The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: txradioguy on February 14, 2019, 02:44:17 pm
-
The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on a government appropriations bill Thursday evening and, with a day until the vote, lawmakers still have not received the text of the legislation.
“No one has seen the final wording of a long and complicated bill we will be expected to vote on tomorrow evening,†Republican Maryland Rep. Andy Harris told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “That’s no way to run a legislature.â€
Republican Study Chairman Mike Johnson also confirmed that “as of lunch on Wednesday, members of the RSC, and to our knowledge, even members of the conference committee, had not seen the text.â€
“It has been reported that [House Majority Leader Steny] Hoyer has said if the bill is dropped today we will consider it tomorrow. This is reminiscent of the, ‘you must pass it to find out what is in it,’ Obamacare debacle,†Johnson said to TheDCNF. “This bill is expected to be well over 1,000 pages, and we will potentially have less than 24 hours to digest it. This is absurd.â€
<snip>
“Pelosi and the Democrats promised a full 72 hours to review legislation,†a senior conservative congressional aide told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “But now we’re voting on a massive, probably thousands-page long conference report tomorrow and we haven’t even seen text the day before? This is worse than under Speaker Ryan.â€
https://dailycaller.com/2019/02/13/house-vote-spending-bill-read/
-
How will this ever be stopped?
They make "rules" with no intention of keeping them.
They refuse the discipline of Regular Order and have stopped the Budget process many years ago.
Now, the order of the day is a constant series of massive omnibus spending bills and continuing resolutions that are rolled out in order to satisfy their goals of keeping spending issues at bay during re-election campaigns and to just keep the gravy train of deficit spending rolling along without regard to need, Constitutionality, or ability to pay.
How will this ever be stopped?
-
How will this ever be stopped?
They make "rules" with no intention of keeping them.
They refuse the discipline of Regular Order and have stopped the Budget process many years ago.
Now, the order of the day is a constant series of massive omnibus spending bills and continuing resolutions that are rolled out in order to satisfy their goals of keeping spending issues at bay during re-election campaigns and to just keep the gravy train of deficit spending rolling along without regard to need, Constitutionality, or ability to pay.
How will this ever be stopped?
I doubt it will be anytime soon. Nancy is simply picking up where she left off before she became minority leader back in 2010. These are the same tactics she instigated when she was speaker the first time.
-
How will this ever be stopped?
We have met the enemy, and it is us.
Bad behavior follows bad culture.
And so, this will continue indefinitely until (or unless) the American people decide to stop asking for unearned favors from our elected representatives.
In effect, we are giving away our freedom and abdicating our responsibilities in exchange for false promises of security to be paid by faceless and nameless others.
-
I doubt it will be anytime soon. Nancy is simply picking up where she left off before she became minority leader back in 2010. These are the same tactics she instigated when she was speaker the first time.
Unfortunately we didn't see the return to Regular Order promised loudly by Speaker Boehner or Speaker Ryan either.
-
We have met the enemy, and it is us.
Bad behavior follows bad culture.
And so, this will continue indefinitely until (or unless) the American people decide to stop asking for unearned favors from our elected representatives.
In effect, we are giving away our freedom and abdicating our responsibilities in exchange for false promises of security to be paid by faceless and nameless others.
Sadly true.
-
Here is a link to the 29 page summary if any one chooses to read 'em and weep.
https://www.scribd.com/document/399623170/Summary-of-Conference-Appropriations-Report (https://www.scribd.com/document/399623170/Summary-of-Conference-Appropriations-Report)
-
More "highlights" are found at:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1095917405925244929.html
-
Here is a link to the 29 page summary if any one chooses to read 'em and weep.
https://www.scribd.com/document/399623170/Summary-of-Conference-Appropriations-Report (https://www.scribd.com/document/399623170/Summary-of-Conference-Appropriations-Report)
Thanks! But I'm afraid to look! My blood pressure won't stand it.
-
Here you go, @Bigun:
FAIR
â€Verified account @FAIRImmigration
2h2 hours ago
WOW! Buried in the spending agreement is a de facto amnesty for anyone near a UAC. This will exacerbate the border crisis and threaten public safety, as many MS-13 arrests have been UACs.
@realDonaldTrump said he would look for landmines in the text. Well, here is a big one.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DzX74X4XcAEOyeG.png:large)
-
There are so many "landmines" that I have to think that maybe they are daring him to not sign this abomination (fancy word for crap sandwich)?
-
Line item veto, Mr. President.
-
Here is a link to the 29 page summary if any one chooses to read 'em and weep.
https://www.scribd.com/document/399623170/Summary-of-Conference-Appropriations-Report (https://www.scribd.com/document/399623170/Summary-of-Conference-Appropriations-Report)
The only part of these type of bills that would interest any legislator would be those that impact their constituents and/or pet projects.
-
Sweet and simple.... The government is the enemy. I love how this shit seems to show up each year as we get ready for our April 15th screwing.
-
How will this ever be stopped?
Convention of States
Tea party couldn’t get traction, so now it will take more
-
Convention of States
Tea party couldn’t get traction, so now it will take more
Bingo!
-
Convention of States
Tea party couldn’t get traction, so now it will take more
Somebody is going to have to explain to me what about further amending the Constitution is going to make these Aholes pay any attention to it whatever!
-
Somebody is going to have to explain to me what about further amending the Constitution is going to make these Aholes pay any attention to it whatever!
Can a convention remove amendments?
-
Can a convention remove amendments?
No! But it could propose removing as many of them as they like. Still would need 3/4 of the states to ratify anything they propose.
-
There are so many "landmines" that I have to think that maybe they are daring him to not sign this abomination (fancy word for crap sandwich)?
She's pulling the same trick she did with Obamacare...ram it through...pass it on party lines before anyone has a chance to read what they've hidden in the back pages that undermines anything the President is trying to do on immigration.
-
Can a convention remove amendments?
It can't remove them but An Article V Convention of States can repeal a previously approved amendment by proposing a new Amendment to repeal an old one..
The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment.
-
It can't remove them but An Article V Convention of States can repeal a previously approved amendment by proposing a new Amendment to repeal an old one..
The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment.
Then repeal the 16th.
-
And the 17th!
(Repealing the 19th would be the icing on the cake) :bolt:
-
Then repeal the 16th.
That's one along with the 17th that's been discussed. The 16th would be replaced with an amendment implementing a flat tax or something along those lines.
The 17th would repeal popular vote for Senators which was a "present" Woodrow Wilson left us when he wasn't re-segregating the Federal Government and having viewings of "Birth of A Nation" in the WH.
-
That's one along with the 17th that's been discussed. The 16th would be replaced with an amendment implementing a flat tax or something along those lines.
The 17th would repeal popular vote for Senators which was a "present" Woodrow Wilson left us when he wasn't re-segregating the Federal Government and having viewings of "Birth of A Nation" in the WH.
I would like to see term limits.
-
Line item veto, Mr. President.
Already ruled unconstitutional, 20 years ago.
-
She's pulling the same trick she did with Obamacare...ram it through...pass it on party lines before anyone has a chance to read what they've hidden in the back pages that undermines anything the President is trying to do on immigration.
That maybe true, but last year, during the omnibus signing, this particular president said, “But I say to Congress that I will never sign another bill like this again. I'm not going to do it again. Nobody read it, it’s only hours old."
-
That maybe true, but last year, during the omnibus signing, this particular president said, “But I say to Congress that I will never sign another bill like this again. I'm not going to do it again. Nobody read it, it’s only hours old."
And he's already said he's gonna sign it.
"read my lips"
-
I would like to see term limits.
Term limits would do nothing except make things easier and cheaper for the people over on K Street. Makes the unelected beauracrats even more powerful than they already are
-
And he's already said he's gonna sign it.
"read my lips"
This is a different Congress and the bill is $300B less than the last one. So, I suppose he’s covered. *****rollingeyes*****
-
Term limits would do nothing except make things easier and cheaper for the people over on K Street. Makes the unelected beauracrats even more powerful than they already are
So limit lobbying. Take away those bureaucrats "right" to not be fired.
-
EdJames wrote:
"How will this ever be stopped?"
I grin whenever I see comments like yours from members of this forum (who probably take pride in calling themselves "fiscal conservatives").
It will NEVER be "stopped", until circumstances that politicians don't, won't, or can't control actually STOP it.
Then, and only then, will those with the powers to do so actually attempt to correct things.
(I said "attempt")
The budget (and its excesses, and the resulting deficits) are like the proverbial Vietnamese village that first had to be destroyed before it could be "saved".
But mark these words:
The steps taken that will actually correct "the problems" will be draconian and totalitarian.
You're not gonna like 'em!
-
Bele wrote:
"Line item veto, Mr. President."
That's unconstitutional, as the issue litigated before the U.S. Supreme Court back around 1998 or so. The Court said "no".
