HouseYep, I’d say it’s pretty much a “slam dunk,” as they say, that the “abortion services” item ensured that the Repugs would continue to inflict the “poor stepchild” treatment on DC, whose representative, Eleanor Holmes Norton, is able to serve on and vote with committees, as well as speak from the House floor, though she is not permitted to vote on final passage of any legislation because she is not a full member of Congress (pathetic).
Appropriations, auto dealerships. Voting 219-208, the House passed a bill (HR 3170) to appropriate $24.2 billion in fiscal 2010 for the Treasury Department, White House, District of Columbia, the federal judiciary, and several independent agencies, including ones that regulate financial markets, protect consumers, and fund small businesses. The bill would require General Motors and Chrysler Corp. to restore franchise agreements with more than 2,000 dealerships, leaving the firms closed but entitling them to seek compensation under state laws, something disallowed in bankruptcy proceedings.
In part, the bill would provide $6.9 billion for the federal judiciary; $1.04 billion for the Securities and Exchange Commission; $848 million for the Small Business Administration; $768 million for the District of Columbia; $292 million for the Federal Trade Commission, and $113 million for the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
The bill also would give the District of Columbia the same right the 50 states have to spend locally raised funds on abortion services.
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: John Adler (D., N.J.), Robert E. Andrews (D., N.J.), Robert A. Brady (D., Pa.), Michael N. Castle (R., Del.), Chaka Fattah (D., Pa.), Tim Holden (D., Pa.), Patrick Murphy (D., Pa.), Allyson Y. Schwartz (D., Pa.), and Joe Sestak (D., Pa.).
Voting no: Charles W. Dent (R., Pa.), Jim Gerlach (R., Pa.), Frank A. LoBiondo (R., N.J.), Joseph R. Pitts (R., Pa.), and Christopher H. Smith (R., N.J.).
At least Mike Castle acted like an adult here – my compliments.
Energy, water appropriations. Voting 320-97, the House passed a bill (HR 3183) to appropriate $33.3 billion for energy, water and nuclear programs in fiscal 2010. In part, the bill would provide $6.3 billion for maintaining the U.S. nuclear stockpile; $5.5 billion for Army Corps of Engineers public works; $5.4 billion for environmental cleanup at nuclear sites; $4.9 billion for research into long-term energy needs; $373 million for developing clean-vehicle technologies; $259 million for solar energy, and $208 million for upgrading the nation's electrical grid.This is yet another brain dead vote by PA-16’s rep, but I actually think that you have to cut Pancake Joe some slack here.
Additionally, the bill would fund the administration's decision to permanently bar nuclear waste disposal at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, and establish a commission to evaluate alternatives.
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: Adler, Andrews, Brady, Castle, Dent, Fattah, Gerlach, Holden, LoBiondo, Murphy, Schwartz, Sestak, and Smith.
Voting no: Pitts.
You see, he’s been busy picking a fight with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg over a comment in a New York Times Magazine article almost two weeks ago implying that there was an abortion-worthy class of “undesirables” out there (I would say it was a “wise Latina” moment by Justice Ginsburg on the matter of abortion services that aren’t available for poor women, though they are generally for women of means, and that’s what she was trying to communicate – this site is sympathetic to Pitts, but trust me; he doesn’t deserve it).
Also, as noted here (third item), “Values Voter” Joe was busy propagandizing over the supposed abortion mandate in the upcoming health care legislation. So my guess is that all of the activity tired him out and made him more disoriented than usual.
Energy, water spending cut. Voting 167-259, the House rejected a proposed 5 percent across-the-board cut in fiscal 2010 appropriations (HR 3183, above) to fund the government's energy and water programs. The amendment would have trimmed $1.7 billion from the bill's $33.3 billion in discretionary spending.This amendment was introduced by Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who, as noted here…well, you can make up your own mind on how awful her remarks were.
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Adler, Dent, Gerlach, Murphy, and Pitts.
