Showing posts with label Favor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Favor. Show all posts

Monday, April 29, 2013

Governor Trying To Save Republicans From Themselves Comes Out In Favor Of Universal Background Checks

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal (R), who has been trying to make a name for himself as a maverick in the GOP, on Sunday became the latest Republican to come out in favor of universal background checks on all gun sales.

Jindal is engaged in a dedicated effort to frame himself as a politician outside of the Republican establishment. Last month, he gave a speech begging Republicans not to be “the stupid party.” Presumably as part of the effort, Jindal on Sunday’s Meet the Press, agued that background checks are the most sensible, and agreeable, route to take on gun regulations:

I think there is an opportunity to do something here. If we’re serious about doing something and not just having a political football here, I think we can work with Democrats, we can work even with the administration to say. I think we all agree that we shouldn’t have guns get into the hands with those with serious mental illness. We propose legislation to provide more of that legislation, more of those records into the background check system than is happening today. Let’s fix the current background system.

In January, Jindal pushed to strengthen the system in Louisiana for inputting the mentally ill into the National Instant Criminal Background Check system, but the move was mostly symbolic. Overall, Jindal’s track record on guns has been to side with gun manufacturers over protecting citizens. In 2010, he signed a law that allowed guns in houses of worship. He has also voted to protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits, and vehemently opposes any regulation on high capacity magazine clips or automatic weapons.

Currently, background checks are not required on private gun sales, allowing an easy workaround for criminals or the mentally ill to buy firearms. But 92 percent of Americans think that they should be. And Jindal is actually not a maverick on the issue; Republicans have been tapping into this public opinion of late, with several prominent figures including Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), Tom Coburn (R-OK), and Mark Kirk (R-IL) assessing that it’s an achievable goal for Congress to take on.


View the original article here

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Meet The Congressmen Who Favor A Broken Plane Over Saving The Economy

As mandatory budget cuts loom, a group of Congressional Republicans has cheered the coming reductions in federal spending — so long as federal funding is maintained for a plane that is years behind schedule and doesn’t fly, that is.

The Department of Defense announced on Friday afternoon that it has grounded the entire fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in light of an issue with its engine. Grounding the fleet, in all three of its variations, is just the latest in a slew of setbacks to the troubled acquisition program. Produced by Lockheed Martin to the tune of $100 million per plane, the total cost of the project so far has climbed over $400 billion, making it the most expensive weapons system in U.S. history. By contrast, the Manhattan Project — which created the nuclear weapon from scratch — cost about $55 billion in today’s dollars.

The F-35 project as a whole is currently at least six years behind schedule, slated for delivery in 2015 at the earliest. Beginning on March 1, the Defense Department budget is poised to fall under the effect of mandatory budget cuts known as sequestration, cutting $1 trillion from the budget in military and domestic spending over the next ten years.

Enter the Joint Strike Fighter Caucus.

Formed in 2011, as talks to avoid sequestration were first ongoing, 49 members of the House of Representatives — hailing from both parties — signed on to protect the F-35. Several of the Republican members of the JSF Caucus, however, are among the most ardent supporters of slashing federal funding currently in Congress. Among their ranks are Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX), Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA), Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), each of whom have called for deep reductions to programs that actually work.

Broun, in a 2012 interview with Politico, estimated that he had proposed $4 billion in cuts in the House Science, Technology, and Commerce committee alone. Franks has made clear that he believes the only way to shrink the government “is to choke the monster.” Poe has compared Congress to “addicts” when it comes to spending, proposing a 12 step program to break the habit as he argued against the fiscal cliff deal.

While several Republicans have favored raising revenues to help offset sequestration, none of the Republicans listed above have joined in. Instead, the Representatives listed above all voted “aye” on a bill to replace the defense cuts in sequestration entirely with cuts on the domestic side. Cuts to defense can be made certainly made to military spending — if done smartly — making voting to protect a plane that doesn’t work in opposition to providing health care to millions of Americans near unconscionable.


View the original article here