Dec. 30: Fox News: Businesses brace for the highest minimum wage in the county
As talk builds on Capitol Hill over hiking the federal minimum wage, one city in Washington state is poised to set the highest rate in the nation. On Jan. 1, an estimated 1,600 hotel and transportation workers in SeaTac, Wash., will see their pay jump to $15 an hour, a 60 percent increase from the state's $9.32 minimum wage.  While many workers look forward to the higher pay, employers are looking for ways to absorb the big increase in labor costs. Some plan on eliminating jobs.  "We're going to be looking at making some serious cuts," said Cedarbrook Lodge General Manager Scott Ostrander. "We're going to be looking at reducing employee hours, reducing benefits and eliminating some positions." 

One employer has told a trade group it is going to close one of its two restaurants, eliminating 200 jobs. The plan has also caused Han Kim -- who runs Hotel Concepts, a company that owns and manages 11 hotels in Washington state -- to shelve plans to build a hotel in SeaTac. The company already has three hotels in SeaTac, and Kim and a business partner were looking to build a fourth on land they own.   "Uncertainty is bad for business, and right now we're right in that area so we're just putting everything on hold," Kim said. 

It is clear that the short-sightedness of raising the minimum wage rate does have an impact on jobs and decreases job opportunities for those who can least afford it, those who are less skilled.  Many of these folks may be laid off and added to the unemployment rolls.

Dec. 27: The Hill: Jobless benefits expired this weekend – 1.3 Million affected – What does this say about economic recovery?
Roughly 1.3 million people lost their extended unemployment benefits on Saturday as both Congressional Republicans and Democrats allowed the program to expire.  Even so, some Democrats — angry that an extension wasn't included in the recently-enacted budget agreement — have vowed to make the benefits the first item on their 2014 agenda.  Republicans contend that lawmakers would better serve their constituents by directing their efforts to other job-boosting areas, especially given that a year-long unemployment extension comes with a $26 billion price tag. They also are waiting on Democrats to put forward a specific plan.  A question that is not being asked is “What does the fact that 1.3 million people have remained unemployed for so long say about the wellbeing of efforts to improve the economy and increase job creation?”

Dec. 25: Fox News: Dems try changing the subject turning to jobless benefits, minimum wage benefits:
Reeling from public dissatisfaction with ObamaCare, Senate Democrats hope to change the subject when they return in the new year, with a proposal to raise the minimum wage by 40 percent and another to extend long-term unemployment benefits for three months.   But Democrats face two big hurdles. One is House Republicans skeptical of both measures. The other is Democrats' own claims about the economy itself. 

Democrats have touted modest progress in the economy lately, and critics ask: If it's doing as well as Democrats claim, why are those bills needed?   "Extending unemployment insurance isn't going to help," said Glenn Hubbard, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under the George W. Bush administration.   The economy still is on shaky ground, but Democrats may struggle to convince colleagues that more emergency economic measures are needed.   The current jobless benefits extension runs out Dec. 28. 

Dec. 19: Roll Call: Now comes the hard part: Three Weeks to craft the $1 Trillion Appropriations Bill
Appropriators from both parties and both sides of the Capitol have opened intentionally secretive negotiations on the mammoth and complex measure necessary to make good on the budgetary truce just called by Congress.  The four-dozen or so members involved have given themselves less than three weeks to agree on the several thousand line items in the bill, which will be written as non-amendable legislation dictating all of the government’s discretionary spending for the final 37 weeks of this budget year.
The enormity of the task and the extraordinarily tight time table would normally present significant obstacles to a smooth or successful outcome. But the lawmakers who have taken the assignment are betting that those challenges will be eased by several factors:

• The fiscal deal the Senate cleared Thursday, which President Barack Obama will sign before leaving this weekend to spend the holidays in Hawaii, sets a grand total of $1.012 trillion for the package that both parties’ negotiators say they can live with. The figure is $45 billion, or 4.6 percent, more than would have been allowed if the sequester had remained fully on the books.
  
• The vast majority of lawmakers, not to mention hundreds of lobbyists and advocates, will be away from Washington during the next two work weeks. That should afford the negotiators and their aides an opportunity to set their priorities and make their tradeoffs without the usual volume of importuning — a tiny silver lining, also, for having to work through Christmas and New Year’s Eve.
  
• The leaders of the talks, Kentucky’s Harold Rogers for the Republican majority in the House and Maryland’s Barbara A. Mikulski for the Democratic majority in the Senate, have agreed to draft the bill as a take-it-or-leave it package deal. Their bet here is that substantial numbers from the rank and file in all four caucuses will be willing to set aside their reservations about the content and their annoyance about the process and vote “yes” — because they know defeating the measure would threaten another government shutdown as the first congressional action of the midterm election year.

The timetable for the next three weeks sketched begins with a deadline for the end of the week: apportioning the spending grand total into a dozen slices — the so-called 302(b) spending caps for the subcommittees that are supposed to write 12 different spending bills every year.

Dec. 19: Politico:  Treasury says debt limit ceiling will be reached in March:
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told Congress on Thursday that the debt ceiling will need to be raised by late February or early March.  In a letter to members of the House and Senate, Lew urged Congress to “take prompt action” to raise the country’s borrowing limit.  Congress was able to enact a budget deal this month, but it failed to address the debt ceiling issue, leaving open the possibility of another fiscal showdown next spring.
This week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said he doesn’t believe the next debt ceiling increase will be “clean,” a sign that Republicans may attempt to win political concessions, such as reductions in spending, in exchange for raising the borrowing cap.  The administration maintains it will not negotiate over the debt ceiling, arguing it is the job of Congress to make sure the government doesn’t default on its obligations.

Dec. 18: Politico: Murray distancing self from cut in military pensions after brokering the deal with Ryan:
Sen. Patty Murray is distancing herself from a cut in military pensions in the budget deal she brokered with Rep. Paul Ryan.  Her unease about a key element of her own deal, which passed the Senate on Wednesday and is now headed to President Barack Obama, comes amid a backlash from veterans groups and Senate defense hawks that has put her and her colleagues in a tough spot going into an election year.  Murray’s response: The pension cut isn’t final.  “We wrote this bill in a way that will allow two years before this change is implemented so that Democrats and Republicans can keep working to either improve this provision or find smarter savings elsewhere,” she said on the Senate floor this week.  But one needs to consider that Murray, from Washington, has a lot of military installations in her state and these people vote!

Her stance provides a major opening for opponents of the cut to work to get it tossed out or replaced with alternate savings — an effort that could weaken the budget deal and force vulnerable senators to continue defending their support for an agreement that would provide sequester relief for federal agencies at the expense of veterans.  “We’re probably going to lose this fight, but we will win the war,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, who voted against the budget deal, declared to a group of veterans on Tuesday — vowing to take this fight into the next year.

Dec. 17: Fox News: Senate moving to cut Vet benefits instead of those for illegals:
A final effort by Senate Republicans to halt cuts to pensions of military retirees failed late Tuesday, after Democrats blocked an amendment to the controversial budget bill.  The two-year budget agreement, which cleared a key test vote earlier in the day, was expected to get a final vote no later than Wednesday. Ahead of the final vote, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) tried unsuccessfully to offer an amendment to undo the cuts for military retirees.  A provision in the already House-passed bill would cut retirement benefits for military retirees by $6 billion over 10 years.  Sessions wanted to eliminate an estimated $4.2 billion in spending by reining in an IRS credit that illegal immigrants have claimed.  He and fellow senators argued the bill unfairly sticks veterans and other military retirees with the cost of new spending.

“It’s not correct, and it should not happen,” Sessions said on the floor.  "By blocking my amendment, they voted to cut pensions for wounded warriors," he said afterwards. "Senators in this chamber have many valid ideas for replacing these pension cuts, including my proposal to close the tax welfare loophole for illegal filers, and all deserved a fair and open hearing. But they were denied.” Sessions’ office claimed the vote Tuesday to block the amendment was a vote to "cut military pensions instead of cutting welfare for illegal immigrants."

Dec. 17:  Washington Free Beacon:  Disabled Vets not exempt from pension cuts
A provision cutting the pensions of military retirees in the bipartisan budget deal that the Senate will vote on this week does not exempt disabled veterans, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.   Disabled retirees were previously thought to be exempt from the changes to military retiree pay, which could cost service members up to $124,000 over a 20-year period.

The Free Beacon previously reportedthat military retirees under the age of 62 would receive 1 percentage point less in their annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in the budget deal.   The section of the U.S. code that has been altered also applies to disabled service members, many of whom have been wounded in combat.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, called the change “unthinkable.”  “ I was deeply troubled when my staff and I discovered that even individuals who have been wounded and suffered a service-related disability could see their pensions reduced under this plan.  It is unthinkable that this provision would be included in a deal that spares current civilian workers from the same treatment,” he said. “An equivalent amount of savings and more can be easily found, and I hope the Senate will move to address the unbalanced treatment of our service members before considering the legislation any further.”

