"Lawmakers spent Wednesday rifling through a 1,603-page, $1.1 trillion spending bill that House Republicans and Senate Democrats negotiated for the last several months, but that was revealed publicly only late Tuesday night."
Related:
Lame Duck Se$$ion: Tax Cuts Passed
Lame Duck Se$$ion: War Machine Funded
I hope you enjoyed the political theater. Blog hits suggest you did not, but I no longer trust those (that would also explain the garbage results I have been getting for my research searches).
"As clock ticks, Warren balks at spending bill" by Noah Bierman and Jessica Meyers, Globe Staff December 10, 2014
WASHINGTON — Senator Elizabeth Warren led a liberal revolt Wednesday against an effort that she says weakens financial regulations, casting uncertainty over whether Congress would approve a yearlong bill to fund the government before lawmakers adjourn for the year.
Uh-huh.
A shutdown, though unlikely, remained a possibility, as funding for the government runs out Thursday.
Lawmakers spent Wednesday rifling through a 1,603-page, $1.1 trillion spending bill that House Republicans and Senate Democrats negotiated for the last several months, but that was revealed publicly only late Tuesday night.
I feel manipulated and misled.
The source of debate Wednesday involved a change affecting the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul that was passed after the 2008 financial collapse. Warren, joined by House minority leader Nancy Pelosi and a host of liberal groups and Wall Street watchdogs, said a provision in the bill that lifts some restrictions on big banks would be an unacceptable gift to Wall Street.
“We can’t just let them slip in grenades that blow up pieces of financial regulations,” Warren said in an interview.
Warren urged House Democrats, who are scheduled to vote on the budget bill Thursday, to withhold support unless the provision was removed. Democrats also complained about a campaign finance provision in the bill that could allow individuals to dramatically raise their giving to political parties, possibly to as much as hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.
The bill also contained hundreds of policy and spending provisions, including a relaxation of campaign finance rules, $100 million for the Green Line extension to Somerville and Medford, a change in federal pension rules that cuts retirement funds for some Americans, $5.4 billion to fight Ebola, and a ban on transferring prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay detention camp to US facilities.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said President Obama would have to consider “the whole package before we make a decision about whether or not to sign it.”
Pelosi accused Republicans of “working to stack the deck for the special interests” and said the Dodd-Frank provision “opens the door to another taxpayer-funded bailout of big banks, forcing middle class families to bear the burden of Wall Street’s mistakes.”
I guess she just found out about it all, too. Pretty sorry excuse for leadership if that is the case.
Sorry I'm not into all the political illu$ion and rhetoric anymore, folks.
If House Democrats unite behind Warren, and Republicans refuse to relent, it could threaten the larger spending bill, which is intended to keep the government open through September. House Speaker John Boehner will probably need support from some Democrats to pass the bill, as conservatives in his party have said they will withhold their support because it does not fight hard enough against Obama’s unilateral immigration agenda.
I do it on principle because -- if the Globe's reporting is true, and there is no reason to believe it is not here, it's keeping track of that vital tax loot money for $elected intere$ts -- it's a one-year war budget with tax cuts for the elite. That's not the change the American people voted for.
To push back against Obama’s immigration moves, the spending plan funds the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees immigration, only through February.
Republican leaders, who were blamed for a federal government shutdown last year, may be willing to test Democrats’ resolve, banking that the public will blame liberals.
Always a good whipping boy, and not without some merit.
The provision Warren opposes would remove a rule that requires big banks to move certain risky financial investments into separate units, so that they are not backed by federal government insurance or given other protections.
“Those provisions, like the entire bill, were the result of a bipartisan, bicameral process,” said Michael Steel, a Boehner spokesman.
Yeah, I know. Amazing how when it comes to Israel Wall Street, and the war machine, you guys are all one big biparti$an group!
A provision similar to the one Warren opposes was supported by 22 of 28 Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee during a vote last year, and 70 House Democrats on a House floor vote.
