep. Pitts is passed, hospitals that accept federal funding will have Congress' blessing to turn away a woman who needs an emergency termination of a pregnancy in order to save her life.

We can't let women get thrown under the bus again. And we cannot settle for pro-choice senators who filibuster the stand-alone anti-choice bills but allow a vote on the Continuing Resolution that defunds Planned Parenthood. The most important vote on each of these three bills will not be a "no" vote on passage. It will be the decision to support a filibuster blocking an up-or-down vote on the floor of the Senate where anti-choice forces are sure to secure the votes necessary to ratify this extreme assault on women's rights.

Tell pro-choice senators: Filibuster any bill that introduces new restrictions on abortion or defunds Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest provider of reproductive health care to women. Click here to automatically sign the petition.

The Senate is our firewall. Lines must be drawn. The time is now to take urgent action and stop the attacks on women.

Becky Bond, Political Director
CREDO Action from Working Assets

Notes:
¹"Choice composition of Congress," NARAL Pro-Choice America