Dec. 17: The Hill: McConnell: GOP ready for debt ceiling debate
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Tuesday predicted a springtime fight will erupt over the debt ceiling because the GOP will make demands in exchange for increasing it.  “I doubt if the House, or for that matter the Senate, is willing to give the president a clean debt-ceiling increase," McConnell, the top Republican in the Senate, said. "The debt ceiling legislation is a time that brings everyone together and gets the president’s attention."

McConnell was able to negotiate discretionary spending caps, including the automatic sequester spending cuts, as a condition of Congress raising the debt ceiling in 2011. In October he had less success in securing concessions from Democrats and the Obama administration in exchange for raising the debt ceiling through Feb. 7. The October deal, coming during an unpopular government shutdown.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) said Tuesday he wants to demand ObamaCare changes as a condition of raising the debt ceiling. He said giving individuals the legal right to keep their current insurance policies would be one option.   
"I'd love to take a look whether we can attach to the debt ceiling a piece of legislation to preserve freedom of choice in the healthcare system, or allow people to keep their employer-sponsored plans, which is going to be the next shoe to drop," he said.

Dec. 17: Fox News: Sessions tries to undo cuts to military retiree benefits in Budget “Deal”
A top Republican senator is trying to undo cuts to military retiree benefits in the House-passed budget deal ahead of a crucial vote Tuesday morning in the Senate.  Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions filed an amendment late Monday to restore money that was cut from veteran and military retiree pension benefits by closing a loophole that allows illegal immigrants to qualify for child tax credits.  His move comes after several GOP senators voiced complaints about the budget package, which sailed out of the House last week on a strong bipartisan vote.

Now it appears America's veterans and military retirees could be a determining factor in whether the deal makes it through the Senate. Some Republicans say the plan unfairly forces veterans to pick up the cost of new spending. The provision generating heated opposition from Veterans of Foreign Wars and allied lawmakers would cut retirement benefits for military retirees by $6 billion over 10 years.  "It's unacceptable to single out our men and women in uniform in this way," said Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., who has already expressed her intention to vote against the proposed budget.

Democrats need to hold most of their caucus of 55 senators together and pick up a handful of GOP senators in order to reach the 60-vote threshold to advance the bill on Tuesday.

Dec. 15: The Hill: Durbin: GOP and TEA Party challengers imperil budget deal
Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (IL), the second-ranking Senate Democratic leader, said Sunday that Republicans jockeying for the White House in 2016 and Tea Party challengers in 2014 have imperiled the budget deal.  Durbin estimated that Democrats will lose three members of their caucus on the vote, which means they’ll need at least eight Republicans to cross the aisle and vote with them. The challenge Democratic leaders face in trying to round up the vote has been compounded by the outspoken opposition to the deal from Republicans weighing presidential bids and a slew of Republican primary races in 2014.

“A handful of members of the Senate are vying for the presidency in years to come and are thinking about this vote in that context and others are, frankly, afraid of this new force, the Tea Party force, the Heritage Foundation force, that is threatening seven out of the 12 senators running for reelection,” Durbin said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL), who are weighing presidential bids in 2016, have all blasted the deal. 

No Senate Democrat has yet publicly voiced their opposition to the deal negotiated by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-WA) and her counterpart, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), but Durbin expects three defections.

Dec. 15: The Hill: Ryan signals a new fight on the debt ceiling
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) on Sunday said Republicans will insist on more concessions for raising the debt limit in early 2014, indicating that the fiscal ceasefire he brokered in a budget deal may not last long. “We don’t want nothing out of this debt limit,” Ryan said on “Fox News Sunday.” “We are going to decide what it is we can accomplish out of this debt-limit fight.”  The two-year budget agreement Ryan negotiated with Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) did not increase the nation’s borrowing authority, which the Treasury Department believes will be needed by March after extraordinary measures are exhausted.  “One step at a time,” Ryan said. “Patty Murray and I knew we weren’t going to solve every problem, like the debt limit problem.”

House and Senate Republicans will discuss their debt-limit strategy at separate party retreats in January, Ryan said.  Asked about the debt limit on Thursday, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) similarly deflected the question, saying he was focused on the current budget agreement, which most notably would prevent a government shutdown for the next two years.  Boehner has previously demanded spending cuts or reforms greater than the increase in borrowing authority, although the last two suspensions in the debt limit did not get Republicans much in return.  President Obama has vowed not to negotiate over the debt ceiling after doing so in 2011, and he is expected to maintain that position next year.

