New York Times:

The bill stands no chance of becoming law, with Democrats in control of the Senate and the White House. Republican leaders acknowledge that its purpose is to satisfy vocal elements of their base who have renewed a push for greater restrictions on reproductive rights, even if those issues harmed the party’s reputation with women in 2012.

It will be the 10th such vote the GOP has taken since taking control of the House in 2011.

• February 17, 2011
• February 19, 2011
• April 14, 2011
• May 4, 2011
• May 25, 2011
• June 16, 2011
• October 13, 2011
• May 31, 2012
• July 31, 2012

Meanwhile, it’s been 87 days since the Senate passed a budget. It’s time for Speaker Boehner and House Republicans to abandon their ideological agenda and appoint budget conferees so we can engage in an open debate on a budget that replaces the sequester with a plan to create jobs, strengthen the middle class, and responsibly reduce the deficit.

On Friday, House Republican Leaders quietly replaced Rep. Trent Franks with Rep. Marsha Blackburn as the floor manager of the bill when it comes up for debate tomorrow and added a limited exception, with onerous requirements, for victims of rape or incest. From Steve Benen, MSNBC:

If Franks has become a lightning rod for controversy, then it certainly makes sense to replace him with Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) – though it’s still the bill he wrote, sponsored, and pushed through the committee process, so no one should be fooled into calling it Blackburn’s bill.

And including rape and incest exceptions might make the proposal slightly less offensive in a culture-war context, but problems remain. For one thing, the bill would require a woman to prove that she has reported her rape before she can exercise her constitutional right to terminate the unwanted pregnancy. For another, Franks’ original version also banned abortions in “medically futile pregnancies,” involving fetuses so badly compromised that they have no chance of survival. If this provision remains intact, it’s still intended to force women to carry such pregnancies through to the doomed birth.

House Republicans are replacing Mr. Franks with an even more conservative Republican in Congress. Ms. Blackburn ranked #3 in the most recent National Journal annual list of most conservative members of Congress, behind former Rep. Todd Akin (“legitimate rape”) and Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA). For comparison: Rep. Trent Franks ranked 78^th.  Just two weeks ago, Ms. Blackburn told Meet the Press that American women “don’t want” equal pay laws. From Donna Brazile, CNN:

GOP aides now say Rep. Marsha Blackburn will be managing Franks’ anti-abortion bill. Given her record – “no” votes on major equality or women-protection legislation and “yea” for issues like ending federal funding for Planned Parenthood – that’s hardly an improvement.

Since 2011, House Republicans have voted at least nine times to restrict women’s choice. Meanwhile, the American people are still waiting for the GOP plan to create jobs here at home. More from Benen:

Making the legislation slightly more palatable to the American mainstream, and removing the offensive lawmaker from his role in championing his bill publicly, is predicated on a dubious assumption: that this is what the House of Representatives should be working on right now. It is, in other words, the best use of lawmakers’ time.

It’s really not. We’re talking about legislation that’s probably unconstitutional, has nothing to do with the nation’s top priorities, and can’t pass the Senate anyway, making the entire effort a vanity exercise intended to make the far-right feel better about itself. [6/17]

Bottom line: Putting a woman in charge of a bill that restricts women’s health choices does not make it less of an assault on the rights of American women. And wasting time on an ideologically motivated, dead-end bill to pacify the Tea Party caucus does not create jobs for the American people.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, we asked– our viewers for questions for you. And so many came in on the same exact theme. Where are the jobs? What is this Congress doing for jobs?

BOEHNER: Well, that’s interesting, George. Because it really is our number one priority… 

Really, Speaker Boehner?

From National Journal: Congress Has Passed 13 Laws This Year—None of Them Have to Do With Jobs

…In the six months and four days since the 113th Congress began, it has passed 13 laws.  And, despite lawmakers constantly beating the drum on boosting jobs, none of the new measures have been focused on employment. Here’s a list of what the 113th Congress has passed in its first six months:

