• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boehner demands Senate cancel its vacation

Gill said:
I know this is a hard concept for you to grasp, but typing a short reply here and there doesn't take much time. Doing some research on the internet does.
Click to expand...

But you said houses of Congress passes bills without amendment "all the time." It shouldn't be hard to find one.
 
misterman said:
But you said houses of Congress passes bills without amendment "all the time." It shouldn't be hard to find one.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't have them memorized.

Now stop acting like a 3 year old.......wait, my youngest granddaughter is a 3 year old and she more mature than you.
 
Gill said:
Sorry, but I don't have them memorized.
Click to expand...

That's what Thomas is for.

I've been doing legislative research since before Thomas existed. Thomas is easy. It's almost as easy as coming here and posting over and over that you don't have time because you have reports to write.
 
Gill said:
Here's the way it works:

The House passes a bill.

The Senate passes a slightly different bill.

The House and Senate meet in Conference to iron out the differences and get a bill both will support.
Click to expand...

:lol: So much for that. They just pass identical bills, without amendments, all the time!
 
Gill said:
Bwwaaaaa, haaaaaaaaa............ that's the funniest thing I've seen in weeks.
Click to expand...

It is funny, isn't it? Everything was done on paper. You'd use the Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, and if you wanted a bill, you got it on paper, from the GPO or a little room in the Capitol. If you wanted to see what was going on on the floor, you actually went to the gallery and listened in person. None of that wussy C-SPAN stuff.

Now we have the internet, where you can just get bill text and status and votes almost instantly, or you can make silly claims on forums and fail to back them up.
 
Gill said:
And you seem to believe that all 435 Representatives should give up their responsibility to craft legislation, and just act like automatons and vote on whatever is placed in front of them.
Click to expand...

If you think I'm the one who claimed that either half of Congress should vote on the other halfs' bills without any review, then you should check your meds.
 
Last edited:
MarineTpartier said:
I'm reposting this so it can move past the childish rants of a few and get some real debate going.

I'll give a very original reply to this that I think no one has posted yet. I think everyone in Congress is wrong about this politically and fiscally, and I'll tell you why. The Dems are wrong because A) The cut they proposed (with GOP minority support) does not fund itself properly and has no long term plan B) They are cutting funding for the very program they always champion, Social Security C) They are punishing Freddie and Fannie, 2 companies they have a vested interest in seeing prosper. The GOP and Tea Party are wrong because A) They are cutting the one tax that can vilify them later. I don't put it past the Dems to use the fact that they want to cut this tax longer as a later argument that the conservatives are trying to bankrupt Social Security. Honestly, would that surprise anyone on this? B) The House should have made it known they would not vote this bill in a lot sooner than they did C) The GOP and Tea Party (notice I didn't mention them as one party) should have suggested another kind of tax cut besides the payroll tax. In addition, why would anyone want to cut this tax longer, which is something both parties want to do, just at different times. This is the last tax our gov't should be going after. As jacked up and underfunded as Social Security is, we should not be cutting the only source of funding for it. I don't agree with Social Security one iota. However, a promise was made to the American people, including myself, that we would get what we put in. I think Social Security should overhauled and made voluntary, but that's neither here nor there because its still active and we have to solve it. There you have it, a non-partisan look at how stupid our Congress is, no matter the party affiliation
Click to expand...

Formatting is A Good Thing
 
Gill said:
Sorry, but I don't have them memorized.

Now stop acting like a 3 year old.......wait, my youngest granddaughter is a 3 year old and she more mature than you.
Click to expand...

"There were so many I can't remember any of them" :roll:
 
Wow, this thread has devolved into an adolescent finger pointing game. This is where I unsubscribe.
 
Gill said:
And you seem to believe that all 435 Representatives should give up their responsibility to craft legislation, and just act like automatons and vote on whatever is placed in front of them.
Click to expand...

Yet you not only expect 100 Senators to do the exact same thing, you claim that it happens often.
 
Still waiting on Gill....
 
Do that research yet, Gill?
 
misterman said:
:lol: So much for that. They just pass identical bills, without amendments, all the time!
Click to expand...

The Health Care Reform Act was passed with no amendments.

