News

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the McConnell-Paul Right to Work amendment:

“Almost a year ago now, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder signed historic Right to Work legislation into law.

“At the time, he said he viewed it ‘as an opportunity to stand up for Michigan’s workers, to be pro-worker.’

“The Union Bosses, the entrenched special interests, and the Professional Left may have stood in united, militant disagreement, but Michigan’s soft-spoken Governor was right. And the more venom Big Labor directed at him … the more it seemed to confirm the suspicions of many of the middle-class workers Snyder was trying to help: he was on their side.

“The truth is, over the years, Big Labor had come to care more about its own perks and power than the workers it was charged with protecting. Snyder knew that. And he knew it was time to tip the scales back in favor of workers. Well, he’s not alone.

“Here in the Senate, Senator Paul and I share Governor Snyder’s commitment to helping restore worker rights. And that’s why, yesterday, we filed an amendment that would enact similar, forward-looking reforms at the federal level.

“Our Right to Work amendment is simple enough.

“It merely calls for repealing the discriminatory clauses in federal law that allow, as a condition of employment, forcing workers to join a union or forcing workers to pay union dues.

“In practical terms, here’s what that would mean for middle-class folks in Kentucky and across America: If you want to join a union, you can. And if you don’t want to join a union, you don’t have to.

“That’s it.

“Look: This is just common sense. It’s basic fairness. According to one survey, about 80% of unionized workers agree that employees should be able to decide whether or not joining a union is for them. But this amendment isn’t just about ending institutional discrimination against workers; it’s also about job creation, economic growth, and making America more competitive in the 21st Century.

“Consider the fact that manufacturing employment is one-third higher in states with right to work laws. Or that, according to a recent study, states with Right to Work saw improvements in real personal income and average annual employment compared to what they would have seen without such laws. Or that many of our nation’s labor laws were passed in an earlier era – in some cases, before many folks even had televisions.

“America’s labor regulations are antiquated, and they need to be updated for the modern world. That’s what the flex-time legislation I introduced last week sought to achieve. And that’s what Right to Work seeks to achieve too.

“Protecting the rights of workers. Creating jobs. Growing the economy. And keeping pace with the modern world. That’s what Right to Work is all about. It’s just common sense. And if states like Michigan with proud traditions of organized labor can look their problems in the face and act, then it’s time for the federal government to act too.

“So I urge my colleagues to join Senator Paul and me in supporting this important amendment.”

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the need to protect constituents from the consequences of Obamacare:

“I recently received a disturbing note from a constituent in Burlington, Kentucky. And unfortunately, I suspect a lot of my colleagues have been receiving notes just like it. This gentleman said that after receiving several letters from his insurer, it became clear to him that the President was being misleading when he said that if you like the plan you have, you can keep it. That’s because he found out that his policy, which came into effect just two months after the law’s arbitrary cutoff date for grandfathered plans, will be discontinued next year. And he’s not happy, especially given the fact that a plan on the Obamacare exchanges will dramatically drive up his insurance costs, from under $400 a month to more than $700 – with zero subsidies available. ‘My wife and I are 54,’ he wrote. ‘We don't need maternity care and we don't need Obamacare.’

“Well, he’s right to be upset.

“This is simply not in keeping with the spirit of the President’s often repeated promise.

“Perhaps the Administration would like to tell him he should’ve just done a better job of keeping up with its regulatory dictats. But what about the millions who purchased their plans relying on the President’s promise that they could keep them? What about the husbands and wives across Kentucky who suffered when two of our largest employers had to drop spousal coverage?

“What about the husbands and wives across Kentucky who suffered when two of our largest employers had to drop spousal coverage?

“What about the folks who’ve lost coverage at work?

“What about all the smaller paychecks and lost jobs?

“What about the part-time-ization of our economy?

“This law is a mess.

“As Secretary Sebelius has said herself yesterday: “The system is not functioning.” Maybe she was referring to more narrow problems with HealthCare.gov. But as the President reminds us over and over, Obamacare is about more than just a website. And that’s why, if ‘the system is not functioning,’ it’s just another sign that Obamacare itself is not working. The President and his Washington Democrat allies understand this. That’s why the White House is so eager to enroll everybody – other than themselves – into the exchanges. It’s why they handed out a year-long delay to businesses.

“And that’s why the Democrats’ Big Labor allies are looking for their own special carveouts.

“But what about the middle class?

“So far, Washington Democrats have resisted every attempt to exempt the struggling constituents we represent.

“The folks who rammed this partisan bill through know it’s not ready for primetime, and they seem to want no part of it themselves. But for you, the middle class, it seems to be ‘tough luck.’

“We’ve even seen some of the same folks try to stamp out innovations that would help folks get out from under some of Obamacare’s more crushing burdens. That’s why they’ve launched a crusade against small businesses who dare to experiment with self-insurance and other pioneering ideas. Maybe the administration doesn’t like self-insurance because it represents a free market alternative to Obamacare. But the fact is, nearly 100 million Americans are already availing themselves of it. And I’m sure most of them really like the greater flexibility and affordability it provides.