Dec. 15: The Hill: In Budget Deal, a Secret Reward for the Dems
The two-year budget deal approved by the House has hidden political benefits for Senate Democrats, Republicans charge. Because it sets a top-line budget number for 2015, Democrats won’t have to write and pass a budget resolution in the midterm election year.  That means vulnerable Democrats like Sens. Mark Pryor (AR), Mark Begich (AK), Kay Hagen (NC) and Mary Landrieu (LA) won’t have to take tough votes as part of a budget vote-o-rama. 

Republicans are unhappy, as they believe the tough votes would have made it easier to defeat those candidates next fall and take control off the Senate in 2015. With ObamaCare's difficult rollout, forcing members to vote on many aspects of the healthcare law would be especially appealing.  The Senate is expected to vote on the budget deal on Tuesday.

Until this spring, when the Senate approved its first budget resolution in four years, Senate Democrats had repeatedly avoided passing a budget in part because of the problems it would have created for vulnerable members.  In two of the years in which the Senate failed to pass a budget, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) argued budget caps in the 2011 Budget Control Act law meant no resolution was legally necessary.   Republicans said Reid was wrong then, and he’d be wrong now if he used the new bill to avoid a budget vote.  “Yes we should do a budget every year and the Budget Control Act was used as an excuse and it was a poor excuse,” Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Sessions told The Hill on Friday. “It seems to me it would be the same with this.”  At this point, Democrats aren’t committing to doing a new budget.

Dec. 14: Fox News:  Conservatives pushing back over Boehner and the budget “deal”
Tea party activists are pushing back hard against Speaker John Boehner for attacking conservative groups that are opposed to bipartisan budget legislation approved this week by the House, claiming he has "declared war on the Tea Party" with his blunt criticism.   In a fundraising email to supporters, Tea Party Patriots referred to the Ohio Republican as a "ruling class politician" who only pretends to be a conservative while remaining a "tax-and-spend liberal," The Hill reported Friday. 

The group, which supported efforts to defund the Affordable Care Act, accused Boehner of passing a "back-room budget deal which increases discretionary spending, does nothing to reform entitlements, and fully funds ObamaCare."   The organization called the deal "an out and out betrayal of the American people."

All three top Republican leaders were among 169 members of the rank and file in voting for the measure, which cleared the House on Tuesday on an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 332-94.  In advance of the vote, Boehner unleashed a stinging attack on conservative groups campaigning for the bill's demise, saying they lacked credibility. He also blamed them for leading the party into the partial government shutdown this fall.

Dec. 13: The Daily Caller:  Senate schedules Budget Deal for Next Tuesday
The Senate will take up the Ryan-Murray budget deal on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Friday, one of the final items on the agenda before the Senate heads home until 2014.  On Thursday evening, the House the budget plan forged by House and Senate Budget Committee Chairs Paul Ryan and Patty Murray won by a large margin, with a majority of both parties voting for it.   In the Senate, the bill’s support is less bipartisan. A number of Republicans have come out against it, since the agreement was announced on Tuesday.

Dec. 13: Fox News:
Outcome of Budget Deal in the Senate is uncertain – the “Warren Wing” of progressing Democrats may revolt:
Speaker John Boehner delivered on his promise to pass a bipartisan budget bill through the House, and he’s taking plenty of blowback from conservatives for it. But the real test for the two year can-kick seems to be whether Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can tame an increasingly unruly liberal wing of his own party. 

Far-left senators like Elizabeth Warren, D-MA, Sherrod Brown, D-O, Al Franken, D-MN, Tom Udall, D-NM and Bernie Sanders, I-VT., can’t be happy about maintaining more than half of the spending caps from the 2011 debt-limit deal and making no provisions for extended welfare benefits.  Given that so many Democrats are secretly rooting for a shutdown, it might even seem like the strategic thing to do for a party stuck in the bogs of ObamaCare. Reid, who needs four Republican votes if he has all 56 Democrats on board, will have to pick up one GOPer for every liberal who walks away from the deal. Boehner found a way. Can Reid? And as Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said, “I’m not sure of anything,” when it comes to the vote count.

Go nuke yourself - Republicans don’t mind squeezing Reid as he tries to corral what’s been called the “Elizabeth Warren wing” of the Democratic Party.  After all, Reid just nuked filibusters on presidential nominations, so his demands for swift acquiescence sounded like laugh lines in the Red Team locker room. Among those already out: Sens. Marco Rubio, R-FL, Tom Coburn, R-OK, Lindsey Graham, R-SC, Ted Cruz, R-TX, Kelly Ayotte, R-NH, and Jeff Sessions, R-AJ. Sessions says he will lead a filibuster.  Reid may be able to count on liberal-moderate members like John McCain, R-AR, Lisa Murkowski, R-AL, and Susan Collins, R-MA, but so far, they’re not saying.

