Log in or Sign up

GOOD NEWS? Drudge links report of GOP REVOLT!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Liability, Jul 26, 2011.

Page 1 of 11

Jul 26, 2011 #1

Offline
Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 2009

Messages:

35,447

Thanks Received:

5,049

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

Mansion in Ravi's Head

Ratings:

+5,065

House GOP revolts against Boehner plan - Washington Times

Mr. Boehners bill would reduce future discretionary spending by $1.2 trillion, grant an immediate debt increase of $1 trillion, and set up a committee to work on trillions of dollars in future deficit reduction either through more spending cuts or tax increases, which would then earn another future debt increase. It would also require both the House and Senate to hold votes on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

But conservative Republicans in the House, many allied to the tea party movement, said they dont just want votes on the amendment, they want an assurance it will be sent to the states.
Click to expand...

Id.

It could cut in unexpected ways, but as a matter of principle: GOOD!
Jul 26, 2011 #2

Offline
Full-Auto Gold Member

Joined:

Jun 13, 2009

Messages:

13,555

Thanks Received:

1,614

Trophy Points:

153

Ratings:

+1,615

Liability said: ↑

House GOP revolts against Boehner plan - Washington Times

Mr. Boehners bill would reduce future discretionary spending by $1.2 trillion, grant an immediate debt increase of $1 trillion, and set up a committee to work on trillions of dollars in future deficit reduction either through more spending cuts or tax increases, which would then earn another future debt increase. It would also require both the House and Senate to hold votes on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

But conservative Republicans in the House, many allied to the tea party movement, said they dont just want votes on the amendment, they want an assurance it will be sent to the states.
Click to expand...

Id.

It could cut in unexpected ways, but as a matter of principle: GOOD!

Click to expand...

Thats what debate is all about. I still like the NOT ANOTHER DIME.
Jul 26, 2011 #3

Offline
Conservative Type 40

Joined:

Jul 1, 2011

Messages:

17,082

Thanks Received:

2,026

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

Pennsylvania

Ratings:

+2,030

But conservative Republicans in the House, many allied to the tea party movement, said they dont just want votes on the amendment, they want an assurance it will be sent to the states.
Click to expand...

correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the only way to send an amendment to the Constitution to the states, for it to be voted on by the House, Senate... passed... signed by the President? Isn't it then up to 3/4's of the states to ratify it?
Jul 26, 2011 #4

Offline
Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 2009

Messages:

35,447

Thanks Received:

5,049

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

Mansion in Ravi's Head

Ratings:

+5,065

Conservative said: ↑

But conservative Republicans in the House, many allied to the tea party movement, said they don’t just want votes on the amendment, they want an assurance it will be sent to the states.
Click to expand...

correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the only way to send an amendment to the Constitution to the states, for it to be voted on by the House, Senate... passed... signed by the President? Isn't it then up to 3/4's of the states to ratify it?
Click to expand...

The Amendment Process

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about. * * * *
Click to expand...

-- Constitutional Amendments - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

See:

Article 5 - Amendment

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Click to expand...

Last edited: Jul 26, 2011
Jul 26, 2011 #5

Offline
ScreamingEagle Gold Member

Joined:

Jul 5, 2004

Messages:

13,105

Thanks Received:

1,659

Trophy Points:

245

Ratings:

+2,470

Conservatives are not happy with the milktoast republicans who keep watering down the plan...if it's not going to do the real job that is needed....why pass it....?

some are promoting a bill to priortize bond payments, social security, and military pay if nothing gets passed by Aug 2...
Jul 26, 2011 #6

Offline
the_savage Rookie

Joined:

Jun 27, 2011

Messages:

25

Thanks Received:

2

Trophy Points:

1

Ratings:

+2

Obama will have no bill to sign so he won't get blamed for this crash that is coming
Jul 26, 2011 #7

Offline
8537 Senior Member

Joined:

Aug 23, 2010

Messages:

7,754

Thanks Received:

729

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

New England's West Coast

Ratings:

+729

Demanding that a Balanced Budget amendment has "assurances it will be sent to the states" is voting for default. I wish the Tea Partiers would just be honest.
Jul 26, 2011 #8

Offline
Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 2009

Messages:

35,447

Thanks Received:

5,049

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

Mansion in Ravi's Head

Ratings:

+5,065

8537 said: ↑

Demanding that a Balanced Budget amendment has "assurances it will be sent to the states" is voting for default. I wish the Tea Partiers would just be honest.
Click to expand...

No. It's not.

I wish you'd be honest.
Jul 26, 2011 #9

Offline
Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 2009

Messages:

35,447

Thanks Received:

5,049

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

Mansion in Ravi's Head

Ratings:

+5,065
the_savage said: ↑

Obama will have no bill to sign so he won't get blamed for this crash that is coming
Click to expand...

There is no default coming (even if there's no agreement). There will be no "crash" coming unless, for traitorous partisan political reasons, the liberal Democrats cause one.
- Thank You! x 2
Jul 26, 2011 #10

Offline
8537 Senior Member

Joined:

Aug 23, 2010

Messages:

7,754

Thanks Received:

729

Trophy Points:

48

Location:

New England's West Coast

Ratings:

+729

Liability said: ↑

8537 said: ↑

Demanding that a Balanced Budget amendment has "assurances it will be sent to the states" is voting for default. I wish the Tea Partiers would just be honest.
Click to expand...

No. It's not.

I wish you'd be honest.
Click to expand...

of course it is. It leaves two possibilities, one of which is impossible:

1. We have "assurances" that a balanced budget amendment will be sent to the states. Exactly what assurances do you have in mind? It's impossible.

2. We default.

Since (1) is impossible, it's a vote for (2). But luckily for sane people, the Tea Party doesn't have a large enough caucus to prevent sane people from passing a sane debt limit increase.

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 1 of 11

Share This Page

Active Topics

The Roman exile of the biblical...
louie888 posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:46 AM
Pro Trump group launches new...
Odium posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:42 AM
The Liberal Excuse...
Rexx Taylor posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:33 AM
Trump's base see him as the...
deanrd posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:21 AM
Trump's base see him as the...
deanrd posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:21 AM
Al Franken Inadvertently admits...
HaShev posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:16 AM
Do right wingers on here...
nat4900 posted Jun 26, 2017 at 8:08 AM
Trump almost got off the mat...
JakeStarkey posted Jun 26, 2017 at 7:58 AM

Loading...

Search