Posted on 03/01/2006 6:27:28 AM PST by OXENinFLA
Reid up now .. moving to immigration
Reid just announced that Frist promises the first amendment to the First bill be a substitute, where the Committee bill is dropped in the place of Frist's.
With that agreement, Reid announces that the cloture motion to take up Frist's immigration bill is vitiated (won't happen - doesn't need to because they now have unanimous consent to pick up "Frist's" bill. I put that in quotes because the first thing that happens after picking it up will be to replace it with the Committee Bill.
So Fox is right, technically; but ultimately incorrect that Frist's bill will "be debated."
Vice Admiral Thad W. Allen was confirmed to be Commandant of the US Coast Guard, to be Admiral.
H.R. 4911 - To temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, passed; as did S.Res 410 and S.Res 411 (typical resolutions naming April a month of something and recognizing Galudet (sp?) University for something.)
S.2467, a Trade Relations measure, was advanced to a second reading. McConnell then described the order of business for tomorrow.
Open at 9:30, 1 hour for morning business. Then take up the lobbying bill, S.2349. At 10:50 Dodd is recognized to call up amendments, and at 10:55, Lott is recognized for the same purpose. All amendments must be filed by 11:00 AM. McConnell indicated that he expects all debate on amendments and the underlying bill will be completed tomorrow, and a vote on the bill will be held tomorrow.
Wednesday will be all lobbying bill, all day. After that, immigration reform.
HMMMM...I thought this whole week was for immigration...funny how these things work...LOL
Thanks so much for keeping me up to date...had a hectic afternoon...and I am very interested..
BTW...had an "encounter" with high school protestors today while picking up my granddaughter....these kids need to go back to school to learn HISTORY, GEOGRAPHY, AND CIVICS.
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/blog-detail.php?id=13565
Check out this list..LOL
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, earlier today, my colleague from Alabama, Senator Sessions, alleged that I have a ``hold'' on the Intelligence Authorization Act. Nothing could be further from the truth. ...I know my friend from Alabama voted against my amendment when it was on the floor in November. I am sure he would vote against it again. We can agree to disagree on this issue, but his assertion that I have placed a hold on the intelligence bill is simply not true.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, earlier today, the Senator from Alabama, Senator SESSIONS said that Senator KERRY and I objected to Senate consideration of the intelligence authorization bill because we wish to offer amendments.
In fact, neither Senator KERRY nor I have objected to this bill and no other Democrat has objected to considering it. The bill is cleared on the Democratic side. That means an unidentified Republican Senator or Senators have placed a hold on the bill and are preventing the Senate from considering it.
I do have two amendments to the bill. My first amendment would require the administration provide to the Intelligence Committee with the presidential daily briefs on Iraq from 1997 to the first day of the Iraq war as part of the committee's investigation on the use of prewar intelligence. I would certainly be willing to support a time agreement allowing reasonable debate and a vote on the amendment.
My second amendment would guarantee that detainees held by the intelligence community would be treated humanely, and that treatment would be verified independently.
Apparently, to prevent debate on this very important issue, a Republican Senator is willing to let the whole intelligence bill fail. That's an outrage.
27 . HOLDS ON INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION -- (Senate - March 28, 2006)
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to note that it has now been more than one full year that the nomination of William Myers to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has been pending on the Senate Calendar. On March 17, 2005, the Judiciary Committee approved the Myers nomination by a vote of 10-8. Unfortunately, this was not the first time Mr. Myers has been approved by the Judiciary Committee. We are also approaching the two-year anniversary when Bill Myers was approved by the Judiciary Committee in the 108th Congress on April 1, 2004. ...Bill Myers is a qualified nominee and there is no justification for continuing to filibuster or delay his nomination. My fellow Idahoans and all residents in the 9th Circuit deserve to have their appeals heard in a timely manner. To do this, we must fill all vacancies on the court in a timely manner. I join with my colleague from Idaho, Senator CRAIG, in urging this Senate to hold an up or down vote on the nomination of William Myers to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Mr. CRAIG. ... My colleagues know that this is the second time Mr. Myers will be considered by the Senate for a seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It is important to note that in the previous Congress a majority of the Senate voted to confirm him. Due to the circumstances of that time, however, his confirmation required a supermajority. I am confident that the current Congress will see the fine qualities of Mr. Myers, and he will receive a full bipartisan vote for confirmation.
29 . NOMINATION OF WILLIAM MYERS TO 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. MENENDEZ):
S. 2461. A bill to prohibit United States assistance to develop or promote any rail connections or railway-related connections that traverse or connect Baku, Azerbaijan, Tbilisi, Georgia, and Kars, Turkey, and that specifically exclude cities in Armenia; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. ...By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. DEMINT, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. CRAPO, and Mrs. DOLE):
S. 2467. A bill to enhance and improve the trade relations of the United States by strengthening United States trade enforcement efforts and encouraging United States trading partners to adhere to the rules and norms of international trade, and for other purposes; read the first time.
Wednesday, Mar 29, 2006
9:30 a.m.: Convene and begin a period of morning business. Thereafter, resume consideration of S. 2349, the Lobbying Reform bill.
Previous Meeting
Tuesday, Mar 28, 2006
The Senate convened at 9:45 a.m. and adjourned at 7:08 p.m. Three record votes were taken.
I am quite curious to learn who (if anybody) has a hold on the intelligence authorization bill. Kerry and Kennedy say it is a Republican, and Sessions says it is Kennedy and/or Kerry. They can't all be telling the truth.
