In the dead of night, Schumer & Senate Dems tried to pass their DC power grab, with "the Corrupt Politicians Act"...Ted Cruz heroically objected!

basquebromance

Diamond Member
Nov 26, 2015
109,396
27,061
2,220
i need to examine the bill further, but i'm against it for now


 
chuckie should take another 1 up ITS ass....another corrupt piece of shit from NY
 
Isnt that the bill that forces tax payers to fund politicians expenses for running for office? The one that basically takes control of state elections?
These mother fuckers have got to go

Yes. It gives you $6 for every $1 donated below $200 as well as nationalizes election rules.
 
Well at least the article provided the legislation's bill number, not much else there.

Measure passed 50-49, strictly along party line votes. I would have preferred that it hadn't.



1628682564710.png
 
So instead of politicians getting paid by lobbyists they get paid by taxpayers...

How fucking novel... So politicians work for the people that pay them

Don't worry Ted Cruz will have none of that...
I have voiced support for tax payer funded elections for years. This isnt how to do it.
They never do anything right. Its still a popular contest and the small DECENT minded people still dont have a chance.
They need a set budget, and the federal govt sponsor all the debates. With everyone included. And to go along with this, should be ranked choice voting.
But no, we get this bullshit.
Amazing how our morally and intellectual superiors are such corrupt, stupid jerkoffs.
 
Measure passed 50-49, strictly along party line votes.
That measure being "to Discharge" meaning no action taken or you know it's far too late in the evening to take this up, Chucky! But, contrary to the OP's horrendous source, this had nothing to do with any "Corrupt Politicians Act" which languishes in the House. The fight to pass the Senate version of the "For the People Act" has only just begun.. and appears off to a good start!

 
i need to examine the bill further, but i'm against it for now



Why would Ted "Cancun" Cruz vote against anything for corruption? He pretty much epitomizes corruption. He should be all for it.

What is the "corrupt politicians bill" anyway?
 
So instead of politicians getting paid by lobbyists they get paid by taxpayers...

How fucking novel... So politicians work for the people that pay them

Don't worry Ted Cruz will have none of that...
People would not leave areas from Prog laws passed if they were great. And they have. Many have done the same things to the new areas they came to. You have got to know that men will not die for Prog women after the initial deaths are registered in a war setting. You stupid ph uk!
 
So instead of politicians getting paid by lobbyists they get paid by taxpayers...

How fucking novel... So politicians work for the people that pay them

Don't worry Ted Cruz will have none of that...
And Obama's millions in small donations from foreign countries like China, don't think we forgot about that. Now every China dollar donated to a Dem gets another $6 from taxpayers, yeah we know what's going on.
 
That measure being "to Discharge" meaning no action taken or you know it's far too late in the evening to take this up, Chucky! But, contrary to the OP's horrendous source, this had nothing to do with any "Corrupt Politicians Act" which languishes in the House. The fight to pass the Senate version of the "For the People Act" has only just begun.. and appears off to a good start!


It is my understanding that a 'measure to discharge' enables a bill (or presidential nomination) that is stuck in a committee to be yanked (discharged) from that committee so that it can be taken up by the full Senate. This is especially useful to the majority party when there is a tie vote on an issue within the committee.
 
So instead of politicians getting paid by lobbyists they get paid by taxpayers...

How fucking novel... So politicians work for the people that pay them

Don't worry Ted Cruz will have none of that...

Regardless of all that, the SCOTUS will never go for it because the federal government has very little authority to regulate state election procedures. This bill would be a disaster if upheld as states legislature would exercise their exclusive constitutional authority as to their presidential electors to create all kinds of weird ways to escape the reach of the law.
 
It is my understanding that a 'measure to discharge' enables a bill (or presidential nomination) that is stuck in a committee to be yanked (discharged) from that committee so that it can be taken up by the full Senate. This is especially useful to the majority party when there is a tie vote on an issue within the committee.
Makes sense (and cents), unlike this thread's title. Especially considering "Senate - 08/11/2021 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 123."
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top