Posted on 02/11/2009 8:58:36 AM PST by Perdogg
A Senate committee approved a bill today that would give the District its first full seat in the House of Representatives, setting up a crucial vote by the full chamber sometime in coming months.
The Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee passed the legislation 11 to 1 at its first business meeting in the new Congress. The lone "no" vote was cast by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the 2008 Republican presidential nominee.
It's not clear when the legislation will reach the Senate floor for what is likely to be the key vote on the measure. In 2007, a similar bill died in the Senate after falling three votes short of the 60 needed to head off a filibuster. But proponents believe they are now in better shape thanks to Democratic gains in the last election.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
“Just another vote for the RATS. Get used to this all-out effort to corner the voting process.”
Next it’ll be two seats in the Senate for DC, and two more for Puerto Rico after statehood for both, essentially forever locking in a majority for dems.
The only way D.C. can get representation is via constitutional amendment.
But it is also the right thing to do.And the only right way to do it is via constitutional amendment.
This is probably already in the “Porkulous Bill”. I don’t they have anything left to ad!!!
Spending and terrorism would have increased under Al Gore. The Republicans did not have much of a majority. Gore would have found enough RINOs to pick off to pass all kinds of crap. Osama and terrorism could have continued unabated with no significant response by Gore. But if you would have preferred Al Gore you must be glad to see Obama.
Does this need to be added to “the List”?
That doesn’t make sense. Bush led to Obama.
Not for the “Obama” list. Not unless we can find his people ordering this.
Texas could decide to split into 5 states. That would give the repubs some 8 more Senators, and a few more representatives, depending on round off. Then we could annex western Canadian provinces (leave Ontario and Quebec alone!)
My belief is that Bush permitted the spending to get support for the War. For him, all was subordinate to the war. The one we won.
He got a lot wrong, but he got one big thing right.
He was spending before the war even begun...before 9/11...
He was a liberal...loving to spend other peoples’ money.
OBL would consider it a victory, too.
One of his goals was to damage us economically. It worked.
No it's you that makes no sense. No conservative in their right mind would prefer Al Gore over George W. Bush.
No it’s you that makes no sense. No conservative in their right mind would prefer Barack Obama over a conservative.
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.