Deadline pulled from war funding bill

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-05-23 12:26pm

The Democrats deal with (mostly) the same voting public that the Republicans do. Their behaviour is not surprising. Ultimately, one can only blame the politicians for so long before turning his eye on the public, whose opinions the politicians are simply whoring themselves out to.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2007-05-23 04:05pm

The bill also raises minimal wage, another fine example of the American legislative system in action. I’m sure if it was looked over line by line you’d also find 65 million to dredge a canal to connect luxury homes with the Chesapeake Bay and similar nonsense.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2007-05-23 04:35pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:The bill also raises minimal wage, another fine example of the American legislative system in action. I’m sure if it was looked over line by line you’d also find 65 million to dredge a canal to connect luxury homes with the Chesapeake Bay and similar nonsense.

....You know, that reeks of a 'poison pill' amendment. 'Sure. You can have your blank check... Just raise the minimum wage! Go on! Do it! Doooo eeeeet!'.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2007-05-23 04:48pm

I wonder if once it gets on the floor of the Senate, Byrd will tack on another ryder appropriating funds for making Amtrak's Cardinal provide daily instead of thrice-weekly service through his state?

Post by **Edi** » 2007-05-24 01:09am

I never understood the idea of unrelated shit being inserted to laws. It's not done here and probably couldn't either, since if a law is stated to have a definite purpose, it can't contain extraneous, unrelated shit or it would be ruled unconstitutional. It would also fuck up due process something fierce due to the practical effects of statutes being scattered all over.

The US desperately needs something like that.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2007-05-24 01:15am

Edi wrote:I never understood the idea of unrelated shit being inserted to laws. It's not done here and probably couldn't either, since if a law is stated to have a definite purpose, it can't contain extraneous, unrelated shit or it would be ruled unconstitutional. It would also fuck up due process something fierce due to the practical effects of statutes being scattered all over.

The US desperately needs something like that.

That it does, but it’s not in the interest of people already serving in the legislature to change the rules, so it will never happen. Bills to ban these changes, called riders, come up from time to time but they never make any progress. A great deal of the detailed US legislative process, the backroom negotiations, revolves around the ability to absurdly amend bills at will.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2007-05-24 01:45am

SirNitram wrote: If the Democrats can't get their shit together on a supplemental, no one's gonna fight tooth, nail, and shin over the funding of the military.

Exactly. Political clout withers like a muscle that never gets flexed. I wish the Dems would get it through their thick skulls that they're going to get smeared as cowards and traitors no matter what they do, just as social democrats were by German war whores after the Great War. They might as well pull the plug now, before Kaiser Numbnuts can run off to Paraguay and leave them to end the war and take the blame.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2007-05-24 01:48am

Elfdart wrote:
SirNitram wrote: If the Democrats can't get their shit together on a supplemental, no one's gonna fight tooth, nail, and shin over the funding of the military.
Exactly. Political clout withers like a muscle that never gets flexed. I wish the Dems would get it through their thick skulls that they're going to get smeared as cowards and traitors no matter what they do, just as social democrats were by German war whores after the Great War. They might as well pull the plug now, before Kaiser Numbnuts can run off to Paraguay and leave them to end the war and take the blame.

Meh. Nothing with teeth is getting through. Not unless the GOP really feels pressure from voters, and even then, it'd be a 'Oh it's a month to the elections, let's do something now' nonsense.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2007-05-24 08:29am

Glocksman wrote:The last Congress to play budget chicken with the President lost, and lost badly.
Of course that was back in the mid 90's, and the President was Bill Clinton.

I'm sure that's heavily in the democrat party leadership's minds too.

Now comes the fun part of watching the nutroots wing of teh democrat party begin the infighting.

white_rabbit · Post by **white_rabbit** » 2007-05-24 09:21am

I'm not sure I've understood this correctly,

But can anything at all be added to any bill at all in Yankeeland, and how the hell does that not fuck up actually making law ?

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2007-05-24 09:42am

white_rabbit wrote:But can anything at all be added to any bill at all in Yankeeland, and how the hell does that not fuck up actually making law ?

Yep.

*tacks ryder onto White Rabbit's post proclaiming that we should spend $65 million on redeveloping Silver Spring MD*

white_rabbit · Post by **white_rabbit** » 2007-05-24 09:44am

MKSheppard wrote:
white_rabbit wrote:But can anything at all be added to any bill at all in Yankeeland, and how the hell does that not fuck up actually making law ?
Yep.

*tacks ryder onto White Rabbit's post proclaiming that we should spend $65 million on redeveloping Silver Spring MD*

Can I add a rider to my own Bill ?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2007-05-24 10:32pm

Roll Call from the Senate vote: Here

Roll Call from the House vote: Here

Passed both houses, despite the minimum wage rider.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2007-05-24 10:48pm

white_rabbit wrote:I'm not sure I've understood this correctly,

But can anything at all be added to any bill at all in Yankeeland, and how the hell does that not fuck up actually making law ?

I'm attaching another ryder to your post which provides the resumption of daily train service between Indianapolis and Louisville.

Redleader34 · Post by **Redleader34** » 2007-05-24 11:45pm

Riders are facanting really, but on topic, how much can a bill be tor apart before it hits the floor for a vote? I have seen this shi one of our own poster's breast feeding bill, but could one tear apart the core of a a bill before it hits the floor?

*adds a rider making LIRR have 1100 million for Prototype Jet Train Service from the Hamptons to New York City*

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2007-05-24 11:48pm

Its argued in committee, iirc.

metavac · Post by **metavac** » 2007-05-24 11:56pm

Redleader34 wrote:Riders are facanting really, but on topic, how much can a bill be tor apart before it hits the floor for a vote? I have seen this shi one of our own poster's breast feeding bill, but could one tear apart the core of a a bill before it hits the floor?

*adds a rider making LIRR have 1100 million for Prototype Jet Train Service from the Hamptons to New York City*

Bills get tossed to committees, who hold informational hearings and then mark it up (which is itself just a really boring hearing). Then it gets tossed to the floor. More amendments are added under whatever rules operate on the floor.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2007-05-25 02:49am

SirNitram wrote:Roll Call from the Senate vote: Here

Roll Call from the House vote: Here

Passed both houses, despite the minimum wage rider.

Many thanks for these lists.

And... *checks* hooray! All of the Oregon Democrats voted Nay!

Wyrm · Post by **Wyrm** » 2007-05-26 12:45am

All of Vermont voted Nay.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2007-05-26 02:23am

Uraniun235 wrote:
MRDOD wrote:I'm sick of this fucking country that I think once (not if) the Matthew Shepard Bill is passed in the Senate and Bush vetoes it I'm going to look into leaving.
Depending on your intended destination, moving abroad is likely to be a very lengthy and expensive endeavour.

Also remember that Britain, Australia, and Canada all often bow to U.S. pressure on certain issues. I'm not sure how important that is to you but it seemed worth noting.

It helps if you have Irish or Italian grandparents. Then you automatically qualify for their citizenship and hence EU citizenship, which would make it much easier to get a job anywhere within the EU. These are the two nations I'm aware of which are lenient with their requirements...I'm pretty sure there are others.

The Spartan · Post by **The Spartan** » 2007-05-28 08:34am

kheegster wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:
MRDOD wrote:I'm sick of this fucking country that I think once (not if) the Matthew Shepard Bill is passed in the Senate and Bush vetoes it I'm going to look into leaving.
Depending on your intended destination, moving abroad is likely to be a very lengthy and expensive endeavour.

Also remember that Britain, Australia, and Canada all often bow to U.S. pressure on certain issues. I'm not sure how important that is to you but it seemed worth noting.
It helps if you have Irish or Italian grandparents. Then you automatically qualify for their citizenship and hence EU citizenship, which would make it much easier to get a job anywhere within the EU. These are the two nations I'm aware of which are lenient with their requirements...I'm pretty sure there are others.

What about a Scottish (now naturalized American citizen) mother?