Bizarre, Congress, Politics, Society

Politico: Vitter Moves To Block Exception For Congress Under Obamacare . . . Dems Move To Raise 2007 Prostitution Scandal

vitter-headshot-200It honestly takes a lot to get me to feel sympathy for David Vitter, (R. La.) Like most of the world, I was floored by the voters of Louisiana returning Vitter, a religious right politician, to the Senate after his scandal involving high-priced prostitutes. However, that is precisely the unique skill of the current Democratic leadership — they seem eager to win any race to the bottom. Vitter this week opposed an Obama regulation that gives an exemption of members of Congress and their aides under Obamacare. The regulation allows Congress to pay for its own generous subsidies to avoid having to live under the new law like normal citizens. While there is a definite appeal to Vitter’s view that the Congress should live under the same law applicable to average citizens, there may be some legitimate argument that I am missing. What should be clear is that some Democrats reacted in worse possible way. Politico is reporting that it has legislation drafted by Democrats that would eliminate health care benefits for lawmakers where there is “probable cause” to believe they patronized prostitutes. If true, this is really a sophomoric act of retaliation. Politico is reporting that this is not a joke but something actually raised as a meeting of Democratic members.

Apparently even Republicans are mad at Vitter for exposing the hypocrisy of Congress imposing a law on the country while (yet again) creating an exception for itself. The law actually has language barring exceptions, but the Obama Administration issued an order during the August recess to require the Office of Personnel Management to retain the subsidy for members and their staffs.

Even if you believe Congress should be able spare itself from having to get insurance like other Americans, this alleged proposal (and other retaliatory measure directed at Senators supporting Vitter) would set a new low for Congress. I still find it hard to believe that any Democrat would draft such an openly retaliatory and vicious response. Yet, there has been no denial that a draft was circulated that I could find.

Vitter has demanded an investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee, specifically naming Sens. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). A Reid spokeswoman said Vitter’s aim is a “desperate attempt to change the subject from his previous ethics issues.” That statement is troubling since I fail to see why we are discussing Vitter’s ethics at all in this context. He has a perfectly valid point in seeking to block an exception for members under this controversial law.

What do you think about the effective subsidy that Congress will continue to give itself under the regulation?

78 thoughts on “Politico: Vitter Moves To Block Exception For Congress Under Obamacare . . . Dems Move To Raise 2007 Prostitution Scandal”

  1. Nancy Pelosi approves of torture and took the impeachment of Bush off the table. She is a war criminal. However, had she pointed out this hypocrisy and illegality, which of course she would never do, it would still be a good point. The point, not Pelosi, would deserve our support.

    There are already laws on the books for taking actions against war criminals and I certainly hope people here think those laws should be used to investigate and bring to justice those who committed war crimes, be they Republicans or Democrats.

    It is certainly not wrong to point out Vitter’s reprehensible actions. He is depraved and harmed women.

    However, here we have the classic case of rule of fiat or rule by law. The law is a weapon in the hands of the powerful to go after those less powerful including the ordinary citizens of this nation. It does not surprise me that Democrats would be party to such an action, nor does it surprise me to see how easily their followers are in coming to the defense of illegalities when committed by their own bad guys.

    Your support of rule by fiat, dear followers, will eventually come to bite you in the back. You will not always be favored and when that happens, you will wish you had had the principles and courage to uphold the rule of law, instead of seeking favor with your party.

  2. Blouise, “Cruzism” is the word. Problem for him is that he and Rand Paul are going after the same republican primary voters. One is appealing to the Jesse Helm fans and the other hired a white supremacist.

  3. SwM,

    And where is Cruz in all this?! One would think he’d be taking this wonderful opportunity to jump up and down yelling, “Look at me … I can be President!!”

  4. Gene, Vitter lucked out because the phones with cameras were not in use when he was wearing the diapers. Otherwise he would be long gone like Anthony Weiner.

  5. Nutrition and Housing for Convicted Individuals and Families

    “In 2013, Vitter offered a series of amendments that would deny public benefits to formerly incarcerated people and their families.

    In May, he offered amendment 1056 to S.954, the Farm Bill, which would deny food assistance through SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, for life to people convicted of certain offenses[53] and would result in lesser SNAP benefits for their children and other family members. Because the amendment was retroactive, an elderly person who long ago completed his or her prison sentence could lose food assistance under it.

    In July, Vitter offered amendment 1744 to S.1243, the transportation and housing spending bill, which would deny federal housing assistance to people convicted of certain violent crimes — a measure that could force their families out of their homes.[54]

    Of the 1.6 million people in state or federal prison, about one in six were convicted of the offenses targeted by these amendments.[55] Over time, the bans would apply to well over a million people. Disparities in the criminal justice system mean African Americans and Latinos would be disproportionately affected.[56] “wiki” Vitter,who represents a state with many that live below the poverty line, is particularly harsh on the poor.

  6. Smom,

    As someone far more familiar with Vitter than I’d like, I’ll just add that any resemblance between him and a vertebrate mammal is purely coincidental.

  8. “If true, this is really a sophomoric act of retaliation. Politico is reporting that this is not a joke but something actually raised as a meeting of Democratic members.”
    So the professor is reporting on this, which may or may not be true, and which may have been raised at a meeting but even if so did it go any further. How many meetings have any of us gone to where someone raises a ridiculous idea and some others say Hey, yeah, that’s an idea. Sounds more like this is another excuse for repubs to go after dems Reid and Boxer.

    The article is also wrong on for whom the exception would be, sounds really bad, and a continuation of the right wing lies and exaggerations, distortions about the ACA: that it is congress rather then the staffers.

    This article is more what I expect to read from Mike Huckabee, et al. An accusation without facts to back it up, merely speculation. A blatant error about the ACA, one that the right has been “reporting” on for quite some time.
    As for the exclusion, it is different if it is staffers but yes they should have to do the same as the rest of the country. By not raising their salaries but given the exemption instead, would this save the taxayers money. Might that be the basis for the exclusion?

  9. So what if he’s hired pros…. It seems we have pros on both sides of the isle….

  13. Pingback: Democrat Legislators Fight Dirty To Keep Their Special Snowflake Obamacare Privilege | Bydio

  14. I take issue with any person who criticizes Vitter for paying “expensive” prostitutes. Women use all sorts of measures to extract money or items from dumb men in exchange for sex or the promise of sex and in later life for the promise of three squares a day. Smart men extract money or items from dumb women in exchange for sex or the promise thereof. If Vitter was paying money to get laid then his constituents simply saw this as an efficient way for him to operate in Washington DC. When in Rome, do as the Romans. Or when in Roma, do as the Gypsies. When you go visit DC, inquire as to the whereabouts of C Street and K Street and what is available on each thoroughfare and for what fare. This dog has been a human hooker in a prior life, has lived in DC and has no care in the world for Obamacare.

  16. Congress acting in the spirit of a Bill of Attainder and ex post facto law. How can congress make a statute that establishes probable cause for an act that happened prior to the codification of the statute? Even the firearm prohibition for conviction of misdemeanor domestic violence assault only applies to convictions that were after the effective date of the law.

    So let’s look at this from another point of view. Congress and the president pride themselves in offering affordable health care to as many as possible but then say that due to certain alleged criminal activities, not conviction, but mere Probable Cause, a medical benefit can be denied to a citizen of the country. And, a specific segment of the population by one occupational group (politician)

    So what is it. Do these congressional leaders want to be able to say that based upon probable cause alone workers can be denied health care for prostitution or any other statute? So health care is to be used as a coercive weapon? Or, is it that this entire thing is not to deny benefits to the populatoin but to attack a particular individual?

    So what happens where prostitution is legal, like in parts of Nevada Senator Reid. You going to punish your constituents who engage in lawful commerce there to? So what is it.

    Professor Turley here mentions this is another example of the race to a new low for congress. Yes it is. But it has been my observation that there is only so much a person can achieve, but there is no limit to how low he can sink.

  17. Interesting. So congressional staffers are a different category of human than the rest of us. I am sympathetic to the staffers but there should be NO. Exemptions to the Health Care Law at all. I hate to agree with Vitter on this one but it is time that Congress have to live with the laws that they pass or don’t pass. In this case, I would require that all congress members give up their government paid for health care until all of us have health care provided by the government. Single payor is the way to go.

    Obamais granting exceptions left and right to corporations. It is almost like he really doesn’t like “Obamacare” !

Comments are closed.