Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House rejects creation of federal work force for screening (Airport Security)
StLtoday.com ^ | 11-1-01 | Jim Abrams

Posted on 11/01/2001 4:28:54 PM PST by FairWitness

Edited on 05/11/2004 5:33:17 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House rejected a plan Thursday to turn airport screening operations over to federal employees, handing a major victory to the White House and its Republican allies.

The 218-214 vote to defeat the Senate-passed, Democratic-backed alternative set the stage for passing a GOP aviation security bill that would allow screening to be contracted out to private employers. A vote on the Republican bill was to come later Thursday evening.


(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-162 next last
To: MileHi
Remember the Park Police who investigated the Vince Foster murder........we want those guys at the airports?
101 posted on 11/01/2001 5:59:09 PM PST by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jojonomo55
There are a lot of scared people out there who would have felt a lot better with federal employees (me included) and this just might sink in with them.

If you think that the federal government could - if the Senate bill had passed - field trained federal government employees to screen baggage before the holidays, I've got a nice bridge in NY that I'll sell you cheap.

Seems like you should pay a little more attention to what's going on in the world.

102 posted on 11/01/2001 6:00:28 PM PST by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Brit Hume showed a poll of federal employees a couple of days ago which was quite revealing. 28 percent felt their supervisors were incompetent and 34 percent felt their fellow employees were incompetent. The fact that the sheeple are concerned with how they "feel" instead of reality just shows how they have been brainwashed. That was the only thing I give Clintoon credit for--he knew appealing to peoples "feelings" was a better political tactic than appealing to their good sense.
103 posted on 11/01/2001 6:00:34 PM PST by Kangaroo Court
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
The first amendment went down to defeat 218 - 214; the RAT version of the bill went down to defeat 227 - 201 with all Republicans, Nine Democrats, and one Indy voting to defeat it; Final version (Republican bill) passed 286 - 139.

Results of today's votes can be viewed at:

Roll Call Votes

104 posted on 11/01/2001 6:00:59 PM PST by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: jojonomo55
maybe, but the company(s) whose responsibility it is to protect the skies from terrorists gave us 5,000 dead people.

Pull your head out of the sand for a minute. Terrorists gave us 5,000 dead people. TERROISTS! Would you blame rape on the victims? On the clothes? On the car a woman drives? Same logic.

The real blame belongs to terrorists.

If you want to play the blame game though, why not go to the root causes? Why not blame affirmative action? Thanks to affirmative action there are QUOTAS for hiring in airports- the more so because airports are NOT privately owned. They are city or county owned, with PC regulations out the wazoo and hiring quotas a big issue in the city councils. They are horribly inefficient. The buildings themselves are designed for political profiteering, not for genuine efficiency or security. The legal protections for workers amkes it difficult to even fire ground personnel who get caught STEAL ING items from the luggage! Firing people isn't easy- it sets you up for lawsuit after lawsuit, many of them based on accusations of racism.

Why not blame the cities?

The costs for operating in a system where cities levy HUGE taxes for landing privileges and such make the costs of operating an airline absolutely ridiculous. Some of these costs are for reasonable things relating to the industry but much of it is siphoned off for giveaways to local contractors, friends of the mayor and city council, make-work projects for voters, and light rail links to places where there is little demand for the services.

Why not blame lawyers and people who demand ridiculous amounts of damages?

Want to know what else makes airlines struggle so that they have little money to spare for security? Excessive rewards on lawsuits, frivolous lawsuits, etc. That raises the costs of operating airlines and essentially takes money from security.

Why not blame your own congressman? Chances are he thought the CIA shouldn't deal with scoundrels, and so cut back on their ability to infiltrate or spy on groups like Al-Qeada. Chances are, he thought retreating from Somalia with our tails between our legs was a good idea, and bringing our dead back in the middle of the night so the public wouldn't see was OK, since it kept Clinton from getting the blame he so richly deserved. Chances are your congressman thought the local military base was more important than buying essential spare parts for the military or more important than investing more effort into a terrorism problem that seemed so far away, or thought socialized health care and a study on waterflea sex habits was more important than improving communications and information between the INS and the FBI. Chances are he thought the INS was doing a bang-up job of screening immigrants and didn't care that no security checks were performed in the last decade on thousands and thousands of them. Chances are, your congressman thought diversity supercedes common sense, and passed much legislation that protected terrorist activity and fundraising in this country and ABROAD.

Why not blame the customers, since they don't want to pay for for non-smoking areas set aside in airports (now that was a bit of brilliant legislation, wasn't it?), inflated bidding on contracts, minority set asides in hiring personnel, public art in airport terminals, kissing up to the local politician's brother in law's construction company, excessive jet fuel taxes and surcharges, airport landing fees, EPA studies on aircraft noise and airport pollution, ergonomically designed computer keyboards for complaining employees, incredible insurance fees to cover excessivce and abusive litigation awards, form legal fees for all the people who slip on the boarding ramp, back pain experiences by baggage handlers, hurt feelings and hate crime lawsuits, to people killed in accidents whose families collect millions upon millions of dollars, etc. If we were only willing to pay for more of those overpriced tickets, the airlines would have loads of ticket sale business and be able to afford security.

i just cant trust them at this time and it's going to take quite a bit for me to get on an airplane again.

