This Republican Congress is on pace to make history with the least productive legislative year in the post World War II era, USA Today reports.
"Just 61 bills have become law to date in 2012 out of 3,914 bills that have been introduced by lawmakers, or less than 2% of all proposed laws, according to a USA Today analysis of records since 1947 kept by the U.S. House Clerk's office. "
With unemployment, jobs, taxes, gun violence, and social security all important issues... this Republican Congress is more interested in over 30 failed bills to end ObamaCare or bills to limit women's health care.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So, in other words, what you're saying is that this Congress, one that is half controlled by Republicans, the other half being controlled by Democrats, is actually the LEAST INVASIVE Congress into the lives of the residents of the Republic since we came out of the Great Depression? Hmmm.... maybe it's something we should try a little more. Maybe there should now be bills that will wipe out a bunch of the junk that has been passed since the war.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
If they can't be active repealing laws, a great comprimise is not passing new laws.
Not sure about this, but I think to 'repeal' a law, they have to PASS a Resolution that repeals it.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Not sure about this, but I think to 'repeal' a law, they have to PASS a Resolution that repeals it.
Even if true, the resolution only affects the legislative body, it is not a NEW ADDIONAL law affecting the citizen. So if you want to play semantics - if they aren't passing resolutions to repeal laws, a good compromise is not passing new additional laws on to the citizens.
Even if true, the resolution only affects the legislative body, it is not a NEW ADDIONAL law affecting the citizen. So if you want to play semantics - if they aren't passing resolutions to repeal laws, a good compromise is not passing new additional laws on to the citizens.
As always... we disagree. (Of course) If a law existed that required seat belt usage... Citizens are affected. By passing a repeal to that law... Citizens are affected.
Anti govt radicals always consider any government action to be a negative and opposed... (even if the government action is exactly what they want to happen)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
As always... we disagree. (Of course) If a law existed that required seat belt usage... Citizens are affected. By passing a repeal to that law... Citizens are affected.
Anti govt radicals always consider any government action to be a negative and opposed... (even if the government action is exactly what they want to happen)
And that would be a law that should be at the state level, not the federal level. Of course, you probably think (I'm not saying that you do, but I bet ya...) that this should be under the federal Department of Transportation, which, besides the roadways to move the mail and the militia, would be unconstitutional.
And that would be a law that should be at the state level, not the federal level. Of course, you probably think (I'm not saying that you do, but I bet ya...) that this should be under the federal Department of Transportation, which, besides the roadways to move the mail and the militia, would be unconstitutional.
Everyone has their own OPINION of what is and what is not Constitutional. Much of the disagreement has yet to be settled in the court.
My post had nothing to do with seatbelts but instead with inaction of Congress, and the discussion of how repealing a bill requires Congress to vote FOR a bill that repeals a law.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
It's about time that congress puts on the breaks!! The white house is overstepping their boundries with their state mandates. Letthe people and the states they live in govern themselves. The FED is w-a-y out of control!!!
It's not 'less productive'..........its 'less invasive'!!
However, the lame stream medias will use those 'catch phrases' that they are so famous for!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
It's about time that congress puts on the breaks!! The white house is overstepping their boundries with their state mandates. Letthe people and the states they live in govern themselves. The FED is w-a-y out of control!!!
It's not 'less productive'..........its 'less invasive'!!
However, the lame stream medias will use those 'catch phrases' that they are so famous for!!
LMAO! "LAME STREAM MEDIA" bumbler is complaining about "catch phrases!!!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
As always... we disagree. (Of course) If a law existed that required seat belt usage... Citizens are affected. By passing a repeal to that law... Citizens are affected.
No, they aren't affected...Citizens are now FREE to choose whether or not to wear their seatbelt...Repealing the seatbelt law does't make it illegal to wear a seatbelt. The only entity affected by repealing the seatbelt law is the government that collects revenue enforcing this victimless arbitrary law.
The only entity affected by repealing the seatbelt law is the government that collects revenue enforcing this victimless arbitrary law.
Very true although most law enforcement today is all about revenue collection not about protecting and serving. Schenectady has a entire unit that does nothing but enforce revenue collecting laws.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Logged
