• 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!

John Boehner: No House vote on Senate immigration bill

I think viewing things through just the lens of race is going to sooner or later turn out to be a huge mistake for the -ist party. That will happen either when the well runs dry from the government trough or when people finally see it for what it is. That of course being when groups of people finally get tired of being told they are not smart enough, not good enough or just can't make it because of something that happened years and years ago. And that's all the Dems offer.

Am I supposed to think that Democrats don't use gerrymandering? I don't and won't with reason.

yeah because we live in a post racial America. :doh:roll:

every part gerrymanders. My comments were ones of reality based on who controlled the 2010 election cycle when redistricting happened across the nation.
 
I didn't say that, and you are intentionally trying to stretch what I did. I asked specifically about the person claiming that jobs bills had been sent and tabled. That is not true. Now surely the revoke RomneyCare and advanced abortion restrictions and similar bull****, surely, but not any jobs bills.

So you can take your attempt to rewrite what I'm discussing by exaggerating and hyping into something entirely more broad and general than I focused on if it makes you feel like somehow your FNC bull**** is viable.

well you believe what you wish to believe, but i never once mention FNC, you have only concluded what you wish conclude.
 
The republicant House disagrees with the demorat Senate - I am truely shocked by this recent development. ;)

Republican Senators voted for the bill or it wouldn't have passed. That is how our Govt. works..you vote on things.
 
Republican Senators voted for the bill or it wouldn't have passed. That is how our Govt. works..you vote on things.

Really? Is it not also possible that the House will draft its own immigration "reform" bill and then reconcile any differences with the Senate's bill? How many House budgets made to the Senate floor for a vote? When the administration does not even enforce the nation's current immigration law(s), as written, then why would the House believe that the new law, as passed by the Senate, will be enforced "as written"? A "dreamy" immigraiton law has not been passed, yet the administration pretends that it has - you see they simply "lack resources" to enforce only the parts of the current immigration law(s) that they wish not to, yet have plenty of resources to fight any state that dares to try to.
 
Really? Is it not also possible that the House will draft its own immigration "reform" bill and then reconcile any differences with the Senate's bill? How many House budgets made to the Senate floor for a vote? When the administration does not even enforce the nation's current immigration law(s), as written, then why would the House believe that the new law, as passed by the Senate, will be enforced "as written"? A "dreamy" immigraiton law has not been passed, yet the administration pretends that it has - you see they simply "lack resources" to enforce only the parts of the current immigration law(s) that they wish not to, yet have plenty of resources to fight any state that dares to try to.

does it say anywhere in the constitution that the senate and house have to vote on every piece of legislature that one chamber sends to the other?
 
does it say anywhere in the constitution that the senate and house have to vote on every piece of legislature that one chamber sends to the other?

No. So why complain about the House not "hopping to" and voting on the latest amnesty bill from the Senate?
 
No. So why complain about the House not "hopping to" and voting on the latest amnesty bill from the Senate?

it also nullifys any complaint about the senate not voting on house bills, since neither chamber are required to vote on every piece of legislature.
 
where does it say in the constitution that the senate and house is required to give every piece of legislation a up or down vote?

it does not say anywhere.... your correct, ..so why is this thread started then...why the complaints that the lower house is not going to vote?
 
it also nullifys any complaint about the senate not voting on house bills, since neither chamber are required to vote on every piece of legislature.

Yep. We don't need no stinking federal budget, that requires a vote and taking responsibility for its contents - just take current federal spending and add some percentage to all of it for next year. That way they voted to avoid a gov't shutdown, not to approve all of the pork/waste. ;)
 
it does not say anywhere.... your correct, ..so why is this thread started then...why the complaints that the lower house is not going to vote?

i said it to nullify the complaints about all the bills the lower house passed and were not given a vote in the senate.
 
Didn't we do that in the mid-80's as well?

Did the bill in the mid 80s include over $40 billion to upgrade border security and a 13 year pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants?
 
Anything to see that asshole Harry Reid gone.

To be replaced by an even bigger asshole who looks like Yertl the turtle. I can't wait.

91999779-the-kentucky.jpg
 
Please name ONE jobs related bill that has been held up in the Senate. Just one JOBS Bill as you say. All I've seen or heard coming from the House are abortion restriction bills and revoke RomneyCare bills.

You missed it in posts 22 and 29.
 
consider the data from this link

SNAP Monthly Data

consider how 20 billion in cuts will affect a program which currently has to serve 40 million people.

it is no big surprise why the number skyrocketed around 2008, given the financial crash that year.

Actually its currently 80 million people. And yes I do, its 25$ if its all taken on the backs of the people recieving benefits.
 
Read more: John Boehner: No House vote on Senate immigration bill - Ginger Gibson - POLITICO.com

And we are back to the Republican house holding everything up again. Back to the good ol do nothing congress.. [/FONT][/COLOR]

If you are against illegal immigration then this is a great thing.earn citizenship,legalization, dream acts and other paper coated terms for amnesty only encourage illegal immigration.It amounts to putting up a free beer sign outside a bar and then wondering why you can get rid of all the bums.
 
Please name ONE jobs related bill that has been held up in the Senate. Just one JOBS Bill as you say. All I've seen or heard coming from the House are abortion restriction bills and revoke RomneyCare bills.

The 2014 budget, the 2013 budget, the 2012 budget to name a few. Keystone Pipeline bill (stalled in Senate), Improving Job Opportunities for Veterans Act of 2013 (stalled in senate) SEC Regulatory Accountability Act, Preventing Greater Uncertainty in Labor-Management Relations Act, SKILLS Act.

And thats just the last 6 months, bills that have passed in the House, and stalled in the Senate. We can go back 6 years to find plenty more.
 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.” ― Calvin Coolidge.
 
I would think quite a few have a good sense of it.
It's extraordinarily complex because of the complexity of the system.

But I love you're insinuation that the house leader can refuse to let the majority rule because one party will protect the American people because they 'know better'.


Seems to me the House leader is letting the majority rule. I love the insinuation that the House Speaker has done something wrong.

Best to brush up on your civics lessons.

By the way, any problem with the Senate Majority leader sitting on legislation passed by the majority in the House?
 
Seems to me the House leader is letting the majority rule. I love the insinuation that the House Speaker has done something wrong.

Best to brush up on your civics lessons.

By the way, any problem with the Senate Majority leader sitting on legislation passed by the majority in the House?

Letting the majority rule by blocking a bill that looks like will pass by majority vote?
 
Letting the majority rule by blocking a bill that looks like will pass by majority vote?

Again, please point to any action that is not supported by congressional rules.

I think Obamacare was a joke. It was passed in the dead of night without any opposition party input. However, there was nothing illegal, or, against legal process about it.

That's the way it goes.

So, do your complaints only work one way?
 
Again, please point to any action that is not supported by congressional rules.

I think Obamacare was a joke. It was passed in the dead of night without any opposition party input. However, there was nothing illegal, or, against legal process about it.

That's the way it goes.

So, do your complaints only work one way?

Letting the majority rule by blocking a bill that looks like will pass by majority vote?

there may be a way to get the immigration bill passed even if the speaker won't bring it to the floor for a vote. The democrats can call on a parlimentary procedure and issue something called a discharge petition on the senate immigration bill which requires only a simple majority to pass. so if all 201 democrats vote for the discharge petition, it would take only 17 republicans to vote yes to get a simple majority.

Discharge petitions are not uncommon. a discharge petition is how the McCain-Feingold act was ultimately passed.

Discharge petition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Again, please point to any action that is not supported by congressional rules.

I think Obamacare was a joke. It was passed in the dead of night without any opposition party input. However, there was nothing illegal, or, against legal process about it.

That's the way it goes.

So, do your complaints only work one way?

I never said it was illegal, I never said it wasn't against the rules.

I just said it was not the will of the majority.

If it makes you feel better to hide behind rules designed to thwart the majority, that's up to you. I'm sure you can rationalize your way to peace with the issue...
 
I never said it was illegal, I never said it wasn't against the rules.

I just said it was not the will of the majority.

If it makes you feel better to hide behind rules designed to thwart the majority, that's up to you. I'm sure you can rationalize your way to peace with the issue...


Of course it's the will of the majority. Every member of Congress has been elected as a result of a process meant to reflect the will of the majority.

There are reasons legislation is drafted and voted on through a well defined process. The Founding Fathers, and the Supreme Court, have seen to that.
 
Back
Top Bottom