The Senate has passed, by a 91-9 vote, the short-term continuing resolution, and the President has signed it into law. So there’s now government funding through 18 March, giving negotiators 16 days and 5 hours to come up with a spending plan for the rest of the year. Will that happen in time? Will the resulting bill actually be good for the economy? Stay tuned….
2 March 2011
H.R. 4, the 1099 Report (Repeal) Bill
Besides the continuing resolution (which passed the House yesterday 335-91; the Senate will vote on it at 11 AM EST today), the big item in the House this week is H.R. 4. This bill repeals the infamous “1099 reporting requirements” that small businesses have been objecting to as overly burdensome. As this costs about $19 billion, the repeal is paid for by increasing tax repayments for health exchange subsidy overpayments. (An amendment to strike that tax change was defeated in the Ways and Means committee by a party-line vote.)
—
Tomorrow, the House will be considering H.R. 4 under a closed rule (which will be voted on today). Two and a half hours of debate and no amendments (except for the usual motion to recommit) are in order.
Comments Off
1 March 2011
H.R. 662, the Surface Transportation Extension Bill
Also expiring on 4 March are a number of programs funded by the federal Highway Trust Fund. To extend these programs for the full year, the House will consider H.R. 662 tomorrow. This bipartisan bill extends federal highway funds, at FY2009 funding levels, through the end of the current fiscal year. If you’re really interested in the details, there’s a committee report, but the bill seems pretty straightforward.
—
Tomorrow, the House will be considering H.R. 662 under a modified closed rule. After the usual hour of general debate, an amendment is in order to make three technical corrections to the bill.
Comments Off
FCC v. AT&T
Today, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion in FCC v. AT&T. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the Court, held that corporations do not have “personal privacy” for the purposes of the relevant exemption from Freedom of Information Act requests for law enforcement records. The opinion turns on the fact that adjective and noun forms of the same words often have separate meanings. Which means that the Chief Justice can’t resist closing with the following (slip op. at 12, emphasis added):
We reject the argument that because “person” is defined for purposes of FOIA to include a corporation, the phrase “personal privacy” in Exemption 7(C) reaches corporations as well. The protection in FOIA against disclosure of law enforcement information on the ground that it would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy does not extend to corporations. We trust that AT&T will not take it personally.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed.
I highly approve of terrible puns in Supreme Court opinions.
Comments Off