• 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:
Please provide proof.
Click to expand...

And you claim to know more than me about how Congress works.

It is irrelevant which bill is voted on. All that matters is what is in the bill that is passed.

If one chamber wants a completely different bill, it can vote on its own bill - or it can simply amend a bill that came from the other chamber by replacing the entire contents with its own version. (An "amendment in the nature of a substitute").

So saying that the Senate didn't allow the House bill to come to a vote is a completely meaningless statement. The Senate voted on and passed its version of the bill. If it had taken up the House version, it would have simply amended it to be the exact same bill that it ended up passing. The only difference would have been the number on the bill.

As far as I can tell, that's exactly what happened, though I haven't tracked it all down. But you may be correct about the part where the House sent a bill to the Senate first. I haven't looked at the timeline in detail.
 
Last edited:
And once again the Republicans refuse to take up the House bill. On top of that, they cut off the C-Span feed (which is controlled by the Speaker of the House's office) to mute the backlash.

 
AdamT said:
And once again the Republicans refuse to take up the House bill. On top of that, they cut off the C-Span feed (which is controlled by the Speaker of the House's office) to mute the backlash.

Click to expand...

so much for transparency
what is the speaker of the house needing to hide from the public?
 
misterman said:
Oh, I almost forgot. In addition to the lame, pathetic hypocrisy of the House whining about the Senate passing a short-term bill and then adjourning - after the House did exactly the same thing this past summer and triggered a partial shutdown of the FAA - the House voted down the Senate's short-term tax extension this week using a version of the "deem and pass" procedure that they freaked out about when the Democrats used it to pass the health care bill last year, so they could avoid having a roll call vote showing a bunch of Republicans voting down a tax cut.
Click to expand...

Except its a damned appropriations bill which is exactly what its supposed to be used for.
 
misterman said:
And you claim to know more than me about how Congress works.

It is irrelevant which bill is voted on. All that matters is what is in the bill that is passed.

If one chamber wants a completely different bill, it can vote on its own bill - or it can simply amend a bill that came from the other chamber by replacing the entire contents with its own version. (An "amendment in the nature of a substitute").

So saying that the Senate didn't allow the House bill to come to a vote is a completely meaningless statement. The Senate voted on and passed its version of the bill. If it had taken up the House version, it would have simply amended it to be the exact same bill that it ended up passing. The only difference would have been the number on the bill.

As far as I can tell, that's exactly what happened, though I haven't tracked it all down. But you may be correct about the part where the House sent a bill to the Senate first. I haven't looked at the timeline in detail.
Click to expand...

Instead of posting this diatribe, you could have simply said you were wrong.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Except its a damned appropriations bill which is exactly what its supposed to be used for.
Click to expand...

1. No, it isn't an appropriations bill.
2. No, deem and pass is not used specificially on appropriations bills.

Wrong on all counts.
 
Gill said:
Instead of posting this diatribe, you could have simply said you were wrong.
Click to expand...

I wasn't wrong about the procedure at all. Your statement that "the Senate didn't allow a vote on the House bill" is false and non-sensical. I screwed up some of the facts, which I'm happy to admit. I also screwed up another fact, btw - the Senate didn't adjourn, it's in pro forma session.
 
misterman said:
I wasn't wrong about the procedure at all. Your statement that "the Senate didn't allow a vote on the House bill" is false and non-sensical. I screwed up some of the facts, which I'm happy to admit. I also screwed up another fact, btw - the Senate didn't adjourn, it's in pro forma session.
Click to expand...

If you still insist that the Senate voted on the House Bill, let's see some proof. They voted in their own bill which amended the house bill.

I won't be holding my breath.
 
Gill said:
If you still insist that the Senate voted on the House Bill, let's see some proof. They voted in their own bill which amended the house bill.

I won't be holding my breath.
Click to expand...

hey gill......yesterday, talking about conferencing, my point was that boehner could have just let the senate bill come to a vote without changes. it probably would have passed, but he would not let the house vote on it. is that accurate?
 
liblady said:
hey gill......yesterday, talking about conferencing, my point was that boehner could have just let the senate bill come to a vote without changes. it probably would have passed, but he would not let the house vote on it. is that accurate?
Click to expand...

100% correct, except we don't know if it would have passed. Reid could have done the same with the House bill.
 
Gill said:
If you still insist that the Senate voted on the House Bill, let's see some proof. They voted in their own bill which amended the house bill.
Click to expand...

I never said the Senate voted on the House bill (although it did - after amending it, which is exactly what it's supposed to do).

