Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yeah, I don't get it. The gop uses reconcillation and complains about lack of bipartisanship.I commented on this topic elsewhere but now I can't seem to find it. It turns out this is all over McConnell getting outmaneuvered by Schumer and Manchin.
It's not like McConnell never plays that game. He got all butt hurt over it and took it out on wounded veterans.
True. But it’s true of all legislation. Bad actors will seek to take advantage of opportunities to steal. I mean, hey: just look at Hunter and his “10% for the big guy” dad.But pork always leads to misuse of funds
Nope. Democrats added more spending on pork.It passed the House with bipartisan support. It was set to pass the Senate until Mitch had a conniption. Screw the veterans, Mitch got outplayed.
"They’re manufacturing reasons to vote against legislation that they literally voted for just last month," Butler added. "And so it’s really a new level of low."
Veterans who were exposed to toxins during deployments said the lives of sick and dying people who served the nation are on the line.
"It’s angering. It’s frustrating," said Tom Porter, 54, who developed asthma after spending a year in Afghanistan with the U.S. Navy Reserve from 2010 to 2011.
In the first week of his deployment, Porter said he suffered a serious reaction with his lungs and could not breathe.
Le Roy Torres, 49, who was diagnosed with a lung disease and a toxic brain injury after he was deployed to Iraq with the U.S. Army, said he was devastated about the failure of the bill and urged lawmakers to reconvene immediately.
MSN
www.msn.com
Is that anyway to treat the veterans, they are spiteful at Joe Manchins agreeing to the package.
Well Toomey can bring up his amendments. but seriously for the party of the 2017 tax cuts to complain about deficits or billion dollar corporations paying ANY tax. I mean, jesus, we're not talking about a mom and pop diner with a 3% profit margin in good years.No you haven't covered the pork that you support.
link. The only links I saw was the bill is identical to the one the gop already voted on.Nope. Democrats added more spending on pork.
They voted it down because they were upset with Manchin for finally growing a pair and joining with the Dems to come up with a reconciliation bill that addresses, climate change, inflation, and other issues that are critical to ordinary Americans. It does not give corporations or 1%ers some tax breaks, so repubs are against it.That has been discussed in the thread, actually.
Maybe read the thread before making yourself look like a moron.
Congress Amends the PACT Act to Apply to All Vaping Products, Placing Huge Burden on Small Manufacturers as Third-Party Common Carriers Refuse to Ship Products
Background on the PACT Actwww.natlawreview.com
Sorry, but the OP is wrong. The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act IS NOT the Pact Act. The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act is Senate Bill 3363 and was voted on a couple of days ago. The Pact Act is Senate Bill 797, has been read twice and referred to committee. There have been no votes.I took it upon myself to peruse the PACT act bill. It appears to feature a lot of pork —although in fairness, the pork seems to be related to the actual purpose of the act (ie, assisting our vets exposed to toxic waste as the likely cause of subsequent illnesses).
Text - H.R.3967 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Honoring our PACT Act of 2022
Text for H.R.3967 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Honoring our PACT Act of 2022www.congress.gov
The cost projections are as fuzzy as fuck. But this seems to be the most recent relevant document on that aspect of this topic:
If all of what you said is true, imma gonna have a word with Google.Look, the OP was wrong. The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act IS NOT the PACT act. The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act is Senate Bill 117S3373. That was the bill that was voted on a couple of days ago. The PACT act is Senate Bill 117S797. It has been read twice and referred to committee. There have been no votes.
I have posted links to a
Sorry, but the OP was wrong.
Sorry, but the OP is wrong. The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act IS NOT the Pact Act. The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act is Senate Bill 3363 and was voted on a couple of days ago. The Pact Act is Senate Bill 797, has been read twice and referred to committee. There have been no votes.
There is no "pork" in the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act. I have posted links to the act itself within this thread, you are more than free to peruse the 60 or so pages and find some pork. The entire bill deals with veterans and outside of water quality issues at Camp Legeune, it deals explicitly with the effects of toxic fumes from burn pits.
Then why would republicans change their vote if it's identical to the one they said yes to?link. The only links I saw was the bill is identical to the one the gop already voted on.
That is not what was done here and I have clearly documented that.Democrats have perverted the bill by including all kinds of extra pork after making a deal. This is what they do. Aren't you aware of that?
and yet i sided totally with the vets and you gave me a thumbs down....explain that one....Partisan as in siding with the veterans? Yes indeed.
Read the entire article.That is not what was done here and I have clearly documented that.
and yet i sided totally with the vets and you gave me a thumbs down....explain that one....
The problem is that the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act is sometimes called the PACT act with PACT signifying Promise to Adress Comprehensive Toxics. But the “Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act is also called the PACT act. It appears McConnell and his compadres are purposely mixing the two to cover their asses on the recent vote.If all of what you said is true, imma gonna have a word with Google.
Nobody changed their vote. It's the best propaganda tool in politics. Introduce a faulty bill that allegedly benefits some Veterans but doesn't have a prayer of passing and then accuse republicans when it doesn't pass. Desperate times call for desperate tactics. It beats talking about Biden's impending war with China over Taiwan.
Because they didn't think Machin would agree to reconcilliation.Then why would republicans change their vote if it's identical to the one they said yes to?
www.foxnews.com
I saw one PACT Act dealing with animal cruelty. Nomenclature isn’t their strongest skill set.The problem is that the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act is sometimes called the PACT act with PACT signifying Promise to Adress Comprehensive Toxics. But the “Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act is also called the PACT act. It appears McConnell and his compadres are purposely mixing the two to cover their asses on the recent vote.