More recently:

HR 3080 was passed with no amendments.
HR 3078 was passed with no amendments.
HR 3079 was passed with no amendments
S 627 was passed with no amendments
HR 1473 was passed with no amendments
HR 4 was passed with no amendments
H. J. Resolution 48 was passed with no amendments
HR 4314 was passed with no amendments

That's enough for now, but I think you get the drift.
 
More dishonest drivel

The PPAC Act was written with the input of all 535 members of Congress.
HR 3080 was a trade pact, which couldn't be amended, So was HR 3078 and HR2079

S 627 was amended. Here's the link to the amendments
Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.627 - All Congressional Actions with Amendments - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

HR 1473 dealt with the highly partisan issue of "To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to make a technical correction relating to stainless steel single-piece exhaust gas manifolds" :lamo

To make it even funnier, HR 1473 is itself an amendment to a prior piece of legislation :lamo

There are FIVE versions of HR 4!!!

There are FOUR versions of H J Res 48!!

HR 4314 went through committees where it was subject to amendments

Yeah, we get the drift. You've got nothing
 
sangha said:
More dishonest drivel
Click to expand...

Then why don't you stop posting the drivel.... or you could mind your own business.

The PPAC Act was written with the input of all 535 members of Congress.
Click to expand...

So what, it was a bill passed by both houses with no amendments, which was the subject of the discussion.
HR 3080 was a trade pact, which couldn't be amended, So was HR 3078 and HR2079
Click to expand...

So what. Trade bills were not excluded from the original discussion.

S 627 was amended. Here's the link to the amendments
Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.627 - All Congressional Actions with Amendments - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
Click to expand...

You are correct on this one.

HR 1473 dealt with the highly partisan issue of "To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to make a technical correction relating to stainless steel single-piece exhaust gas manifolds" :lamo

To make it even funnier, HR 1473 is itself an amendment to a prior piece of legislation :lamo
Click to expand...

What the hell are you babbling about???? HR 1473 was the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, hardly a bill on tariffs, :lamo

There are FIVE versions of HR 4!!!
Click to expand...

So what? The final version was passed by both houses with no amendments.
There are FOUR versions of H J Res 48!!
Click to expand...

So what? The final version was passed by both houses with no amendments.

HR 4314 went through committees where it was subject to amendments
Click to expand...

So what? I claimed that bills were frequently passed by both houses with no amendments. I never claimed that no amendments were added in committee before it was passed by both houses.

Yeah, we get the drift. You've got nothing
Click to expand...

Total fail on your part. That's what happens when you jump into a dispute between posters that you know nothing about.

Hope you learned a lesson. By the way, I noticed you didn't mention the Healthcare Reform Act. Couldn't you think of any snarky excuses??
 
Gill said:
The Health Care Reform Act was passed with no amendments.

More recently:

HR 3080 was passed with no amendments.
HR 3078 was passed with no amendments.
HR 3079 was passed with no amendments
S 627 was passed with no amendments
HR 1473 was passed with no amendments
HR 4 was passed with no amendments
H. J. Resolution 48 was passed with no amendments
HR 4314 was passed with no amendments

That's enough for now, but I think you get the drift.
Click to expand...

I had a feeling you'd display your ignorance.

No, none of these were passed with no amendment. That's absurd.

The amendment were simply made at the committee level, or in an informal process to create a "manager's amendment" or some other process. Then the ENTIRE BILL was replaced (technically - amended!) to reflect those changes. I explained how this works earlier - remember "amendment in the nature of a substitute?"

Seriously, did you really believe that these bills were simply swallowed whole without any changes by the other chamber? That's ridicuous. You simply don't know how the process works and you aren't willing to figure it out.
 
Gill said:
So what? I claimed that bills were frequently passed by both houses with no amendments. I never claimed that no amendments were added in committee before it was passed by both houses.
Click to expand...

This is where you completely fail. Seriously, Gill, it all comes down to a lame technicality?
 
misterman said:
Sorry.

Didja find that example of a major, non-emergency bill that passed a house in Congress, after passing one house, without any amendments yet? I'd like to see it.
Click to expand...

Changing the parameters of what you asked for now?
 
Samhain said:
Changing the parameters of what you asked for now?
Click to expand...

No. Go back in the thread and see for yourself.

Here's the bottom line - Gill claimed that one house routinely passes bills from the other house without making any changes. That's bull****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom