goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: john "teach me how to" dougie on April 26, 2013, 03:49:15 PM
-
A nearly unanimous vote for a good idea. I guess we just need more good ideas.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/26/congress-tells-obama-stop-faa-furloughs/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/26/congress-tells-obama-stop-faa-furloughs/)
“I think we all agree the FAA and the administration has handled the sequester poorly,” said Rep. Tom Latham, Iowa Republican. “The administration has played shameful politics with sequestration at the expense of hardworking families.”
The bill passed the House 361-41, and the Senate had already pre-approved the bill unanimously late Thursday night.
It now goes to Mr. Obama, who signaled he will sign it — though the White House was not happy about it.
“It is a band-aid solution. It does not solve the bigger problem,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said.
He said this was a one-time exception and the president wouldn’t entertain other specific carve-outs from the sequesters.
Previously, the president had rejected efforts to give him flexibility to move money around, saying that he didn’t want to pick-and-choose between programs and instead wanted to see taxes raised to cover the costs of the programs.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/26/congress-tells-obama-stop-faa-furloughs/#ixzz2RbX9cXm8
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
-
A nearly unanimous vote for a good idea. I guess we just need more good ideas.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/26/congress-tells-obama-stop-faa-furloughs/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/26/congress-tells-obama-stop-faa-furloughs/)
“I think we all agree the FAA and the administration has handled the sequester poorly,” said Rep. Tom Latham, Iowa Republican. “The administration has played shameful politics with sequestration at the expense of hardworking families.”
The bill passed the House 361-41, and the Senate had already pre-approved the bill unanimously late Thursday night.
It now goes to Mr. Obama, who signaled he will sign it — though the White House was not happy about it.
“It is a band-aid solution. It does not solve the bigger problem,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said.
He said this was a one-time exception and the president wouldn’t entertain other specific carve-outs from the sequesters.
Previously, the president had rejected efforts to give him flexibility to move money around, saying that he didn’t want to pick-and-choose between programs and instead wanted to see taxes raised to cover the costs of the programs.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/26/congress-tells-obama-stop-faa-furloughs/#ixzz2RbX9cXm8
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
No, it's just that frequent business travelers tend to be affluent and the members within congress (and thus congress) exist only with their support. If anything this is an example of how intertwined money and politics are in our system.
You won't see anyone doing anything about cuts in housing programs there are estimated to make 100,000 people homeless.
-
Oh man, this is a terrible example of Congress/Presidency not being broken. It's actually a really good example of how mumped up things are right now.
-
Oh man, this is a terrible example of Congress/Presidency not being broken. It's actually a really good example of how mumped up things are right now.
yeah. another great example of Republicans trying to rewrite their history so they look less shitty.
-
Previously, the president had rejected efforts to give him flexibility to move money around,
Way to ignore the most important statement in the post. Talk about rewriting history.