Dream Act passage in a lame duck session? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 05, 2024, 03:45:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Dream Act passage in a lame duck session? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Dream Act passage in a lame duck session?  (Read 7254 times)
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,118
United States


« on: September 24, 2010, 12:38:24 AM »

A Republican from West Virginia would filibuster it. DioGuardi is a wild card considering he hasn't voted on any issues since 1988 and Ken Buck would probably vote to preserve Republican filibuster.

Mark Kirk might vote for it depending on what position he staked on it in the campaign


ILL, NY, CO, WV, and DE would be seated in November.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,118
United States


« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2010, 04:53:03 PM »


Anvikshiki (why can't you have a simpler screen name guy, I have to always copy and paste it, least I screw up your odd string of little letters Smiley) and Badger (now that is a name I can handle!), I never said the Pubbies do not do, and say, dumb things. But I did not really see myself any really serious give and take negotiations. It was all just a stage show - particularly those staged televised "negotiations" over the Health Care Bill. What a cf that was! And there was a compromise to be had, if folks had well, listened to me for instance. Smiley

And it does not help for Obama to call for a meeting with the Pubbies, setting a date, via the press, without checking with them privately first, as to what would be a good date, allowing time for the Pubbies to get their act together, and formulate their position, so that something productive might happen. And then the Dems bitch that the Pubbies are being "rude" to Obama. This kind of thing is just not very helpful. It sucks.

And there certainly was no negotiations over that execrable stimulus bill, aka a massive borrowing of money to ship off to state and local public employees (overmanned, over paid, and over pensioned), which was the last place we needed to spend money. Much of the rest was supposed to go to shovel ready construction projects (a sop to the unions), which were not shovel ready, and a lot of that money just disappeared into the woodwork, and nobody will ever know where it really went. Some states and localities don't even keep adequate records of it. It still makes me angry just thinking about it.

Especially after what happened at the last summitt, you would think the Republicans have a legitimate claim to having some "pre-conditions" set up and in place before going.

This actually seems like cover for the Democrats to buy them more time, hence announcing it without consulting with the GOP leaders first. The Republicans have a unified position on the tax cuts, extend them all permenently, but settle for temporary extentions if necessary. The Democrats are the ones who need to get on the same page. Kent Conrad has an idea, Warner and Schumer another, and Harry Reid wants to go down fighting to make sure the rich tax cuts expire in January. 

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 10 queries.