Another reason I dislike politics

[Texsox]

Alabama's seven-member delegation in the House voted for a measure that will open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. The provision was part of a 453 billion dollar defense spending bill.

 

The passage brought an all-night session -- and the House's work for the year -- to a close this morning.

 

Attaching the Arctic oil drilling provision to the major defense bill forced many opponents to vote in favor of it. The bill, passed 308-to-106, also included money for hurricane relief and bird flu preventive measures.

 

---

 

Voting yes were 106 Democrats and 202 Republicans.

 

Voting no were 89 Democrats, 16 Republicans and 1 Independent.

 

Why did the GOP attach the Artic Drilling, hurricane relief, and bird flu, to a defense bill? Because anyone who voted no, we be accused of not supporting the Troops and flip flopping.

 

There outta be a law that eliminates adding unrelated items to a bill.

[EvilMonkey]

As long as you are not pretending that this is a Republican-only trick, I agree with you. Both sides do this, it sucks, and is the best reason ever for a line item veto for the President.

[Rex Kickass]

Except for when the President wants it done.

 

It's sneaky, tricky and shouldn't be done. And its been done way too often and for far too long.

[Balta1701]

There outta be a law that eliminates adding unrelated items to a bill.

And interestingly enough, that law would be passed with a Congressional pay raise, a suspension of Habeus Corpus, and a few tax cuts paper clipped to it.

[mr_genius]

And interestingly enough, that law would be passed with a Congressional pay raise, a suspension of Habeus Corpus, and a few tax cuts paper clipped to it.

 

 

[Texsox]

As long as you are not pretending that this is a Republican-only trick, I agree with you.  Both sides do this, it sucks, and is the best reason ever for a line item veto for the President.

This is a bipartisan technique. Part of the problem is one side doesn't trust the other. So a sneaky you vote for this and I'll vote for that becomes a I'll just tack it all together and we'll vote on it at once.

 

Ugly, b.s. and the voters go along with it. When we here that so and so didn't vote for something, it may be because of something tacked on. We all should find out "the rest, of the story".

[FlaSoxxJim]

This was disgusting to wake up to. And I am very disgusted with the Dems right now because they could have made a stand and voted down the bill as long as it had the ANWR provision in it. A revised version of the bill without ANWR in it then would have been brought to a vote and could have been passed.

[Texsox]

This was disgusting to wake up to.  And I am very disgusted with the Dems right now because they could have made a stand and voted down the bill as long as it had the ANWR provision in it.  A revised version of the bill without ANWR in it then would have been brought to a vote and could have been passed.

 

Then they would have been accused of flip flopping and not supporting the Troops.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Then they would have been accused of flip flopping and not supporting the Troops.

I get that that was the strategy, and that voting records wthout a lengthy explaination as to what really transpires can be misleading.

 

But in this specific instance, where so much is riding on the defense spending bill getting passed and where moderates on both sides actually have a voice, the amended bill could have been voted down and a big stink could have been raised pointing out the sneakiness at work. GOP leqdership would have had no choice but to strip te ANWR provision and then try to get the bill to pass.

[bmags]

And interestingly enough, that law would be passed with a Congressional pay raise, a suspension of Habeus Corpus, and a few tax cuts paper clipped to it.

[southsider2k5]

This would be an excellent time to mention line item veto for riders... But then again so would have the highway bill...

[Rex Kickass]

There was a line item veto. It was thrown out by the courts.

[southsider2k5]

There was a line item veto. It was thrown out by the courts.

 

Doesn't mean I like it... If they are going to use riders to hide things in bills, I see no reason that a line item veto shouldn't be allowed. It is the only counterbalance for such a thing. I could take a bill for giving money to blind homeless orphans to get one last Christmas presant and attach a bill for dropping anvils on puppies and your politicial choices become voting against orphans or for genocide against puppies. Its stupid.

[Rex Kickass]

I think you could still put a line item veto in, it just had to be worded differently if I remember correctly. But by the time that got thrown out, the new GOP congress had already gotten fat and sassy enough that they felt no need to retake the issue.

 

It's a shame because it was one of the only points of the Contract on America that was both responsible and kept.

[mreye]

Leave it to Tex to start a thread, in a forum where we're supposed to hate each other, that we can all agree on.

[southsider2k5]

As if I needed more evidence to dislike this clown, and believe in the line item veto.

 

Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, attached the drilling plan to a wartime Pentagon spending bill that also included $29 billion in new aid for Gulf Coast hurricane victims and as well as new money for border security and winter heating subsidies in an attempt to crack a threatened filibuster. Both the defense and budget bills were passed by the House on Monday before it adjourned for the year.

 

So senators, are you for the poor hurricane victims starving, the poor who can't afford heat, freezing, and sealing our borders against illegal aliens who are streaming into the US, or are you for murdering the enviornment for a few drops of oil?

[Balta1701]

As if I needed more evidence to dislike this clown

Personally, I just love how that's the same Senator who threatened to resign if his $250 million bridge to no where was killed off.

[jasonxctf]

wasnt the line item veto part of the reason Congress and the White House were able to balance the budget during the Clinton years? It wasn't an all or nothing type of bill. Was it found unconstitutional???

[Rex Kickass]

The Line Item Veto was used fairly sparingly, but the Supreme Court did throw it out.

[Steve Bartman's my idol]

Why did the GOP attach the Artic Drilling, hurricane relief, and bird flu, to a defense bill? Because anyone who voted no, we be accused of not supporting the Troops and flip flopping.

 

There outta be a law that eliminates adding unrelated items to a bill.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not to make light of the situation (I think it sucks!) but there was a Simpsons episode about this. Krusty ran for "Kongress" to get Springfield out of a flight pattern, and had to use the "congressman's best friend" (A PAPERCLIP) to attach that to another bill.

[Rex Kickass]

I've been thinking about that episode ever since this story broke.

 

The Senate may filibuster this bill. BTW.

[Cknolls]

I've been thinking about that episode ever since this story broke.

 

The Senate may filibuster this bill. BTW.

 

 

Never going to happen.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Never going to happen.

 

Why do you say that? In the light of day everyone can see exactly what the holdup on passage is and who is responsible for it.

[YASNY]

Damn tree huggers want to undercut our military and let the Katrina victims freeze.

 

Ain't politics grand?

[Rex Kickass]

What would end up happening is they would filibuster, table the filibuster and introduce a new version without the ANWR provision that would pass. Under the scenario I've seen.