Think about this. You are in GREATER peril every time you drive to the store than you would be on an airliner, even if there was no security at all. You want to FEEL safe, and that FEELING is more important to you than the actual danger. You drive your car don't you? You are in incredible danger- that is a fact- by just driving to the store for a bottle of milk. Why are you still willing to drive? Would it be logical to give up your car and your driving privileges? Quit FEELING and start THINKING.

Federal screeners would have been an excellent first step.

Why don't we federalize YOUR job too. Why don't we just turn completely communist and federalize everyone, if you really think FEDERAL employment is the way to go. We're already getting close to it anyway. Do you want a the kind of people that worked for the census to screen people at airports? Do you want that numbskull at the patent office - one of the few government agencies that actually does a halfway decent job- to be your security chief at Dulles Airport when he spent two years hiding patent applications in the suspended ceiling to avoid the work and everyone knew about it but transferring him was easier than firing him because he was unionized and a minority? Every time they told him to work or threatened to fire him he screamed racism and his supervisors were afraid of him. So they let him botch and delay years of patent applications.

Oh, right- trust federal employees and expect QUALITY?

Why not trust the one in the pentagon who thought picture framing was more important than purchasing ammunition. Or the EPA which wants barnacles to be collected, rather than dropped back into the sea, because they are a biohazard- unless of course you scrape them while you are standing in the water, in which case it is OK for them to be left into the water. Your government in action...

105 posted on 11/01/2001 6:05:59 PM PST by piasa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Thanks for the link, looks like a good site to remember.
106 posted on 11/01/2001 6:08:02 PM PST by FairWitness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
Those roll call votes go up about an hour after the vote -- sometimes faster and it is great to be able to see how everyone voted!
107 posted on 11/01/2001 6:10:06 PM PST by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
``My greatest fear is that if it goes to a conference, it never comes out,'' House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt said

He means he'll pull some partisan politics until someone else dies on a plane so he can blame Bush. Hey, politics first. So what if a few peasants die "for the good of the federal employee union votes."

. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., a chief sponsor of the Republican bill, said he was determined not to ``create the biggest bureaucracy in the history of a generation.''

Good man. Good job!!

``What a tragedy it would be, after seven weeks of delay, that we'd delay even more prior to the time we complete our work and ensure greater security and safety in airports all across this country,'' said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.

Vote with the Republicans, and it will be fixed tomarrow. Why wait????

There was common agreement that Congress must act quickly to get leery Americans back on planes.

Vote Republican.

Gephardt said that could include private airport security companies that have been under fire for giving their employees poor pay and training.

No no no, let the taxpayers foot a higher pay, hey, the money grows on trees!

The Democrats would have imposed a $2.50 per flight fee to pay for increased security. The GOP fee would be $2.50 per trip, so passengers who take connecting flights don't pay twice.

Republicans, always looking out for the tax payer instead of federal union employee votes. What a good bunch of guys, eh?

108 posted on 11/01/2001 6:10:11 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
Contracting out the Marines is kind of interesting. When the Feds try to put their standard of living in the gutter they would be very tough to negotiate with.
109 posted on 11/01/2001 6:11:06 PM PST by Elihu Burritt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jackbill
There are a lot of scared people out there who would have felt a lot better with federal employees (me included) and this just might sink in with them.

Really? When was the last time you went to the DMV?

IRS ever owe YOU money? A year isn't that long to wait, really.

Did you support Hillary Health Care? Same idea!

110 posted on 11/01/2001 6:14:05 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
The sad fact is the Republican Senators are "good ole boys" in the worst sense.

When he was in the House, I actually respected Trent Lott. I think he has proven himself a spineless wimp time and again in the Senate. Worse than that, I guess that's who the GOP Senators want to lead them.

Say what you want about Daschle, he's one tough dude.

111 posted on 11/01/2001 6:17:58 PM PST by Paraclete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
I'm not so up on the Capital Hill ins and outs - why is DeLay the hero here, and not Hastert? Please advise...
112 posted on 11/01/2001 6:21:57 PM PST by PianoMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Darn tootin'!
113 posted on 11/01/2001 6:23:54 PM PST by PianoMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

Comment #114 Removed by Moderator

To: PhiKapMom
Thanks soooo much for this GREAT link!!! It's a keeper :-)
115 posted on 11/01/2001 6:28:54 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Your remarks are so good they are practically poetic. Should be required reading of every member of the Conference committee on this Bill. Too bad sending mail to congressmen is not very practical right now. And I don't think e-mails get any respect. Suggestions?
116 posted on 11/01/2001 6:30:22 PM PST by maica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: PianoMan
Tom Delay has a set of principles he lives by. He'll compromise on legislation but not on his principles. He is also the Republican Whip which means he is the guy responsible for convincing the rank and file republicans to vote the right way, our way. :-}
117 posted on 11/01/2001 6:38:08 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
Now it goes into committee with the Senate version for a compromise. . .any bets?
118 posted on 11/01/2001 6:39:23 PM PST by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
Hmm, if the Republicans aren't careful I might reconsider my promise never to vote for them ever again. I'll wait and see. This may only be one nugget to get me back, Yeah Right!
119 posted on 11/01/2001 6:42:34 PM PST by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PianoMan
Delay is the Majority Whip...he's the guy that persuades and then counts the votes.
They don't call him "The Hammer" for nothin.
120 posted on 11/01/2001 6:44:32 PM PST by MamaLucci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-162 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson