The super congress. What do you all think.

It is a very interesting concept that borders on being unconstitutional. Tax bills have to be originated in the House, that cannot be delegated to the group. What I find likely is that nothing will get agreed on and automatic cuts to Social security, Medicare and entitlement programs take effect that have already been agreed to. The Repubs have the winning hand here and do not have to do anything. I wonder how many of the 6 seats the Repubs have will be T party. And why did they pick an even number?

Really? Defense spending will be hit the hardest if there is no action. Doesn't sound like the GOP won to me.

Why would the GOP have lost if defense spending is cut? The implication in your post is the GOP benefits from defense contractors earning billions and sharing the governments largess with the Republican Party.

We spend more on defense than any other country; we have two large oceans and a solid ally to our North, and enough nuclear weapons to annihilate any nation on earth. Yet 19 Saudis set in motion the economic destruction of our country.

Lets bring most of our troops home, let the world know we will no longer police the world.

Fair trade yes, free trade under unfair conditions, NO longer!

Pay down our debt, but first reduce deficit spending. Job one, cut the pay and benefits of each member of Congress, and impose merit pay. The way they are acting suggests merit pay for this Congress is ZERO.

Wow this is the first time in history I agree with a post you made.
 
The word "super" is often misused in a political sense. It would be more accurate to say that democrats had a majority in both houses f congress for four years and super majority for two years . What did they do with a majority in both houses of congress and radical leftie president? Jokes like "cash for clunkers" and 9.2% unemployment.
 
Bend over grab your socks and get ready for the super screw.:ssex:

Here this might help

anal%20lube_medium.jpeg
 
If the committee was just advisory and anything agreed to was put to the chambers then it would be constitutional. However the triggers and other powers they are delegating to the committee circumvent the essence of the Constitution and therefore makes those things unconstitutional. I suspect there will be legal action taken challenging the constitutionality of those powers, derived or otherwise delegated.

The committee willwrite the proposed bill. It will then be introduced each chamber and referred to the appropriate committee(s). The only difference is that no amendments are allowed and no bickering on proceedures.
 
We have a dysfunctional government. A divided government that is driven by ideological concerns and not the best interests of the American people.

And now we're going to distill the partisanship and the bickering and the complete loss of logic down to six members? What could possibly go wrong?
 
This thing is set up to fail. They will not agree on any cuts and the triggers will kick in. When the cuts to defense and entitlements are made, all sides can walk away without culpability or accountability.

That's the way of the federal government today. Not enough balls to make the tough decisions.
 
Leave it to ignorant left wing editorialists to invent a political term and then promote hysteria about it. What is a "super congress"? Maybe a (bipartisan) committee appointed to attempt to iron out differences in the now accepted crisis in federal spending? Get a grip people.
 
The republicans proposed the Super Congress because they'll band together like they have been since 01/09. Republicans know they can get just one democrat for the simple majority and hence they'll get their way. What an ingenious move on the part of the Republicans to curtail the power of the Democrats holding the presidency and the senate and to break the political impasse. And when the Republicans get their way and people get angry at the loss of government aid the Republicans will exclaim "The Democrats had the presidency and the senate!!! Blame the Democrats!"

I am betting the corporate shill Max Baucus will vote with the Republicans.
 
The republicans proposed the Super Congress because they'll band together like they have been since 01/09. Republicans know they can get just one democrat for the simple majority and hence they'll get their way. What an ingenious move on the part of the Republicans to curtail the power of the Democrats holding the presidency and the senate and to break the political impasse. And when the Republicans get their way and people get angry at the loss of government aid the Republicans will exclaim "The Democrats had the presidency and the senate!!! Blame the Democrats!"

I am betting the corporate shill Max Baucus will vote with the Republicans.

Yeah....right, that's it. :cuckoo:
 
The republicans proposed the Super Congress because they'll band together like they have been since 01/09. Republicans know they can get just one democrat for the simple majority and hence they'll get their way. What an ingenious move on the part of the Republicans to curtail the power of the Democrats holding the presidency and the senate and to break the political impasse. And when the Republicans get their way and people get angry at the loss of government aid the Republicans will exclaim "The Democrats had the presidency and the senate!!! Blame the Democrats!"

I am betting the corporate shill Max Baucus will vote with the Republicans.

Yeah....right, that's it. :cuckoo:

Much to kind, sir.
 
The republicans proposed the Super Congress because they'll band together like they have been since 01/09. Republicans know they can get just one democrat for the simple majority and hence they'll get their way. What an ingenious move on the part of the Republicans to curtail the power of the Democrats holding the presidency and the senate and to break the political impasse. And when the Republicans get their way and people get angry at the loss of government aid the Republicans will exclaim "The Democrats had the presidency and the senate!!! Blame the Democrats!"

I am betting the corporate shill Max Baucus will vote with the Republicans.

Yeah....right, that's it. :cuckoo:

Derogatory statements directed at other members as well as direct or indirect personal attacks are permitted with the stipulation that you generally look like a fool when resorting to these tactics within a serious conversation on real issues. If you're comfortable playing the fool, feel free to do so.
 
Seig Heil !

Derogatory statements directed at other members as well as direct or indirect personal attacks are permitted with the stipulation that you generally look like a fool when resorting to these tactics within a serious conversation on real issues. If you're comfortable playing the fool, feel free to do so.
 
Seig Heil !

Derogatory statements directed at other members as well as direct or indirect personal attacks are permitted with the stipulation that you generally look like a fool when resorting to these tactics within a serious conversation on real issues. If you're comfortable playing the fool, feel free to do so.
Asshat. This wasn't directed at anyone.
You're no hippie. Do your homework. This " super congress' is a Nazi tactic. Enjoy your demise.
 
If the committee was just advisory and anything agreed to was put to the chambers then it would be constitutional. However the triggers and other powers they are delegating to the committee circumvent the essence of the Constitution and therefore makes those things unconstitutional. I suspect there will be legal action taken challenging the constitutionality of those powers, derived or otherwise delegated.

The whole Congress still has to vote, however. Since the triggers would be in the legislation, I see no unconstitutionality. I doubt this the first time legislation would contain wording that indicated something would happen, if something else happened.
 
If the committee was just advisory and anything agreed to was put to the chambers then it would be constitutional. However the triggers and other powers they are delegating to the committee circumvent the essence of the Constitution and therefore makes those things unconstitutional. I suspect there will be legal action taken challenging the constitutionality of those powers, derived or otherwise delegated.

The whole Congress still has to vote, however. Since the triggers would be in the legislation, I see no unconstitutionality. I doubt this the first time legislation would contain wording that indicated something would happen, if something else happened.

This congress can set the rules for this congress, not beyond that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top