[LisaMalia]

I'm no whiz at Senate procedures, but I wish someone would tell me why extension for my unemployment benefits was tacked on this bill, 1805??????????

(S.1805 To extend and expand the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002, and for other purposes.)

www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN01805:@@@L&summ2=m&

[OXENinFLA]

This is a "trick" to get laws passed w/o really have to fully debate it.

[looscnnn]

"I'm no whiz at Senate procedures, but I wish someone would tell me why extension for my unemployment benefits was tacked on this bill, 1805??????????"

Because they can, that is why. There is no rule or law keeping them from adding amendments that have nothing to do with the original bill. There should be, but there isn't.

[RockChucker]

Let them have it. It will take away the issue and provides bargening space for constitiutional legislators.

[No.6]

That amendment to the bill has already been defeated.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00018

[LisaMalia]

Or I should have said, why is this other stuff tacked on the original bill. But I know the answer. Sad.

[El Gato]

I'm no whiz at Senate procedures, but I wish someone would tell me why extension for my unemployment benefits was tacked on this bill, 1805??????????

So couple/three Senators could say they voted for the bill because you needed that unemployment benefit extention so badly. That and the same reason that Fienstein will atttempt to attach the AWB to the bill, because they think that will increase the changes of getting the provisions into law.