State of the Union Speech Shows Few Opportunities for Congressional Action

Obama strikes a populist tone, but likely will hit a Congressional wall over proposals in speech

January 25, 2012 RSS Feed Print

President Obama alternated between feisty populism to a few conciliatory notes on Tuesday night, but ultimately made his point clear—he's tired of a Congress which has rejected key proposals and likely will continue to do so in an election year.

That's why so many of the key planks in his speech—including a Trade Enforcement Unit to crack down on unfair trade practices from China, clearing away red tape for new construction projects, and promising heightened legal action of those involved in the housing crisis—don't need Congressional approval. The go-it-alone strategy from the White House is leaving Congressional Republicans feeling increasingly miffed.

"I thought the talk was a little top-heavy on what he would do without our authority," says Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul. "Halfway is halfway. He's going to have to come here to Capital Hill and try to work with us."

Republicans were heartened to hear the president call for an "all-of-the-above" energy strategy, and promises to open more of America's domestic oil fields. Whether Obama meant the comment as a hint that he was willing to reconsider the shelved Keystone XL pipeline will remain to be seen. Also unclear is whether Republicans, who have blasted failed investments in clean energy companies such as Solyndra, will support any strategy that would put more money toward them.

"His call for all-of-the-above energy policy is good," says Oregon Republican Rep. Greg Walden. "We'll look forward to seeing the details on that."

The president's call for increased investment in American manufacturing, especially in clean energy, and for a tax code which taxes millionaires with an effective rate of at least 30 percent is likely to hit a wall in Congress.

While the president pushes for changing the tax code to penalize companies who move overseas, Republicans have been pushing for a "repatriation" tax holiday, which would allow companies with off-shore assets to move them back into the United States at a lower tax rate. Critics claim it's just another loophole for companies to hide profits overseas.

And as far as the so-called "Buffett Rule" goes—the principle that America's top earners shouldn't pay a tax rate lower than middle-class Americans—many critics see it only as an election-year prop, perhaps aimed at former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who revealed Tuesday that he paid only a 14 percent tax rate despite making millions. So far, the president has yet to be outline the Buffett Rule in detail. It could mean hiking the capital gains tax above 15 percent, or eliminating some tax deductions that wealthy Americans tend to use.

Democrats are pushing for some version of the principle to be included in a deal over the expiring payroll tax cut. Republicans are insisting that any move to raise taxes, even to offset another tax cut, is a non-starter.

But Obama's call for increased taxes on the rich adds yet another wrinkle to the emerging showdown at the end of the year. The capital gains tax is scheduled to hike from 15 percent to 25 percent at the beginning of 2013 as the Bush-era tax cuts expire.

One item which may not see much resistance is a proposed ban on insider trading from members of Congress, which was sparked by a 60 Minutes report showing alleged abuses. But, as always, the devil is in the details. Despite widespread support for such a measure, so far proposed bills have been caught in legal technicalities.

aparker@usnews.com

Twitter: @AlexParkerDC

Tags:
Obama administration,
Congress,
State of the Union,
Barack Obama

Reader Comments Read all comments (1)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Disclosure to short

The disclosure period is to short. Congress "should be required to file forms a few days after every trade, as executives must," as was stated in the original act. The reporting of securities transactions should reveal to the public, hidden information that is happening now, not some historical record of things gone past, at least as timely, as confidential corporate information.

Five days

An article in the Wall Street Journal suggested transactions over $5,000.00 be reported in five days. Brian Baird who originated the Stock act said, “Really it should be 48 hours.” We are not trying to get something on congress people; we are trying to make public the secret information used by congress for their own personal trades, soon after they make the trades.

Real time

The way congress gets away with everything, is reporting it to late for anyone to do anything about it. Disclosure should be in real time, or the same two days like everybody else that falls under the insider trading laws, to substitute a philosophy of full disclosure for the current one of caveat emptor. We can't know what is in someone’s head or what they knew when they did something. But if it is promptly reported constituents can decide for themselves, and their vote will be unappealable.

Appearance

Congress made laws making insider-trading illegal for the private sector and exempted itself by avoiding prompt reporting requirements. The insider-trading loophole, that they give themselves is that they use time to hinder procession and cover things up. The SEC cannot have adequate enforcement without prompt disclosure. People calling for longer disclosure times appear to need more time to cover corrupt activities, and to destroy evidence.

Public interest

A policy requiring more timely and complete reporting of congressional security transactions is in the public interest. Reporting requirements similar to those imposed on corporate insiders should be used for helping voters evaluate the behavior of their Representatives in terms of the pursuit of personal profit versus obligations to the public interest.

Enforcement

Members of Congress and legislative staffers are immune from enforcement of insider-trading laws, and are taking advantage of their positions to the public’s detriment. The SEC is helpless to prevent it because Congress refuses prompt disclosure of there trading activities and they can hide evidence behind the Speech or Debate Clause. The current laws under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), and under federal statutes prohibiting mail fraud or wire fraud, already apply to members of Congress. And could be used if the SEC could get current information.

Double standard

Robert Khuzami, director of the enforcement division at the Securities and Exchange Commission, pointed out that congressional investments in ETFs, options and mutual funds based on inside information aren’t covered under the House bill.

Sumflow of HI 1:12PM January 25, 2012

Photo Galleries

Before and After the Joplin Tornado

A look at Joplin one year after the deadly tornado.

advertisement

Latest Video