Voting no: Andrews, Brady, Castle, Fattah, Holden, LoBiondo, Schwartz, Sestak, and Smith.
John Adler continues to languish in some kind of a slump with yet another bad vote (and with respect, Patrick, this was not a good one for you either – siding with Pitts, Dent and Gerlach is not a good place to be).
Wild horses, burros. Voting 239-185, the House passed a bill (HR 1018) to protect the estimated 36,000 wild horses and burros that roam public lands in the West. The bill would prevent the sale of these animals for slaughter, greatly expand the federal acreage available to them, and prohibit the penning of them for longer than six months.Comforting to know that Joe was prevented from aiding the “Trigger burger” industry here (seriously, this could have affected the food supply, to the point where tainted meat could have made us as ill as we would be after a lengthy review of Pitts’ voting record).
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: Adler, Andrews, Brady, Castle, Dent, Fattah, Gerlach, Holden, LoBiondo, Murphy, Schwartz, Sestak, and Smith.
Voting no: Pitts.
SenateThere’s more going on here than meets the eye, as bmaz, blogging for emptywheel, tells us here…
Hate-crimes prosecutions. Voting 63-28, the Senate advanced a hate-crimes amendment that sponsors seek to add to the $680 million, fiscal 2010 defense budget (S 1390), which remains in debate. The amendment would expand the federal law against hate crimes to include offenses based on sexual orientation, gender, or disability as well as the existing categories of national origin, religion, and race.
A yes vote was to advance a hate-crimes measure.
Voting yes: Thomas Carper (D., Del.), Bob Casey (D., Pa.), Ted Kaufman (D., Del.), Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.), Robert Menendez (D., N.J.), and Arlen Specter (D., Pa.).
Religious freedom. Senators voted, 78-13, to ensure that hate-crimes language proposed for S 1390 (above) could not limit religious expression except when the intent of the expression is to plan, prepare for, or incite an act of physical violence.
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Carper, Casey, Kaufman, Menendez, and Specter.
Voting no: Lautenberg.
There are inherent First Amendment and equal protection issues with any "hate crime" legislation as I pointed out when Eric Holder started aggressively pushing Congress for passage of a new bill. That said, if you are going to enact such laws, they must be targeted, rational and designed to effect the result desired and not any other. Such laws should not be vague and expansive, should not be able to be wielded by prosecutors as selective bludgeons and should not infringe on First Amendment rights to free speech and association.The post goes on to note that the following language was omitted from the Senate version of this bill (versus a comparable House version)…
Late Thursday night, the Senate passed a Hate Crimes Bill that arguably violates all of the above.
Evidence of expression or association of the defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects the rules of evidence governing the impeachment of a witness.Without that language, bmaz and the ACLU believe that prosecutors will “use hate crimes statutes much more as leverage to force plea agreements and prove defendants guilty simply on the basis of non-conforming speech and membership in gangs, fringe political groups and the like than they do for the righteous purpose intended.”
And the amendment noted above by Sam Brownback of Kansas (who surely understood the danger of the vagueness of the Senate bill without the language noted above), which was passed, now gives the anti-abortion forces legal protection denied to those of opposite political and social points of view.
Kudos to Sen. Lautenberg for realizing that and voting No to the Brownback amendment (and a pox on those who voted Yes).
New census chief. The Senate voted, 76-15, to end a Republican-led filibuster against the nomination of Robert M. Groves as director of the U.S. Census Bureau.This prior post (second item) discussed the typically idiotic Repug obstruction on the appointment of Dr. Groves, which is happily now no longer an issue.
He had directed the University of Michigan Survey Research Center. Republicans delayed the nomination for three months with claims that a Democratic administration might politicize the 2010 census.
A yes vote backed Groves as Census Bureau chief.
Voting yes: Carper, Casey, Kaufman, Lautenberg, Menendez, and Specter.
This week, the House took up the 2010 intelligence budget, while the Senate continued to debate the 2010 defense budget.
No comments:
Post a Comment