-
If anyone is interested, here are the Senate "no" votes:
Statistically Notable Votes
Vote Party Representative State
Nay R Cotton, Tom AR
Nay D Harris, Kamala CA
Nay R Rubio, Marco FL
Nay R Braun, Mike IN
Nay R Paul, Rand KY
Nay D Markey, Ed MA
Nay D Warren, Elizabeth MA
Nay R Hawley, Joshua MO
Nay R Sasse, Benjamin NE
Nay D Booker, Cory NJ
Nay D Gillibrand, Kirsten NY
Nay R Inhofe, Jim OK
Nay R Toomey, Pat PA
Nay R Scott, Tim SC
Nay R Cruz, Ted TX
Nay R Lee, Mike UT
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/116-2019/s26 (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/116-2019/s26)
-
If anyone is interested, here are the Senate "no" votes:
Anyone want to bet on how many of those Dems are running in 2020?
-
Thanks for that @Sanguine I was looking for it earlier, looks like a solid block of Conservative? Senators voted against.
-
Thanks for that @Sanguine I was looking for it earlier, looks like a solid block of Conservative? Senators voted against.
Yes, it does.
-
Thanks for that @Sanguine I was looking for it earlier, looks like a solid block of Conservative? Senators voted against.
YEP. That tells me all I need to know.
-
YEP. That tells me all I need to know.
Me too. That Trump should vote nay too.
-
Anyone want to bet on how many of those Dems are running in 2020?
1 out of 5. Gillibrand
3 of the other 4 are running for President in 2020. The bill passed both chambers of Congress with VETO-proof majorities
-
Thanks for that @Sanguine I was looking for it earlier, looks like a solid block of Conservative? Senators voted against.
It's a little over 20% of the GOP Senate.
-
https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1096229706175733760
Ann Coulter @AnnCoulter
He CAN'T declare a national emergency to do something a bill he signed prevents him from doing.
https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1096229840980652034
Ann Coulter @AnnCoulter
Now you know: Trump's "national emergency" ruse was always just a way to fool the rubes in his base.
88finger point
-
https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1096229706175733760
Ann Coulter @AnnCoulter
He CAN'T declare a national emergency to do something a bill he signed prevents him from doing.
https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1096229840980652034
Ann Coulter @AnnCoulter
Now you know: Trump's "national emergency" ruse was always just a way to fool the rubes in his base.
88finger point
She is just bloviating, making statements without any specifics source. Sorta like some do here.
-
She is just bloviating, making statements without any specifics source. Sorta like some do here.
Are you speaking of yourself? Because I provided links.
-
Are you speaking of yourself? Because I provided links.
No. Links to bloviating tweets provides no substance.
-
Nobody is going to read it,either. At MOST,some will double check to make sure THEIR "piece of pork" isn't missing,but that's it.
This won't change until and unless "We,the people" start climbing up on their backs and INSISTING they read and debate any spending bill in open chambers before they can even vote on it.
-
Nobody is going to read it,either. At MOST,some will double check to make sure THEIR "piece of pork" isn't missing,but that's it.
This won't change until and unless "We,the people" start climbing up on their backs and INSISTING they read and debate any spending bill in open chambers before they can even vote on it.
There already are rules in places, but both parties routinely dispense with the rules by majority vote and do whatever they want.
-
There already are rules in places, but both parties routinely dispense with the rules by majority vote and do whatever they want.
@RetBobbyMI
Well,that's only fair since we all know that laws are only for the "little people",right?
-
We have met the enemy, and it is us.
Bad behavior follows bad culture.
And so, this will continue indefinitely until (or unless) the American people decide to stop asking for unearned favors from our elected representatives.
In effect, we are giving away our freedom and abdicating our responsibilities in exchange for false promises of security to be paid by faceless and nameless others.
Interesting take, and duly noted.
-
Nobody is going to read it,either. At MOST,some will double check to make sure THEIR "piece of pork" isn't missing,but that's it.
This won't change until and unless "We,the people" start climbing up on their backs and INSISTING they read and debate any spending bill in open chambers before they can even vote on it.
Oh, the liberals know what's in it. You can bet every Latino group, and Immigration lawyers knows too.
-
She is just bloviating, making statements without any specifics source. Sorta like some do here.
Is she? If you give local governments the authority to reject border "wall", "fencing" you have already signed to that agreement. So any declaration will exclude the provisions he signed to in the bill. I think Anne is telling the truth here.
-
Is she? If you give local governments the authority to reject border "wall", "fencing" you have already signed to that agreement. So any declaration will exclude the provisions he signed to in the bill. I think Anne is telling the truth here.
She may be entirely correct in what she tweeted, but the point is she doesn’t support her statement by pointing out which part of a thousand page bill she’s referring to. Thus just bloviating or bellyaching.