• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

*Update*Ethics reform bill stalled in the Senate

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Get rid of all earmarks and no line item veto.

One must be used to cancel the other
 
And on that note, Former Congressman Bob Ney (R) was sentenced to 30 months in prison today. He blames alcohol for his failures, just like numerous other Republicans who can't stand to bear personal responsibility for their own F-ups. Sad and pathetic. Good riddance, Mr. Ney.

WASHINGTON, July 19 ? Former Congressman Bob Ney was sentenced to 30 months in prison today for accepting tens of thousands of dollars in illegal gifts in return for using his legislative influence to help his benefactors.

[...]

In his plea bargain last year, Mr. Ney admitted that he had essentially sold his office to Mr. Abramoff?s lobbying operation and others in return for a series of lavish gifts.

Those gifts included overseas trips, the use of skyboxes at Washington-area sports arenas, meals, concert tickets and thousands of dollars worth of gambling chips in London casinos.
Click to expand...

Link
 
Notice how the line item veto measure can't stand on its own merits, and repubs know it. So they need to attach it to something unrelated- now it's the minimum wage increase. They probably don't have the votes for that, either... They'll keep trying, however, since they desperately need a smokescreen for their own cut taxes and spend more money record...

Remember how they whined like little princesses when dems filibustered a few fringe-whack judicial nominees, threatened to break the rules of the Senate to have their own way? The nuclear option? Ultimately, the only reason they didn't was because some repubs broke ranks...

I seriously doubt Dems will play that tough a game, which the repubs will see as weakness... Not that I'm advocating such behavior from Dems, but I'd love to hear the whining and howling from the repubs if such ever comes to pass... Comeuppance can be a beautiful thing...
 
But, ultimately, it was Byrd that tried to block all of Reid's efforts to accommodate Republican demands on a measure long sought by President Bush that would allow the president to submit to Congress a list of spending items that the White House wants to strike from congressionally passed spending bills. Under the measure, Congress would then vote on whether to sustain or accept those rescissions. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), its sponsor, called it a modest proposal to help ferret out egregious waste that leaves Congress the final say.

But Byrd decried it as "an assault on the single most important protection the American people have against a president, any president, who wants to run roughshod over [their] liberties." GOP demands for a vote were "little more than political blackmail," he said.

Under the agreement reached last night, Byrd and Gregg will rejoin that battle next week, when the spending-control provision finally comes to a vote.
Click to expand...
Amazing that Byrd would stand in the way of such a measure. No wonder he is considered one of the worst when it comes to pork and spending.
Any bill that can control spending is a good bill, and in the end congress still has control of whether or not to spend the money.
The only thing this provision does is allow the President to bring to the attention of the American people parts of a spending bill by trying to strike it. This makes it harder politically for one party to put pork BACK in after the President has suggested it is taken out.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
But, ultimately, it was Byrd that tried to block all of Reid's efforts to accommodate Republican demands on a measure long sought by President Bush that would allow the president to submit to Congress a list of spending items that the White House wants to strike from congressionally passed spending bills. Under the measure, Congress would then vote on whether to sustain or accept those rescissions. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), its sponsor, called it a modest proposal to help ferret out egregious waste that leaves Congress the final say.

But Byrd decried it as "an assault on the single most important protection the American people have against a president, any president, who wants to run roughshod over [their] liberties." GOP demands for a vote were "little more than political blackmail," he said.

Under the agreement reached last night, Byrd and Gregg will rejoin that battle next week, when the spending-control provision finally comes to a vote.
Click to expand...
Amazing that Byrd would stand in the way of such a measure. No wonder he is considered one of the worst when it comes to pork and spending.
Any bill that can control spending is a good bill, and in the end congress still has control of whether or not to spend the money.
The only thing this provision does is allow the President to bring to the attention of the American people parts of a spending bill by trying to strike it. This makes it harder politically for one party to put pork BACK in after the President has suggested it is taken out.
Click to expand...


Like the man said, they had 6 YEARS to do this, if they really thought it was so extremely important. The last thing we need in this country is more power in the hands of the Executive branch. Hell, they out to be getting bills prepped to curtail signing statements, since that has been shown to be easily abused. There are lots of ways to make it more difficult for governmental 'corrupt practices'. Without cutting out still more checks and balances.


 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
But, ultimately, it was Byrd that tried to block all of Reid's efforts to accommodate Republican demands on a measure long sought by President Bush that would allow the president to submit to Congress a list of spending items that the White House wants to strike from congressionally passed spending bills. Under the measure, Congress would then vote on whether to sustain or accept those rescissions. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), its sponsor, called it a modest proposal to help ferret out egregious waste that leaves Congress the final say.

But Byrd decried it as "an assault on the single most important protection the American people have against a president, any president, who wants to run roughshod over [their] liberties." GOP demands for a vote were "little more than political blackmail," he said.

Under the agreement reached last night, Byrd and Gregg will rejoin that battle next week, when the spending-control provision finally comes to a vote.
Click to expand...
Amazing that Byrd would stand in the way of such a measure. No wonder he is considered one of the worst when it comes to pork and spending.
Any bill that can control spending is a good bill, and in the end congress still has control of whether or not to spend the money.
The only thing this provision does is allow the President to bring to the attention of the American people parts of a spending bill by trying to strike it. This makes it harder politically for one party to put pork BACK in after the President has suggested it is taken out.
Click to expand...


When was the last time your president saw some spending he didn't like

Plus... there is no way in hell this bill is as sweet and innocent as you make it out to be.. not a chance

Another thing.. WHY does it matter who brought up the bill -- IF IT WHAT THE NATION NEEDS THEN DO IT ..

I have said before many many times

Create ANY Pork Rider and you go to jail

All Lobbyist meetings will be done TOWN HALL Style or not at all
 
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
So the Dems want to kill/stall line item veto.

The Repub have a hissy fit and block ethics reform.

Does not look like either side really wants to change the status quo.
Click to expand...

Democrats also wanted to kill free speech but failed, so far. I am sure they will try again.
 
Apparently, the repub answer to a chief executive who has abused the power of the office and usurped whatever other power he could get is to... give him more power!

It only makes sense in the context of trying to look like they're serious about deficits when they're not, at all. Let Dubya pick away at minor pork, even as they dole out the really big money as fatcat taxcuts, huge pork to their friends in the military contracting sector, agribusiness sector, Pharma sector, pound sand into the security sector rathole...

After six years of klepto-capitalist looting and pork, heaven forbid that somebody else get the crumbs that remain...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top