I said they voted on their own bill, and then used that bill to amend the House bill. That is correct. I also explained that this is completely routine, and an absolutely meaningless comment on your part. Of course the Senate amended the House bill to insert what it wanted into it. That's what it's supposed to do. It doesn't matter whether it takes up the House bill first or simply substitutes its own bill into the House bill - the result is the same. Both chambers frequently do that in order to get to work on an issue instead of sitting and waiting for the other House to finish. The end result is the same.
 
Gill said:
100% correct, except we don't know if it would have passed. Reid could have done the same with the House bill.
Click to expand...

And someone would have offered the same amendments first. So the end result would have been the same. What we do know is that the Senate bill passed with 89 yes votes. And any Senator could have offered amendments to the Senate bill to make it more like, or identical to, the House bill. So the idea that Reid somehow prevented a vote is absurd. That's not now the Senate works, only the House.
 
misterman said:
And someone would have offered the same amendments first. So the end result would have been the same. What we do know is that the Senate bill passed with 89 yes votes. And any Senator could have offered amendments to the Senate bill to make it more like, or identical to, the House bill. So the idea that Reid somehow prevented a vote is absurd. That's not now the Senate works, only the House.
Click to expand...

I'm tired of playing your games.

Did Reid allow a vote on the House bill with no changes or not???
 
Gill said:
I'm tired of playing your games.

Did Reid allow a vote on the House bill with no changes or not???
Click to expand...
why would he need to
the senate passed its own version by a vote of 89 affirm to 10 opposed


maybe you can explain why he/the senate was expected to have done anything differently. this should be rich!
 
Gill said:
I'm tired of playing your games.

Did Reid allow a vote on the House bill with no changes or not???
Click to expand...

Yes, he did. No Senator was denied the opportunity to vote on or propose amendments to the bill that was passed by the Senate as it's version of the House bill. The fact that it began working on it in a draft form before officially making it the House bill is irrelevant to that fact. If you understood congressional procedure you'd understand that. The fact that the bill passed with a majority of both Democratic and Republican senators voting yes should tell you something.
 
misterman said:
Yes, he did. No Senator was denied the opportunity to vote on or propose amendments to the bill that was passed by the Senate as it's version of the House bill. The fact that it began working on it in a draft form before officially making it the House bill is irrelevant to that fact. If you understood congressional procedure you'd understand that. The fact that the bill passed with a majority of both Democratic and Republican senators voting yes should tell you something.
Click to expand...

It took long enough for you to admit you were wrong. The bill passed by the House was never voted on in its original form by the Senate.

Even your liberal buddy Justabubba agrees with me.
 
justabubba said:
why would he need to
the senate passed its own version by a vote of 89 affirm to 10 opposed


maybe you can explain why he/the senate was expected to have done anything differently. this should be rich!
Click to expand...

Never said they were "expected" to do anything differently, just said they could have.

Perhaps you can point out where I made such a claim. This should be rich.
 
Gill said:
It took long enough for you to admit you were wrong. The bill passed by the House was never voted on in its original form by the Senate.

Even your liberal buddy Justabubba agrees with me.
Click to expand...

1. I'm not the least bit wrong.
2. You don't know if I'm a liberal or not.
3. I don't care who agrees with your. They're wrong too.

The Senate considered and passed the House bill, with its own amendments. Just like how any other bill works. You are trying to turn nothing into something. It's pathetic.
 
misterman said:
1. I'm not the least bit wrong.
2. You don't know if I'm a liberal or not.
3. I don't care who agrees with your. They're wrong too.

The Senate considered and passed the House bill, with its own amendments. Just like how any other bill works. You are trying to turn nothing into something. It's pathetic.
Click to expand...

Only an idiot would look at your posts and not conclude you are a flaming liberal.

Whether you know it or not, you just admitted I was right, for the third time. The Senate NEVER voted on the House version with no changes, the same claim I've been making all along.

Just admit you were wrong and stop these childish games.
 
Gill said:
Only an idiot would look at your posts and not conclude you are a flaming liberal.
Click to expand...

It is irrelevant. Please stay on topic.

Whether you know it or not, you just admitted I was right, for the third time. The Senate NEVER voted on the House version with no changes, the same claim I've been making all along.
Click to expand...

No chamber ever votes on the other chamber's bills with "no changes" unless it is extremely non-controversial legislation. Why would they do that? The point of considering a bill is to consider changes to it. Are you suggesting the Senate should have held a vote on the bill without allowing any amendments to it?

Stop pretending you know what you're talking about or that you have a point. You are hanging your hat on a piece of useless, irrelevant information as if it matters. Now that is childish.
 
Here is the bottom line: Boehner made a deal with the Senate to avoid a conference, and then he couldn't hold up his end of the bargain and now he's blaming everyone but himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom