Just curious how everyone feels about him calling for a 767 page amendment to be read aloud on the Senate floor? Was it appropriate?
And if you don't think it was appropriate, if it was such a great amendment why did Bernie Sanders withdraw the amendment?
Does anyone really know what was in there? It sounds like it was nothing good since he withdrew it himself.
Thoughts? (not looking for bashing, I just don't get what was in there and why it shouldn't have been read aloud - since tax payers are footing the bills).
Answer by thundernlight at 11:30 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
I think they should have to read EVERY SINGLE THING they are trying to pass on the floor. Bet THEN they become a WHOLE lot more concise and a whole lot less corrupt! AND we would at least KNOW that they know WHAT they are voting for or against! I think the single thing that pisses me off the most right now with all those nut cases up there is that they are voting in things they haven't even READ!
Answer by momof030404 at 9:07 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
Oh, I forgot some links. unfortunately I am not getting much out of them. But here they are:
I know it's a fox news link. I will look for a more "neutral" one in a min.
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:08 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
It will take 12 hours
by jamming up Senate business, Coburn's move prevents a vote on a funding bill for the Department of Defense. The current funding provision expires at midnight on Friday.
Sanders provided a summary of his amendment to colleagues: "This amendment would establish a single payer health insurance system that would cover every person legally residing in the United States. The single payer system would be regulated and funded by the federal government through a payroll tax and an income tax, but it would be administered by the states. It would replace the coverage and revenue titles of the current bill, but it would leave in place most of the provisions in the quality, prevention, and workforce titles of the bill. This amendment starts from the premise that health care is a human right, and that every citizen, rich or poor, should have access to health care, just as every citizen has access to the fire department, the police, or public schools."
Here's a HuffPo link for those that hate fox.
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:11 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
Don't you find it a bit sneaky to put an amendment that would demand a single payer system for health care into a military spending bill? Considering the amendment would cost exponentially more than the military spending? Did he withdraw it to keep the process for military spending on track?
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:13 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
Answer by tnmomofive at 9:32 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
One of the articles had stated that the deadline for the military spending bill is Friday night. Did he pull it because it would kill the whole bill, or because he didn't want it read aloud? I guess that's really what my question is.
And I agree tn, I don't like that it was put into the military spending bill. It seems very sneaky indeed.
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:38 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
Answer by yourspecialkid at 10:24 PM on Dec. 16, 2009
Check out some of the top posts today in Groups: