Posted on 02/25/2007 5:49:23 AM PST by yoe
Reap now what you have sown children.
Please provide one specific instance where one senator held a BILL and stopped it from being voted upon or debated?
Incidently, remember a few years ago Leahy begging a single republican senator to release his hold on the Leahy-Grassley FBI Reform Act?
Just took one senator to stop it cold in its tracks. A republican will do the same with the Kennedy bill.
More empty rhetoric. In many posters I'd condemn it as shameful. In your case I'm willing to excuse it, because I know with your limited capabilities it's actually the best you can do.
No, I don't. Was that in committee or on the Senate floor? Please provide more details.
See his own web site:
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200206/062002a.html
"Frist vowed: “Let me be clear, hold or no hold, I will bring this legislation to the floor for a vote in September.”
Right, in Sept., barring if there is no more holds placed! Holds are very effective is stopping bills.
Okey-Dokey.
I'll get right on the phone to Dick Durbin and Osama Obama's office to tell them to fight this.
(stuck captive in IL)
;-)
The Dems control the Senate and they will proceed on a vote on the bill and there will enough Reps to invoke cloture. If holds were so effective, then why was there a vote in the Senate on the first bill or why were Bush's tax cuts passed? One rogue senator cannot stop the entire operation of the senate.
So, what's the problem?
Our guy will Veto it. Right? </s
If not,that's the only place I can take the fight. My two senators couldn't be bothered.
Holds are not formally recognized under Senate rules, said Steven S. Smith, a political scientist at Washington University in St. Louis who has studied holds.
"There is a worry that over the long haul, formally recognizing them in the rules will make them subject to partisan interplay and maybe eventually make matters worse," said Smith, director of the university's Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government and Public Policy
Senate leaders aren't bound to honor secret holds, but they traditionally have done so, to prevent lengthy filibusters that stall debate.
The root of the problem, Smith said, is in Senate leaders' willingness to honor the holds.
"There's a little too much wishful thinking going on here about how this will change the Senate," Smith said. "What really needs to be done is somebody needs to run for floor leader and say, 'I'm not going to observe holds.' "
Lott said he missed the opportunity for "substantial change" when he was Senate Majority Leader.
"I must confess that, in my opinion," Lott said, "I didn't do enough in that area."
Doesn't matter who controls, Dem sunk many republican bills through secret holds with republicans holding the majority.
McCain tried to get a Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 2006 and could never shake off the multiple holds that was being placed on it.
There is enough republicans to make any McAmnesty bill die slowly.
If I can I would like to add that the RNC, Bush, Rove, et al ran a horrible campaign. The democrats gave the RNC a ton of great quotes to use but didn't. The republicans ran at best a lack luster campaign and paid the price. We lost the middle because we didn't give them a reason to show up. I still have the nagging feeling that Bush and Rove weren't all that upset as they are still seeking the holy grail of this administration...Comprehensive Immigration Reform. The loss of the last election is the only way they can get what they seek.
Add GOP support for unrestraint free trade which have closed many factories in rural southern and mid west districts that usually vote GOP. MFN and CAFTA doomed the GOP candidate in those districts.
Well placed statement MNJohnnie.
Emotional over pragmatic thinking in political matters in itself is a liberal dogma.
I call; and raise you Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. - tom
I challenge you to prove that wild, unsubstantiated claim. Let's see the stats that prove that the other issues, like Republican corruption and the ballooning federal budget fueled by the Republican majority, were not involved at all.
Good luck proving that wild claim that the MOTIVATION of voters was to 'teach the Republicans a lesson'. The facts do not support you. And because you made the claim, it's your responsibility to support it with FACTS. Because you won't be able to provide facts that do not exist, if you're too proud to admit you were just blowing smoke, then slither off back to your George W. Bush shrine that you've erected in your living room, and stop annoying the rest of us.
As I understand it, any one Senator can put a hold on a bill.
None did it last sesson.
Will one out of 100 have the backbone to do it this session?
Last session there were even more R's. But still, none of them had the backbone to put a hold that bill.
Some of those Senators with R's following their name speechify allot. But let one, just one, only one show some backbone and put a hold on this bill.
[But don't bet the farm on it. You will probably lose the farm.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.