When I read a simple wikipedia entry I can look and see a record of all alterations entered. Isn’t there a similar record of insertions and deletions on proposed laws?
In Congress? What do you think this is, a state legislature?
You can’t read what’s not there. The republicans inserted the language after it had passed committee.
Seems so obvious. Like when you go to an ATM you get a piece of paper stating what your transaction was…but for voting machines? No, because:
a). Too hard
b). It would take away the “secret ballot”(!?)
c). It wouldn’t stop election fraud anyway (aw, can’t we just TRY it?)
No, when it comes to stopping shenanigans there are million$ of rea$on$ we can’t do it.
Okay, 'fess up. Did you cheat and go outside TPM to find out facts not included in the TPM story?
Do you know that? If it is true, then the process should go back to the wording when it was voted out of committee. The article didn’t say this. Where is your source on this?
While I agree that Dem Senators have been caught with their pants or panties down don’t they have staff who actually READ the bills and check for a grenade? Both the Senate and the House are doing their best to show that they are a dishonest or incompetent bunch engaged in sneaky stuff. No wonder their “approval” rating has been in the toilet for a while.
Republicans inserted a poison pill into another bi-partisan bill. Damn Democrats!
Republicans insert — Who’d of thunk it ?
I found this…
“shall be subject to the limitations on the use or expending of amounts described in sections 506 and 507 of division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 … to the same extent as if amounts in the Fund were funds appropriated under division H of such Act.”
-snip
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) accused Republicans of “trying pull a fast one” in inserting the abortion provision. Two Democratic leaders, Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), both said Democrats had been advised that it was not among the changes made to the bill since it was taken up last year by a Democratic-controlled Senate. Earlier in the day, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), ranking member of the committee that unanimously forwarded the bill, said Judiciary Committee Democrats were “assured” the provision was not included.
In an early Janunary e-mail reviewed by the Post, a Republican Judiciary Committee staffer sent a Democratic staffer a summary of changes to the previous version of the bill, in seven bullet points. The abortion provision was not among them.
I apologize for commenting ‘blue’, but fuck these fucking shitstains right back to the primordial ooze. Does every goddamned thing have to come back to killing abortion rights, the social safety net and compassion for immigrants? For fuck’s sake. (Insert Sam Kinnison scream here.)
I apologize; I confused another article on a bill from last week where the republicans were caught slipping anti-abortion language into it after-the-fact.
They seem to be having these kinds of unfortunate accidents a lot recently.
“The Rules Committee slipped the new language into a part of the bill known as the “manager’s amendment,” which is normally reserved for non-controversial fixes to a piece of legislation that are agreed to ahead of time.”
Dear Elected Democrats,
You can’t trust the Republicans. If you need specifics, please see the years 1981 - Current.
Sincerely,
Voting Democrats
*** Earlier in the day, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), ranking member of the committee that unanimously forwarded the bill, said Judiciary Committee Democrats were “assured” the provision was not included.***
how about reading the fucking thing… the three dems listed – schumer, durbin, leahy – most certainly have the most experienced and likely most number of staffers that should be tasked with this shit. if not, hire someone specifically for that job – since they clearly have no interest in actually reading the bills themselves.
goddamn, this is so infuriating.
Big, bad John.
FACT: This disgusting amendment is akin to trying to outlaw abortion even in the case of rape and the Dems are failing horribly to message that. Trafficked human beings are largely women and little girls who are sold into sexual slavery. Banning this revenue stream, which is intended to be used to help these victims, from being used to fund abortions for any of them who are suffering an unwanted pregnancy as a result of their quasi-rape at the hands of the sick fucks who pay to sexually abuse them is, as far as I’m concerned, no different than trying to force them to carry rape babies to term.
The Dems need to get their heads out of their fucking assholes and start saying as much.
Until you get handed a version that you don’t realize was revised.
“None of that strikes me as plausible.”
Cornyn could write for House of Cards… create a sneaky scenario with intrigue and deception, then act surprised that you fooled them when your victims realize they’ve been had, and that you have patently deceived them.
They should also have some sort of colored text on their Congressional computer word programs that only matches the rest of the bill once the whole committee has approved it.
That way, they could always refer to the “red letter” version or whatever color they chose, and that conversion couldn’t be made to the text unless ALL committee members signed off on the change.
By coloring the text that hasn’t been approved, it stands out to even the most casual speed reader. Then make t a crime to change the text color before the committee has agreed to it. Seriously, they can still arrest some poor sucker for a joint in many states, we can’t arrest someone for screwing with our precious law?
Even now, I would wager if they did some serious investigating, they’d uncover a well-defined conspiracy of Senators and staffers who stealthily engineered this whole thing, which in itself I would wager is already illegal in more than one statute.
But, then, those kinds of crimes against democracy don’t matter, its the horrendous pot-smoking and j-walking street crime committed by poor petty criminals that counts.
Don’t the Senators have staffs that read and evaluate bills?