Democrats haven't done ANYTHING and aren't DOING anything

[bigtree]

. . . except working to advance these bills they've already passed in the House:


Implementing 9/11 Commission's Recommendations - H.R. 1
This legislation provides for the implementation of the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations. The bill’s provisions include major improvements in aviation security, border security, and infrastructure security; providing first responders the equipment and training they need; beefing up efforts to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction; and significantly expanding diplomatic, economic, educational, and other strategies designed to counter Islamic terrorism.
Status: Passed January 9, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Concurrent Resolution on the President's Escalation Plan - H.RES.63
This resolution disapproves of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq. It further resolves that Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq.
Status: Passed February 16, 2007

National Security FIRST Act - H.R. 556
This bill strengthens national security by reforming the interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) process by which the Federal Government reviews foreign investments in the United States for their national security implications.
Status: Passed February 28, 2007

U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health and Iraq Accountability Act
Had it not been vetoed by the President, this bill would have supported our troops and veterans, held the Bush Administration and Iraqi government accountable, and brought our soldiers home by August 2008 or sooner. It would have expanded funding for veterans’ health care and hospitals and refocused military efforts on Afghanistan and fighting terrorism.
Status: Passed March 23, 2007
Vetoed by the President May 1, 2007

Rail and Mass Transit Security Act - H.R. 1401
This legislation is designed to close the security gaps facing rail and mass transit and includes provisions on issues such as training, grants, security planning, research and development, and shipments of sensitive materials.
Status: Passed March 26, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Wounded Warrior Assistance Act - H.R. 1538
This bill responds to the problems brought to light at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center and other military health care facilities. It includes provisions to improve the access to quality medical care for wounded service members who are outpatients at military health care facilities, begin the process of restoring the integrity and efficiency of the disability evaluation system, and improve the transition of wounded service members from the Armed Forces to the VA system.
Status: Passed March 28, 2007

FY 2008 Homeland Security Authorization - H.R. 1684
This legislation authorizes $39.8 billion in funding for the Department of Homeland Security in fiscal year 2008. Because the President has been submitting budgets that underfunded key homeland security priorities over the last few years, this bill is authorizing $2.1 billion more than the President requested.
Status: Passed May 9, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Revised Version of the FY 2007 Supplemental Funding Bill - H.R. 2206
This bill is a revised version of the FY 2007 Supplemental, which fails to include the tough provisions holding the Iraqi government accountable and providing a responsible timetable for the redeployment of U.S. troops contained in the earlier version. However, in this bill, the President was forced to abandon his threat to veto any bill containing accountability – agreeing to 18 benchmarks and a potential cut-off of reconstruction aid if progress is not made toward meeting them. The measure also includes a minimum wage increase, children’s health care, and other important domestic priorities.
Status: Passed May 10, 2007
Signed into the law by the President on May 25, 2007

FY 2008 Intelligence Authorization Bill - H.R. 2082
This legislation will make new investments in intelligence personnel and enhance oversight of how intelligence is carried out. It authorizes intelligence funding for all U.S. intelligence agencies, including our military intelligence organizations.
Status: Passed May 11, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

FY 2008 Defense Authorization Bill - H.R. 1585
This legislation will provide the necessary resources and authorities to quickly and efficiently reverse declining trends in training and equipment readiness, and will also provide our service members doing their duty overseas in multiple wars with the best gear and force protection possible. Under the bill, our troops will get better health care, better pay, and the benefits they have earned.
Status: Passed May 17, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Veterans Bills
These 6 bills support our veterans and honor their sacrifices, providing them with expanded health care and the benefits they deserve.

* The Veterans Outreach and Improvement Act of 2007, H.R. 67, would improve outreach activities of the Department of Veterans Affairs. It allows the VA to partner with state and local governments to reach out to veterans and their families in ensuring they receive the benefits for which they are eligible and assist them in completing their benefits claims.

* The Returning Servicemember VA Healthcare Insurance Act of 2007, H.R. 612, extends the period of eligibility for health care for combat service in the Persian Gulf or future hostilities from two years to five years after discharge or release.

* The Traumatic Brain Injury Health Enhancement and Long-Term Support Act of 2007, H.R. 2199, ensures that our veterans are properly screened for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI, the signature injury of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) and, if diagnosed, receive the appropriate treatment.

* The Early Access to Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Benefits Act, H.R. 2239, expands eligibility for vocational rehabilitation benefits for severely injured service members undergoing long-term care and recovery. It makes it easier for injured veterans with service-connected disabilities by allowing the Veterans’ Administration’s vocational rehabilitation and employment (VR&E) benefits to be received before discharge.

* The Chiropractic Care Available to All Veterans Act, H.R. 1470, requires the provision of chiropractic care and services to veterans at all Department of Veterans Affairs medical center.

* H.R. 1660 would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a national cemetery for veterans in the Southern Colorado region.

Status: Passed May 23, 2007

The Afghanistan Freedom and Security Support Act - H.R. 2446
This legislation will fund development, economic and security assistance programs, and establishment of a coordinator to tackle the growing threat of narcotics in Afghanistan. The bill renews a 2002 Afghanistan authorization and provides additional support for programs as diverse as assistance to women and girls, energy development and counter-narcotics. This bill represents the United States’ commitment to achieving long-term stability and security in Afghanistan.
Status: Passed June 6, 2007

Growing our Economy

Raising the Minimum Wage - H.R. 2
This bill increases the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour over two years. Increasing the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour brings a pay raise for up to 13 million Americans.
Status: Passed January 10, 2007
The President signed into law on May 25 as part of the revised 2007 supplemental funding bill, H.R. 2206

Employee Free Choice Act - H.R. 800
The Employee Free Choice Act will restore workers’ rights by removing obstacles that prevent workers from choosing whether or not they want to form or join a union.
Status: Passed March 1, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship Act – H.R. 362
This legislation ensures that our teachers are equipped to adequately prepare the workforce of tomorrow in science, math, and technology. It invests in new teachers through professional development, summer training institutes, graduate education assistance, and scholarships.
Status: Passed April 24, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act – H.R. 363
This act encourages scientists by providing grants in the early stages of their careers, supporting recruiting and training young scientists and engineers.
Status: Passed April 24, 2007

Small Business Lending Improvement Act – H.R. 1332
This legislation provides small businesses with the access to capital they need to start and expand their businesses.
Status: Passed April 25, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

National Science Foundation Authorization Act – H.R. 1867
This legislation puts us on a path to doubling funding for the National Science Foundation’s research over the next 10 years, and encourages young scientists and researchers.
Status: Passed May 2, 2007

Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act – H.R. 1868
This legislation is the first full reauthorization of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology since 1991, authorizing $2.5 billion for fiscal year 2008-2010.
Status: Passed May 3, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act - H.R. 1873
This legislation will put small businesses on a level playing field with big corporations by increasing their access to federal contracts. It will require the Small Business Administration to reach out to small businesses regarding opportunities for earning government contracts, and mandate stricter oversight of government agencies to ensure they are making progress in awarding contracts to small businesses.
Status: Passed May 10, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Ominbus Innovation & Competitiveness bill – H.R. 2272
This bill is made up of five Innovation Agenda bills that have been passed by the House over the last several weeks. They were combined into one bill to prepare to go to conference with the Senate, which passed an omnibus innovation and competitiveness bill (S. 761) on April 25.

H.R. 2272 combined the following five bills:

The 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship Act, H.R. 362

The Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act, H.R. 363

The National Science Foundation Authorization Act, H.R. 1867

The Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act, H.R. 1868

The Amending High-Performance Computing Act, H.R. 1068

Status: Passed May 21, 2007

The No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels (NOPEC) Act - H.R. 2264
This legislation enables the Department of Justice to take legal action against foreign nations for participating in oil cartels that drive up oil prices globally and in the United States. It does so by exempting OPEC and other nations from the provisions of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act when acting in a commercial capacity; by making clear that the so-called “Act of State” doctrine does not prevent courts from ruling on antitrust charges brought against foreign governments; and by authorizing the Department of Justice to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts against cartel members.
Status: Passed May 23, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

The Energy Price Gouging Act – H.R. 1252
This legislation will reduce the burden of rising gas prices on American families, providing immediate relief to consumers by giving the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the authority to investigate and punish those who artificially inflate the price of energy. It ensures the federal government has the tools it needs to adequately respond to energy emergencies and prohibit price gouging – with a priority on refineries and big oil companies.
Status: Passed May 24, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Caring for our Children and Families

Promoting Life-Saving Stem Cell Research - H.R. 3/S.5
This research bill increases the number of lines of stem cells that are eligible to be used in federally-funded research. The bill authorizes Health and Human Services (HHS) to support research involving embryonic stem cells meeting certain criteria, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from an embryo. The bill only authorizes the use of stem cell lines generated from embryos that would otherwise be discarded by fertility clinics.
Status: Passed January 11, 2007
Final version passed by the House on June 7, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Requiring Medicare to Negotiate Lower Prescription Drug Prices - H.R. 4
This bill repeals the current provision that prohibits the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) from negotiating with drug companies for lower prices for those enrolled in Medicare prescription drug plans and instead requires the Secretary to conduct such negotiations.
Status: Passed January 12, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Cutting Interest Rates on Student Loans - H.R. 5
This bill makes college more accessible and affordable by cutting the interest rates on subsidized student loans in half – from the current 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent. This significantly cuts the student debt burden of about 5 million students.
Status: Passed January 17, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act, H.R. 365
This legislation will protect innocent families against the after-effects of methamphetamine production in their neighborhoods by funding meth lab recovery and remediation.
Status: Passed February 7, 2007

Gulf Coast Housing Recovery Act - H.R. 1227
This legislation addresses the housing needs of the survivors of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and is the first of several bills that the House will consider to deal with the unmet needs of the people of the Gulf Coast.
Status: Passed March 21, 2007

Genetic Nondiscrimination Act – H.R. 493
This legislation will protect personal genetic information from discriminatory use by health insurers and employers.
Status: Passed April 25, 2007

Improving Head Start Act – H.R. 1429
This legislation will help more children arrive at kindergarten ready to succeed by improving program quality and expanding access to more children.
Status: Passed May 2, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Hate Crimes Prevention Act – H.R. 1592
This legislation will provide new resources to help state and local law enforcement agencies prevent and prosecute hate crimes, and closes gaps in current federal hate crimes law.
Status: Passed May 3, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

COPS Improvement Act of 2007 - H.R. 1700
This legislation will provide much needed support to local law enforcement agencies for their community oriented policing (COPS) efforts. This legislation is especially important as local law enforcement agencies struggle with funding gaps to keep officers on the streets.
Status: Passed May 15, 2007

Protecting our Planet

Repealing Big Oil Subsidies/Investing in Renewable Fuels - H.R. 6
This bill invests in clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency by repealing billions in subsidies given to big oil companies that are raking in record profits.
Status: Passed January 18, 2007

Reauthorizing Sewer Overflow Control Grants - H.R. 569
This bill authorizes $1.5 billion in grants to local communities over the next five years to construct treatment works to deal with sewer overflows that often occur after heavy rainfalls. This bill is crucial because sewer overflows represent a major public health hazard.
Status: Passed March 7, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Reauthorizing Pilot Program for Increasing Useable Water Supply - H.R. 700
This bill authorizes $125 million to fund projects that increase usable water supply by encouraging innovation in water reclamation, reuse and conservation.
Status: Passed March 8, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Reauthorizing Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund - H.R. 720
The Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund is a vital program for state and local governments that addresses critical water infrastructure needs. This bill authorizes a total of $14 billion for the fund over the next four years, ensures clean water and fosters economic development in local communities by helping pay for building and improving wastewater treatment facilities.
Status: Passed March 9, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Advanced Fuels Infrastructure R&D Act - H.R. 547
This legislation will help make alternative biofuels more quickly and affordably, and assists retailers in the transition to clean diesel fuels.
Status: Passed February 17, 2007

Water Resources Development Act of 2007 - H.R. 1495
This legislation authorizes several projects and studies for the United States Army Corps of Engineers to carry out its major missions of flood control to protect our lives and livelihoods, viable navigation corridors for the movement of goods and services, and ecosystem restoration projects to improve the health of our nation’s environment.
Status: Passed April 19, 2007

Restoring Accountability

Honest Leadership - H.Res. 6
To clean up Washington and sever unethical ties between lawmakers and lobbyists, House Democrats started by banning travel and gifts from lobbyists, requiring full transparency to end the abuse of special interest earmarks, banning travel on corporate jets, shutting down the K Street project, reinstating the strict rules of pay-as-you-go budgeting, and ending the abusive processes that have destroyed democracy in the House of Representatives. These measures are the first steps to ensure that this Congress upholds the highest ethical standards.
Status: Passed January 5, 2007

Pension Forfeiture Act - H.R. 476
This legislation requires that Members convicted of certain federal offenses forfeit their congressional pension rights.
Status: Passed January 23, 2007

The Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 2007 - H.R. 1309
This bill amends the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in a dozen substantive provisions to provide for more timely disclosure of government documents, including restoring the presumption of disclosure to FOIA, helping FOIA requesters obtain timely responses, improving transparency in agency compliance with FOIA, providing an alternative to litigation, and providing accountability for FOIA decisions.
Status: Passed March 14, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2007 - H.R. 1255
Under the Presidential Records Act, presidential records are supposed to be released to historians and the public 12 years after the end of a presidential administration. In 2001, President George W. Bush issued an executive order which gave current and former presidents and vice presidents broad authority to withhold presidential records or delay their release indefinitely. The Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2007 nullifies the Bush executive order and establishes procedures to ensure the timely release of presidential records.
Status: Passed March 14, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Presidential Library Donation Reform Act of 2007 - H.R. 1254
This bill requires the disclosure of donors to Presidential libraries. Presidential libraries are built using private funds raised by an organization or foundation working on behalf of the president. Under current law, donations for the presidential library can be unlimited in size and are not required to be disclosed. The bill would require that all organizations established for the purpose of raising funds for presidential libraries or their related facilities report on a quarterly basis all contributions of $200 or more.
Status: Passed March 14, 2007

Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2007 - H.R. 985
This bill strengthens protections for federal whistleblowers to prevent retaliation against those who report wrongdoing, waste, fraud, or abuse to authorities.
Status: Passed March 14, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Accountability in Contracting Act - H.R. 1362
This bill changes federal acquisition law to require agencies to limit the use of abuse-prone contracts, to increase transparency and accountability in federal contracting, and to protect the integrity of the acquisition workforce.
Status: Passed March 15, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

Interim Appointment of U.S. Attorneys – H.R. 580
This legislation will help better ensure the independence of U.S. Attorneys – by repealing a provision in a 2006 statute that grants the Attorney General the authority to make indefinite interim appointments of U.S. Attorneys, who can then serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation.
Status: Passed March 26, 2007

Taxpayer Protection Act - H.R. 1677
This legislation increases IRS outreach to provide taxpayers with stronger protections from identity theft and tax fraud. The bill simplifies tax filing requirements, strengthens outreach so people know they are entitled to tax refunds or payments under the Earned Income Tax Credit, and it increases taxpayer protections from “predatory” providers.
Status: Passed April 17, 2007

RECOVER Act – H.R. 1361
This legislation overhauls the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Disaster Assistance Program. In response to SBA’s disastrous performance after the 2005 Gulf State hurricanes, this bill provides numerous provisions to improve and strengthen the SBA disaster assistance program.
Status: Passed April 18, 2007
The President opposes in its current form

Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act – H.R. 1257
This bill requires that public companies ensure that shareholders have an annual nonbinding vote on their company’s executive compensation plans. It also requires a nonbinding advisory vote if the company awards a new golden parachute package while simultaneously negotiating the purchase or sale of the company.
Status: Passed April 20, 2007
The Administration opposes in its current form

D.C. Voting Rights Act – H.R. 1905
This legislation will secure voting rights in the House for the District of Columbia, permanently expanding the U.S. House of Representatives from 435 to 437 seats. This provides a vote to the District of Columbia and a new, at-large seat through the 112th Congress to the state next entitled to increase its congressional representation (which, according to the Census, is Utah).
Status: Passed April 19, 2007
The President has threatened to veto

Student Loan Sunshine Act - H.R. 890
In light of mounting evidence of unethical practices in the student loan industry, this legislation cleans up the relationships between student lenders and colleges.
Status: Passed May 9, 2007

Honest Leadership and Open Government Act – H.R. 2316
This legislation ends the tight-knit relationship between lobbyists and lawmakers. This is a tough bill that ends the culture of corruption, and restores accountability in Washington, ending the tight-knit relationship between lobbyists and lawmakers and taking another major step toward making the 110th Congress the most open, honest Congress in history.
Status: Passed May 24, 2007

The Lobbying Transparency Act – H.R. 2317
This bill requiring lobbyists who “bundle,” or collect campaign checks for Members of Congress, to meet strict reporting and disclosure guidelines.
Status: Passed May 24, 2007

The Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act – S. 214
This bill reinstates the Senate’s role in the U.S. Attorney confirmation process. It is designed to help better ensure the independence of U.S. Attorneys – by repealing a provision in a 2006 statute that grants the Attorney General the authority to make indefinite interim appointments of U.S. Attorneys, who can then serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation.
Status: Passed May 22, 2007

The Federal Housing Finance Reform Act – H.R. 1427
This legislation will overhaul the regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks, and create a new, independent regulator with broad powers analogous to current banking regulators. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are government-sponsored enterprises, meaning they are both created and chartered by Congress in addition to being private, profit-seeking businesses. It also creates a non-taxpayer financed affordable housing fund, which will dedicate hundreds of millions of dollars for the construction, maintenance and preservation of affordable housing, with the first year of the fund to be dedicated to the hurricane stricken areas of the Gulf Coast, and billions of dollars over the next five years for affordable housing nationwide.
Status: Passed May 22, 2007

[unpossibles]

1. K&R!!

[tjwash]

2. Right on tree...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. Thank You. K&R For Some Common Sense And Rationality For A Change.

Great thread.

[mmonk]

4. Without holding the administration and all agencies of the executive branch

to the constitution or this nation's laws, how much progress can trump it? Where will it end up? What is permanently gone?

[liberal N proud]

5. Sure would be nice if they would do something

Wouldn't it?


K&R

:applause:

[pocoloco]

9. Well, they are still asking for money,

although a better investment might be in Anal-Lube!

[ThomWV]

6. Well, it appears everything is fine now ... we can all go back to sleep.

Give Congress a big thank you, let Bush stay in office, and everyone go back to sleep.

[Moochy]

12. Silly you are supposed to bust out the pom poms

and join in the cheerleading. No sleep! we need you on the front line of the blog wars! posting upbeat litanies of the achievements of our fearless leaders! CHEER DAMN YOU CHEER! :D

[bigtree]

16. How about getting to work supporting these efforts

and helping them advance into action and law?

Why is that too much to ask from folks supposedly 'concerned' about the efforts of our party and leadership?

[Moochy]

21. No and I applaud your efforts.. thats some mighty fine cheering

I'm sure that whatever motivates you to start these endless
halftime pep rally threads is a powerful benevolent force in your life.

[bigtree]

23. isn't there enough Democrat bashing bullshit around here for you to feed off of?

Do you really expect EVERYONE to sit still for all of that?

[Moochy]

26. I'm for many of these bills for what its worth

No I expect many who want to "influence the debate" to continue to ignore the outrage of the base. carry on.

[ThomWV]

17. My Bad - Rah Rah Rah - My ass is on fire with adoration now

Thank you for the mindset correction. I do not know how I could have been so unappreciative of the good works being done in my name.

[Moochy]

27. Now that you know

you can join the struggle in bashing the bashers! its a perception war, and its critical to line up! yessirree! :patriot:

[BuyingThyme]

7. They're working to "advance" those bills, are they?

How so? Where are you getting your information?

[leftchick]

136. psssst

I suspect here and here.....

http://www.dlc.org/



http://www.dccc.org/

[BuyingThyme]

140. Well, I finally got a response.

Now I can rest assured.

Not.

:hi:

[leftchick]

147. it actually would be funny

if it wasn't all so sad.

peace BT!

[ramapo]

8. Quite the list

I wouldn't expect much from these guys. We didn't get much out of the Clinton years either.

Basically, the entire system is dysfunctional. Some say that it is meant to be a difficult and slow process to get anything accomplished in Congress. I wouldn't even be all that optimistic about a Democratic president and veto-proof congress.

Basic common sense doesn't exist. There is little common ground. The only parts of the equation that matter are money and power. That pretty much ensures that few of these measures you cited have a chance of being enacted.

[ananda]

10. Agreed.

When supposedly elected officials show more allegiance
to corporofascists than to real people, we can't expect
much of anything good from them.

They dance with those that own them.

[aquart]

11. Yeah, democracy doesn't work. Let's go with dictatorship.

This government was DESIGNED to move at a snail's pace and ONLY with compromise. You are way too used to winner take all Republican tyranny to be comfortable with democracy anymore. That's extremely sad.

[LittleClarkie]

157. Sometimes I wonder if some around here wouldn't mind a dictatorship

if it were a leftist one.

I reckon that's why some cheer on Chavez.

[unkachuck]

164. democracy?....

....how long did it take the corporatists and bushco to line their pockets and squander the Clinton years surplus?....

....governmental "snail's pace" is only meant for left-of-center interests....

[bigtree]

14. yet, that is, and always has been, our challenge

to advance our concerns through the political process into action.

We have to stay engaged, and not be dissuaded from the fight just because there's opposition. There will always be negative influences working to derail progress, but we are challenged to stay in the fight until we succeed.

I agree that finding and establishing 'common ground' is essential to getting these accomplished.

[BuyingThyme]

18. I again ask you to read the stuff you're posting

before you post it.

If you don't read it, you will never understand it, and by misrepresenting what you post, you will continue to cause harm to the Democrats.

[bigtree]

22. that's right, BuyingThyme. If I don't agree with you, I MUST be wrong

These are bills passed by the House. They do need to be mirrored in the Senate and reconciled if the Senate manages to take them up, but it's much harder, as you well know, to advance legislation in the Senate, especially given the balance of power. But to claim, as some do, that Democrats aren't doing anything, is a lie. They are very active, and are working to reconcile their differences into action. You may not like the pace or direction, but you can't get away with claiming that they're. somehow, standing still.

You desperately want to paint them as failures. I believe, from your efforts here, that if you had your way, your every action would help ensure that failure.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

28. blah blah blah

go find another tree to bark up. You make absolutely no sense at all.

[Moochy]

29. Brilliantly argued

not. Your boosterism is a liability.

[bigtree]

31. I made my argument. I made it well.

What I don't have time or patience for is the baiting by this poster who wants to tell me how ignorant he thinks I am in presenting these bills passed out of the House. Our party still has work to do, but I never expected their efforts to sail all the way through, given the balance of power. Some of these bills are DOA, some of them will be reworked and presented again for consideration. That's the legislative process. But to look upon the rejections of the legislation passed as the beat-all/end-all assumes that our legislators have just given up. That's what BT wants to claim. I don't see it, and BT can't prove they've abandoned these issues they worked so hard to advance this far. But, I CAN prove that there are legislators, both in the leadership and without, who are working to make their proposals and initiatives stick. What sense does it make to continually portray our party members as unconcerned and ineffective just because republicans are standing in the way? Republicans are the problem, not these Democrats who are working to advance our concerns into action or law.

[BuyingThyme]

34. Again, why do you refuse to read what you've posted?

If you actually/finally take a moment to read it, you'll find that the list includes items which are now law and which have already been vetoed.

Do you really believe that people will believe you can prove what you've posted if you haven't even read what you posted?

By the way, why haven't you bothered to prove anything?

[bigtree]

36. what an idiotic argument. What do I have to prove?

Democrats worked, and are working, to advance these initiatives. The proof is in their passing. Why aren't you bothering to prove your assertion that they're not working to advance these initiatives they passed?

[BuyingThyme]

37. You're the one who made up the premise.

Then you said you can prove it.

Why should I be compelled to disprove the nonsense which you clearly made up and have refused to prove?

Have you read your post yet?

[bigtree]

40. I proved it.

BuyingThyme disagrees with that proof. So what? Why don't you move on if you have nothing more to offer?

[BuyingThyme]

46. Please provide the post number(s) so I can examine the proof.

No nonsense. Just provide the numbers(s).

[Moochy]

44. Thank you for the response

A dose of realism is a good thing to mix in with the message. It makes your message seem more reality based to bring up the senate's role in the passage of those bills.

[BuyingThyme]

30. Well, if you take the time to read the spam you post,

you may be able to understand. But since you are dead set on misrepresenting what the Dems are doing, you don't want to understand, do you?

[bigtree]

33. If my posts are spam, then what the hell are yours?

[BuyingThyme]

35. Truth.

That's why you're so upset.

[bigtree]

38. you really are enamored of yourself, arent you?

I respond this way all of the time to bullshit. Your post are not the least enlightening. There's really nothing 'truthful' about them. You're just bullying here, and you think I should cringe in the face of your irrefutable criticism.

Your point is absurd. Democrats are working hard to advance the concerns they were elected to address. These bill represent some of that work. They are the most visible manifestation of that work given the republican obstruction which has, so far, prevented them from advancing. That's why I listed them. The fact that they have not been advanced to the point of becoming law, doesn't detract at all from their efforts, except to underscore the republican obstruction.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

45. and, you accuse ME of SPAMMING???

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

51. you BT will be the first, and only person on my ignore list

feel free to 'prove your point' without the interference of my response.

[BuyingThyme]

54. Wrong again. You ignored your own posts before you ignored mine.

Had you not blocked your own OP, you may have understood what you copied and pasted. And you may have been able to understand the responses within your own thread.

[TheWatcher]

152. Denial is Truth.

How Orwellian Apologist Of You.

:eyes:

[Morgana LaFey]

70. The problem is, bigtree, they may be VERY busy , but are they

busy about the right things? I think it was Al Gore who put it this way (someone correct me if it wasn't him): You don't go redecorating when the damn house is burning down.

Our HOUSE is burning down. The nation is crumbling; I fear we are seeing the beginnings of the END of this nation, literally. Bush is nothing if not a destroyer.

So go ahead and beat those drums and shake those pom poms -- and when things fall completely apart, remember how thrilled you were with the people who not only LET it happen but in large part contributed, aided and abetted (driven mostly by self-interest and greed and secondly by unbelievable naievete plus a blind eye and deaf ear -- including blind and deaf to their base AND the majority of the whole electorate).

In the meantime, I'm with those who are critical and disatisfied with the current performance of our elected Dems.

[bigtree]

77. well, just because 'things fall apart' shouldn't make any and all responses prudent

I would measure whatever you propose they do against the likelihood of its success.

I don't think an impeachment can possibly address all of the malfeasance from this administration, and I can't help but acknowledge that many other levers of accountability and oversight which our legislators have at their disposal and are charged with exercising are also mandated by their oath. I would measure any impeachment against the effect it would have on those congressional responsibilities which also intend to uphold the law.

Also, I would measure an impeachment against the effect I think it may have on efforts to forge a compromise on legislation which directs Bush to begin to bring troops home and end his occupation by a date certain.

And, I would want to have some reasonable certainty that at the end of the process the target wasn't just going to walk away, absolved of their crime by the inability of the politicians to gather enough support to convict. I would prefer that the charges originate outside of Congress, from an outside prosecutor, to remove any taint of partisanship which would have the potential to doom the process to failure from the start.

Moreover, I don't believe that the blunt, political instrument of impeachment should be relied on just because our numbers in Congress won't allow us to have our way against the opposition of the minority. As much as I'd enjoy rolling over the republican minority, I believe and respect the basic structure of our democratic institutions where the minority is free (although accountable to the voters) to exercise those levers of resistance which further their own aims. I believe we have to either overcome that opposition by electing more Democratic legislators. The alternative is to continue to debate, build coalitions, and work toward a compromise.

All of that my own view, I really don't see our party standing still. If you look at the docket of Conyers and Leahy alone, many of their investigations could very well lead to an outside investigation and indictment. I don't think these things happen overnight, though. So I don't think we have to abandon our regular legislative functions just to get accountability from this administration. But. I don't think that accounting is an automatic process. Investigations can take years before an indictment, but that's what's necessary for the effort to stick. The sticking is the whole point. And no matter how much of a slam dunk charges may look from the outside, we can't underestimate the potential defense. These things take time, and I believe, nonetheless, that our legislators are busy working to close those gaps.

[Vilis Veritas]

95. So just because an impeachment might not take..

it should not be tried?

AG could be removed by force. Congress has the power, at least, I seem to remember that they did have the power to arrest and detain the AG...link: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070518.html

The fact that they have not started any of this, given the grave and dire realities of the war in Iraq (the list is long and I think you know it...) has me seriously considering that both parties are complicit in the crimes against humanity.

By not DOING the IMPOSSIBLE and STARTING the process, they appear COMPLICIT. So what if it fails? TRY AGAIN.

I never told my son that if he fears failure, don't do it. I teach my son that REGARDLESS of the POSSIBILITY of FAILURE, you must DO WHAT IS RIGHT and TRY and if you FAIL, TRY AGAIN. Why? Because it is RIGHT and you must always DO YOUR BEST. There is no such thing as failure, there is ONLY the possibility of not achieving your goal.

They tried to impeach Clinton for lying about a BJ...the BFEE, gets away with...well, the list is long and posted in many other places here at DU...but lets just state a few for the record...murdering, raping and torturing non-combatants and our elected leaders sit idly by and pass a few bills and laws that MEAN aboslutely nothing and go nowhere?

I appreciate your attempt, but it was lost on me...I can not stand up and applaud their efforts. As long as children scream out in terror while their assholes are being ripped apart on orders from our commander in chief, I beg to defer my applause.

Peace.

[bigtree]

116. as I said, I think ANY remedy that our politicians undertake must be weighed

against other priorities and concerns, as well as evaluated for its chance of success. The process should have SOME goal other than PR.

And, there are other ways to challenge the abuses and the crimes which don't rise to the congress-numbing level of an impeachment. Those other remedies are also mandated by their oath to uphold the law. Just because Congress doesn't set itself on a course to remove someone directly from office in an impeachment proceeding doesn't mean they are just ignoring those abuses and crimes.

I see several processes in motion which could lead to an outside prosecutor who is able to indict, and possibly some efforts which could lead to an impeachment. But, I don't believe that just ANY old impeachment, especially one which is determined to have no reasonable chance of success, would necessarily the best course for this Congress to follow over all other levers of accountability Congress has at its disposal. That should be measured against the other factors I mentioned, once the charges and target(s) are revealed.

[Vilis Veritas]

130. You sound like a professional.

I can not challenge you with words.

I see sloth and denial in congress. I see some sparks that almost make me think a fire is started, and then I see the BFEE pissing on the flames.

I pray we all survive.

Peace.

[Name removed]

165. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

175. Impeachment will likely NOT address all the ills in our government

and it's sophistry to represent impeachment as the ultimate solution to EVERY problem we face with this administration and its lackeys in government.

Now you want to represent that Congress has no other option except to bring an impeachment. But, there are countless ways for our legislators to adequately address the abuses and crimes of this administration which don't necessarily rise to the level of impeachment. Those other remedies are ALSO integral functions of their constitutional duties. Those levers of accountability are already being exercised. Just because they haven't produced indictments or firings doesn't mean that they won't be ultimately effective in the same time frame that an impeachment would cover. I really don't know why you get to present impeachment as some slam-dunk panacea when we don't even have any notion what the charges would actually entail. We can all make a wish list, but any impeachment will NOT encompass ALL of the malfeasance of this administration. It will likely address a specific issue with a specific set of charges; not some omnibus Article of charges which would stifle the republican party and whatever the impeachment didn't address.

Also, the balance of power that exists in this Congress suggests that there will be a very real possibility that the end of the process could result in the target walking away unscathed, acquitted by the politicians in the inherently political procedure.

I've said repeatedly that I believe any impeachment should be initiated on charges brought OUTSIDE of Congress so that the process isn't tainted by partisanship and doomed from the start to a circling of the wagons from the opposition party. And, I really don't see the value in beginning an impeachment process which is determined to have little reasonable chance to succeed.

So, with those caveats, I DO believe that impeachment CAN be an appropriate response to the abuses and crimes of the administration. However, the way it has been presented by those with endless animosity to our party and our members as the end-all-beat-all is just false and misleading. There is no way that an impeachment can address all of the malfeasance, and it's really undeniable that an impeachment process will obscure and stifle MANY other functions of oversight and accountability which serve to keep many OTHER laws and offenders in check. I believe an impeachment should be weighed - and its potential for success in the things we say we want - measured against these factors I've outlined here, and other factors as well.

My position on this is much more sound and reasonable than the hyperventilated ridicule you're dishing out here would suggest.

[pokercat999]

181. Now, Now, we got a lot from the Clinton years. We got, ah

we got, ah well, we got ah............ welfare reform,

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

13. WOW!!!

:wow: That is an incredible list!!! THANK YOU!!! I'm printing for reference.

[BuyingThyme]

72. Thank Nancy Pelosi. The list is from her website.

For some, plagiarism is the only way.

[Phredicles]

74. A link would be helpful here.

[BuyingThyme]

75. This stuff appears on many Pelosi pages, but here's a good one:

http://www.speaker.gov/legislation/

[Phredicles]

78. Yes, this is indeed helpful. Thanks!

[Tekla West]

143. For the record

Miss Nancy has had protesters outside her home since the election and is not getting any more popular in her home district at all. She would not be the first Speaker of the House to forget that while they serve the greater masters, they lose the local election.

[cascadiance]

15. Another reason to threaten to bring impeachment back ON THE TABLE!

With all of this demonstrable behavior of not working with the congress at all to pass any legislation, it seems high time that Nancy Pelosi delivers the message, "Either you play ball, Mr. President, or impeachment will be brought back ON the table!" As that goal gets closer the more you corner all of the remaining senators needed to impeach him in the senate with some of these bills being threatened to get retaliation from voters in 2008, perhaps Bushco will be a bit more "flexible" later if they want to stay out of prison for the remaining years of their lives!

[DeeDeeNY]

19. My local newspaper must have not gotten this information

I haven't seen any stories on the Democratic Congress accomplishments. But they do keep me up to date on Paris Hilton.

[endarkenment]

20. meanwhile over in the senate....

...nothing is happening. The fillibuster is firmly in place.


Oh yes and about the power of subpoena?

[bigtree]

24. so, you blame Democrats for the republican obstruction?

neat.

[endarkenment]

63. So do you always put words in other people's mouths?

Super.

You made a less than fully honest claim over progress by citing the legislation passed in the house. You failed to disclose that almost none of this legislation is going anywhere.

No I do not blame the Democratic leadership for Republican obstruction. I do note however that this same leadership generally refused to obstruct when they were the minority in the Senate. Why is that?

Our leaders are not particularly effective in exploiting Republican obstruction. In fact that is being generous. Our leadership is basically completely ineffective in exploiting the obstruction. It is almost as if they are relieved that they do not actually have to do anything.

Meanwhile, about those subpoenas.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

117. wow. hanging around to dish out personal insults

inspiring.

[Name removed]

118. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bigtree]

120. don't own a fax. just a computer and a keyboard.

Go Democrats!! :kick:

[Moochy]

145. Glad i inspired you

to hit alert that is. :eyes:

[onenote]

124. funny thing about facts

You seem to be of the opinion that the Democrats refused to use the power to block cloture while the repubs are not shy about it.

Well, if you check, you'll find that while cloture votes were taken more often during the six months of 2007 (29 times) than the first six months of this year (20 times), cloture was rejected more than half the time when the Democrats were in the minority while it has been successfully invoked more than half the time this year.

Funny facts.

[TreasonousBastard]

32. Right on! They ARE working, but...

the chorus of sniveling whiners in the peanut gallery won't admit it if we're still in Iraq, Gonzo is still AG, Shrub isn't impeached, Rove and Cheney aren't hung from the highest tree...

[mmonk]

39. Here's the bottom line.

Whenever a party comes into power, they get some legislation passed. This does not absolve them from doing nothing about the greatest assault on the constitution probably since the Civil War.

[bigtree]

41. How can you honestly say they've done nothing?

You may disagree with what they've done so far, but they've worked, and are still working, to confront and resolve those assaults on the constitution. They don't have all of the power in the world to accomplish that, you know.

[mmonk]

50. They don't have the power to do what?

Yes, politics as usual is something if you like what gets passed. However, there is no excuse for not attempting to defend the constitution. Hell, they seldom hold any kind of news conference to explain crimes that have transpired. And they play ball on the field of false framing. You may be satisfied. But for example, Clinton pretending Matthews question about Libby wasn't a real question says it all about what's wrong and to top it off, not answering it. Does that mean she has no problem with elected officials and their staffs acting outside or above the law? How is someone who realizes what is going on supposed to interpret that?

[bigtree]

53. you know that I don't see an impeachment as their ONLY 'defense' of the constitution available

and I've provided many posts highlighting the Democratic leadership's consistent responses to Bush's crimes.

And Clinton? I can't and won't vouch for the rhetoric which surrounds her campaign right now.

[mmonk]

59. I admit I'm for what you've mentioned in your posts.

I'm not sure America can still live by the lies and misinformation concerning this surreal situation we live in though. One thing for sure, those things this president wants to veto are the very things that hit at the core of an open and modern democracy. I think putting the pressure of articles of impeachment on the table will make those vetoes harder as well as educate the people on the reality of the moment.

[Phredicles]

56. And this hits the problem spot on: They're pursuing politics as usual, as if

these are usual circumstances, as if the administration in place is just another normal crappy presidency as, let's face it, many if not most of them have been. I see no recognition that what we're facing here is the greatest menace to our gonstitutional government since the 1860s, or even a particularly bad thing.

[redqueen]

68. Thank you... this is it exactly.

*sigh*

[Phredicles]

42. "Working to advance", eh? What exactly does that mean?

And I see all of it's expected to come to naught due to Il Dunce's vetos.

I wouldn't normally be inclined to blame the Democrats for Rethugs' obstructionism, except when they appear perfectly content to leave the obstructors in place, without even an attempt to pressure the more vulnerable members of the gang to do right by their country on the issues that really mattered in the last election: Getting us out of Iraq and restoring the Constitution.

[bigtree]

48. I don't know. Maybe they can armor up for a full military assault on the White House

But they are working hard with what they have, and with what they reasonably expect will succeed.

And, I really don't know how you expect our majority to remove all of the republican obstruction, as if the Democrats were somehow able to remove Bush and Cheney and some benign figure would take their place, ready and willing to do our bidding.

[Phredicles]

52. The problem is that what they "reasonably expect" is unreasonably timid,

a litany of "don't have the votes, let's not even try".

Since we all agree that nothing will get done with the aforementioned obstruction in place, I truly don't see why they won't address this obstruction directly. We're left with the appearance that they're content with its presence, as it absolves them of any real responsibilty.

[bigtree]

55. I think that's because impeachment has been presented as the cure for all the ills

and anything outside of that, anything which involves the hard work of legislating or reconciling their differences is seen as 'timid'

I don't think impeachment can be used as a substitute, or even an effective lever for all of the concerns we have. On Iraq, for instance, I believe the inevitable hardening of the opposition which would result from a drive to impeach, has the potential to scuttle what I expect will be a compromise which will begin to bring our troops home and end the occupation. I really think there's still time to overcome the predictable, initial republican opposition and move a lot of these concerns forward as we approach the election season.

[Phredicles]

58. What differences are reconcilable? What willingness to compromise have

the Rethugs shown? You yourself admonished against blaming the Democrats for Publican obstructionism. As such, it's not realistic to proceed as if such obstructionism doesn't exist.

And even if the Senate does manage to hammer out a compromise that would bring the occupation of Iraq to an end, is there any reason to believe Mr. Decider Guy would heed it? And that, my friend, is why we keep coming back to impeachment.

[bigtree]

66. well, I'm not convinced that an impeachment would necessarily move Bush out of Iraq either.

I think there is great value in advancing legislation which actually directs Bush to do the things we want him to do. If he ignores that mandate, he can then be taken to court, or even impeached. But to go into an impeachment process expecting Bush to abandon the one thing that allows him to assume as much false authority as he has is relying solely on Bush to decide what course to follow, with no direction at all coming from Congress. We have to keep pressing our concerns in legislation so that, in the end, Bush can't say (as he has repeatedly) that Congress hasn't directed him to do anything.

We can't just take the floor debate and the polls and offer them as proof of congressional will. In order for the judgment of Congress to be effectively recognized - by the courts or anyone else concerned with actually holding him to account - it has to be in the form of a bill which is supported by enough of a majority to overcome Bush's objections to it.That is what our democracy recognizes as the ultimate measure of congressional will, and by extension, the will of the American people who elected them.

Now, if we do move to some impeachment - over Iraq, for instance - the Articles will have contain something more than the parameters of the debate that's gridlocked between the parties so far to expect any different outcome. And, if we do move to any impeachment, Phredicles, I will work along with everyone else to pressure Bush on Iraq. But, I'd feel more empowered in that if we were acting on congressionally-approved legislation rather than the assumption that Bush would fold in our direction.

I think we're going to see a hasty retreat by the republicans from their enabling support of Bush and his entire agenda as the election season draws closer. There's where the pressure, I think, is best applied: to those republican obstructionists with a constituency already in opposition to the present course.

[Morgana LaFey]

71. Yes, and completely ignoring the FACT that the majority of the

electorate want serious change. All they'd have to do, really, is get on the PR bandwagon big time -- call out the troops, so to speak (the public). Get the public to put pressure on those Congresspeople who aren't lining up to do the public's will. They're not even trying. Just turning defeatist without ANY attempt at anything better. It's sickening.

[Phredicles]

73. Exactly - I see that they face a great challenge and will not succeed quickly,

but what I and, I believe, a great many of us are so pissed off about is that it doesn't even look like they're trying very hard to face this.

[Usrename]

170. "But they are working hard with what they have..."

Bwahahahaha...

You're funny!

You must be referring to the Alito confirmation!

Only 41 votes were needed to stop him and 42 voted that they don't think he's fit for the Court.

Yet there he sits, for the rest of his life.

"But they are working hard with what they have..."

ROFLMAO

41 votes needed to stop him and 42 votes that think he is unfit. Think about it a little bit.

"But they are working hard with what they have..."

You are funny, real funny!

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WilliamPitt]

57. They should use this thread in abberant psychology classes

as a good example of the kind of abberant psychological dementia that compells certain people to be angry and bitter, no matter how fact-deprived or baseless that anger actually is.

It's fun being angry. It feels really good. We call that self-indulgence.

Great list, bigtree. Thanks for putting it together.

[Phredicles]

60. Or as a good example of how some people use smug detachment to insulate

themselves from a truly outrageous reality.

[BuyingThyme]

62. Perfect example.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[endarkenment]

64. I see you've gone and lost your angry again.

Too bad.

[Forkboy]

69. LOL

I get the feeling he was never all that angry to start with.

And if he was it was obviously just because it's fun to be angry. :crazy:

[SharonRB]

123. You're one of the few voices of reason on this entire thread

Some people just need to be angry all the time and are blind to any progress being made at all -- they want it all, and they want it all NOW. Reality bites sometimes, but we have to be realistic and play with the hand we've been dealt. We'll do what we can do in the next 19 months and then once the criminals are gone, we can really get down to business with a bigger majority and a Dem in the WH, hopefully.

[mmonk]

133. I would give anything to not be angry anymore

but that would require the current outrages to disappear. Thus I guess I'm doomed to keep having "fun" and being "self-indulgent".

[BuyingThyme]

192. In the interest of truth over selective censorship, here's the truth again:

Bigtree neither compiled the list nor bothered to read it.

But your post is proof positive of the psychological dementia.

[DuaneBidoux]

76. Agreed. We are losing our moral edge. Action is needed. Even if Bush vetos our bills

We need to show that we have at least tried, and that Bush has been the obstructionist in doing good things for the country.

[Tekla West]

144. I'm not sure

that we (Dems) ever had a moral edge. I sure did not see it last election. "VOTE 4 ME" (because I'm not them) is not the moral high ground at any rate. Remember, the only thing as low as bush in the poll ratings is Congress.

[DuaneBidoux]

180. Okay. I'll give that point to you. But I do think people wanted something different.

And I think what they wanted was a lot closer to what we were offering than what the 'Pugs were offering--so it is our responsibility to do our best to deliver, even if Bush stops it (for example the stem cell bill that he intends to veto today).

[bigtree]

79. here's a link to the legislation from the Speaker's site, with details and explanations

the ONLY comprehensive list available, in easy to read form with explanations and intentions for many of the bills.


http://www.speaker.gov/legislation/


. . . if someone can provide a more comprehensive list, I'd like to see it.

[BuyingThyme]

80. It's fun to post the source after you've been caught taking credit for the material,

but you really could have come up with a better context.

How's that ignore feature working?

[Moochy]

154. LOL

its working almost as well as the 'Alert' function... apparently.

[Old and In the Way]

81. Well done bigtree.

Kinda deflates the anti-Democrat rants that seem to be infesting the board. Yes, we got warts...but the other Party is one gawd-awful cancer on our country.

[Phredicles]

82. The problem with our Democratic Party, however, is that it insists on treating

this cancer as if it were just another set of warts. THAT's where the "anti-Democrat rants" are coming from - we see what a menace they are; why don't they, or why don't they act in a way to show they see it? Under these circumstances, boasting of passing a "Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act", for example, is trivial to the point of being insulting.

[bigtree]

83. I'll bet this DUer doesn't think it's trivial

I just found out my 20x50 shed on my prop was a meth lab in 2000
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=866970


from the office of Rep. David Obey:

House Passes Methamphetamine
Remediation Research Act

Obey Cosponsored Measure Intended To Help States
Deal With Contaminated Meth Labs

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 365, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act, which instructs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop model guidelines to help state and local authorities ensure that former meth lab sites pose no public health risk. Seventh District Congressman Dave Obey (D-WI) cosponsored the measure.

“Despite the danger posed by former meth labs, there is currently no good health-based data to guide the decontamination process, which has left state and local agencies on their own when dealing with those hazards,” said Obey. “By requiring the EPA to act, this bill is intended to change that and make sure that everyone has the best possible information available when dealing with the hazardous waste in these labs.”

Methamphetamine is often made in makeshift labs located in houses, apartments or hotel rooms and, while many chemicals used in the production of meth are commonly found in homes, the poor handling and disposal of those chemicals, as well as the mixing of incompatible compounds, can leave hazardous residue that poses a significant health threat even after production is stopped, including a strong risk of fire or explosion.

Decontamination of former meth lab properties can range from minor cleaning to complete demolition of buildings. Some meth labs require soil and/or groundwater cleanup as well, depending on the extent contamination.

In addition to requiring the establishment of decontamination guidelines, the bill also:

· Directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology to work with EPA to develop technologies to help detect meth labs.

· Requires the National Academy of Sciences to study the long-term health impacts of methamphetamine exposure on first-responders and on children taken from meth lab sites.

“Over the last few years we’ve made real headway in fighting the growth of meth, but it still poses a real threat to our children and our communities,” said Obey. “We need to do everything we can to make sure that our law enforcement and public health officials have the tools and information they need to continue to safely and effectively address this problem.”


small in comparison to the rest of their efforts, perhaps, but it is clear that our perceptions of Congress are going to revolve around our own priorities where we live, work; or center on the things we advocate for.

[Phredicles]

84. Well, compared to an out-of-control band of war criminals and fascists at

the head of our country's governmental apparatus, it IS trivial.

[bigtree]

86. sure, but it is in ADDITION to other important concerns addressed in legislation they've advanced

I'll wager though, that if it was your home with the fire risk, you'd want and expect swift action. One example, but, of course, there are many other efforts underway to respond to what the voters elected these legislators to accomplish, including vigorous oversight.


Take the House committee charged with oversight of the White House:

Here's a snip of Rep. Henry Waxman's efforts which he's highlighted and listed: http://oversight.house.gov/chronology.asp


Monday, June 18, 2007
The Use of RNC E-Mail Accounts by White House Officials

Chairman Waxman releases a report detailing the use of RNC political e-mail accounts by 88 White House officials. Senior advisor Karl Rove sent and received at least 140,216 e-mails on his RNC e-mail account, more than any other White House official, including over 75,000 e-mails communicating with individuals using official ".gov" e-mail accounts. Deposition testimony from Susan Ralston, Mr. Rove's former executive assistant, provides evidence that the White House Counsel's office may have known in 2001 that Mr. Rove was using his RNC e-mail account for official correspondence but took no action to preserve these official communications.

Thursday, June 14, 2007
Rep. Waxman Questions GSA Plans to Contract Out Contract Oversight

In a letter to GSA Administrator Lurita Doan, Chairman Waxman asks for a briefing on GSA’s plans to expand the role of contractors into contract oversight and management. He also asks that GSA halt implementation of the proposal until Congress has a chance to conduct its oversight.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Hearing Examines Statements Made by GSA Administrator Doan

The Oversight Committee held a hearing on June 13, 2007, to examine statements made by GSA Administrator Lurita Doan that impugn the reputation of federal officials who cooperated with a Committee investigation into Ms. Doan's conduct at the General Services Administration.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Chairman Waxman Reiterates Request for DOT Documents Related to Lobbying

Rep. Waxman responds to Secretary Peters and reiterates his request for documents and an interview relating to the Department lobbying Members of Congress to oppose efforts by California and other states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Hearing on White House Use of Iraq War Intelligence Postponed

In letters to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and former CIA Director George Tenet, Chairman Waxman explains that the previously scheduled hearing on the White House’s use of pre-war intelligence regarding Iraq’s nuclear program has been postponed while the Committee continues to interview senior government officials and review documents being provided by the CIA and State Department.


Thursday, June 07, 2007
Chairman Waxman Asks Towers Perrin to Reconsider Refusal to Cooperate with the Committee

In a letter to Mark Mactas the CEO of Towers Perrin, Chairman Waxman asks Towers Perrin to reconsider its refusal to cooperate with the Committee’s inquiry into potential conflicts of interest relating to the advice consultants provide to corporate boards on executive compensation.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Hearing on FDA’s Role in Evaluating Safety of Avandia

On June 6, 2007, the Committee held an oversight hearing on the role of the Food and Drug Administration in evaluating the safety of Avandia, a diabetes drug taken by about one million Americans. At the hearing, the Committee examined the failure of FDA to obtain an adequate post-market clinical trial designed to assess whether patients taking Avandia are at increased risk of heart attack.

Monday, June 04, 2007
Chairman Waxman Asks EPA to Clarify the Administration's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy

In a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency, Chairman Waxman asks the EPA to clarify the Administration’s position on whether greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced.

Thursday, May 31, 2007
Committee Requests GAO Investigation of Federal Crop Insurance Programs

Following the Committee’s May 3 hearing on waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal crop insurance program, Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Davis, and Committee Member Jim Cooper ask the Government Accountability Office to investigate the program. Specifically, the Committee asks GAO to examine financial arrangements between the insurance companies, sales agents, and farmers and ranchers who participate in the program.

Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Committee Requests Documents From Doan Investigation

Chairman Waxman requests from the Office of Special Counsel documents related to its investigation of Hatch Act violations by GSA Administrator Lurita Doan. The OSC concluded that Administrator Doan violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits executive branch officials from engaging in partisan politics while on duty, in official government work spaces, or with government equipment.

Thursday, May 24, 2007
Hearing on Mental Health Problems Confronting Soldiers Returning from Iraq, Afghanistan

On Thursday, May 24, 2007, the Committee held an oversight hearing on mental health problems confronting soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Committee heard from afflicted soldiers and their families, examined the ability of the DOD and the VA to screen, treat, and track returning soldiers who are at risk, and assessed the impact that these illnesses are having on military readiness and military families.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007
FDA Responds to Chairman Waxman’s Question about Lead in Women’s Multivitamins

In response to Rep. Waxman’s questions about FDA’s response to reports that certain women’s multivitamins were contaminated with lead, FDA writes that the matter is still being investigated.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Chairman Waxman Responds to White House Counsel Fred Fielding's May 18 Letter

In a letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding, Chairman Waxman explains that, as the principal oversight body of the House of Representatives, it is the Committee’s constitutional obligation to investigate the role played by the White House and National Security Council in the false and misleading intelligence that precipitated the war in Iraq.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Hearing Examines Achievements and Opportunities for Climate Protection Under the Montreal Protocol

On Wednesday, May 23, the Committee held a hearing to examine the benefits that have accrued as a result of the Montreal Protocol. The Montreal Protocol is an international agreement established to address the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer by human-produced chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and is frequently described as the most successful international environmental treaty ever.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Former Rove Aide Testifies to Committee but Refuses to Answer Questions Related to Abramoff Contacts with the White House

At a deposition earlier this month, Susan Ralston, the former executive assistant to Karl Rove, responded to questions in a number of areas but would not answer questions about White House contacts with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and her lawyer said Ms. Ralston would assert her Fifth Amendment privilege if compelled to testify. In a memo, Chairman Waxman explains the Committee will seek testimony from Mr. Abramoff’s former lobbying associates and former and current Administration officials before considering Ms. Ralston’s request for immunity.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Waxman, Davis Request GAO Survey of Government-Encouraged Broadband Deployment

Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Davis ask GAO to conduct a survey of all actions undertaken by the federal government to encourage broadband deployment.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Joint Hearing on the Government Accountability Office's Personnel Reform Efforts

The House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the District of Columbia and the Senate Subcommittee on Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia held a joint hearing on GAO personnel reforms. The hearing examined the implementation of GAO’s Human Capital Reform Act of 2004, the market-based compensation study conducted by Watson Wyatt Worldwide for GAO, and the performance ratings of African-Americans at GAO.

Friday, May 18, 2007
White House Responds to Chairman Waxman's May 4th Letter Regarding Pre-War Intelligence

White House Counsel Fred Fielding responds to Chairman Waxman's May 4, 2007 letter regarding pre-war intelligence and claims that Iraq attempted to obtain nuclear material.

Friday, May 18, 2007
Fifteen Chairmen Urge the President to Stop Efforts to Weaken the G-8 Declaration Regarding Global Climate Change

Fifteen House Committee Chairmen sent a letter to the President urging him not to weaken a proposed G-8 declaration regarding global climate change. According to press reports, Administration officials are seeking to eliminate the G-8 pledges to limit the increase in global temperatures and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the officials may be attempting to remove phrases in the declaration that highlight the urgent need to address the threat of global warming.

Thursday, May 17, 2007
Committee Inquires on Disciplinary Action

The Oversight Committee has asked General Ham whether disciplinary action was taken following Lt. Col. Kauzlarich's denigrating remarks questioning the Tillman family's faith.

Thursday, May 17, 2007
Hearing on The Carbon-Neutral Government Act of 2007

The Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement held a hearing on The Carbon-Neutral Government Act of 2007.

Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Chairman Waxman Reiterates his Request to FEMA for Documents Relating to Toxic Formaldehyde Levels in Hurricane Victims’ Trailers

Chairman Waxman sent a letter to Administrator Paulison reiterating his two previous requests for documents relating to high levels of formaldehyde in trailers provided to Gulf Coast hurricane victims. Recent reports have indicated that some occupants continue to live in FEMA-issued trailers with formaldehyde levels above the acceptable limit for humans.

more: http://oversight.house.gov/chronology.asp?start=25

[Phredicles]

87. That's nice, and you can post as many weighty tomes as you like, but we have a BIG PROBLEM,

and I see you here dancing around this problem like it's just one of many issues on a par with brush fire risk and toxic formaldehyde levels. If you're here to convince me I'm wrong to call the Democratic members of congress lazy, very well, they're not lazy.

But if you're trying to reassure us that they have a sound set of priorities, you've in fact demonstrated the opposite: It looks to me like they're trying to address everything BUT the one BIG, HUGE, GIGANTIC, ENORMOUS, HIDEOUS PROBLEM that makes the solving of all these other problems insufficient, irrelevant, and, yes, trivial.

We're sinking: So stop strolling in here bragging about the great progress in deck-chair alignment modification.

[bigtree]

88. strolling onto my own thread? What bullshit. Why are YOU parked here?

You've contributed nothing but bluster and ridicule in your attempt to make our party members' efforts on behalf of the American people appear 'trivial'.

There is NOTHING 'trivial' at all about the efforts of the Waxman committee, as I've demonstrated.

[Phredicles]

90. I mean, strolling onto DU selling for Pelosi, etc. As for Mr. Waxman,

I'm not seeing anything on that list about what he plans to do to enforce the subpoena he issued for Rice. Which renders the rest of it, well, the same word applies.

[bigtree]

100. well, you can do the doubting at every step:"Oh but, I'll bet he won't do this next" or the other

I think they would have to press the Justice Dept. to enforce the subpoenas, but they would likely resist citing Executive privilege. But it can be done . . .

on the Subpeona of Whitewater Notes (from the Duke Law Review) :

In 1995, the Special Senate Committee to Investigate Whitewater Development Corporation and Related Matters (the Senate Whitewater Committee) issued a subpoena for certain documents. The White House announced that it would withhold material about a November 5, 1993, meeting involving senior presidential aides and private lawyers, on the ground that the documents were protected by the lawyer-client privilege and executive privilege. William Kennedy, who at the time was an associate White House counsel, took extensive notes at the meeting. President Clinton said that he believed "the president ought to have a right to have a confidential conversation with his minister, his doctor, his lawyer." That argument would apply if a president met with his private lawyer, but the issue was complicated by the presence of government lawyers at the meeting.

Within a few days, the White House offered to turn over the Kennedy notes if the committee agreed that the meeting was privileged. The committee refused because it learned of other meetings attended by White House officials and private attorneys. Unable to reach an acceptable compromise, the committee voted to send the issue to the Senate floor and from there to federal district court. On December 20, 1995, the Senate began consideration of a resolution directing the Senate Legal Counsel to bring a civil action to enforce the subpoena. The resolution invoked a special statute regarding the authority of the Senate Legal Counsel to sue for subpoena enforcement orders. In a letter on that same day to the committee, White House Special Counsel Jane Sherburne described various options, stating: "We have said all along that we are prepared to make the notes public." The resolution passed the Senate by a vote of fifty-one to forty-five. On the following day, the White House agreed to give the notes to the Senate Whitewater Committee.

edit: link

http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?52+Duke+L.+J.+323

[Phredicles]

102. So far he hasn't. That's what counts.

If in the future he does enforce it, that's great. But until then, not enforcing it is tantamount to admitting that it doesn't really matter. In effect, in concedes the whole "unitary executive" premise. It shows the Dear Leader that he can safely continue to ignore congress.

If in fact it's necessary to press the Justice Dept. to enforce the subpoenas, then let's see him get on it already.

Congressman Waxman has been my representative since I moved to his district in 1994. This is the first time he's disappointed me, and it's a biggie.

[bigtree]

109. I'll challenge you right here to put your charge about Waxman in your own thread

The lengths you've gone to paint our party and its members as unwilling to confront Bush are amazing. I've yet to hear anything more than second-guessing from you. And with Rep. Waxman, your hypothetical characterization of his motives borders on outright slander, based on nothing but your own biased view against our party and its members.

[Phredicles]

113. I believe, sir, that DU's rules give me the right to post what I've said here.

I've been voting straight Democratic since 1984 and I see remarkably little to show for it. In particular, the lengths our party and its members have gone to to avoid confronting Bush are amazing and in fact downright baffling.

You started this thread, as I understand it, to show us doubters that we had the wrong idea about our party's leaders. And many thousands of words later I remain unconvinced. So sorry if that disappoints you; there's a lot of that going around, isn't there?

[bigtree]

119. who said you couldn't do what you want? Not me. I challenge you to take that issue

to the larger DU and debate it, that's all. Simple proposition. I think balderdash like your characterization of Rep. Waxman's intentions deserves an airing beyond the confines of this thread. This is an incredibly dedicated man. If that's the drift of your opposition to take a dedicated Democrat like Rep. Waxman and posture like he's too timid to move forward, you are certainly far afield from anything remotely resembling reality.

[jgraz]

85. Hmmm...for some reason you forgot to mention the secret free trade deal

I'm going to die of not surprise.

As for the rest, wake me up when they actually make something happen. :boring:

[endarkenment]

89. You have to laugh at Pelosi's attempt to spin the escalation funding:

"Revised Version of the FY 2007 Supplemental Funding Bill - H.R. 2206
This bill is a revised version of the FY 2007 Supplemental, which fails to include the tough provisions holding the Iraqi government accountable and providing a responsible timetable for the redeployment of U.S. troops contained in the earlier version. However, in this bill, the President was forced to abandon his threat to veto any bill containing accountability – agreeing to 18 benchmarks and a potential cut-off of reconstruction aid if progress is not made toward meeting them. The measure also includes a minimum wage increase, children’s health care, and other important domestic priorities.
Status: Passed May 10, 2007
Signed into the law by the President on May 25, 2007"

There is the singular achievement of this congress. A complete cave-in, a funding of a blank check ESCALATION of our criminal occupation of Iraq and war against Iraqi self-determination, characterized as "However, in this bill, the President was forced to abandon his threat to veto any bill containing accountability – agreeing to 18 benchmarks and a potential cut-off of reconstruction aid if progress is not made toward meeting them."

Yikes. Liars. At least admit that we surrendered with only the mildest show of a false fight.

[jgraz]

92. Laughter is not exactly my first reaction

:grr:

[LSK]

99. got a bill #?

There are no secret bills on house.gov, senate.gov, thomas.gov.

Just nobody reads them, thats all.

[jgraz]

105. See, secret agreements and negotiations don't often get bill #'s

But you can read about it here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/secret-trade-deal-dem-k-_b_50116.html

Google secret+trade+deal and you'll get all sorts of info about it.

[RestoreGore]

93. No carbon cap legislation?

No legislation raising CAFE standards? Where is the bold intitiative based on Mr. Gore's Hill testimony in March? Oh wait, that's right... they don't want to impeach these criminals so any of these biils can just be vetoed anyway. So nothing really gets done.

[bigtree]

104. Congress to reconsider caps on carbon

McCain, Obama among sponsors of bill to curb global warming

Updated: 1:41 p.m. ET Jan 12, 2007

WASHINGTON - Potential presidential rivals John McCain and Barack Obama are joining with newly independent Sen. Joe Lieberman on a plan they say would reduce annual global-warming gases by two-thirds by mid-century.

Their bill, announced Friday, is intended to cut the heat-trapping emissions by 2 percent a year. It is sure to produce a contentious debate on climate control in the new Democratic-run Congress and draw strong opposition from the White House and industry.

Sens. McCain, R-Ariz., Obama, D-Ill., and Lieberman, the Connecticut independent, are calling for mandatory caps on greenhouse emissions for power plants, industry and oil refineries. Their plan would require releases of heat-trapping gases to return to 2004 levels by 2012 and to 1990 levels by 2020.

Carbon dioxide, produced from the burning of fossil fuels, is the primary greenhouse gas. U.S. emissions of this gas have increased an average of about 1 percent year since 1990.

Under the proposed legislation, greenhouse gas emissions would be cut from 6,100 metric tons of carbon equivalent in 2004 to about 2,100 metric tons in 2050, according to a fact sheet describing the legislation.

More modest alternative

As a compromise, the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee is preparing a more modest bill that would slow the growth of greenhouse gases. Under the proposal by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., annual emissions would continue to increase until 2030 and then perhaps decline.

report: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16593468/

[RestoreGore]

114. Mid century isn't good enough with the timeframe we are working with

I already heard of this, and if it doesn't include carbon sequestration, taxes, and the like, how is it then not just a presidential election year bill with no teeth? It seems that no matter what they write they always have to give corporations a pass. We actually need a carbon freeze yesterday, but of course, that is simply beyond the scope of what this political system will entertain. And of course, building more coal and nuclear plants will go on as well I am sure to offset any small cuts, as well as air and ship travel.

[RestoreGore]

172. Well, I guess that's that then

[bigtree]

177. heck, RestoreGore

I've NEVER had total agreement with the direction of Congress, but I see value (on some issues) in incremental changes which move us closer to our ultimate goal. I do think their efforts here are a far sight from the 'nothing' that you initially said was occurring in Congress over this issue. The thing to do now would be to engage these legislators with your concerns and work to build more of a consensus for your ideas. There are obviously folks there who ARE concerned and ready to take some action. There is value in staying engaged and continuing to press for what we want out of our elected. And, it is a certainty that, if we disengage, or don't work to maintain and increase our majority, NOTHING will be done on these issues by the republican opposition. That's the way it's ALWAYS been. We can't just elect these folks and assume that they will stay focused on what we want unless we continue to work to build support within and without the institution for our concerns.

I look forward to following the issues you've raised and highlighting those concerns as I advocate.

[RestoreGore]

179. I have been engaging for years, but they just aren't listening

And regarding the planetary emergency we face, small incremental steps thirty years too late are simply not going to cut it now. That is reality. So please, do not make this my fault by saying I am not "engaging" our bought and sold politicians on both sdies who have been promising to fix healthcare for decades with nothing happening but it getting worse. Who promise to do so much for the working class and we still suffer day to day out here just trying to eek out enough to survive. I'm tired of engaging and I am tired of being told I am not doing enough to bring my concerns to those who should already know them.

[bigtree]

185. I'm not faulting you if you plan to stay engaged

There are countless initiatives which fail to get support until there is enough of a coalition of support to press action. That has always been the challenge in our political institutions. It always will be. Just failing to get the support you need right now isn't an excuse for just give up.

It may be a reason (your choice) but it's certainly not an excuse to abandon the process and throw up your hands. That's a recipe for certain defeat, plain and simple. I don't think any of us bring our concerns to the process expecting immediate action on every aspect of what we want or need. More often than not, political change takes time and an inexhaustible effort, usually through successive campaigns and elections. C'mon, stay with it. You gained MY support. Keep going.

[Old and In the Way]

94. If I were a Republican activist looking at 2008.....

I'd be working overtime trying to convince people that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the Parties.

Just saying....

[endarkenment]

96. And the difference between the two on the war is?

Just saying....

[LSK]

101. and your solution is?

[endarkenment]

103. Challenge each and every war party democrat in his or her primary.

Fund anti-war progressives through channels that only fund anti-war progressives. Be honest about the corruption that is pervasive in our party's leadership. Stop being a mindless cheerleader for 'our team'. Rather than lying to people about all the progress our party is making, tell the people the truth, and tell them that if they help vote in progressive Democrats, there really can be a change in direction in this country.

And your attempt to broadbrush smear all of us critics as republican operatives is duly noted. Typical.

[LSK]

107. I dont even know how to respond to that

You start off with an actual logical attempt at discussion, but then go right to the personal attack?

What the fuck is that?

[endarkenment]

110. The fuck is your original post.

"If I were a Republican activist looking at 2008.....
I'd be working overtime trying to convince people that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the Parties.

Just saying...."

Don't claim the highground here. You started the insults and now you are acting all offended. Deal with it.

By the way you never answered my question. Typical.

[LSK]

112. who are you replying too???

Got a link to this post????

Hint: My name is NOT "Old and In the Way"

[endarkenment]

128. I apologize.

You are correct. Sorry about that. My mistake.

[LSK]

129. Thanks

Its forgotten.

[Old and In the Way]

161. Yep, that would be one of the Republican pitching points here.

"Be honest about the corruption that is pervasive in our party's leadership."

Please cite backing for that statement. Corruption? Sure, we have one freelancer under indictment. You want to equate the same level of corruption between Republicans and Democrats?

"And your attempt to broadbrush smear all of us critics as republican operatives is duly noted. Typical.
" You don't think that Republican operatives would be targeting places like DU and DKos, etc. to spread divisiveness and spread the "why bother" gospel?

I've been at DU though 3 election cycles...they come like night follows day. Oddly enough, many describe themselves as critics who just expect perfection in the Democratic Party. I'm betting the Democrats will never be good enough for you to vote for them. Your statement on the pervasiveness of Democratic corruption is a tell.

[Phredicles]

106. Uhh, didn't we elect them 'cause they said they had a solution,

and they never once said or implied it was "Talk big, then give Caesar Disgustus what he wants"?

[LSK]

111. no, I volunteered for, donated to and voted for them

So they can stop the bleeding. I was not expecting magical legislation to instantly stop the war, impeach them, eliminate global warming and balance the budget in 6 months.

Why are Senate rules so hard to understand?

60 votes are needed for cloture.

[onenote]

126. difference: Democrats virtually unanimously supported a timetable

and repubs virtually unanimously opposed it.

Seems like a difference to me.

[endarkenment]

127. They voted for a timetable before they voted against it.

That dance of theirs was a fig leaf tossed in our direction.

[onenote]

135. show me where they voted against it.

Where a bill proposing a timetable was in front of them and they voted no.

[BuyingThyme]

137. Please be embarrassed for yourself.

House Rejects Nine-Month Iraq Withdrawal

May 10, 7:40 PM (ET)
By DAVID ESPO

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Democratic-controlled House defeated legislation Thursday to require the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq within nine months, then pivoted quickly to a fresh challenge of President Bush's handling of the unpopular war.

The vote on the nine-month withdrawal measure was 255-171.

On a day of complex maneuvering, Democrats said they would approve legislation funding the war on an installment plan, and Bush said he would veto it. But the president, under pressure from lawmakers in both parties, coupled his threat with an offer to accept a spending bill that sets out standards for the Iraqi government to meet.

"Time's running out, because the longer we wait the more strain we're going to put on the military," said Bush, who previously had insisted on what he termed a "clean" war funding bill.

...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070510/D8P1QR700.html

[onenote]

138. 169 Democrats For, 59 against; 196 repubs Against, 2 for

And you still don't think there is a difference?

[BuyingThyme]

139. I'm not the difference guy. I'm the guy who's pissed at Pelosi

for dumbing DUers down.

[Old and In the Way]

158. Well, the difference seems to be the Democrats want to end it and the Republicans want to continue

it.

So do you agree or disagree with my observation on Republicans here wanting to soften rather than sharpen the differences between the 2 parties?

[LSK]

97. Minimum Wage DID Pass

K&R

[endarkenment]

98. Soaked in blood.

K&R

[EFerrari]

108. Well done, bigtree.

:)

We knew that's the meme the Thugs would use.

[hurricaneric]

115. Awesome post

I happen to be one of the folks tired of all the Dem bashing going on so this was particularly nice to see. Thanks!!

[SharonRB]

121. Thank you for this great summary

I'm so sick of people saying they aren't doing anything. They're doing a lot -- they just can't get anything past the Repubs in the Senate or a signature from * on anything. We'll have to pass everything all over again with a larger majority and a Dem president in '09.

[ooglymoogly]

122. It is posts like this that get the message out and hold this admin

up to searing sunshine, feet to the fire and all that.... and will be in the end the difference between winning and losing for us. big nom

[puebloknot]

125. This laundry list of Dem "progress" is pablum, serving...

...as a distraction to keep We the Dems voting for Dems in 2008, no matter how many deaths of our own troops and those of Iraqi civilians ensue. And no matter how grandly our elected Democratic saviors cave on *every* meaningful constitutional issue.

Really now, shall we praise the Dems for the items on this list, which fade into triviality against the backdrop of criminality that pervades our government today? There is no dearth of impeachable offenses which are *already* on the record. Yet the Dems cannot seem to bring to ground any of their oversight activities in which they are currently engaged.

We are way past a time when We the People need to start admitting to ourselves that we've been duped, that we have become a cult-worshipping people, and that the rule of law is gone in this country (hopefully only temporarily). Whether we'll ever see our constitution restored in all its fullness -- and not just "amendments" to the Patriot Act, which is criminal on its face -- becomes more and more problematical.

Does the phrase "restoration of habeus corpus" cause any of the rest of you at DU to think we've collectively fallen down the rabbit hole, and don't know where Kansas is anymore, because we've warmly embraced The Big Lie?

I am ANGRY over the lackluster performance of the Democratic Party, and I hope to see many more of my fellow Americans succumb to this "self-serving psychological disorder" as soon as possible. Otherwise, we're just ersatz patriots, following our own version of "Der Fuhrer" -- without rancor, with a smile on our faces, and pathetic gratitude for the crumbs we are being thrown from the Big Table!

Do we *really* think that the American Revolution was created out of the "psychological wholeness," the passive acceptance that serves as Democratic Party loyalty on the part of some today?

There *is* historic precedent for the path we're meandering down. But let's not forget that we're *helpless*, and our recently-elected Dems are *powerless* to do anything because they "don't have the votes." And let's keep repeating that mantra and fingering our worry beads or whatever other masturbatory device we use to continue convincing ourselves that we're good and loyal citizens, devoted Dems, while the rule of law goes begging and we lose our beloved America!

"Raging against the dying of the light" gets my vote. Along with concrete, real-world demands that our Democratic "leaders" act like Democrats.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

156. W h a t y o u s a i d !

DAMN, that was accurate

[tomp]

182. i want them to stop acting like Democrats ....

.. and start acting like democrats...or patriots...or statespersons.

the two party system is crap. the lesser of the two evils is still evil.

wonderful post, thanks!

[puebloknot]

188. Yes, we who are loyal to democratic principles...

...have to start thinking outside the Dem/Repub box. Loyalty to a fraudulent cause is not laudible.

Best,

Long-time Dem, still loyal to the "old-time Dem religion."

[brentspeak]

131. K and R

:kick:

[Senator]

132. "Working to advance these bills" to where, exactly??

Without a magic potion to circumvent "Rule By Signing Statement," impeachment is their only non-masturbatory option.

And the public/electorate is tired of being forced to watch.

Euphemism is rationalization -- not reality.

--

[BuyingThyme]

134. To some stand-in-line thread on DU.

That's it.

[D23MIURG23]

141. Thank you.

I really needed to see this. Certain aspects of their tenure haven't been to my liking, but they really are a FAR CRY from the reprobative fascists on the other side of the isle.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

142. Those bills ignore the two overwhelming issues of our day:

1. The Bush administration aided by the complicity or stupidity of key Democratic leaders committed an unprovoked invasion and occupation of an independent country and refuses to leave. This illegal, immoral war is not only killing dozens or hundreds of people per day but also bleeding our own Treasury dry.

2. The Bush administration is trying to destroy the rule of law in this country and although I used to cringe when the anti-war activists of the 1960s referred to Johnson and Nixon as 'fascists," I'm sorry, all you Dem apologists, but this time we DO have an administration full of heartless, greedy fascists.

All other issues, and yes, I mean all other issues, are secondary. They're nice to have if your country isn't committing war crimes and sliding into fascism.

The Democratic Congressional leaders are like a team of surgeons who have been assigned to root serious but still survivable cancer out of a patient. Instead of treating the cancer, they put new curtains in the patient's hospital room, bring in a wide-screen TV, reform the hospital billing system, increase the nurses' wages, lower the bills charged to child patients, and consult with the doctors whom the patient fired as to how to proceed. Meanwhile, the patient feels worse and worse and what would have been treatable is suddenly terminal.

That's why people (including me) are angry at the Congressional Democrats. As time goes on, I am more and more convinced that the leadership are either bought, blackmailed, or threatened. Or maybe, in my more charitable moments, I think that perhaps they are so acculturated into the standards and beliefs of the wealthy that they can only pretend to care about the needless American and Iraqi deaths or about the increasingly militaristic and controlling atmosphere in our society. What else could explain such consistent spinelessness and eagerness to compromise with evil over the past 27 years?

This doesn't mean that we like the Republicans. Far from it. We want the Democrats to be a bold opposition party that doesn't care what the corporate contributors or the "beautiful peope" on the Washington cocktail party circuit think.

[walldude]

146. So basically a bunch of bills that will go nowhere were passed

and one bill managed to get signed into law. The one authorizing funding for Iraq. Wow I'm impressed.

[HughSeries]

148. But the world is not PERFECT yet!

and they've had 6 months to make it perfect! Ergo, they've done NOTHING.

[mzmolly]

149. Thanks for posting.

I considered it, but I'm tired. Yawn.

:hi:

[Truth2Tell]

150. Golly gee, thanks, I've been wondering

what legislators spend their time doing when they're not stopping wars, not stopping domestic spying, not stopping torture, not restoring habeas corpus, not increasing fuel economy standards, not stopping extrajudicial rendition, not protecting the sanctity of the ballot box and not holding the executive branch accountable.

I see they rearrange deck chairs. Good to see they're keeping busy.

[opihimoimoi]

151. You tell un Tree...The REAL SPINELESS areThem Pubs/GOP for sucking Bushy Balls for 6 friggen years..

That is an Impressive List you put together...

lemme pour you some Fine Wine...:toast:

[TheWatcher]

153. One of these days I pray the people of this country are going to WAKE UP

to the False Left/Right Paradigm we are living in.

NEITHER Party has interests of We The People at heart. And that is very tough language for Democrats to deal with, but you can no longer deny AT THE VERY LEAST they simply are not doing their job.

I know everyone at DU truly wants to believe that 2008 will bring real change.

It will NOT. It will be more Bread, More Circuses, and more promises and manipulation to control and subdue the herd, as BOTH parties continue to do as they wish, despite the fact they are supposed to be working for US.

I no longer care about getting flamed for making statements like this.

The American People need to Wake Up, Grow Up, and accept the fact they have been HAD, that the whole thing is nothing more than a well orchestrated Dog And Pony Show.

You can crucify people like me, people like bigtree, and anyone else who tries to shed light on the fact that our government is simply no longer working for us.

How much more do the people need to see? How much more clues does everyone need before they finally at least start accepting the POSSIBILITY of The Unthinkable?

Even if you think people like me are full of shit, there is one thing you can no longer deny.

Your government IS. NOT. LISTENING. TO. YOU.

Your government IS. NOT. REPRESENTING. YOU. ANY OF YOU.

Your government DOES. NOT. CARE.

WAKE. UP.

Time is almost up.

[dweller]

159. there's the nut.

i read this whole post to find the hidden gem.

:thumbsup:


dp

[katsy]

163. "Your government IS. NOT. REPRESENTING. YOU. ANY OF YOU."

Can't be said loudly enough.

[maggiegault]

167. I would never crucify you. Maybe they need to lose a family member in this war in order to WAKE UP

Truer words have never been spoken on this site, from where I sit. The government doesn't give a damn about any of us.

[RestoreGore]

173. You most certainly speak truth...

The game is rigged and we better do something soon. And I find myself wanting to yell WAKE UP at people more each day... Perhaps I need to start doing that.

[Telly Savalas]

155. Tactically brilliant!

Most people would take no-brainer legislation like funding health care for veterans and send it to the president with the result either being:

1. It passes; or
2. It gets vetoed, and the Republicans have to deal with a bunch of ugly headlines in the papers.

Congressional Democrats understand that it's more effective to let it sit and post "the Administration opposes it in it's current form" on an obscure webpage read by only a couple thousand people. That's how you advance an agenda.

[leftofthedial]

160. there are LOTS of deck chairs to arrange . . .

Meanwhile, we'll spend a trillion bucks and another thousand or more lives (just counting our own) in the illegal occupation of Iraq; there still is no habeas corpus in the US; the executive branch can detain anyone it wants on any or no basis indefinitely with no right to be charged, much less tried; the executive branch can torture anyone it wishes, using techniques so hideous that the Gestapo deemed them excessive; 50 million-ish aMurkans have no health care; another 80 million or so have no jobs or are grossly underemployed; median wages have plummeted with no end in sight; Greenland and Antarctica are melting . . . (etc.)

But I'm glad they voted to adopt the "national security" recommendations of the biggest whitewash since the Warren Commission.

[maggiegault]

166. My brother died on their watch

The American people spoke loudly and clearly about the Iraq war in November 2006.

The Democrats refuse to give * a timeline, and they have continued to permit * to spend willy nilly.

The same week that the Democrats refused to give * a timeline, my brother was killed by an IED.

Any questions?

[upi402]

168. Your brother is EXACTLY why we try to get them to act like Democrats

And an opposition party to the corporate fascism running this entire show.
I'm sorry about your brother, the hero. His courage isn't dimnished by the cowardice and greed of the Republicans and corporate Dems.

[leftofthedial]

169. I'm so sorry for your loss

[puebloknot]

191. No questions, but sincere sympathy for what you must be feeling...

...today, and all your tomorrows.

Your loss is not abstract; it's personal and ever before you.

Peace.

Judy
Santa Fe

[RaleighNCDUer]

162. That's telling em. Hold their feet to the fire!

I'm SO tired of these do nothings!

:headbang:

[donheld]

171. Bigtree. you are a treasure

This is a fabulous piece of work. Thanks for posting this.

[acmavm]

174. Thinking like this is why we're getting nowhere and the dems

that were elected to REIGN IN this corrupt administration get away with enabling them to continue on with their criminal agenda.

The American people didn't send them to Washington to raise the minimum wage (although that's a good thing). And yes, they proposed some legislation, passed others. But isn't that their jobs? And a damn good paying job at that. They've fiddled and farted around with a lot of issues, but they've done nothing on the ones that got them elected.

[ComerPerro]

176. Great post, but still not good enough for the uninformed "all or nothing" crowd, it appears

[bigtree]

178. It seems like many expect for our tentative majority to be able to just dictate action

However, it's clear that the balance of power in this Congress makes it necessary that we engage in the hard work of forging coalitions and building support for the issues we care so much about. Our democracy just doesn't provide all of the room folks expect for a majority which isn't veto-proof to automatically prevail.

I think the frustration with the pace of all of that is understandable. But, the solution to that slow pace isn't necessarily to try and circumvent the normal legislative process just because we've run into some initial, predictable opposition. We need to stay engaged and focused on pressuring those republicans in opposition who are facing reelection to join with us in confronting the administration on Iraq and on the crimes and abuses. And, I believe we need to continue to exercise all of the other remedies and levers of accountability the Constitution and the law provide out legislators which may not rise to the level of removing someone from office.

I won't echo your characterizations, except to say that, despite the frustration of some, the majority of our party is just as intent on holding the administration accountable as we are. I don't believe they have a panacea for all of the ills. But, they're facing an administration on the run; wildly unpopular, and, many who serve Bush, one step away from jail. I've witnessed Congress successfully prosecuting abuses and malfeasance in previous administrations by exercising their many oversight functions. And this Congress IS NOT standing still, despite the frustrated admonitions of folks here.

Nice to see your support for our party and its many excellent members, CP. Keep it up.

[puebloknot]

187. "...circumvent the normal legislative process..." ???

Here's something to chew on from a legislative expert:

Jonathan Turley, Lawyer and Constitutional Scholar, speaking on Keith Olbermann's show on June 19, with regard to the Congress reining in this rogue pResident:

They've got to put something behind their rhetoric. They have to start to get tough, and to start withholding funds, withholding confirmations, using those powers that the Framers gave them to protect their own institution.

You said: "And, I believe we need to continue to exercise all of the other remedies and levers of accountability the Constitution and the law provide our legislators which may not rise to the level of removing someone from office."

Continue? Exactly when do you think this Congress *started* to exercise all of the other remedies....?

And while they are not doing the above, per Mr. Turley, people are dying in Iraq. And our nation is in extremis!

[tomp]

184. what an insulting reference.

uninformed? all or nothing? that's broad-brushed slander, and just like a Democrat.

[ComerPerro]

186. If you aren't a Dem, then WTF are you doing here at all?

[tomp]

190. slumming. nt

[tomp]

183. it's important to realize this disagreement is not going away.

obviously, there are posters on both sides who are adamantly attached to their views and are not likely to change. as lenin once famously asked, What is to be done?

not that i have the answer, but i think there is little choice but to accept the fact that we have a split party, and THAT is the value of this thread. we have, in simple terms "progressives" and "moderates". or, the people who can wait and the people who can't. i want to make it clear, my waiting did not begin on 12/12/00. no, it began in 1967, when i first became acutley aware of two-party politics. nothing has improved since then. the "left" continues to be coopted and sold out by political opportunists and hacks. the bush II era only highlights that fact and the chasm between "the people" and the parties grows wider.

i do know what is NOT to be done and that is more of the same.

[Grandrose]

189. A mighty Kick!!!

Thanks for keeping it real!:applause: :kick: