Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"GOP kills energy funding bill over LGBT measure"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "GOP kills energy funding bill over LGBT measure"

    WTF does LGBT have to do with energy?
    The House on Thursday morning overwhelmingly rejected a $37.4 billion energy and water funding bill that included an amendment from Democrats protecting LGBT rights.

    The Energy and Water Appropriations Bill included funding for the Department of Energy, Army Corps of Engineers and other related agencies. It went down 112-305, as many Republicans and almost all Democrats voted against it.

    [...]

    The energy and water funding bill is often one of the least controversial appropriations bills due to the Army Corps of Engineers projects included in the bill. The Senate version of the bill passed overwhelmingly earlier this month.

    [...]

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2592367
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

  • #2
    Excellent. America's energy needs have nothing to do with pandering to the gay community.
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #3
      All part of Speaker Ryan's pandering to 30-40 hardcore house conservatives. He promised them "regular order" and this is what happens.
      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
      “To talk of many things:
      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
      Of cabbages—and kings—
      And why the sea is boiling hot—
      And whether pigs have wings.”
      ― Lewis Carroll

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
        All part of Speaker Ryan's pandering to 30-40 hardcore house conservatives. He promised them "regular order" and this is what happens.
        You mean 305 congressmen from both parties acting together?
        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
          You mean 305 congressmen from both parties acting together?
          Nope, no limits on amendments, by either party.
          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
          “To talk of many things:
          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
          Of cabbages—and kings—
          And why the sea is boiling hot—
          And whether pigs have wings.”
          ― Lewis Carroll

          Comment


          • #6
            There should be a Constitutional Amendment that forbids appropriations bills from including non-appropriations measures within.....or measures outside the subject matter of the bill.

            For Example.....this one. And the Defense Authorization Bills filled with foreign aid or other riders.
            Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

            Comment


            • #7
              Let's fry these wicked lesbians in a solar oven !
              That rug really tied the room together

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                There should be a Constitutional Amendment that forbids appropriations bills from including non-appropriations measures within.....or measures outside the subject matter of the bill.

                For Example.....this one. And the Defense Authorization Bills filled with foreign aid or other riders.
                I agree. From this remove adding amendments which have nothing to do with the substance of the Bill looks like a bizarre anomaly. I suspect it looks even more bizarre up close!
                "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their
                validity." - Abraham Lincoln.
                "Nothing's going to change while one side it lying about the cause and the other is lying about the solution" - Me

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                  WTF does LGBT have to do with energy?
                  The House on Thursday morning overwhelmingly rejected a $37.4 billion energy and water funding bill that included an amendment from Democrats protecting LGBT rights.

                  The Energy and Water Appropriations Bill included funding for the Department of Energy, Army Corps of Engineers and other related agencies. It went down 112-305, as many Republicans and almost all Democrats voted against it.

                  [...]

                  The energy and water funding bill is often one of the least controversial appropriations bills due to the Army Corps of Engineers projects included in the bill. The Senate version of the bill passed overwhelmingly earlier this month.

                  [...]

                  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2592367
                  It appears that pandering to social conservatives was more important than the energy portion of the bill. So, now that they have clearly articulated their priorities what is going to be their next trick?
                  Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

                  Initiated Chief Petty Officer
                  Hard core! Old School! Deal with it!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                    There should be a Constitutional Amendment that forbids appropriations bills from including non-appropriations measures within.....or measures outside the subject matter of the bill.

                    For Example.....this one. And the Defense Authorization Bills filled with foreign aid or other riders.
                    It's called "germane" and the rules already stop it, if in forced. However the LBGT amendment was germane and would meet your requirement also as it related directly to appropriations in that it set in law contracting requirements concerning discrimination by companies holding those contracts. Contracting is a direct part of the appropriations process.
                    “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                    “To talk of many things:
                    Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                    Of cabbages—and kings—
                    And why the sea is boiling hot—
                    And whether pigs have wings.”
                    ― Lewis Carroll

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                      It's called "germane" and the rules already stop it, if in forced. However the LBGT amendment was germane and would meet your requirement also as it related directly to appropriations in that it set in law contracting requirements concerning discrimination by companies holding those contracts. Contracting is a direct part of the appropriations process.
                      Depends.

                      What specifically was the amendment. Was it an amendment noting that sexual orientation should not be considered when choosing a contractor....IE something normal?

                      Or was it an amendment establishing Transgender as an officially recognized subset of the Sexual Orientation non-discriminatory stuff/

                      The former is already established as law, and as such really doesn't need an amendment.

                      The latter would be a back-door method for amending the Civil Rights act, effectively if not directly.

                      The Transgender mess needs a debate, but it needs its own debate.....not back-door measures in appropriations bills.
                      Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                        There should be a Constitutional Amendment that forbids appropriations bills from including non-appropriations measures within.....or measures outside the subject matter of the bill.

                        For Example.....this one. And the Defense Authorization Bills filled with foreign aid or other riders.
                        I agree, but it will never happen, appropriations bills would never get passed without pork.
                        Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          the bigoted religious right has held this country for far too long. For years they sided with Republicans and only stopped Democrats from getting things done but now the party has moved forward on social issues and they are
                          stuck in the past and stopping even the Republicans from passing legislature.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by A7V View Post
                            the bigoted religious right has held this country for far too long. For years they sided with Republicans and only stopped Democrats from getting things done but now the party has moved forward on social issue and they are stopping even the Republicans from passing legislature.
                            Did you even read the excerpt? I know you didn't read the article, and I'm debating whether you read at all.

                            ALMOST ALL DEMOCRATS AND MANY REPUBLICANS VOTED AGAINST IT.

                            So yep....the 'religious right'......meaning Democrats, voted against it.
                            Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by A7V View Post
                              the bigoted religious right has held this country for far too long. For years they sided with Republicans and only stopped Democrats from getting things done but now the party has moved forward on social issues and they are
                              stuck in the past and stopping even the Republicans from passing legislature.
                              Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X