A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Tuesday, January 3, 2017
President-elect Donald Trump and
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan meet in the speaker's office in November.
Ryan says their discussions have centered on “a timeline” for passing
already- determined Republican priorities. (Alex Brandon/AP)
For six years, since they took back the House of Representatives,
Republicans have added to a pile of legislation that moldered outside
the White House. In their thwarted agenda, financial regulations were to
be unspooled. Business taxes were to be slashed. Planned Parenthood
would be stripped of federal funds. The Affordable Care Act was teed up
for repeal — dozens of times.
When the 115th Congress begins this week, with Republicans firmly in
charge of the House and Senate, much of that legislation will form the
basis of the most ambitious conservative policy agenda since the 1920s.
And rather than a Democratic president standing in the way, a
soon-to-be-inaugurated Donald Trump seems ready to sign much of it into
law.
The dynamic reflects just how ready Congress is to push through a
conservative makeover of government, and how little Trump’s
unpredictable, attention-grabbing style matters to the Republican game
plan.
That plan was long in the making.
Almost the entire agenda has already been vetted, promoted and worked
over by Republicans and think tanks that look at the White House less
for leadership and more for signing ceremonies.
In 2012, Americans for Tax Reform’s Grover Norquist described the ideal
president as “a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen”
and “sign the legislation that has already been prepared.” In 2015, when
Senate Republicans used procedural maneuvers to undermine a potential
Democratic filibuster and vote to repeal the health-care law, it did not
matter that President Obama’s White House stopped them: As the
conservative advocacy group Heritage Action put it, the process was “a
trial run for 2017, when we will hopefully have a President willing to
sign a full repeal bill.”
“What I told our committees a year ago was: Assume you get the White
House and Congress,” House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) told CNBC in a
post-election interview last month. “Come 2018, what do you want to have
accomplished?” Negotiations with the incoming Trump administration, he said, were mostly “on timeline, on an execution strategy.”
Few presidential candidates have dominated the coverage of an election
like Trump did in 2016. In the campaign’s final stretch, Republican
candidates often got less attention for their records in Congress than
for their positions on Trump’s controversial statements.
The irony, as Democrats realized after the election, was that
congressional Republicans were poised to have more influence over the
national agenda in 2017 than congressional Democrats did after the 2008
election that put Obama in the White House with his party in control on
Capitol Hill.
While the Democratic majority in 2009 was larger than the GOP advantage
this year, the Democrats were hamstrung in ways they came to regret.
Responding to the Great Recession, they spent the transition and first
month of 2009 on a $831 billion stimulus package, with Obama aides
openly hoping that they could pass it with bipartisan supermajorities.
Every House Republican and all but three Senate Republicans opposed it,
and within 20 days of inauguration, the first tea party protests had
broken out against it. Protesters twinned their opposition to the
stimulus with opposition to the bank bailouts, which had bipartisan
backing.
Since November, Republicans have preempted any problems like this by making no attempt to frame their agenda as bipartisan.
In his first news conference after the election, Ryan said that voters
had delivered a mandate for “unified Republican government.” Eight years
earlier, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had said only that
Americans “voted in large numbers for change” and said the White House
would be driving the agenda.
This year’s agenda from House and Senate Republicans has clarity that
was often lacking from Trump’s own campaign. Senate Republicans favor
using a procedure known as “budget reconciliation,” in which measures
can be passed with a simple 51-vote majority rather than a
filibuster-proof 60 votes, to tackle the ACA and to undo much of the
2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform.
As part of undoing the financial overhaul law, some GOP leaders have
begun planning strategies for how to effectively kill the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, whether by giving Congress control over its
budget or finding cause to replace its director, Richard Cordray, with a
weaker board.
“I’d like to repeal the whole thing, period,” Senate Banking Committee
Chairman Richard C. Shelby said of Dodd-Frank in a December interview
with the Wall Street Journal.
The reconciliation process is also likely to be used to pass tax
changes, which both Trump and congressional Republicans want to use to
lower rates and end the estate tax.
Republicans also are examining ways to undo many of the regulations and
other orders enacted by Obama and his administration, including ones
issued in the weeks since Trump’s victory and designed to solidify the
Democratic president’s environmental legacy.
GOP leaders have cited the 21-year old Congressional Review Act, which
allows Congress to cast simple majority votes of disapproval for
regulations, as a way to block anything the administration has ordered
since June 2016.
Since its passage, the CRA has been used only once. But in December, the
conservative House Freedom Caucus began compiling a list of more than
200 regulations it views as vulnerable to a disapproval vote. They
include “burdensome” school lunch standards, tobacco regulations, laws
that set higher wages for contractors and elements of the Paris
climate-change agreement.
“Talking to some individuals with the Trump transition team, they are
taking this extremely serious[ly],” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), chairman
of the Freedom Caucus, told the Heritage Foundation last month.
Republicans intend to supplement the CRA by enacting a law that would
subject any regulation with an economic impact greater than $100 million
to a vote of Congress, a change that would have prevented nearly every
climate or employment rule change of the Obama years. The measure,
called the Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act, or
Reins, is a conservative priority that passed the Republican House in
2011, 2013 and 2015 with backing from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Republican aides now hope for a vote on Reins in the coming days so it
can be sent for Trump’s signature immediately after he is sworn in on
Jan. 20.
Some Republican lawmakers also want legislation that would stop courts
from deferring to federal agencies’ interpretations of statutes — a
practice known as “Chevron deference,” after the 1984 Supreme Court case
that went against the energy company — and have them instead defer to
Congress.
Little of this was discussed during the presidential campaign, and none
has much buy-in from Democrats. Just one rural Democrat in the 115th
Congress, Rep. Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota, voted for Reins. But
Democrats do not see the next few months playing out for them the way
the first half of 2009 played out for Republicans.
“I think there was a unique benefit to Republicans in obstructing the
Obama agenda,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who served in the House
in Obama’s first term and arrived in the Senate in 2013. “In 2008,
Obama’s entire premise was built on fixing Washington by ending
partisanship. It was dependent on getting two parties to work together.
Mitch McConnell figured out quickly that he alone held the keys to
success or lack of success.”
Democrats, said Murphy, would oppose Republicans where they can. But
they are not in a position to block everything. “Trump pays lip service
to bringing people together, but his theme is that ‘only he can fix
it,’ ” he said. “That’s about results, not whether Washington is
‘working,’ so there’s not the same political benefit to pure
obstruction.”
Instead, Democrats see opportunities on issues on which Trump clashed
with his party or where Republicans themselves worry that the party’s
position is unpopular. One of them is the Defund Planned Parenthood Act,
which sailed through the House in 2015. Last month, when Obama issued
an order halting state efforts to defund the group, the legislation’s
sponsor, Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.), said new “pro-life majorities in
Congress” would “not only roll back this latest overreach but also enact
new legal protections for these most vulnerable members of our
society.”
Trump, who became antiabortion late in life, sent mixed messages about
Planned Parenthood, praising its non-abortion work in televised debates.
That, say Democrats and abortion rights advocates, suggests a wedge can
be shoved between the Republican Congress and the president. “Trump
didn’t run on, nor was he elected to act on, attacking reproductive
health care,” said Ericka Sackin, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood.
There’s less clarity about how to respond on other Republican
priorities. Legislation to allow concealed weapons to be carried across
state lines, a major goal of the National Rifle Association, was
endorsed by Trump and may be hard for red-state Democrats to oppose.
A possible Trump-backed stimulus package intrigued even blue-state
Democrats when it was floated in November. Interest waned when, in lieu
of detailed spending plans, Trump allies suggested the stimulus would
consist of tax breaks.
In the short term, Democrats are focused more on Trump’s Cabinet picks
and the looming Supreme Court nomination. In 2009, 59 Democratic
senators were occasionally bogged down in getting the 60th vote to
confirm lower-level Obama appointees such as Tom Perez as an assistant
attorney general at the Justice Department and Harold Koh as a legal
adviser at State.
In 2017, thanks to Democrats’ change of the filibuster, Republicans no
longer need to get 60 votes for cloture on nominees; they need a simple
majority for any administration position or any judicial opening lower
than the Supreme Court. This, Democrats admit, will give Republicans
more running room and more floor time to pass bills. Shellshocked after
being defeated in an election few people expected they could lose, some
concede that Trump’s ability to command media attention will make it
harder to turn their losing congressional battles into headlines.
They will try. On Jan. 15, Democrats will organize rallies in several
states to draw attention to Trump’s campaign pledge to leave Social
Security and Medicare untouched — a difference with Republicans like
Ryan. And the party’s concurrent fight over who will head the Democratic
National Committee has focused, in large part, on how the party can
draw attention to the fast-moving Republican Congress and promote its
own work, something Hillary Clinton failed to do in the campaign.
“There’s no question we’ll see a greater number of people who are
uninsured, more people who are unemployed and more kids getting low test
scores,” said Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), a leading candidate for DNC
chairman. “But if we think Trump will create bad conditions and that’ll
be enough for Democrats to win, we are absolutely wrong.”