Mr. SESSIONS ... I want the American people to know how bills are passed in this Senate. We were talking about some sunshine here. Let's talk about it. There is a system we have called a hotline. What is a hotline? In each Senate office there are three telephones with hotline buttons on them. Most evenings, sometimes after business hours, these phones begin to ring. The calls are from the Republican and the Democratic leaders to each of their Members, asking consent to pass this or that bill--not consider the bill or have debate on the bill but to pass it. Those calls will normally give a deadline. If the staff do not call back in 30 minutes, the bill passes. Boom. It can be 500 pages. In many offices, when staffers do not know anything about the bill, they usually ignore the hotline and let the bill pass without even informing their Senators. If the staff miss the hotline, or do not know about it or were not around, the Senator is deemed to have consented to the passage of some bill which might be quite an important piece of information.So that is the real issue here. The issue is not about holds. The rules say nothing about holds. Holds do not exist. The issue is consent. Nobody has a right to have an individual Senator's consent to pass a bill. They act as though you have a right to get it. You would expect if you are going to say you have unanimous consent, you have consent. But that is not always the case. ...
In many cases, even Senators sponsoring the bill have never read it, unfortunately. Committee reports are filed on bills. Very few staff have read the committee reports. How do I know about this? I have the thankless task of chairing the Senate Steering Committee. One of our commitments is to review every bill that is hotlined in the Senate. My staff actually reads them. It is a service to my colleagues, I suggest. They read the CBO scores which tell how much the bill costs the taxpayers. A lot of times they do not want you to know that. Some committee, group, or someone has moved a bill on the floor--they move it along--and nobody has read the score. Many contain massive, new spending programs. Some bust the budget. We think Senators who are looking out for the taxpayers and taking the time to study bills should have the same rights as Senators who are willing to let big spending bills pass without reading them. This amendment is not good government. It will make it more likely that bills will pass in the middle of the night filled with pork and who knows what else. ...
This amendment says those Senators who are willing to grant consent to legislation they have never read or have perhaps never even heard of--those are the good Senators.
But those Senators who dare to say: I would like time to read this legislation, to see how much it costs, to see whether it is within the national interests--they are the troublemakers. These scoundrels need to be exposed to the public.
So, in summary, here is where we are.
Passing midnight spending boondoggles with two Senators in the Chamber: Good. Reviewing legislation: Bad. Objecting to big spending legislation: Really bad.
Lobbyists must be thrilled with this. Lobbyists who are pushing special-interest legislation will now have a ready-made target list. ...
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, thank you. And I thank Senator Wyden for his leadership and the time.Everything this body has heard the Senator from Alabama say about what is wrong with this piece of legislation is entirely inaccurate. Everything he said we need to do to study bills--to hold them up until we get a feel about everything in a bill before enactment by this body--this amendment, which brings transparency to holds, does not in any way prevent any of that from happening. All it simply says is, if you are going to put a hold on legislation, you ought to have guts enough, not be a sissy that the public might find out who you are, why you are holding something up. State for the entire country why you think this person or this bill ought to be held up in the Senate. You can hold it up for a year. You can hold it up for 1 day. ...
25 . LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2006
Senator Sessions is talking about the problem again. Nobody knows what these things say. He doesn't know what's in the McCain/Kennedy bill and he's on the committee.
TomGuy has posted a live thread for the immigration debate.
It's a day early ;-) Most of today is going to be on the subject of lobbying reform. Sessions and Kennedy are talking in morning business.
I'm staying on this thread where it's nice and comfy. :-)
I am too....I posted once "over there"...but I have a feeling, my comments might "conflict" some with some of the other posters...if you know what I mean...
I DID post over there that Teddy sounds like he is reading something written FOR him, by someone not too smart...and hasn't got a clue what he is actually saying...
I know exactly what you mean. :-)
Well...bless Sessions' heart....there are a lot of us that follow the Senate regularly that KNOW that there have been "deals" or something....that has caused things to happen that shouldn't have..
I point to the Barrett Report as a prime example...I find it very interesting that GRASSLEY, who went on Tony Snow's show, promising to get the WHOLE report "sunshined"..never has...and maybe we know why now.
It sounds like, from the bit of his speech..that he was NOT happy with Sessions "spilling the beans" about the LACK of oversight these people purposely do not do on a regular basis.
I find this speech by Sessions (which I didn't see, darn it), totally refreshing, just like I have, some of Sen. Coburn's re: pork spending.
I REALLY thank you Cboldt...for posting that transcript. If I thought a lot of freepers really cared about that, I would suggest a whole thread on the topic....I find it shameful.
Okay, I'd rather hang out with you guys anyway :) I would love to tell Durbin what he can do with his "Dream Act." Oh FGS, he wants illegals to be certified to teach. Apparently, they are all math and science geniuses.
I'm not gonna be any good today.
I had my truck broken into last night and can't even think straight right now.
Oh..yeah. Well...in Dallas, the school board has member that wanted to bring in illegals to teach Spanish to American students so they would understand the illegals...
LOL...of course in Dallas, the board member was hispanic, and so is the DISD Superintendent...sheesh
Durbin would be so PROUD....lol
Oh...NO! Gosh, I am so sorry....do you have any idea who did it? Was it in your driveway?
I am so sorry to hear that. I had a car stolen once. I was furious for a long, long time.
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.