There’s two sides the story. I’m not trying to defend Senator McConnell, but I don’t think it’s as simple as some think. Whether we agree with it or not, McConnell has made it clear that he will not allow the government to be shut down again. If the transportation bill was amended to add the ban on Planned Infanticide (Parenthood) funding, President Obama would have certainly vetoed it, and that would have led to another possible shutdown.
McConnell may very well oppose Planned Parenthood, but he cannot do anything about it so long as he’s promised the government will not be shut down. That ties his hands. I think you’re right that this is a symbolic vote so that he can say he tried. He’s not stupid. He has to know it will fail, but he also has to know that nothing will get past the president’s veto regardless.
If the Republican elites truly oppose Obama (and that’s a very big IF these days), they have very little power so long as they refuse to use their biggest weapon—the power of the purse. A promise to avoid another government shutdown at all costs basically hands the minority party and their president complete veto power over all legislation.
And of all the promises he has made (and broken) why is this the one he decides to keep? And to whom is he keeping it?
Truth is he agrees with large portion of the lib agenda or at minimum the elite power structure and hides behind “show votes” to keep status quo. Pretty simple.....
Enough with the amendments. Stand-alone bills only. And simple majority for most votes.
Amendments take away our representatives’ ability to vote their conscience, and therefore ours too. In addition, they complicate the process with trade-offs so that half the time we don’t even know what’s happening. Back to basics.
The first person to campaign on this gets my vote, even if it’s Bernie.
The second side of this story is why does keeping the government open have to be the only promise turtle boy keeps?
What harm did the shut down do?