• 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!

Hypothetical: How would you have voted on Cromnibus?

See thread title


  • Total voters
    16

SocialDemocrat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Messages
922
Reaction score
309
Location
The beautiful Pacific Northwest
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
As a member of congress, how would you have voted on the Cromnibus bill that recently passed both houses of congress?

A strong no vote from me.
 
If congress critters were honest then they would never vote for these huge package deals of pork laden, unrelated matters. Bills should be about a single topic and funding bills should be about a single program. If the federal gov't is so big that it bcomes impossible to do so then let that help shrink it. Voting for massive bills that nobody even reads, much less debates, is insane. The concept that if a single massive bill is not passed (four months late?) then the entire federal government must shut down is absolutely ridiculous.
 
If congress critters were honest then they would never vote for these huge package deals of pork laden, unrelated matters. Bills should be about a single topic and funding bills should be about a single program. If the federal gov't is so big that it bcomes impossible to do so then let that help shrink it. Voting for massive bills that nobody even reads, much less debates, is insane. The concept that if a single massive bill is not passed (four months late?) then the entire federal government must shut down is absolutely ridiculous.

I agree. Let what ever issue of piece of legislation either stand of fall on it own merits.
 
As a member of congress, how would you have voted on the Cromnibus bill that recently passed both houses of congress?

A strong no vote from me.

Warren and Cruz do make strange bed fellows. Different reasons of course. I think the taxpayer is burden enough, big banks are way too big and for that reason a no vote. Now if we could do away with pacs and super pacs along with money bundling, to accomplish that I would have raised the campaign limits 5 times. Its not the limits that bother me, What I want is for each candidate to be responsible for every cent spent during the campaign.
 
In a way if they worked only 7 days out of the year, perhaps we wouldn't get all this hogwash from Washington.

Not likely, they would simply claim to be too busy to do anything but add 4% to 5% to everything we now have, raise the debt ceiling and then get back to campaign fund raising. ;)
 
Not likely, they would simply claim to be too busy to do anything but add 4% to 5% to everything we now have, raise the debt ceiling and then get back to campaign fund raising. ;)

That is the problem isn't, fund raising. When one has to raise more than a billion dollars to run for president, more than 100 million for a senate seat in some states, it all boil down to cash and from whom you can get it.
 
As a member of congress, how would you have voted on the Cromnibus bill that recently passed both houses of congress?

A strong no vote from me.

I suspect it is being passed because congressmen want to avoid a shutdown and go home for the holidays, not because they think it is good legislation. I doubt any of them have read it or could tell you what was in it. Yet they vote for it. Not sure how Americans benefit from that sort of thing no matter which party you prefer.
 
That is the problem isn't, fund raising. When one has to raise more than a billion dollars to run for president, more than 100 million for a senate seat in some states, it all boil down to cash and from whom you can get it.

Yep, but look at all the loot they get to toss back to those loyal campaign contributors. In the last funding bill I noticed that the congress critters have a Capital Police Force of 1,775 officers which is over 3 police officers for each congress critter. To put that in context, the city of Baltimore, MD (pop. 621K) has about 3,400 police officers and DC (pop. 646K) has about 3,800 police officers.
 
Yep, but look at all the loot they get to toss back to those loyal campaign contributors. In the last funding bill I noticed that the congress critters have a Capital Police Force of 1,775 officers which is over 3 police officers for each congress critter. To put that in context, the city of Baltimore, MD (pop. 621K) has about 3,400 police officers and DC (pop. 646K) has about 3,800 police officers.

You have to reward the one who give you the cash. In any other line of work it would be called bribes with jail time.
 
You have to reward the one who give you the cash. In any other line of work it would be called bribes with jail time.

Yep, a good clue is - why would anyone spend 100X (or far more) what a job pays annually just to apply for it? ;)
 
As a member of congress, how would you have voted on the Cromnibus bill that recently passed both houses of congress?

A strong no vote from me.

I would vote no.Bills should be one subject at a time and those voting for the bill should actually be the ones reading the entire bill and the bill should be posted online at least 72 hours or longer depending on the size of the bill before it is voted on.
 
Simple common sense: Any bill that is too voluminous to read in a reasonable time--VOTE NO!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom