Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Senate Republicans block Veterans Jobs Bill

Posted by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 10:30 AM
  • 44 Replies
1 mom liked this

Republican objections to spending in veterans jobs bill blocks election-year legislation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republican-objections-to-spending-in-veterans-jobs-bill-blocks-election-year-legislation/2012/09/19/d3acf5dc-02b7-11e2-9132-f2750cd65f97_story.html

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked legislation Wednesday that would have established a $1 billion jobs program putting veterans back to work tending to the country’s federal lands and bolstering local police and fire departments.

Republicans said the spending authorized in the bill violated limits that Congress agreed to last year. Democrats fell two votes shy of the 60-vote majority needed to waive the objection, forcing the legislation back to committee.

Supporters loosely modeled their proposal after the President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps used during the Great Depression to put people to work planting trees, building parks and constructing dams. They said the latest monthly jobs report, showing a nearly 11 percent unemployment rate for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, merited action from Congress.

Democratic lawmakers turned to the legislation shortly before they’ll adjourn for the finals weeks of this year’s election campaigns. The bill had little chance of passing the House this Congress, but it still allowed senators to appeal to a key voting bloc.

“(With) a need so great as unemployed veterans, this is not the time to draw a technical line on the budget,” said Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, the bill’s lead sponsor, who faces a competitive re-election battle.

Republicans said the effort to help veterans was noble, but the bill was flawed nevertheless.

Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma said the federal government already has six job-training programs for veterans and there is no way to know how well they are working. He argued that making progress on the country’s debt was the best way to help veterans in the long-term.

“We ought to do nothing now that makes the problem worse for our kids and grandkids,” Coburn said.

Democratic officials did not have an estimate for how many veterans would be hired as a result of the legislation. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said much would depend upon the number of applicants. She noted that more than 720,000 veterans are unemployed across the nation, including 220,000 veterans who have served since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. She said putting veterans back to work was the cost of war.

“Instead of meeting us halfway, we have been met with resistance. Instead of saying yes to the nearly 1 million unemployed veterans, it seems some on the other side have spent the last week and a half seeking any way to say no,” Murray said.

The advocacy group Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America denounced the vote.

“This bill was smart bipartisan policy that would put veterans back into service for their communities as policemen, firefighters and first responders,” the group’s founder and chief executive, Paul Rieckhoff, said in statement. “The result of today’s vote creates tremendous doubt that this Congress will be able to pass any additional veterans legislation in 2012. Iraq and Afghanistan veterans should not have to wait until 2013 for critical support from Congress.”

A handful of Republicans joined with Democrats in voting to waive the objection to the bill: Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Dean Heller of Nevada, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Maine’s Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe. Brown and Heller are also in tough re-election contests.

Heller said he was proud to support the bill.

“After everything our veterans have done for us, the least we can do is make sure they are afforded every opportunity to thrive here at home,” Heller said.

by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
katy_kay08
by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 11:57 AM
8 moms liked this

Shouldn't our support of Veterans extend to insuring they can reacclimate to society upon their return?  How many of these veterans were reservists that left jobs to serve our country only to return and find their job no longer existed?  If they gave up their security to defend ours we owe them more.  

Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on Sep. 21, 2012 at 11:59 AM
1 mom liked this
While I think the bill is initially a good plan it is not in the budget. Where would the money come from?

If they could allocate funds from somewhere else to support the propsal I would love to see it implemented.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
katy_kay08
by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 12:04 PM
2 moms liked this

The bill was completely self funding through the generation of fees for service.  

http://www.whitehouse.gov/economy/jobsact/read-the-bill#290

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley:

While I think the bill is initially a good plan it is not in the budget. Where would the money come from?

If they could allocate funds from somewhere else to support the propsal I would love to see it implemented.


Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on Sep. 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM
My phone won't let me click on that link... Can you give me a run-down?

Quoting katy_kay08:

The bill was completely self funding through the generation of fees for service.  

http://www.whitehouse.gov/economy/jobsact/read-the-bill#290

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley:

While I think the bill is initially a good plan it is not in the budget. Where would the money come from?



If they could allocate funds from somewhere else to support the propsal I would love to see it implemented.


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
LucyMom08
by Gold Member on Sep. 21, 2012 at 12:08 PM
5 moms liked this
The bipartisan temper tantrums in Congress are getting old...
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
CountryStrong84
by Member on Sep. 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM
1 mom liked this
I'm pissed Jeff sessions represents Alabama.
katy_kay08
by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Here is the summary of the section that covers the funding of the bill.  

Section 290  Permanent Self-Funding; Duty to Assess and Collect Fees for Network Use.  This section allows the Corporation to charge fees for the use of the public safety broadband network’s capacity, whether public safety users or commercial users on a secondary basis.  It also requires that fees cover the operations of the network after the initial expenditure of Federal funds and that proceeds from fees be reinvested in the network.


and here is the wording of that section: 

SECTION 290. PERMANENT SELF-FUNDING; DUTY TO ASSESS AND COLLECT FEES FOR NETWORK USE.
(a) In General.—The Corporation shall have the authority to assess and collect the following fees:
(1) NETWORK USER FEE.—A user or subscription fee from each entity, including any public safety entity or secondary user, that seeks access to or use of the nationwide public safety interoperable broadband network established under this Title.
(2) LEASE FEES RELATED TO NETWORK CAPACITY.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—A fee from any non-Federal entity that seeks to enter into a covered leasing agreement.
(B) COVERED LEASING AGREEMENT.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), a “covered leasing agreement” means a written agreement between the Corporation and secondary user to permit—
(i) access to network capacity on a secondary basis for non-public safety services; and
(ii) the spectrum allocated to such entity to be used for commercial transmissions along the dark fiber of the long-haul network of such entity.
(3) LEASE FEES RELATED TO NETWORK EQUIPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE.—A fee from any non-Federal entity that seeks access to or use of any equipment or infrastructure, including antennas or towers, constructed or otherwise owned by the Corporation.
(b) Establishment of Fee Amounts; Permanent Self-funding.—The total amount of the fees assessed for each fiscal year pursuant to this section shall be sufficient, and shall not exceed the amount necessary, to recoup the total expenses of the Corporation in carrying out its duties and responsibilities described under this Title for the fiscal year involved.
(c) Required Reinvestment of Funds.—The Corporation shall reinvest amounts received from the assessment of fees under this section in the nationwide public safety interoperable broadband network by using such funds only for constructing, maintaining, managing or improving the network.
Quoting Mommy_of_Riley:

My phone won't let me click on that link... Can you give me a run-down?

Quoting katy_kay08:

The bill was completely self funding through the generation of fees for service.  

http://www.whitehouse.gov/economy/jobsact/read-the-bill#290

Quoting Mommy_of_Riley:

While I think the bill is initially a good plan it is not in the budget. Where would the money come from?



If they could allocate funds from somewhere else to support the propsal I would love to see it implemented.



AMBG825
by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM
2 moms liked this
If what Coburn says is true I'm siding with him. If there are already 6 other bills in place and no way to predict if this one is going to even work, don't pass it. At this point it would be a waste of money we don't have.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
radioheid
by Libertarian on Sep. 21, 2012 at 2:08 PM
6 moms liked this

 Why couldn't they just take it out of the aid package for Egypt? Or from the fortune we're wasting in Afghanistan? Nah, let's keep creating physically and emotionally screwed up veterans we have no interest in helping. Goes right along with the huge back-log of VA disability claims.


"Roger that. Over."

R   A   D    I    O    H    E    I    D

katy_kay08
by on Sep. 21, 2012 at 2:09 PM
3 moms liked this

what really gets me is the claim that they didn't have the funding.  The bill was self funding and held the potential to raise additional revenue.  They didn't have to take it from anywhere.  


Quoting radioheid:

 Why couldn't they just take it out of the aid package for Egypt? Or from the fortune we're wasting in Afghanistan? Nah, let's keep creating physically and emotionally screwed up veterans we have no interest in helping. Goes right along with the huge back-log of VA disability claims.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN