So the Dem bill Friday needed a 2/3 vote...Bush's bill today just needed a majority....

[Junkdrawer]

And WE control the House?

OK, somebody want to explain why the Dem alternative bill was anything but a thin ploy to appease the Dem base.

Anyone?

[creeksneakers2]

1. I keep asking the same question n/t

[Junkdrawer]

2. The Democratic FISA alternative bill in the HOUSE won 217 to 208...

but it LOST because it needed a two thirds majority...


...

A proposal by House Democrats to fix the problem failed today to obtain the two-thirds margin required after McConnell said it ``would not allow me to carry out my responsibility to provide warning and to protect the nation.''

The measure, like the Democratic alternative in the Senate, would have required a court order to authorize interceptions of e-mails and phone calls of foreign-based terrorists routed through U.S. telephone switching points.

....

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aMS_tRNJpPvo&refer=home

[Nitrogenica]

3. I think that Bush is pushing a strategy to paint the Democrats

as ineffective by blocking things and blaming Democrats. Democrats, facing the media spin machine, have their backs against the wall.

The solution is to get that veto-proof majority in 2008. We can't get anything done with Righties still weilding as much power as they have.

[Tesha]

38. We haven't got a prayer of a veto-proof majority.

And oddly enough, the Republicans never had one either
as they steam-rolled the Constitution.

What we need is a majority who knows how to govern
and fight political wars as though they actually
meant to win.

Tesha

[Junkdrawer]

4. I mean, being sold down the river is one thing...but this is just insulting....

I guess they think we're retarded...perhaps we are...

[jgraz]

33. If you'd seen the fundraising letters that went out after the Iraq funding vote

you wouldn't "guess" they think we're retarded. Pelosi and Reid kept insisting the HAD to fund the war because they didn't have a veto-proof majority.

[Junkdrawer]

34. Built too low to the ground. The fast ones just go right over their heads...

They couldn't stop the funding of the war because Bush would veto any bill that gave him less.

"You can't stop me you dirty screws...if you give me less, I'll force you to give me nothing at all..."

Yep, he's unstoppable.

[leftchick]

35. you should see the lovely letter I printed up and sent back

in that envelope. Apparently they still have no clue.

[Junkdrawer]

5. .

[Junkdrawer]

31. .

[Junkdrawer]

32. .

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

39. This morning I posted this. So far it's sunk like a stone. I think the Truth is too painful.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_al

[KharmaTrain]

6. Senate Rules Vs. House Rules

The House always votes on a majority plus one. The Senate operates under different rules...a "supermajority" or 60 votes for a debate to go forward and 67 votes for a majority to either over-ride a veto or that is placed on certain controversial votes (such as impeachment or troop withdrawls). Got a problem with the system, then let's revise the Constitution.

Control doesn't mean dominance. And while the Democrats control the Senate agenda, they are far from controling the votes...a fact the Repugnicans play like a violin...and in turn Democrats...especially those here...get frustrated with. Instead of putting pressure and wedging the "moderate" or "WINO" repugnicans, the first place people bring out their knives on are Democrats. It's this divide and conquer game the booosh regime plays.

Expect polls now to come out this week that show House and Senate approval lower than booshie's approval...and the corporate media is sure to play it up how weak Democrats are and how "strong" boooshie is. Our angst fuels this big lie.

Yep...be mad, be angry...get involved. Don't like how your Representative voted? Find a candidate who does represent your views and either get out the checkbook or the shoe leather and make a change that matters.

[Junkdrawer]

7. It was the HOUSE that needed a 2/3 vote Friday....

The Democratic FISA alternative bill in the HOUSE won 217 to 208 - but it LOST because it needed a two thirds majority...

...

A proposal by House Democrats to fix the problem failed today to obtain the two-thirds margin required after McConnell said it ``would not allow me to carry out my responsibility to provide warning and to protect the nation.''

The measure, like the Democratic alternative in the Senate, would have required a court order to authorize interceptions of e-mails and phone calls of foreign-based terrorists routed through U.S. telephone switching points.

....


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aMS_tRNJpPvo&refer=home

[KharmaTrain]

10. McConnell's The DNI...Not The Senate...

The quote you put was from MIKE McConnell of the DNI...that's what confused me. I had a chance to read the article and it's still vague on what transpired, but this appears to be an ammendment to the Senate bill...which can require a 2/3rds to pass...this was to change the passed Senate bill. This wasn't a vote on the FISA bill in the House that pissed out with a simple majority last night.