That indication of bipartisan support, and the threat of a shutdown, could sway some Democrats to support the spending measure.
Like who?
“More than 400 members voted for it,” said Representative James P. Moran, Jr., a Virginia Democrat. “So to now say this is not acceptable is a little stretch. It should pass. It would be nice to do something that represented the spirit of compromise and good will, and this does.”
Senate Appropriations Committee chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat, called the bill she helped craft a “monumental achievement” in bipartisanship.
“Sometimes you give a little, you take a little, but you stand up from them all,” she said from the House floor. “So I wanted to say to my colleagues, ‘Stay steady, stay strong.’ ”
(After more than eight long years of blogging, blog editor finally realizes beyond all doubt that this government is beyond saving, nor should it be saved. It's an in$ane government, corrupted and rotted beyond all restoration. To believe otherwise is to be in denial)
But several members of the Massachusetts delegation said they were leaning against supporting the bill.
“I have grave concerns that the needs of the families of my district and this country are not being met, and yet we are offering Wall Street another sweetheart deal,” said Katherine Clark, a Melrose Democrat.
Just "taking a little."
Barney Frank, the former Newton representative who cowrote the Dodd-Frank law, said the provision would not gut the financial overhaul but is ill-advised and would be “the road map for stealthily undoing all this in the future.”
Why didn't you guys write a better law, failure?
Opponents of the law should attack it head on rather than inserting riders into larger bills without debate, he said.
The executive vice president of the American Bankers Association, James Ballentine, said in a statement that the changes would protect customers by making it easier for banks and customers to hedge against market risks.
Yeah, right.
Warren said she would vote against the spending bill in its current form but refused to say whether she would hold up a vote in the Senate.
Democrats never use filibusters.
She sent an e-mail to supporters Wednesday afternoon titled “Urgent Action: Stop the Republicans’ Wall Street giveaway.” Other liberal groups, including the AFL-CIO, also condemned the provision.
Warren was named to a newly created leadership position among Senate Democrats last month.
Yeah, she's part of the "New" Leadership in Wa$hington.
Her decision to oppose the bill could become a sign of her influence if most Democrats join her, or a rebuke if most refuse. Moreover, if her action scuttles the entire spending bill, she could be viewed as an obstructionist.
And that would really damage her presidential aspirations.
Obstructionist, btw, is what the agenda-pu$hing propaganda pre$$ labels you when you have strayed from the narrow frame of debate provided the AmeriKan power structure and gotten in the way of its concerns.
Warren said that she had asked Democrats in a closed-door luncheon meeting Tuesday about the banking provision, but that her colleagues did not provide a rationale for its inclusion. A spokesman for majority leader Harry Reid had no comment. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the third-ranking Democrat, said he would not speak about the bill until it passes the House.
Though funding for the government runs out Thursday, a shutdown is not the only other option. Congress could pass short-term funding extensions of either a few days, if a larger bill is imminent, or a few months, if lawmakers decide they cannot come up with a compromise on the comprehensive deal before next year.
So, as we saw from the cited quotation at the top, is really much ado about nothing.
--more--"
Yesterday it was a raised fist, today it's a "take a hike" look for Liz.
Of course, it's all about you kids down there:
"Obama followed up on a promise to expand early education opportunities for tens of thousands of children by announcing $1 billion in public-private spending on programs for young learners. On top of the federal money is more than $330 million from dozens of corporations, foundations, and individuals. That money is part of a new campaign called Invest in US."
He says you are just as talented as his kids.
Can there be any more doubt about the fu$ion of corporate interests with government in what has to be the purest form of true fa$ci$m the world has veneer seen?
Related: Mass. receives $15m US grant to increase access to preschool
Also see: Congress relaxes whole grain standards for schools
Kind of makes the lying wars that will cost you your life or the looting of your futures for a $elf-$erving agenda well worth it, doesn't it?
The great thing about it all? You kids will grow up healthy and strong to either serve in the military or drown in student loan debt.
