Posted on 03/01/2006 6:27:28 AM PST by OXENinFLA
I wonder if that qualifies as a personal attack.
Only if you hit the abuse button....
I didn't see where JR answered your question either...I guess you will just have to try it..and find out!! LOL
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.CON.RES.83: <- Text of Bill
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SC00083: <- Links re: Bill
No amendment by Cantwell, offered or withdrawn. BUT, the Senators are known to "spring" amendments onto the floor - it's almost normal procedure to do so.
The first scheduled votes tomorrow are "debt limit" (Baucus amendment S.Amnd.3041 or S.Amnd.3058 to S.Con.Res.83 - not the same as raise the debt ceiling for "now" per H.J.Res.47), followed by two competing amendments that relate to avian flu preparation. After that, back to what is referred to as vote-a-rama. I haven't figured out a way to keep track of what is going on in realtime - it's hard enough to sort out after the fact.
It'll be S.Amnd.3058.
SA 3058. Mr. BAUCUS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the concurrent resolution S. Con. Res. 83, setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2007 and including the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2006 and 2008 through 2011; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $880,000,000.
On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $1,800,000,000.
On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $800,000,000.
On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $240,000,000.
On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $880,000,000.
On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $1,800,000,000.
On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $800,000,000.
On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $240,000,000.
On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $4,000,000,000.
On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $880,000,000.
On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $1,800,000,000.
On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $800,000,000.
On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $240,000,000.
On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
On page 11, line 21, increase the amount by $4,000,000,000.
On page 11, line 22, increase the amount by $880,000,000.
On page 12, line 1, increase the amount by $1,800,000,000.
On page 12, line 5, increase the amount by $800,000,000.
On page 12, line 9, increase the amount by $240,000,000.
On page 12, line 13, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $4,000,000,000.
On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $880,000,000.
Either way, they have to approve the "right now" one - I don't expect much debate on that one, except to segue into objection to S.Amnd.3058.
Coburn up to slam the DEMs for overspending.
Ha ha !!! You got Post #666!
I kept hearing the term "vote-o-rama" spoken today...they are starting to run the Senate like the House...
I hate that...because the impact of an amendment might not be as "acute" when voted on a day later...
I know that is probably just nit-picking on my part...but I prefer the Senate to vote, debate, vote...
Starting?
House, Senate OK budget blueprints
Upper house clips $100 billion from tax cut
David E. Rosenbaum, New York TimesSaturday, March 22, 2003
SENATE 'VOTE-A-RAMA'
In the Senate, the 50 hours of debate allotted under rules expired Thursday night. The Senate spent all day Friday in what is known as a "vote-a-rama," one vote after another on amendments with only a minute or so in between when the sponsor was permitted to describe the amendment.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/03/22/MN258612.DTL
I prefer the Senate to vote, debate, vote...
That they'll do - but the "debate" part will be brief ;-)
Boy, I bet they were cranky having to have a vote-o-rama on a Saturday!!!
Grassley's speech will be a good one to review. I don't know what he has in mid as a substitute for "debt limit," but he is clearly referring to the contents of H.J.Res.47.
Senate faces tough vote on raising debt limitBy Richard Cowan - Reuters
Friday, March 3, 2006; 1:01 PM... In a speech on the Senate floor, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid put all 55 Senate Republicans on notice that they "are going to have to belly up to the bar and vote to increase the debt," saying it was Republican budgets that have created the massive deficit spending requiring more federal borrowing.
"Democrats are not going to vote to increase this debt," Reid said. ...
In mid-February, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, told Reuters he hoped the legislation would be quietly brought to a vote just before the Senate's next recess, which is set for March 18.
The debt ceiling increase historically has been politically distasteful and some conservative Republicans in the Senate could join Democrats in opposing the increase.
"It's highly unlikely that I can support a debt limit (increase) without major structural change that brings the spending under control," Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma told Reuters.
Coburn said the need to increase the debt limit offered "a great opportunity to put as much pressure as we can" to bring down government spending.
Looks like Laut is losing his charts
HEY DEMOCRATS .. IF YOU ARE SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WORRIED ABOUT THE DEBT ... THEN PULL ALL YOUR SPENDING AMENDMENTS NOW!!
Till then ... YOU ARE ALL HYPOCRITES!!
/ rant>
"Dependant on foreign capital ..." and he segues into the Dubai deal, as well as holding China away from certain investment.
Notes that the debt has increased during the last 6 years. Same old stuff, IMO. But since it's such a dry and esoteric subject, it won't even make for a good flame war. /sigh/
Who is loaning us this money? Foreign ownership is 2.2 trillion (of 8+ trillion). What share of taxes is being used to pay interest on the debt? Hell, that's KNOWN! He needs to passa law to get that? Idiot.
This is all pretty funny when viewed in light of the projected debt from 2007 to 2011 (see table of debt in multiple posts above).
I have to admit...that my eyes glaze over when they start talking about these subjects...debt limits, .
But, if YOU say that Grassley was trying to make an interesting point...I will be glad to read the transcript...that is easier for me than trying to grasp it from a floor speech.
BTW, Baucus has GOT to be one of the most boring, monotonous speakers in the Senate...zzzzzzzzzzzzz
He's arguing to get rid of a statutory debt limit altogether. No limit. Said the debt limit was put in place to score political points against Clinton, to "shut down" the government, and that doing so was (in hindsight) a mistake.
He noted that Greenspan has argued in favor of eliminating the statutory debt limit.
I don't know what he proposes instead, if anything.
Coburn up chastizing both sides for pointing fingers...and not getting things done....to get spending down.
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.