Alternative is just that...a complete rewrite of already passed legislation...it's the equivelent of the House trying to overturning a veto. Sadly as we saw with the 40 who crossed over on just the majority vote last night, this motion was an attempt to measure how the final bill would pass.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

8. You wrote that the House always votes on a majority plus one. Friday night they

suspended the rules and the FISA bill needed a 2/3 majority. That is how it lost Friday night in the House for the Dems. They had a simple majority of the votes. That vote was an exercise in failure. They knew there weren't 2/3 in favor of the House Bill. It was doomed to fail before it began.

Junkdrawer is as concerned as I am that last night, instead of suspending the rules, they voted on the Senate version of FISA on a straight up and down vote.

[KharmaTrain]

9. The Friday Vote Was In The Senate

I didn't see a FISA vote in the House until last night. If there was a suspension of the rules, please link me...I sure didn't see that brought up.

Maybe ammendments were set at 2/3rds, but not the final bill...and yes, it was the damn Senate sell-out. This bill should have been defeated in the House on a simple majority.

The House was all but dysfunctional on Friday...all but shutting down over a vote on Thursday about an ammendment about giving medical assistance to "illegal aliens" (yep, no health care to Martians as far as I am concerned)...if there was some kind of backroom dealing I'd really like to see that.

I think you're both confusing Friday's Senate vote with yesterday's House vote...but I have been wrong many times...ask my wife.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

11. On Friday night, the House had it's own FISA Bill. There are threads upon threads on this. Many of

us watched.

Not confused at all. You seem to have been out of the loop. You can start here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1507127

[Junkdrawer]

15. "We don't have the votes...We don't have the votes...OH MY GOD we have the votes.."

"What can we do? What can we do? Wait...I know...let's change the rules so that WE need a 2/3 vote, but they don't."

"Brilliant. Only a few wonks will notice the difference and NO ONE listens to them. Oh Steny...tell me again about how much you love my eyes..."

[KharmaTrain]

18. Do You Want A DeLay?

The problem going in was there are "Blue Dogs" and other skittish Democrats from purple and red states (look at the list) where many either squeeked by in the past election or feel constant pressure from local right wing media. There's no excusing this travesty, just an attempt to try to sort out what happened here and to see how it can be prevented in the future. Call it part of my learning curve and I appreciate your patience...while I join in your frustration.

Now where from here? Do we sack leadership and with whom? Do we just throw up arms and scream? I'd like to hear alternatives...

[Junkdrawer]

20. Well, for starters, let's get the whole story out on the table...

I feel like someone is trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

Question #1: WHY THE DIFFERENT RULES FOR THE DIFFERENT BILLS????

[KharmaTrain]

22. Worth Asking Josh Marshall

I'm far from an expert on the Byzantine rules of government...and, honestly, just reading all the wiki entries gave me a headache.

You do ask a very valid question that someone with a greater insight into the personalities and the meat grinding can explain.

The only explanation I see is that the that the alternative bill...which would have superceded the Senate bill that had passed earlier that day (and it appears that was approved by House "conferees") required the suspending of the rules to be brought up for a vote and that this upset egos and applecarts. This ammendment was forced against the wishes of leadership and thus why the suspension occured and thus the 2/3rd rule.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

13. Article

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/08/03/national/w180845D57.DTL&feed=rss.news

[KharmaTrain]

16. FYI...

Suspension Of The Rules...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspension_of_the_rules

Suspension of the rules is a procedure generally used to quickly pass non-controversial bills.

A motion to suspend the rules is in order on Mondays and Tuesdays and towards the end of a session of Congress and may only be made by the Speaker of the House or her designee, though it is customary for committee chairs to write the Speaker requesting a suspension. Once a member makes a motion to "suspend the rules" and take some action, debate is limited to 40 minutes, no amendments can be offered to the motion or the underlying matter, and a 2/3 majority is required to agree to the motion.

A suspension motion sets aside all procedural and other rules that would otherwise prohibit the House from consideration of the measure, but the specific rules that are to be suspended are never mentioned in the motion. Typically, a suspension motion is phrased as a motion to "suspend the rules and pass the bill," and, if the Motion is agreed to, the bill is considered as passed by the House. A Member can also move to suspend the rules and take another action, such as to "suspend the rules and consider the bill," and the House shall take the proposed action if two-thirds of those voting are in favor of the motion.

Most often, bills "on suspension" are non-controversial legislation -- such as naming Post Offices of the United States Postal Service or federal buildings -- and nearly all bills that are considered under suspension rules have bipartisan support. Both major political parties in the United States -- the Democratic Party and Republican Party -- have internal rules that prohibit proposing or supporting a bill under suspension unless it costs less than $100 million.

Sadly, still a majority was needed for final passage...we are where we are...now where? To the barricades??? Torches and Pitchforks?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

17. Odd choice for the House to opt for the suspension of the rules on Friday night

Most often, bills "on suspension" are non-controversial legislation -- such as naming Post Offices of the United States Postal Service or federal buildings -- and nearly all bills that are considered under suspension rules have bipartisan support. Both major political parties in the United States -- the Democratic Party and Republican Party -- have internal rules that prohibit proposing or supporting a bill under suspension unless it costs less than $100 million.

I read this yesterday btw.

As you can see, pitchforks and torches might be in order. The Leadership in the House didn't intend that the House Bill Win.

[Junkdrawer]

19. This time, "they" didn't do it to us. This time, the Dem House Leadership did it...

And they got some 'splaining to do...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

23. Did you see this thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1515818

[Junkdrawer]

25. Yeah...Like I said, OUR leadership doesn't seem to have a high opinion...

of OUR intelligence...

Motto: "Give them a light, and they'll follow it anywhere."

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

24. There have been posts on the board about the "blue dogs" and how they have to be voted out

They do have to be voted out BUT They are meant to be the scapegoats for Progressives/Patriots. After all, they voted For the House Bill on Friday night. In reality it was Reid and Pelosi in cahoots with the WH to show a brief grandstand and then to screw us really well. I knew this was going to happen when the Senate adjourned for summer recess on Friday night.

[Junkdrawer]

26. So..Bush can start Interim Appointing in 10 days....

Betcha a new Gonzo Clone is in the works...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

27. lol! The other day I said he would select Harriet Miers. He could really do that if he

wanted to.

[Junkdrawer]

28. "No...no..really. Mr. Gonzales told me he needed to spend more time"...

"with his family. And speaking of family, I hereby appoint his twin brother Carlos Gonzales as my new Attorney General."


"No questions."

[KharmaTrain]

21. Plenty Of Strange Motions The Last Several Days

Some right wing wench just called into Washington Journal griping about how the journal was all jazzed up on Thursday and how the rules were changes during that late vote and yada yada...it's like the pressure got turned up and leadership cracked. There's no other way to slice it.

I just want anger toward outward, not inward...a day and time will come to settle scores and call our own into account for their past enabling...and, trust me, I've got a very long memory...but forming a circular firing squad while the Repugnicans continue to obstruct and distort just irks me more.

I'll be curious of the fallout outside the DU world in the next several days...and if there is any. If there's silence, then we have a far deeper problem.

Cheers...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

14. For the rest, go back to Friday night DU threads into yesterday. They were all over the board. eom

[nolabels]

30. Yea, and for those poor folks trying to make a living working two or three jobs.........

they are all over the country. We have an elite congress bought and paid for by corporate bucks that does their bidding. Somehow the apologists don't get it yet, we have been sold down the river and are getting lip service in the process (and them apologists are part of it).

Some of us who are not multi-millionaire fortunate and don't have them big issues about the bucks are getting pretty damned pissed off at others trampling over our backs to get them :mad:

Oh yea, describing the whole of DU as some disoriented get together then trying to project it as a microcosm of the rest of country will not work either.

[dkofos]

12. Here's yor explanation, PISS POOR PELOSI BENT OVER FOR *USH.

[Hubert Flottz]

29. Some things are more important than freedom or liberty...

such as vacations.

[mmonk]

36. We should never send such bills through.

This president has support among the Blue Dog democrats. With them, we lose. We have no chance unless the crimes are exposed or the Blue Dogs are driven from office along with their republican party soul mates and replaced with democrats. We're in it for the long haul. America seems destined to become something different.

[Changenow]

37. It's a lie.

They all lie.

[mhatrw]

40. Good FUCKING question! n/t