Have you guys heard what Sen. Coburn (R) OK, has done?

[Lone_Star_Dem]

He stalled the Wild Sky bill.

<snip>
Coburn has employed one of Congress' most powerful weapons against the Wild Sky bill: a parliamentary maneuver that allows members of the Senate to covertly block legislation.

The senator has placed a "hold" on the bill and dozens of others that would authorize new spending. The procedural tactic effectively blocks a quick floor vote and forces Senate leaders to schedule sometimes time-consuming floor debate if they want the measure passed.

Coburn's main objection to the Wild Sky bill is its $19 million price tag. His spokesman, John Hart, confirmed that Coburn had placed the "hold" on the measure. The senator believes "Congress should have to do what everyone else does, which is make choices within their budget," Hart said.

When families want to add a new expense, they have to cut other spending, Coburn has said. "Americans want Congress to live within its means."
<snip>
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/331653_wildsky14.html


Yet somehow all of this spending is fine with the good Senator?

As Iraq Costs Soar, Contractors Earn Record Profits
By Eli Clifton
Inter Press Service
August 2, 2007

In a report to lawmakers earlier this week, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office found that the war in Iraq could cost U.S. taxpayers over a trillion dollars when the long-term costs of caring for soldiers wounded in action, military and economic aid for the Iraqi government, and ongoing costs associated with the 190,000 troops stationed in Iraq are totaled up.

White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels' 2003 estimate that the war in Iraq could cost 50-60 billion dollars stands in stark contrast to the 500 billion dollars already allocated to the conflict in Iraq and reconstruction projects. "We are now spending on these activities more than 10 percent of all the government's annually appropriated funds," Robert A. Sunshine, the assistant director for budget analysis, said Tuesday. In Sunshine's report to Congress, he showed that in an optimistic scenario -- the U.S. reduces its troop levels in Iraq to 30,000 by 2010 -- the war will still cost taxpayers an additional 500 billion dollars.

In a less optimistic scenario in which 75,000 US troops remain in Iraq over the next five years the cost to the U.S. government would total an additional 900 billion dollars. "This is the consequence of going to war haphazardly and without a plan. We're at a point where we look at how much is approved by congress, we're at 450 billion dollars. Then the 116 billion dollars requested by the Bush administration puts the total at over 556 billion dollars," Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Centre for American Progress, told IPS. "The Vietnam war when inflation adjusted cost 652 billion dollars," he added.

While Congressional Budget Office reports showed a gloomy outlook for U.S. costs in Iraq, last week several of Washington's biggest defence contractors released profit reports disclosing huge growth in divisions benefiting from military contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Northrop Grumman's information and services, and electronics divisions showed 15 percent and 7 percent growth, respectively, for the second quarter compared to the same fiscal quarter last year. General Dynamics' combat systems unit experienced a 19 percent growth in sales due to continued demand for tanks and armored vehicles while Lockheed Martin announced a 34 percent rise in profits to 778 million dollars. Lockheed's newest revenue projections are now as high as 41.75 billion dollars.
<snip>
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2007/0802soaringcosts.htm


Amazing what Republicans will take a stand against and what they'll turn a blind eye to. :mad:

[LeftCoast]

1. Roadblock republicans

Unless it's killing troops, they don't wanna fund it.

[havocmom]

2. Dropping dollars to pick up pennies

What a jerk.

And a gutless jerk at that.

[librechik]

3. Does the Wild Sky Intitative put all the eagles in cages?

just curious. The name is so Bushian.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

8. Yeah, I wondered about it too when I first heard the name.

It sounds to be a pretty good thing, however.

This story explains most of the good points pretty well.

Under Larsen's bill, 106,577 acres in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest would receive the highest level of protection afforded federal property.

It would be off limits to vehicles, including bicycles and snowmobiles, as well as to logging, mining and other commercial uses. Wheelchairs would be allowed, and the proposal calls for a 2-mile former logging road to be converted to a wheelchair-accessible trail.

Road construction would be prohibited except in emergencies, such as fires. The goal is to preserve the land so that the 2.4 million people who live within two hours of the valley can experience views and vistas that greeted the first settlers.

And in a break with tradition in which only highest-elevation land is protected -- so-called rocks and ice -- 30 percent of the land protected by Wild Sky would be considered lowland, including forests and salmon-bearing streams.
<snip>

Much more here: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/312053_wildsky18.html

[librechik]

13. I should have known--if Coburn is blocking it, it has to do some good

[maxsolomon]

11. wild sky is the headwaters of the skykomish river

drains a huge area of the north cascades north of US2.

hey okies: you senators SUCK. and i hope you choke on our sonics.

[spanone]

4. why don't the democrats to this to the next iraqi spending bill

[ljm2002]

5. Good question...

...also why didn't they use this as legislation was railroaded through Congress for the last 6 years???

[warren pease]

9. Cuz they don't know what the hell they're doing? n/t

[ljm2002]

10. Political cowardice n/t

[LSK]

14. umm, they are????

"The procedural tactic effectively blocks a quick floor vote and forces Senate leaders to schedule sometimes time-consuming floor debate if they want the measure passed."

:shrug:

[Bluebear]

6. That's why it bothered me that Obama would "seek out" Coburn as a GOP model

"I would also seek out people like Tom Coburn, who is probably the most conservative member of the U.S. Senate. He has become a friend of mine."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082600303.html

[hang a left]

7. I read yesterday the Coburn has used this procedural block

On around 70 pieces of legislation. That his moves are unprecedented.

Why the hell didn't the Dem's do these types of things when they were in the minority??

Things that make you wonder...

[VP505]

12. That's a question

that I have wondered about for some time now. When the Dem's were the minority they couldn't get anything done because they either didn't have the votes or the RePublics wouldn't let it get to the floor for a vote. Now that they are the majority they still cant get stuff to the floor because the minority either filibusters, puts a secret hold on it or they have to have a super majority of votes.