No Furloughs For ObamaCare Officials

The office implementing most of President Obama's healthcare law is not furloughing its workers as a result of sequestration, its director said Wednesday.

Gary Cohen, director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, said Wednesday that his office has not cut its workers' hours and pay as a result of the automatic budget cuts that went into effect in March.

Republicans have accused the Obama administration of politicizing the sequester by targeting highly visible programs like airport security and White House tours.

The fact that ObamaCare officials haven't been furloughed shows that the cuts are political, Rep. Greg Harper (R-Miss.) said Wednesday.

"We're talking about at least a 15 percent furlough of current air-traffic controllers, resulting in delays and perhaps safety concerns, but yet this has been a selective political item by the administration," Harper said.

Agencies across the federal workforce have furloughed their workers, cutting their hours and pay, as a result of the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration. Furloughs have caused airport delays, and extend all the way up to the White House budget office and the West Wing.

More from The Hill:
? EPA: We're not spying on people
? Toomey: Obama 'manufacturing a crisis' with flight delays
? House conservatives demand new vote to repeal ObamaCare
? House GOP to hold new hearings on Benghazi
? Graham: White House 'letting guard down' on security
? Rand Paul clarifies stance on domestic drones
? Reid bill would require background checks to buy explosives

Cohen said the implementation office has still been affected by the sequester because it is under a hiring freeze.

"We have been working very hard to avoid the necessity for furloughs," Cohen said. "We are under a hiring freeze, so I can't hire, I can't replace people who leave, which is a serious issue for me in terms of trying to run a program."

A hiring freeze is "not the same" as cutting the pay of existing employees, Harper said.

"Are you telling me, then, that this administration is furloughing air traffic controllers vital to public safety in this country, and yet you're not furloughing anybody in your agency?" Harper asked during a hearing of the Energy and Commerce oversight subcommittee.

"Well, in effect we are, because we can't replace people who leave," Cohen replied.

View Comments

View the original article here

Guardian: ‘White House Officials … Gave Strong Indications The President Is Inclined To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline’

The Obama Administration has, tragically, signaled it may retreat on two major climate issues.

The UK Guardian reported Friday:

Barack Obama’s grand vision of action on climate change shrank to $200m a year to fund research into clean fuel cars, with signs of retreat on the big environmental issues of the day….

But on the most immediate environmental decision in his in-tray — the future of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline project – White House officials indicated on Friday that Obama’s green and liberal supporters would be in for a disappointment. Officials signalled that the president was inclined to approve the project.

I must say that this $200 million a year, which has zero chance of seeing the light of day in the Tea-Party-controlled House of Representatives, is perhaps the tiniest bone one could imagine throwing the climate community in return for a decision to help unleash the uber-dirty tar sands.

And as if that wasn’t enough to suggest Obama’s recent strong words on climate (“If Congress Won’t Act Soon To Protect Future Generations, I Will“) were just that — words – the Washington Post reported on Friday:

The Obama administration is leaning toward revising its landmark proposal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new power plants, according to several individuals briefed on the matter, a move that would delay tougher restrictions and could anger many environmentalists.

I have also heard from a source very familiar with the regulatory process that EPA now believes it screwed up the initial proposal, potentially subjecting it to court challenge.

Rewriting the proposal would significantly delay any action…

While the move could bolster the administration’s legal justification for regulating power plants’ carbon emissions, any delay on the rules would be a blow to environmental groups and their supporters, who constituted a crucial voting block for President Obama and other Democrats in last year’s elections.

As is typical of the WashPost, the administration’s moved is framed entirely as “a blow to environmental groups” rather, than, say, a blow to the environment itself or as a blow humanity.

The White House appears utterly clueless about the importance of these issues and the self-destructive nature of its “all of the above” energy strategy, as the WH official quoted by the Guardian makes clear:

The official dismissed environmental groups’ contention that building the pipeline would open up vast deposits of the Alberta tar sands, and so increase the emissions that cause climate change. “There have been thousands of miles of pipelines that have been built while President Obama has been in office, and I think the point is, is that it hasn’t necessarily had a significant impact one way or the other on addressing climate change,” the official said.

He added that Obama’s environmental policies would more than make up for any negative impacts from the Keystone XL project. “There’s no question of that.”

Seriously, that’s the White House defense for Keystone: We’ve opened thousands of new spigots for oil (and gas), so what’s one more?

Memo to White House: We are far past the point where breaking even on carbon emissions – or doing a little better than break even —  is a rational goal.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery('#comment_submit').click(function(){if(jQuery('#comment_check:checked').length

View the original article here

Report: DC officials lower turnout estimate for Inauguration Day

Officials in the District of Columbia are lowering their turnout projections for President Obama’s second inauguration.

Chris Geldart, the director of the District's Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency, said Sunday that they now expect between 500,000 and 700,000 people to attend the Monday events, according to a report in The Associated Press. 

That figure is below the original 600,000-to-800,000 estimate, which itself was well below the 1.8 million estimated to have watched Obama being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2009.

The report said that city officials are basing their revised number on the number of charter buses that have arrived in Washington as well as an accounting of hotel and restaurant reservations.

But Geldart said that officials are not making any alterations to their security or transportation plans.

President Obama’s second term officially began shortly before noon on Sunday, when he was sworn in by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in a short ceremony at the White House.

But because the inauguration date set by the Constitution falls on a Sunday, organizers are holding the ceremonial public swearing-in and inaugural parade on Monday. 

Vice President Biden was also sworn in earlier Sunday, by Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

View Comments

View the original article here