Outrageous

[rraley]

Read this story

It appears that when the House Leadership doesn't get what they want; they find ways to bend and even break the rules to change that. Terrible abuse of power and our democracy.

 

[FromTexas]

You should understand the rules before falling into lib media crap

Except as otherwise permitted under clause 8 or 9 of this rule or under clause 6 of rule XVIII, the minimum time for a record vote or quorum call by electronic device shall be 15 minutes.

(c) The Speaker may reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on a question postponed under this clause, or on a question incidental thereto, that follows another electronic vote without intervening business, so long as the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions is 15 minutes.

15 minutes is the minimum time, thank you very much. Some votes go hours depending on the nature and reasoning.

No rules are broken. In fact, 15 minutes is just the MINIMUM, not a standard like the article states.

 

[huntr1]

Dear rraley,
Go away and don't come back until you grow up and learn reading comprehension.
Huntr

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by rraley
Read this story

It appears that when the House Leadership doesn't get what they want; they find ways to bend and even break the rules to change that. Terrible abuse of power and our democracy.

Where you asleep in civics when the taught about the power the Speaker of the House has? He sets the agneda and timetables. It is not new, it has been that way forever and expertly displayed by the master of hackism Tip O'neal. He used it oh so frequently.

 

[Larry Gude]

Jr...

...that's NOTHING.

They kept it open for three hours to pass the medicaire prescription thing.

Read up on the 40 years of Democratic control of the House prior to 1994 if you want to know how the Republicans learned the rules inside out.

 

[rraley]

Originally posted by huntr1
Dear rraley,
Go away and don't come back until you grow up and learn reading comprehension.
Huntr

Thank you sir for that wonderful point of debate. I truly appreciate it.

While the rules state that votes may last more than 15 minutes, you would agree that votes are almost always 15 minutes unless the leadership doesn't get what they wanted. As Larry Gude said, the prescription drug benefit vote was held open for THREE hours...that is not democracy; that is squeezing arms and getting representatives to vote against their consciences.

If you don't believe Democrat me, look at what Rep. Butch Otter (R-Idaho) had to say:

You win some, and some get stolen

I'm sorry but this is wrong.

 

[huntr1]

Originally posted by rraley
While the rules state that votes may last more than 15 minutes, you would agree that votes are almost always 15 minutes unless the leadership doesn't get what they wanted.

Nope. Most votes on bills of any importance or with a good bit of debate going on about it run well over 15 minutes. Watch CSPAN sometime.

 

[rraley]

Originally posted by huntr1
Watch CSPAN sometime.

Have since I was six. Most votes aren't even 15 minutes - usually ten or five. The only times that I have seen them go over the stated time - and even then it was only a couple of minutes - was in order to allow congressmen to return to the Capitol from Rayburn or Dirsken.

 

[FromTexas]

You are implying that it is bending the rules or breaking them, which it is not. The Democrats did the same for years for their agendas. It is part of politics. The rule states MINIMUM time which is the 15 minutes you are arguing. What is the point in calling it minimum time if you don't expect to have times over it?

You are correct that most votes get done in 15. Everyday business gets done quickly to move on to the things of political importance. Things in the realm of political importance rarely take just 15 minutes unless it is something unanimous like denouncing the attacks of Sept 11 or of that like. Everyday business gets done quick because its SOP and its typically well into the majority agreed upon.

C-SPAN since you were 6, eh? Why don't you go ahead and further the image of the lieing liberal to press any argument? I mean, come on.


How old are you? 19?

 

[huntr1]

Originally posted by rraley
Have since I was six. Most votes aren't even 15 minutes - usually ten or five. The only times that I have seen them go over the stated time - and even then it was only a couple of minutes - was in order to allow congressmen to return to the Capitol from Rayburn or Dirsken.

READING COMPREHENSION CAN BE YOUR FRIEND!!!! What part of FromTexas' quote did you not understand???
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except as otherwise permitted under clause 8 or 9 of this rule or under clause 6 of rule XVIII, the minimum time for a record vote or quorum call by electronic device shall be 15 minutes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by FromTexas


How old are you? 19?

According to his profile his age is 17 and not even old enough to vote - I now wonder if we haven't stumbled on to the MPD for smcdem?