“So it’s time these folks spent their energy working with us to look after the middle class. And to bring about the kind of reforms that will actually lower costs and that our constituents want. Because they shouldn’t have to wake up to news like this:

“Florida Blue is dropping 300,000 customers

“Hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans opened the mail last week to find their health insurance plan would no longer exist in 2014

“Half of the roughly 600,000 people in Kentucky's private insurance market will have their current insurance plans discontinued

“This isn’t fair. It’s not what Americans were promised. And Republicans intend to keep fighting for the middle-class families suffering under this law. I hope more of our Democrat colleagues will join us in this battle as well.”

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the D.C. Circuit Court:

“I will vote against cloture on the Millett nomination, and I’d like to discuss why.

“Ms. Millett is no doubt a fine person. This is nothing personal.

“Peter Keisler, of course, is a fine person, too. But our Democratic colleagues pocket-filibustered his nomination to the D.C. Circuit for two years on the ground that the court’s workload did not warrant his confirmation.

“They did so despite his considerable skill as an attorney, and his personal qualities. His nomination languished until the end of the Bush Administration; he waited almost 1,000 days for a vote that never came.

“The criteria our Democratic friends cited to block Mr. Keisler’s nomination then, clearly show that the court is even less busy now.

“For example:

“The seat to which Ms. Millett is nominated is not a judicial emergency. Far from it.

“The number of appeals at the court is down almost 20%.

“And the written decisions, per active judge, are down almost 30%.

“In addition to these metrics, the D.C. Circuit has provided another. The Chief Judge of the Court, who was appointed to the bench by President Clinton, provided an analysis showing that oral arguments for each active judge are also down almost 10% since Mr. Keisler’s nomination was blocked.

“Mr. President, these analyses show that not only is the court less busy in absolute terms now than it was then. It is less busy in relative terms as well, meaning when one takes into account the number of active judges serving on the court.

“The court’s caseload is so low, in fact, that it has cancelled oral argument days in recent years because of a lack of cases.

“And after we confirmed the President’s last nominee to the D.C. Circuit just a few months ago—unanimously, I might add—one of the judges on the court said that if any more judges were confirmed, there wouldn’t be enough work to go around.

“So if the court’s caseload clearly doesn’t meet their own standards for more judges, why are Senate Democrats pushing to fill more seats on a court that doesn’t need them?

“What’s behind this push to fill seats on a court that is cancelling oral argument days for a lack of cases and which, according to the judges who serve on it, won’t have enough work to go around if we do?

“Well, we don’t have to guess. Our Democratic colleagues and the Administration’s supporters have been fairly candid about it. They have admitted they want to control the court so it will advance the President’s agenda.

“As one Administration ally put it, ‘the president’s best hope for advancing his agenda is through executive action, and that runs through the D. C. Circuit.’

“Let me repeat, the reason they want to put more judges on the D.C. Circuit is not because it needs them, but because ‘the president’s best hope for advancing his agenda is through executive action, and that runs through the D.C. Circuit.’

“Another Administration ally complained that the court ‘has made decisions that have frustrated the president’s agenda.’

“Really? The court is evenly-divided between Republican and Democratic appointees.

“And according to data compiled by the federal courts, the D.C. Circuit has ruled against the Obama Administration in administrative matters less often than it ruled against the Bush Administration.

“So it’s not that the court has been more unfavorable to President Obama than it was to President Bush. Rather, the Administration and its allies seem to be complaining that the court hasn’t been favorable enough to it.

“Evidently, they don’t want any meaningful check on the President. You see, there is one in the House of Representatives, but the Administration can circumvent that with aggressive agency rulemaking. That is, if the D.C. Circuit allows it to do so.

“Mr. President, a court should not be a rubberstamp for any administration. And our Democratic colleagues told us again and again during the Bush Administration that the Senate confirmation process should not be a rubberstamp for any administration either.

“For example, they said President Bush’s nomination of Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Circuit was ‘an effort to pack the Federal courts.’ And they filibustered his nomination—seven times, in fact.

“We have confirmed nearly all of President Obama’s judicial nominees.

“Like I said, we confirmed a judge to the D.C. Circuit, unanimously, a few months ago.

“This year, we have confirmed 34 circuit and district court judges; at this time in President Bush’s second term, the Senate had confirmed only 14 of these nominees.

“In fact, we confirmed President Obama’s nominees even during the government shutdown.

“In writing then-Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter to oppose the nomination of Peter Keisler, Senate Democrats said ‘Mr. Keisler should under no circumstances be considered—much less confirmed— . . . before we first address the very need for that judgeship . . . and deal with the genuine judicial emergencies identified by the Judicial Conference.’

“That course of action ought to be followed here, too. Senator Grassley has legislation that will allow the President to fill seats on courts that need judges. The Senate should support that legislation, not transparent efforts to politicize a court that doesn’t need judges in an effort to create a rubberstamp for the Administration’s agenda.”

Recent Press Releases

Sens. McConnell, Paul Offer Common Sense Right to Work Plan

‘Protecting the rights of workers. Creating jobs. Growing the economy. And keeping pace with the modern world. That’s what Right to Work is all about. It’s just common sense.’

November 5, 2013

Obamacare: If You Like It, You (Can’t) Keep It

October 31, 2013

Dems Admit Reasons for DC Circuit Nomination Effort

‘Our Democratic colleagues and the Administration’s supporters have been fairly candid about it. They have admitted they want to control the court so it will advance the President’s agenda.’

October 31, 2013