Posted on 11/01/2005 5:12:40 AM PST by OXENinFLA
Since "Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.", I and others think it's a good idea to centralize what the goes on in the Senate (or House).
So if you see something happening on the Senate/House floor and you don't want to start a new thread to ask if anyone else just heard what you heard, you can leave a short note on who said what and about what and I'll try and find it the next day in THE RECORD. Or if you see a thread that pertains to the Senate, House, or pretty much any GOV'T agency please link your thread here.
If you have any suggestions for this thread please feel free to let me know.
Here's a few helpful links.
C-SPAN what a great thing. Where you can watch or listen live to most Government happenings.
C-SPAN 1 carries the HOUSE.
C-SPAN 2 carries the SENATE.
C-SPAN 3 (most places web only) carries a variety of committee meetings live or other past programming.
OR FEDNET has online feed also.
A great thing about our Government is they make it really easy for the public to research what the Politicians are doing and saying (on the floor anyway).
THOMAS where you can see a RECORD of what Congress is doing each day. You can also search/read a verbatim text of what each Congressmen/women or Senator has said on the floor or submitted 'for the record.' [This is where the real juicy stuff can be found.]
Also found at Thomas are Monthly Calendars for the Senate Majority and Senate Minority
And Monthly Calendars for the House Majority and Roll Call Votes can be found here.
THE WAR DEPARTMENT (aka The Dept. of Defense)
I don't think the Warner amendment is a big deal, just based on my gut, not having checked existing reporting requirements. The Levin amendment will go down in flames. Reid will be saddened. Durbin will be his ususal insufferable self.
... it appears that all the Warner-Frist amendment demands of the administration is a routine update of its present reporting practice. And as the "law" applies only to the Executive, it is probably not justiciable anyway. What is Congress going to do if the report isn't forthcoming?These amendments are politics in a fairly pure form.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1522162/posts?page=264#264
Sessions, Allen, Burr, Hatch, Domenici? Agggggggggggh!
Specter is gutting S.AMND.2524 (Graham's modified "no habeus corpus" amendment). Needs some language changes to make Specter happy, but it seems Specter would prefer the Bingaman amendment, i.e., full respect for the recent SCOTUS decision on the matter.
Thanks for your effort, if we keep calling for Rat blood maybe we will get some eventually.
The President already gives the Senate updates
This is purely a PR stunt by the Dems for the cameras and the pubbies need to counter it
The Dems used that "Take the training wheels off" line yesterday
Thanks for the ping and the reports, Mo1. I can't watch right now, so I appreciate the information. Sounds like the Rat senators think that because W is out of the country they can pull some fast ones. I hope our guys are being smarter than it appears.
-snicker-
LOL
Reid is back ..giving time to Levin
I feel much better now.
And basically calling Frist a liar
Levin keeps saying that his amendment does not say cut & run ... that his amendments says IF conditions are not met
How demeaning of the blood that Iraqis have shed.
(c) Reports to Congress on United States Policy and Military Operations in Iraq.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every three months thereafter until all United States combat brigades have redeployed from Iraq, the President shall submit to Congress an unclassified report on United States policy and military operations in Iraq. Each report shall include the following: ...(7) A campaign plan with estimated dates for the phased redeployment of the United States Armed Forces from Iraq as each condition is met, with the understanding that unexpected contingencies may arise.
You're losing me .. what's your point?
That is what I think is the relevant text from the amendment. Levin is right, it doesn't "say" cut and run, or even set any dates. All the objectionable language does is create an objectionable public reporting requirement.
There is another part of the amendment ...
(4) United States military forces should not stay in Iraq indefinitely and the people of Iraq should be so advised; [Levin]
v.
(4) United States military forces should not stay in Iraq any longer than required and the people of Iraq should be so advised; [Warner]
That some might characterize as a "cut and run" comment, but I wouldn't take either as such.
The amendments seem pretty similar to me. How did this happen?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.