Dec. 12: Breitbart.com: Senator Paul says Budget Deal is a Step Backwards:
Senator Paul (R-KY), in an op-ed piece calls the Ryan-Murray budget plan a joke. According to Paul it adds over $60 billion in new spending in the first two years, it gets rid of the only cuts we have, and it is worse than the status quo, which is already an unacceptable level of spending and debt.  Paul notes that even with the automatic sequester cuts the national debt has risen $2 trillion in two years.    “This is the wrong direction,” Paul contends.  “ Instead of getting rid of the sequester reductions, we need spending cuts.”  He claims the “bipartisan deal” gets rid of the only cuts we have.

It adds over $7 trillion in debt over 10 years. It raises taxes. And I don’t care what you call them – “fees,” “revenues” – if more money leaves the hands of the taxpayers and goes to the government, it is a tax increase; and the budget continues to avoid being balanced.  “This is not a budget ‘deal’ It is a surrender,” Paul concluded.  “It is a cave in [and] it’s a shame.

Dec. 12 : The Daily Caller: Here’s What’s Next for the Budget Deal
The Senate will take up the Ryan-Murray budget deal on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Friday, one of the final items on the agenda before the Senate heads home until 2014.  On Thursday evening, the House the budget plan forged by House and Senate Budget Committee Chairs Paul Ryan and Patty Murray won by a large margin, with a majority of both parties voting for it. In the Senate, the bill’s support is less bipartisan. A number of Republicans have come out against it, since the agreement was announced on Tuesday.

Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the budget committee, said in a statement Tuesday that he would “be unable to support the legislation,” citing the discretionary spending levels that are greater than the caps set in the budget control act, among other issues.  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is not expected to support the plan either, as The Daily Caller previously reported, based on sources with knowledge of his thinking. Nor is Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the second-highest ranking Republican in the Senate.  South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham came out against the bill, saying in a statement that he felt “it will do disproportionate harm to our military retirees. Our men and women in uniform have served admirably during some of our nation’s most troubling times.”  Graham, McConnell, and Cornyn all face re-election next year and all have primary challengers on the right.  New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte said she shared Graham’s concerns.

Dec. 9: The Hill:
Government Sells the last of its General Motors stock – Taxpayers take a $10.5  Billion hit in the process – Is that a good deal?
President Obama proudly declared that “the American auto industry is back” on Monday, after the Treasury Department announced it had sold its outstanding shares of General Motors stock.  Defending the controversial auto bailout, Obama said in a statement that he “refused” to allow GM and Chrysler — “the heartbeat of American manufacturing” — to collapse after the recession in 2008.  “When things looked darkest for our most iconic industry, we bet on what was true: the ingenuity and resilience of the proud, hardworking men and women who make this country strong,” Obama said. “Today, that bet has paid off. The American auto industry is back.”

In total, the government invested some $49.5 billion into the leading auto manufacturer, and recovered $39 billion from selling 31.1 million shares of GM stock — for a loss of $10.5 billion. “When things looked darkest for our most iconic industry, we bet on what was true: the ingenuity and resilience of the proud, hardworking men and women who make this country strong,” Obama said. “Today, that bet has paid off. The American auto industry is back.”

In total, the government invested some $49.5 billion into the leading auto manufacturer, and recovered $39 billion from selling 31.1 million shares of GM stock — for a loss of $10.5 billion.

Dec. 8: Politico:Budget negotiators are looking at military pensions
Can savings from military pensions be part of the solution to avoid deeper cuts from defense next month?  That’s an important question facing House-Senate negotiators as they try to close out a deal this week to avoid another round of sequestration in January and restore some certainty to the appropriations process for the remainder of this Congress.  The two sides appear close but Democrats are anxious about the level of savings being sought by Republicans from civilian federal workers. Finding some money on the military side of the equation could lessen this burden and make the package more equitable too from a political standpoint. 

Indeed, the Pentagon has the greatest stake in some agreement and faces a further $21 billion cut in its 2014 budget if nothing is done. There is a greater recognition too –in Congress and among the Joint Chiefs— that it must come to terms with personnel-related costs, which are eating up more and more of what money remains.  “Forty-four cents of every dollar we spend goes to military personnel,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R.-CA) “You look at Detroit, you look at General Motors, you look at what happens when you build up these costs, but we aren’t doing anything about it in our [defense] bill this year.”

Dec. 6: Politico:
Senate’s Top Budget Negotiator wants to include an extension of unemployment benefits in budget deal:
The Senate D