In Case You Missed It (v114)

Week two of 2023 is in the books. Here's your recap of last week's posts. 

On Sunday, I posted a Sidebar to the post on the election of Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker, and the promised first piece of legislation from his caucus.

 As I noted in my Mr. Speaker post, he told us

I know the night is late, but when we come back, our very first bill will repeal the funding for 87,000 IRS agents. You see, we believe government should be to help you, not go after you.

And, in case you didn't know this,  

Their first order of business is worse than a solution in search of a problem - it's a solution in service to a lie.

There are many good reasons for the funding, which will bring on IT staff and customer service folks - the government employees "who should help you," as McCarthy said. And yes, there will be auditors, who "would be largely tasked with cracking down on corporate and high-income tax evaders." According to folks at Treasury, 

It is wholly inaccurate to describe any of these resources as being about increasing audit scrutiny of the middle class or small businesses.  

I included several ways the funding would help us, something McCarthy pretends he wants to do, and then I closed the post with a really obvious reason.

McCarthy's starting his tenure with a lie; I'll end this post with a truth. In a December 15, 2022 report, the Government Accountability Office said the IRS

... addressed its backlog of 2021 paper returns. However, as of late September 2022, IRS had about 12.4 million returns to process, resulting in refund delays for millions of taxpayers.

 That's a two-million-plus increase in the backlog - since last July. It's only going to get worse if this funding is cancelled.  

Your Sunday School included chats with three House members, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who offered partnership with the Rs, while making it clear it has to be a two-way street. 

We will oppose extremism, of course, whenever necessary. And there are Republicans who are interested in governing. And they're going to have to break from the extreme wings of their party at times around some important issues. And we'll see how that all unfolds.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) talked about the Speaker vote, his disagreement with some of his GOP colleagues, and why he had called some of them 'terrorists. Among other things, he said, 

There was no reason for us to keep voting... keep allowing these speeches that just degraded and diminished and insulted Kevin McCarthy. We didn't have to keep doing that. We could have just adjourned for the whole week and just kept negotiating...  And it seemed very, very pointless.

I can't argue with that sentiment. 

The third guy we heard from was one of Crenshaw's 'terrorists' - Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), who framed the shenanigans as being in service to all of us "very, very tired" Americans. 

You know, the American people are very, very tired of this gang of seven, gang of eight, literally seven or eight people, or just a few people in Washington, DC, running all of the policy for the American people. So, when we had a framework of an agreement where the American people can be in charge, when their representatives can actually bring amendments to the floor in good faith, I said, sure, if we can do that, then I'm all in.

By the end of his interview, I was

suddenly feeling very sleepy, after listening to Perry tell me how exhausted I am. 

I promised we'd hear from the punditry for your Extra Credit, and I chose the panel from ABC's This Week to highlight.

Donna Brazile  (ABC) thinks it may be hard to get a majority of the House to come together on critical legislation. 

... I don’t even know why I can put “unity” and “Republican” in the same breath. I mean, Hakeem Jeffries is going to have a unified caucus. I don't believe that Kevin McCarthy will be able to get the votes he need on the debt ceiling, on the functioning of government, which is to keep it funded, and on any major crisis that might come before us. 

Susan Page (USA Today )said there might be a better question than whether McCarthy can keep his caucus together. 

Could there be a coalition of the more moderate Republicans and the more moderate Democrats to get things through in the House? That's not something we saw happen in the speaker's fight. I think that is possible that we could see it...

I was Wondering on Wednesday about documents, and about Rep. George Santos (Fables 'R' Us). There was much wondering to be done, but one thing that struck me was why he might be so determined not to resign.

Now, I can't help wondering if the reason he's adamant about not resigning is that he feels a responsibility to his former co-workers at Goldman Sachs who may be laid off? The company's letting as many as 3200 people go.  

I wonder how many of them Santos could help develop kick-ass resumes, find great jobs, start their own companies, or even - dare I say it - run for office? 

I wanted to wonder about the committee that's supposed to be providing oversight on important stuff like the 'weaponization' of the government. I think the committee's name might need some work, though...

I'm investigating wondering if it would be worth wondering if the new House Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating - oh, never mind... 

Check the links for more detail on any of the posts, or to leave a comment. I'd love to hear from you!