Fiscal Responsibility? $3 MILLION to defend DOMA

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Aug 5, 2010
42,407
7,739
1,860
Peaking out from the redwoods
Where is the "fiscal responsibility" here?

WASHINGTON -- House Republican leaders have signed on to spend up to $3 million to keep defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, according to a copy of their newly revised legal contract obtained by The Huffington Post.[...]

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders hired attorneys at the law firm Bancroft LLC to represent the House in court cases involving the federal ban on gay marriage -- all with taxpayer dollars.[...]

The revised contract comes on the heels of House Republican leaders inserting language into the rules package for the 113th Congress that authorizes the House legal team to keep paying outside counsel to defend DOMA. The rules package also states that the House legal team continues to "speak for" all House members in its defense of DOMA -- language that infuriated Democrats opposed to the matter. [...]

House Democratic leaders, meanwhile, sent a letter to Boehner later Tuesday voicing their opposition to sinking more money into DOMA's defense -- particularly given Republicans' calls for fiscal responsibility.

"We wish to strongly reaffirm our objections to the repeated actions by the Republican leadership to secretly and dramatically increase the contract between the House and outside counsel in arguing to uphold the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in more than a dozen cases," reads the letter from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.).

"It is the height of hypocrisy for House Republicans to waste public funds in one breath then claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility in the next," the letter continues. "With Republicans willing to take our economy and our country to the brink of default in the name of deficit reduction, there is simply no excuse for any Member of Congress to commit taxpayer dollars to an unnecessary -- and futile -- legal battle."​

DOMA: House Republicans Poised To Spend $3 Million On Legal Defense
 
228 of 229 House Republicans found it in their heart to vote for the bill that included money for DOMA. They drew the line at voting for Sandy relief. Only after Republicans put their own house in order they can complain about others.
 
Hell the fuking rethug retards in the House spent 50 million trying to repeal Obmamcare. What's a few million more to them. It ain't their money.
 
Hell the fuking rethug retards in the House spent 50 million trying to repeal Obmamcare. What's a few million more to them. It ain't their money.

the right also spent 70 million investigating bill clinton.

they went bargain basement on 9/11, though, spending only 7 million to investigate that.

there was, however, a million dollars to research the effect of prayer on healing when baby bush was president.
 
Tax the HagsnFags...they are the ones pushing the gay marriage idiocy.


Cool. Tax the NRA and the gun and ammo manufactuers, they are the ones pushing for armed guards in every schoolhouse idiocy.
 
You wanna mention the spending in the other direction as well?? Or do you want to just keep it hackery??

What "other direction" would that be? Is the "fiscally conservative" GOP doing the spending?

No.. congressional and governmental spending for legal issues on legalizing gay marriage, etc....

The wasteful spending goes both ways (no pun intended)
 
You wanna mention the spending in the other direction as well?? Or do you want to just keep it hackery??

What "other direction" would that be? Is the "fiscally conservative" GOP doing the spending?

No.. congressional and governmental spending for legal issues on legalizing gay marriage, etc....

The wasteful spending goes both ways (no pun intended)

And you have links to these bills, naturally?
 
The #1 coorelating indicator of poverty in America is single parent households.

What could be more fiscally responsible than defending marriage?

That was a rhetorical question. We all know the answer.


LOL
 
The #1 coorelating indicator of poverty in America is single parent households.

What could be more fiscally responsible than defending marriage?

That was a rhetorical question. We all know the answer.


LOL

You do realize that your post is illogical don't you? Keeping people from getting married and extending protections to their families and children is keeping children in "single parent" households.
 
The #1 coorelating indicator of poverty in America is single parent households.

What could be more fiscally responsible than defending marriage?

That was a rhetorical question. We all know the answer.


LOL

So....keeping tax-paying, law-abiding consenting adults FROM marrying will help with that "single parent household" thing........how?
 
The government should be expected to defend its own laws. DOMA is the law of the land, like abortion protection.
 
228 of 229 House Republicans found it in their heart to vote for the bill that included money for DOMA. They drew the line at voting for Sandy relief. Only after Republicans put their own house in order they can complain about others.

O couldn't find it in his heart to vote for the katrina relief bill in 2005.
 
The #1 coorelating indicator of poverty in America is single parent households.

What could be more fiscally responsible than defending marriage?

That was a rhetorical question. We all know the answer.


LOL

You do realize that your post is illogical don't you? Keeping people from getting married and extending protections to their families and children is keeping children in "single parent" households.

Facts do not support you.

The weaker the proponents of traditional marriage in a demographic, the more single parent gubmint dependency.


I am always here to help with the facts!


LOL
 
The #1 coorelating indicator of poverty in America is single parent households.

What could be more fiscally responsible than defending marriage?

That was a rhetorical question. We all know the answer.


LOL

You do realize that your post is illogical don't you? Keeping people from getting married and extending protections to their families and children is keeping children in "single parent" households.

Facts do not support you.

The weaker the proponents of traditional marriage in a demographic, the more single parent gubmint dependency.


I am always here to help with the facts!


LOL

Oh please, I'd LOVE to see those claims supported by facts.
 

Forum List

Back
Top