Posted on 03/15/2011 1:23:09 PM PDT by Justaham
A Democratic state senator wants to make it impossible for senators in the future to block legislative action by leaving the state. … “The main point I want to make is that what we did we had every legal right to do. It was an extraordinary step against an extraordinary bill,” [State Senator Tim] Cullen said. But “the institution of the Senate is not well-served going forward by having this particular avenue available.”
Cullen said his proposal for a constitutional amendment would simply eliminate the requirement currently in the state constitution that three-fifths of state senators be present for the body to vote on certain fiscal bills, including those that contain spending items.
A constitutional amendment must be approved by two consecutive Legislatures and voters in a statewide referendum, meaning it takes at least two years to accomplish.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
I think the man has just defined gall.
He’s afraid the Republicans might use the tactic against the Dems in the future.
Liberals need laws to do the right thing.
I’m confused... weren’t these democrats feted as heroes just yesterday by 100k adoring fans for what they did? So why make a big show of making a law prohibiting it?
Parasite.
Democrats must think they will win the next election
We figure we’re going to retake the government soon - so we don’t want you pulling nasty tricks on us.
Have a nice day. :)
WTH! Hypocrite! Now that they have set the precedent, they are afraid that Republicans can use this tactic in the future (if they are ever in the minority again)!
The idea is, while the senate is fired up about them having bailed, snooker them into changing the budgeting rules so when the Dems next get a majority, the spending sky's the limit. Tough luck.
Just exploiting the sentiment against their fleabagging, I'd say.
KING OEDIPUS DEMANDS END TO INCEST
Bingo.
Just like the EmoRats in the US Senate are now complaining about Philly Busters. Didn’t seem to bother them too much 2000 to 2006.
The Rs should tell them to stick it. They should point out that the only party to have ever done this is theirs.
*ding....ding....ding* We have a winner!!
This is correct, he wants to ensure the repubs can never pull the same tactic in the future.
Let’s also include an amendment that would require retroactive punishment for the flee-baggers. Similarly, we could also provide for an amendment that allows the Republicans to do the same when the Republican find themselves in the majority.
That was my thought, too. Which makes me wonder what they might try to pass.
“How about something better. Any Senator who refuses to serve has his seat declared vacant and avilable to be replaced by the Governor immediately.”
Agree! Maybe I am cynical but, if the quorum rule is removed, then they could pass fiscal bills with out the 3/5ths rule. Wouldn’t that remove the reason it was put in place in the first place? To make it harder to increase spending?
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.