13 Unlikely Congressional Newsmakers of 2013

Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL) speaks during a press conference, on Capitol Hill, July 9, 2013 in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Fawn Johnson
Add to Briefcase
Fawn Johnson
Dec. 19, 2013, 2:52 p.m.

We all knew com­ing in­to 2013 that Sen. Patty Mur­ray and Rep. Paul Ry­an would be im­port­ant in the on­go­ing budget squabble. We also knew that Sens. Marco Ru­bio, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz would be worth watch­ing.

But there are sev­er­al law­makers who made the spot­light this year, even if only briefly, that we didn’t an­ti­cip­ate. Here are 13 of our fa­vor­ite un­likely news­makers.

Rep. Trey Radel, R-Fla. — Co­caine User

Do we need to say that most elec­ted of­fi­cials — or any­body else — prob­ably don’t want to be in the news be­cause they were caught try­ing to buy an eight-ball of co­caine? Along with that mis­for­tune, in which he pleaded guilty to a mis­de­mean­or of­fense, the first-term con­gress­man then faced the hu­mi­li­ation of apo­lo­giz­ing be­fore cam­er­as in his home dis­trict late at night, be­fore he took a leave of ab­sence and checked him­self in­to “in­tens­ive” re­hab. Then, the House Eth­ics Com­mit­tee de­cided to in­vest­ig­ate. Not a good start.

Rep. Raul Lab­rador, R-Idaho — Tea-Party Whisper­er

Lab­rador, a tea-party fa­vor­ite, gave con­ser­vat­ive cred­ib­il­ity to the House’s bi­par­tis­an “Gang of Eight,” who ne­go­ti­ated a broad im­mig­ra­tion bill earli­er this year. He spoke fre­quently about the need for the re­form and mak­ing sure un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants wer­en’t giv­en an un­fair ad­vant­age. Lab­rador be­came the bell­weth­er for con­ser­vat­ives’ will­ing­ness to ac­cept some form of leg­al­iz­a­tion — it wasn’t there. Lab­rador was the first to bail from the gang, ef­fect­ively sig­nal­ing the end of its le­git­im­acy among House con­ser­vat­ives. He then ful­filled the same role dur­ing the gov­ern­ment shut­down, re­peatedly ex­plain­ing why con­ser­vat­ives were protest­ing and why Re­pub­lic­ans even­tu­ally re­len­ted and al­lowed the gov­ern­ment to re­open.

Rep. Steve Co­hen, D-Tenn. — Al­most Fath­er

At first it was weird that Co­hen was hav­ing a Twit­ter re­la­tion­ship with a much young­er wo­man, and dur­ing the State of the Uni­on no less. But he came forth to an­nounce that everything was on the up and up. She was his daugh­ter, the os­tens­ible product of a re­la­tion­ship he had with a mar­ried wo­man years ago. But wait! It turns out she wasn’t his daugh­ter after all, but the daugh­ter of the per­son she thought was her fath­er all along, her moth­er’s ex-hus­band. If you’re hav­ing a hard time fol­low­ing all of this, try be­ing Co­hen, who says he didn’t know much about Twit­ter be­fore strik­ing up a re­la­tion­ship with the daugh­ter/not daugh­ter on Face­book earli­er in the year.

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. — Boehner Mouth­piece

Need a quote about how the House Re­pub­lic­an tea-party wing was mak­ing ne­go­ti­ations dif­fi­cult? Cole was your man. This plain-spoken, six-term law­maker, who is close to Speak­er John Boehner, spent count­less hours in the speak­er’s lobby off the House floor and out­side closed-door GOP con­fer­ences telling re­port­ers ex­actly what es­tab­lish­ment Re­pub­lic­ans were think­ing without say­ing he was an es­tab­lish­ment Re­pub­lic­an. He said in Ju­ly that shut­ting the gov­ern­ment down would be a “sui­cid­al polit­ic­al tac­tic” for Re­pub­lic­ans. At the same time, he reg­u­larly bashed Pres­id­ent Obama for his “my way or the high­way” ap­proach and scol­ded the White House for not “at least con­sid­er­ing” Re­pub­lic­an ideas.

Rep. Sander Lev­in, D-Mich. — Un­em­ploy­ment Guy

No one was more force­ful than Lev­in in protest­ing the Dec. 28 cutoff of long-term un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits res­ult­ing from the minus­cule budget deal. He launched a two-prong at­tack. First, he began a grass­roots cam­paign fo­cus­ing on the hu­man side of un­em­ploy­ment. Second, he offered last-ditch policy pro­pos­al to keep the pro­gram afloat. For his grass­roots cam­paign, he and his staff leaned heav­ily on loc­al me­dia to tout the num­ber of long-term un­em­ployed in cer­tain areas that would be af­fected. Lev­in must have re­peated “1.3 mil­lion” — the num­ber of people whose be­ne­fits will be cut off — hun­dreds of times a day. On the policy front, he teamed up with Budget Com­mit­tee rank­ing mem­ber Chris Van Hol­len, D-Md., to keep be­ne­fits go­ing for three months us­ing the farm bill rev­en­ues. That op­tion was re­jec­ted by the House Rules Com­mit­tee.

Sen. Kirsten Gil­librand, D-N.Y. — Sexu­al-As­sault Pro­test­er

Sexu­al as­saults in the mil­it­ary isn’t an easy top­ic to dis­cuss, but Gil­librand has been more than will­ing to take it on. The ju­ni­or sen­at­or from New York made it her cause célèbre as the Sen­ate was de­lib­er­at­ing the Na­tion­al De­fense Au­thor­iz­a­tion Act, ar­guing for weeks that the pro­ced­ures for mil­it­ary per­son­nel to re­port sexu­al as­saults are in­ad­equate. She tried to amend the bill to re­move people in the im­me­di­ate chain of com­mand from the ad­ju­dic­a­tion of a claim, but that lan­guage was left out of the fi­nal ver­sion of the bill. She ex­pects the pro­pos­al to get a stand-alone vote in the Sen­ate in Janu­ary.

Sen. John Ho­even, R-N.D. — Bor­der-Surge Ad­voc­ate

Ho­even got here two years ago and didn’t make much of a splash. That is, un­til he cooked up a jaw-drop­ping idea with Sen. Bob Cork­er, R-Tenn., to win the Re­pub­lic­an votes needed to put a broad im­mig­ra­tion bill over the top in the Sen­ate. Just put 20,000 troops on the bor­der. Simple, right? The amend­ment Ho­even and Cork­er put to­geth­er drew cri­ti­cism from the bill’s sup­port­ers and op­pon­ents, but it had its de­sired ef­fect in win­ning over squeam­ish Re­pub­lic­ans.

Un­til Ho­even and Cork­er’s amend­ment sur­faced, neither sen­at­or was in­volved in im­mig­ra­tion. Cork­er, at least, had made a few waves dur­ing oth­er policy de­bates, par­tic­u­larly when he in­jec­ted him­self in­to the ne­go­ti­ations over the Dodd-Frank fin­an­cial-reg­u­la­tion bill. Per­haps Ho­even will make sim­il­ar moves in the fu­ture.

Sens. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. — Back­ground-Check Twins

Toomey, formerly the head of the Club for Growth, and Manchin, one of the most con­ser­vat­ive Demo­crats in the Sen­ate, were the last hope for gun-con­trol ad­voc­ates. The un­likely duo, real­iz­ing that the gun-con­trol agenda spurred by the New­town mas­sacre was about to go down, came up with an al­tern­ate pro­pos­al to Sen. Chuck Schu­mer’s bill to ex­pand back­ground checks to all gun pur­chases.

Manchin and Toomey’s pro­pos­al, which had Schu­mer’s bless­ing, would have ex­emp­ted back­ground checks for “over the fence” pur­chases, but it would have re­quired checks at gun shows — a top pri­or­ity for gun-con­trol ad­voc­ates. Toomey and Manchin’s idea did not get the needed 60 votes on the Sen­ate floor, but their in­volve­ment cer­tainly had the gun-rights lobby wor­ried, at least for a little while.

Rep. Har­old Ro­gers, R-Ky. — Lone-Wolf Se­quester Hater

Ro­gers, a 17-term Re­pub­lic­an and chair­man of the power­ful House Ap­pro­pri­ations Com­mit­tee, emerged as a bit of a lone wolf in the GOP caucus op­pos­ing the auto­mat­ic budget cuts that went in­to ef­fect earli­er this year. He called for an end to the se­quester in Ju­ly. In the past, Ro­gers had been called “The Prince of Pork” be­cause he has shep­her­ded so many fed­er­al be­ne­fits to his dis­trict. But he shrugged off the cries that he loved gov­ern­ment be­ne­fits too much, not­ing that the fed­er­al pro­grams are “vi­tal” to his con­stitu­ents. The area Ro­gers rep­res­ents is one of the poorest in the coun­try, with a poverty rate as high as 27 per­cent and an un­em­ploy­ment rate of 16 per­cent, more than twice the na­tion­al av­er­age.

Rep. Steve South­er­land, R-Fla. — Food-Stamp Ques­tion­er

South­er­land went after a sac­red cow in the food-stamp pro­gram, in­sist­ing that it needed a massive over­haul — in­clud­ing a re­quire­ment that be­ne­fit re­cip­i­ents work 20 hours per week. His amend­ment to that ef­fect is cred­ited with killing the farm bill on the House floor. The Wash­ing­ton Post did a 3,000-word pro­file on him that promp­ted the lib­er­al blog Think Pro­gress to write a re­but­tal. South­er­land is un­apo­lo­get­ic. “Work is a bless­ing, not a curse,” he said. Food-stamp re­form is “what I’m about,” he told The Post. Though he’ll have to get used to names like “star­va­tion ex­pert,” as the pa­per noted.

Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. — Nuke Pro­ponent

Merkley, a re­l­at­ively new mem­ber of the Sen­ate, was “hor­ri­fied” at the up­per cham­ber’s dys­func­tion after he was elec­ted in 2008. He emerged this year as one of the top pro­ponents for chan­ging the Sen­ate rules to al­low most White House nom­in­ees to be ap­proved with a simple ma­jor­ity. He worked closely with Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id to craft a change to the rules that would al­low the glut of un­con­firmed nom­in­ees to pro­ceed through the Sen­ate. Tra­di­tion­al­ists ac­cused him of be­ing a young­ster who didn’t un­der­stand the frus­tra­tions of the minor­ity, but he held firm. He draf­ted a memo to Sen­ate Demo­crats not­ing that Sen­ate rule changes ac­tu­ally aren’t that un­usu­al. On av­er­age, it hap­pens once every oth­er year, the memo said.

Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa. — Stater of the Ob­vi­ous

Dent isn’t one to mouth off, but he thought the gov­ern­ment shut­down went too far. In the weeks lead­ing up to the shut­down, he pre­dicted that the even­tu­al out­come would be ex­actly what wound up hap­pen­ing — Re­pub­lic­ans would re­lent and let an al­most-clean stop­gap spend­ing bill pass with Demo­crats. He be­came a me­dia darling overnight for bluntly voicing his frus­tra­tion on the shut­down and then of­fer­ing a thinly veiled “I told you so” when it was all over. He is fond of say­ing now, “Only in Wash­ing­ton, D.C., would stat­ing the ob­vi­ous [the shut­down wasn’t go­ing to stop Obama­care] be con­sidered ground­break­ing and news­worthy.”

Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D. — Gun En­thu­si­ast

Heitkamp came to the Sen­ate in 2013 with a man­date not to look too lib­er­al, hav­ing barely squeaked through a close elec­tion to win the seat of re­tir­ing Sen. Kent Con­rad, a fel­low Demo­crat. Mod­er­ate, yes, but she wasn’t ex­pec­ted to aban­don Demo­crats when they most needed her. But she did so any­way on gun con­trol. Heitkamp joined with three oth­er sen­at­ors in her party, all more seni­or than her, in op­pos­ing a meas­ure to ex­pand back­ground checks on gun pur­chases. Her vote was a sur­prise to K Street whip coun­ters, un­like the oth­er Demo­crat­ic “no” voters — Sens. Max Baucus of Montana, Mark Pry­or of Arkan­sas, and Mark Be­gich of Alaska — who were con­sidered out of reach. Heitkamp de­fen­ded her “no” vote, say­ing it was the will of her con­stitu­ents. That didn’t stop power­ful fun­draisers from howl­ing in protest. Bill Da­ley, Obama’s former chief of staff, de­man­ded his money back after he sup­por­ted her cam­paign.

What We're Following See More »
TRUMP CONTINUES TO LAWYER UP
Kasowitz Out, John Dowd In
2 days ago
THE LATEST

As the Russia investigation heats up, "the role of Marc E. Kasowitz, the president’s longtime New York lawyer, will be significantly reduced. Mr. Trump liked Mr. Kasowitz’s blunt, aggressive style, but he was not a natural fit in the delicate, politically charged criminal investigation. The veteran Washington defense lawyer John Dowd will take the lead in representing Mr. Trump for the Russia inquiry."

Source:
ALSO INQUIRES ABOUT PARDON POWER
Trump Looking to Discredit Mueller
2 days ago
THE LATEST

President Trump's attorneys are "actively compiling a list of Mueller’s alleged potential conflicts of interest, which they say could serve as a way to stymie his work." They plan to argued that Mueller is going outside the scope of his investigation, in inquiring into Trump's finances. They're also playing small ball, highlighting "donations to Democrats by some of" Mueller's team, and "an allegation that Mueller and Trump National Golf Club in Northern Virginia had a dispute over membership fees when Mueller resigned as a member in 2011." Trump is said to be incensed that Mueller may see his tax returns, and has been asking about his power to pardon his family members.

Source:
INCLUDES NY PROBE INTO MANAFORT
Why Yes, Mueller Is Looking into Trump Businesses
2 days ago
THE LATEST

In addition to ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, Robert Mueller's team is also "examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe. FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development in New York with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said. The investigation also has absorbed a money-laundering probe begun by federal prosecutors in New York into Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort."

Source:
Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team is "is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates", including "Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008."

Source:
ANALYSIS FROM CBO
32 Million More Uninsured by 2026 if Obamacare Repealed
2 days ago
THE LATEST

"A Senate bill to gut Obamacare would increase the number of uninsured people by 32 million and double premiums on Obamacare's exchanges by 2026, according to an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The analysis is of a bill that passed Congress in 2015 that would repeal Obamacare's taxes and some of the mandates. Republicans intend to leave Obamacare in place for two years while a replacement is crafted and implemented."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login