1. H.R.41: To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program.
   Sponsor: Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] (introduced 1/3/2013) Cosponsors (44)
2. H.R.152: Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013
   Sponsor: Rep Rogers, Harold [KY-5] (introduced 1/4/2013) Cosponsors (None)
3. H.R.325: No Budget, No Pay Act of 2013
   Sponsor: Rep Camp, Dave [MI-4] (introduced 1/21/2013) Cosponsors (1)
4. S.47: Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013
   Sponsor: Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] (introduced 1/22/2013) Cosponsors (61)
5. H.R.307: Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2013
   Sponsor: Rep Rogers, Mike J. [MI-8] (introduced 1/18/2013) Cosponsors (5)
6. H.R.933: Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013
   Sponsor: Rep Rogers, Harold [KY-5] (introduced 3/4/2013) Cosponsors (None)
7. S.716: A bill to modify the requirements under the STOCK Act regarding online access to certain financial disclosure statements and related forms.
   Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 4/11/2013) Cosponsors (None)
8. H.R.1246: District of Columbia Chief Financial Officer Vacancy Act
   Sponsor: Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] (introduced 3/19/2013) Cosponsors (None)
9. H.R.1765: Reducing Flight Delays Act of 2013
   Sponsor: Rep Latham, Tom [IA-3] (introduced 4/26/2013) Cosponsors (None)
10. H.R.1071: To specify the size of the precious-metal blanks that will be used in the production of the National Baseball Hall of Fame commemorative coins.
    Sponsor: Rep Hanna, Richard L. [NY-22] (introduced 3/12/2013) Cosponsors (2)
11. H.R.360: To award posthumously a Congressional Gold Medal to Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson, and Cynthia Wesley to commemorate the lives they lost 50 years ago in the bombing of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church, where these 4 little Black girls’ ultimate sacrifice served as a catalyst for the Civil Rights Movement.
    Sponsor: Rep Sewell, Terri A. [AL-7] (introduced 1/23/2013) Cosponsors (301)
12. H.R.258: Stolen Valor Act of 2013
    Sponsor: Rep Heck, Joseph J. [NV-3] (introduced 1/15/2013) Cosponsors (127)
13. S.982: Freedom to Fish Act
    Sponsor: Sen Alexander, Lamar [TN] (introduced 5/16/2013) Cosponsors (3)

The House is holding lots of headline-grabbing oversight hearings – 100 in May alone. But when it comes to the actual crafting and advancing of legislation, the lower chamber is on pace for one of the least productive sessions in recent decades.

The 21 permanent committees in the Republican-led House have issued just 94 original reports or markups in the first five months of the year, the second-lowest showing in any opening of a Congress since at least 1997, records show. Production at the start of a new session was only ever lower once – in 2001, when just 80 House committee reports were issued through May…

“No one can look at the floor schedule and argue that this has been a productive Congress that is seeking to address the urgent needs of middle-class Americans,” said Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

A senior House Republican aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, was just as blunt. “Nothing of substance is really getting done,” he said…

Accompanying the low House committee output is another dubious distinction: the small number of “public bills,” a congressional term for measures that have broad impact, and that have been passed by both the House and Senate and signed into law during the first five months of this session.

Through May, there have been just 11 public bills that have become law (two others have not yet been signed), the lowest number for the first five months of a session since at least 1995, according to numbers available from the Library of Congress and the U.S. Government Printing Office…

“Nothing is their agenda. Never is their timetable,” Pelosi complained last month when lamenting what she described as a refusal by House Republicans to take up a more bipartisan agenda.

From BuzzFeed: John Boehner Sits Back As Ted Cruz Fights Budget Negotiations:

The fight over the budget has become an intra-party feud for Republicans in Congress, with Tea Party hero Sen. Ted Cruz objecting to negotiations between the House and Senate because he fears House Republicans will break down and agree to raise the nation’s debt ceiling — a cardinal sin against ideological purity in some conservative circles…

Fights between Republicans normally spell headaches for Boehner. But the nation’s top Republican is remarkably comfortable with this particular behind-the-scenes budget battle — in large part because it’s staving off a much more divisive and public one that could threaten to engulf the party if conference proceedings every begin, senior House and Senate Republicans told BuzzFeed.

Cruz, along with Sens. Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul, has been leading conservatives’ objection to going to a budget conference, much to the frustration of Democrats and quite a few Senate Republicans, like Arizona’s John McCain.

Meanwhile, Boehner is quietly content to let the Tea Party crusaders in the Senate keep the conference from taking place, acknowledging that if it ever does, House Republican bickering will once again be thrust into the national spotlight…

Instead of naming budget conferees to work with the Senate on a bipartisan budget agreement, the GOP used a “deem and pass” maneuver to pretend the devastating Ryan Republican budget passed in both the House and Senate so they could use it as the basis for this week’s appropriations bills.

TPMDC: House Republicans Quietly Return To Budget Stand-Off Mode, Renew Risk Of Government Shutdown

House Republicans have quietly returned to the stand-off driven approach to budgeting and must-pass legislation that was their hallmark before President Obama’s re-election.

On Tuesday afternoon the House passed a measure directing House appropriators, in the absence of a budget agreement with the Senate, to adopt spending levels in the Republican budget. That blueprint calls for enormous cuts to spending on everything from science research to education to health care, in order to rescue the Defense Department and other politically favored agencies from the ravages of sequestration.

Americans do not need smoke and mirrors from the Republicans – they deserve an open and fair debate on our priorities and a budget that replaces the sequester with a plan to create jobs, strengthen the middle class and responsibly reduce the deficit.

It’s time for the GOP to stop the partisan procedural fantasies. Speaker Boehner and the GOP leadership should return to regular order and name conferees to work with the Senate on a bipartisan budget agreement.

Opponents of President Barack Obama’s health-care law are gearing up for a new round of attacks, this time targeting the legislation’s insurance exchanges that would expand coverage to millions of Americans…

While opposition to the health-care program is nothing new, the tactics are changing. Rather than focusing on repealing the law in Congress and the courts, two avenues that have failed so far, the groups are aiming to prevent the cornerstone of the legislation, the insurance exchanges, from succeeding. Their goal is to limit enrollments, drive up costs, and make it easier to roll back all or part of the law later. [5/28]

But many state Marketplaces are already gearing up for business – holding insurance companies accountable and preparing to expand access to insurance plans at affordable rates to millions of Americans across the country.

NPR: Health Insurance At ‘Good Prices’ Coming To Calif. Exchange

California just unveiled a wide array of choices for the 5.3 million people expected to qualify to buy coverage through its online marketplace established by the federal health overhaul.

It’s the first disclosure of prices in the nation’s most populous state for individual health insurance that complies with the Affordable Care Act, and the menu of affordable options surprised some consumer advocates and analysts who had been expecting premiums to be much higher…

Nearly three dozen health plans submitted bids to sell their products in the competitive marketplace, and 13 were selected. But California exchange officials, authorized by state lawmakers to negotiate on behalf of consumers, rejected bids that were too expensive, they said, or failed to include enough choices of doctors and hospitals. [5/24]

AP: Health Reform Plans, Pricing Released in California

Californians are finally getting to see what “Obamacare” means for them…

Some of the state’s largest individual health insurers, including Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Kaiser Permanente and Health Net Inc., will be among the 13 plans competing through the state’s new health exchange…

“California really demonstrates that the concept of an exchange can work by really increasing head-to-head plan competition,” said Caroline Pearson, vice president of Avalere Health, a Washington, D.C. data analysis firm catering to the health care industry and government.  “It brought a lot of carriers into the market. It brought premiums down.  It was sort of the best example of the market working.” [5/23]

Reuters: Two states say 2014 Obamacare insurance costs on low side

In a boost for President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform law, two states in the Northwest said on Friday that insurance companies submitted applications to sell policies on the states’ health insurance exchanges at rates well below what some insurance executives had predicted.

The insurance marketplaces are a key element of the reform law, which is due to take full effect in 2014. A core principle of these exchanges is that competition, along with government subsidies and other measures, will keep rates affordable…

“We were pleasantly surprised at how great the rates look,” said Washington exchange spokesman Michael Marchand. “After subsidies many people will pay even less, and they’ll get more benefits” than are offered in many current policies. [5/17]

Seattle Times:  Some may see lower rates under Obama health law

Some Washington residents may see lower insurance premiums under President Barack Obama’s health care law, with proposed plans released Tuesday countering concerns expressed by the insurance industry just a year ago…

Premera Blue Cross currently offers individual plans for 21-year-old non-smokers at a monthly cost of $325, with a deductible of $1,800.  In the exchange, that same person in King County could purchase a similar Premara plan with a lower deductible with a rate of $276 – a decrease of 15 percent. [5/14]

Bloomberg: Vermont Insurance-Exchange Rates Show Savings From Health Law

Vermont residents may save money on medical insurance through subsidized exchange plans under President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, according to the first state look at premiums under the 2010 health law.

The Vermont rates provide an initial analysis of how much health insurance may cost Americans nationwide as the law’s core provision kicks in next year. In Vermont, a couple earning $32,000 a year would pay about $134 a month after U.S. subsidies for a certain level of coverage that would have cost them $248 under the state’s existing program, according to a comparison document published by the state. [4/2]

USA Today: Market, insurers will keep premiums low, analysts say

Market forces and an impetus to attract younger, healthier people into the insurance market will help keep health insurance premiums lower as the 2010 health care law takes effect on Jan. 1, industry analysts and insurance officials say. [5/21]

We are 135 days into the 113th Congress and House Republicans are utterly failing to do their job.  Instead of doing the work the American people sent them to Washington to do, the GOP is wasting time and taxpayer dollars chasing scandals and voting on dead-end bills to nowhere.

Some conservatives eagerly applaud the partisan political games being played. Heritage Action even sent a letter to Speaker Boehner and House Republicans urging them to do even less legislative work for the American people:

…it would be imprudent to do anything that shifts the focus from the Obama administration to the ideological differences within the House Republican Conference.

To that end, we urge you to avoid bringing any legislation to the House Floor that could expose or highlight major schisms within the conference. [5/15]

But, as the conservative National Review says, “scandal is not an agenda.”

Yesterday, the House GOP voted for the 37^th time to repeal the Affordable Care Act – a bill that has no chance of becoming law. They defended their (in)action by admitting it was pure political theater – saying the Republican freshman members had not had the chance to vote for it yet. From MSNBC:

“If you’re a freshman—the guys who’ve been up here the last year, we can go home and say listen, we voted 36 different times to repeal or replace Obamacare. Tell me what the new guys are supposed to say?” Congressman Mick Mulvaney asked late last month. “We haven’t had a repeal or replace vote this year.”

At $1.45 million per vote – House Republicans have wasted $53.8 million taxpayer dollars just so GOP members can say they did it.

The American people are tired of bitter partisanship. They want action on job creation and bills to strengthen our economy … now.

What else could $52.4 million pay for?

HEAD START: 6,900 kids in Head Start for one year or the equivalent of restoring the estimated Head Start cuts in Ohio (3,600 children), Virginia (1,440 children) and Wisconsin (1,320 children) resulting from the sequester.

PUBLIC DEFENDERS: Restore the estimated $43 million cut to federal public defenders resulting from the sequester.

PREVENTING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN: Restore $20 million funding shortfall to programs that fight domestic violence and sexual assault will see this year as a result of the sequester.

MEALS ON WHEELS: Restore the estimated $41 million cut to Meals on Wheels nutrition programs across the country and ensure the 19 million meals slashed by the sequester are served to those who need them.

THEN

Working Families Flexibility Act of 1996 [H.R. 2391] – Rejected by Congress

Working Families Flexibility Act of 1997 [H.R. 1] – Rejected by Congress

Family Time Flexibility Act of 2003 [H.R. 1113] – Rejected by Congress

NOW 

Working Families Flexibility Act

From Salon –

The talking points haven’t changed much. “To many working men and women, time with their family is just as valuable as extra money,” current House Speaker Boehner said in March of 1997. “In fact, many would prefer to have time rather than money,” then-Rep. Judy Biggert said in 2003. “Time is more precious to [a working father] than the cash payments,” Rep. Martha Roby told the National Review last month. [5/6]

But that’s not the only thing that remains the same. It’s STILL a bad idea.

THEN

1997:

When Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) was being courted by the House leadership to support the flextime measure, he asked the assembled bigwigs if any of them had spoken to labor – the representatives of millions of those workers the bill is supposed to help. “It was as if I had said, Have you met with somebody from Mars?’” said King, who along with Rep. Michael Forbes (R-Quogue) bucked their party to vote against the measure. [Newsday, 3/25/97]

“This bill proposes to alter labor protections that have existed for almost 60 years,” said 9to5′s [Ellen] Bravo. “Families are desperate for more flexibility, but they do not want anyone to tinker with their overtime pay.” [Palm Beach Post, 3/23/97]

2003:

“What this bill does is give employers flexibility to schedule more overtime without paying for it,” said Bill Samuel, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s legislative director. “Right now, the Fair Labor Standards Act is meant to discourage excessive overtime because it costs money. The real point is this is going to mean more overtime for more workers for less pay. And more overtime will mean less family time for many workers.” [NYT, 5/10/03]

“We don’t think it’s the best thing for employees,” said Jack Wells, president and business manager of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 50, which represents more than 1,200 utilities workers across Hampton Roads. “It’s probably pretty good for companies.” [Virginian-Pilot, 5/11/03]

Perhaps the late Molly Ivins put it best in 2003:

“To hear the Republicans tell it, you’d think these were family-friendly bills, something like Clinton’s Family Leave Act, designed to help you balance the difficult combined demands of work and family. With such a smarm of butter over their visages do the Republicans go on about the joys of “flexibility” and “freedom of choice” that you would have to read the bills for maybe 30 seconds before figuring out they’re about repealing the 40-hour workweek and ending overtime.” [4/24/03]

It didn’t work then – and it’s not going to work now. The GOP just doesn’t change.