What does the “W” stand for?
What constitutes “Bi-Partisan”. How many? For this purpose - I will use the Republicans definition. Republican leaders have stated that Trumps impeachment is the 1st “Non bi-partisan impeachment in history” in 1999, only 5 dems voted for Impeachment, so i’ll use Republicans numbers and assume any bill with 5 or more Republicans is “Bi Partisan”
HR 1585 had 33 republicans vote for it in house - Still waiting for senate
HR 5 -8 republicans
HR 6 - 7 Republicans
HR 7 - 7 Republicans
HR 8 - 8 Republicans
There you go. 5 bi-partisan bills that passed the house that the GOP has blocked from coming to a vote in the senate.
2 Likes
■■■■ legislation.
That wasnt the question. The question that was asked was to name “5 bills that had bi-partisan support that the GOP refused to bring to a vote”. I did that. I could name 5 more if it helped.
I wasnt here to argue the legislation or not -i was pointing out that Mitch has made this congress do nothing, because he refuses to take up any of the bills, even those with bi-partisan support.
During the Obama years - GOP just kept saying they wanted up/ down votes on everything.
But now, once again, just like the deficit - GOP is proving that it was all talk and they have no actual core beliefs.
1 Like
■■■■ legislation. McConnell is right to kill it.
What you want more of do as I say not as I do?
What I say is what was good for the goose is good for the gander.
I don’t remember you taking the left to task and telling old Harry that he needed to bring all those house bills up for a vote.
No if I remember right you were cheering Harry on. We were told elections have consequences suck it up. That Harry changing the rules to get judges appointed was just fine. That Harry telling lies about a presidential candidate on the senate floor was just fine because you won didn’t you. That Harry tossing the GOP house bills in the trash was just fine because you all held the senate and white house and had more control than the GOP.
And now look at you here whining because the rules you all cheered on are being used against you. Remember we tried to tell you that you would reap what you sow and you all laughed because there was no way that the GOP was going to hold a majority again. The leftist media told you that and you bought their fake news hook line and sinker.
Usually it means putting up more points than your opponent…
Actually - i wasnt posting here during those years.
But i personally supported bills coming up to a up / down vote - with a filibuster (I supported all bills that passed the house to come up for a vote and pass if it had 60 votes).
But i agree with you that some liberals justified it then. (But i do not remember any liberal group calling the Republican congress a “do nothing” congress like the Republicans are saying about the Dem house.
From google -The only people i could see using the term “Do nothing congress” were Republicans then. Interesting.
So in the end -What is YOUR position? That bills passed by the house can be killed by the senate leader - Regardless of party???
Or that the senate leader should bring bills that passed the house to a vote - regardless of party?
Right now -You see to be saying its wrong when the dems did it but right now.
Cute. In the name of the bill.
The bill actually says CONVICTED of abuse, or are UNDER a restraining order.
What is the process for getting a restraining order lifted?
So…no bi partisan bills. Just amnesty bills, gun control bills etc. Thank goodness Republicans blocked those.
P.S. With only 5 Democrats voting for Bill’s impeachment, that was not bi partisan either.
Im just going by the current republican definition of Bi-Partisan.
What is the magic number that makes something bi-partisan?
I have no idea…
Oh please. Youre going with 5 out of 435 as bipartisan. You know better than that.
Only HR 1585 is arguable.
A rule of trial lawyers is that its ok to make any argument that isn’t so ridiculous that it makes people laugh.
And even if they were bi partisan, they would still suck.
Not me. Republicans.
They have said over and over again that this is the first non bipartisan impeachment ever
That would mean Republican leadership classifies the Clinton impeachment as bipartisan despite only 5 Dems voting for it
So by Republican definition, 5 is bipartisan.
If you don’t like that definition your issue is with Republican leadership. Not me
2 Likes
Sauce for the goose?
That’s not what Republicans were saying back in 2016 when the Dems were blocking everything.
They said stuff like this:
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, lashed out at the Senate this week, saying the upper chamber is holding up bills that could bolster national security.
“The House has passed bills to prevent Islamist extremists from exploiting security gaps overseas. It’s unconscionable that the Senate refuses to act on these bills to protect the homeland and improve security at foreign airports where planes fly directly into the United States,” he said in a statement.
Yep he’s right- I wonder if Rep McCaul is taking Moscow Mitch for doing the same thing like not bringing up election protection bills for discussion.
And remember…the Senate is supposed to be the more deliberative body.
Twenty years is long enough for examples
As I said in my final paragraph of the post:
Should stonewalling by McConnell - or anyone in his position as Senate Majority Leader, regardless of party affiliation - be allowed, or should there be a new law enacted - insisted on by we the people - that says bills go directly to the Senate and don’t get stopped on the Majority Leader’s desk.
The fact that this happened in the past does not excuse the fact that it’s happening now. It’s stupid regardless of which party is in power.
Sure so important liberals were quiet when dingy harry did it but now since liberals dont have control it’s a problem.
2 Likes