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Ken King
I now wonder if we haven't stumbled on to the MPD for smcdem?

Not unless SMC grew up a lot in the last few months and acquired a working brain.

 

[huntr1]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Not unless SMC grew up a lot in the last few months and acquired a working brain.

If rraley is grownup and has a working brain in comparison to smcdem, I fear for smcdem's life, he must be a vegetable.

 

[rraley]

I am 17 years old. I attend Leonardtown High School. I have enjoyed politics since a young age. I watched CSPAN during the summer when I was six when I was not at the pool. There's the background - believe it or not.

I understand that the wording of the rule states 15 minutes, but the fact remains that extending it out, as the Republicans have done lately (which I am sure the Democrats did as well, they were wrong to do it too), is something that is clearly for the purpose of using the "LBJ treatment" to sway some votes towards their side and it something that should not be allowed. Debate on the topic was for an hour or more - the added time to get votes is wrong - the votes to remove this provision (which were bipartisan) were there. It was not until serious arm-twisting that it happened (and I very much so doubt that it was on the substance of the bill). Here's an analogy: let us say that the 15 minute "minimum" is Election Day. Let us pretend it was the 2000 Election with the Republican leadership being Al Gore and the Democrats being George Bush. Bush had enough votes (219 in this case) to win the "election" or the vote on this provision. Well, Gore (Denny Hastert) cried foul because he only had 201 votes. So they decided to do a recount for an extra 23 minutes (or however long it was). Only this time, the votes came out the way that the loser wanted. This is not a democratic practice; it opens this nation even more to the backrooms and we shouldn't stand for that.

 

[rraley]

You know, huntr1, I really don't deserve what you are saying. You can hide behind the keyboard and use the anonymous nature of a forum to say anything negative that you want. But you know, it still is a poor practice on your part, and suggests what you are really all about. I am sorry that I disagree with you and have a different viewpoint - that doesn't mean I am absolutely stupid and cannot understand what I read. So, sir, how about you grow up, show some maturity, and engage in real thoughtful debate.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Not unless SMC grew up a lot in the last few months and acquired a working brain.

Weirder things have happened as a male exits puberty. Besides don’t they share the same surname (though I think smcdem once referred to himself as Patrick, which he has since edited out), but the age is about the same and the blind passion he holds for Democrats is strikingly similar.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Ken King
the age is about the same and the blind passion he holds for Democrats is strikingly similar.

No way. SMC was our resident Socialist, remember? Plus he goes to Ryken and the last name is different.

 

[rraley]

What's an MPD?

 

[huntr1]

Originally posted by rraley
You know, huntr1, I really don't deserve what you are saying. You can hide behind the keyboard and use the anonymous nature of a forum to say anything negative that you want. But you know, it still is a poor practice on your part, and suggests what you are really all about. I am sorry that I disagree with you and have a different viewpoint - that doesn't mean I am absolutely stupid and cannot understand what I read. So, sir, how about you grow up, show some maturity, and engage in real thoughtful debate.

When you take the time to actually read the articles that you link to or posts to which you refer in your posts, and then post about them in an intelligent manner showing that you have read them, I will stop busting your balls about it. Until then, prepared to be busted. I have no problem with you being a flaming liberal. In fact, I enjoy reading your posts (when they follow facts, not just spout party line BS). I am a republican (bet you couldn't tell), but I don't vote party line. I vote candidate and issue every time. I am not getting on your case because of your point of view. I am busting your balls because you don't seem to pay attention to what you are reading/typing. It took you how long to get that the MINIMUM time for a vote is 15 minutes? Pick ANY big issue votes, and you will see that 9 times out of 10, the vote took longer than 15 minutes. I never said you were stupid. I said you were an idiot. 2 totally different things. Idiots normally have lots of smarts, just don't apply them. I would be happy to have a meaningful debate with you, but I am leaving for the day. It would also require you to think for yourself and look beyond the BS the political parties put out. If you can do that, and think of an issue I care about, I would be happy to debate it with you.

 

[huntr1]

Originally posted by rraley
What's an MPD?

an MPD is a user who has multiple screen names, and posts under them.