"Cromnibus" Spending Bill - Shutdown Averted!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

A truly horrible bill, and all of those 57 DINOs who were re-elected need to be primaried.  And Obama needs to veto.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't want the shut down or less restrictions on campaign donations. If it does shut down at least it will be for a respectable reason.

I do. Every "Democrat" in the House who voted for this (who didn't get beaten in the House) deserves to be primaried.

This bill is certainly awful enough that a government shutdown is definitely preferable. This is a total taxpayer give away to the banks, allows people to give $3 million to a political party, vetoes DC's legalization of pot, and other ridiculous crap.

Obama had better veto this, and our next Presidential nominee needs to be significantly more liberal to the point where they don't consider signing garbage like this.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't want the shut down or less restrictions on campaign donations. If it does shut down at least it will be for a respectable reason.

I do. Every "Democrat" in the House who voted for this (who didn't get beaten in the House) deserves to be primaried.

Obama had better veto this,

I hope you realize that there's no way that's happening.

Obama is really a pathetic President.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30443960


The Good


-increasing the amount an individual person can contribute to a national political party from $32,400 to $324,000

-blocking certain Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations

-cuts in the budgets of the EPA and the US tax agency

-increases in the budget for Wall Street regulation agencies, including the Securities and Exchange Commission.


The Bad.


-blocks the District of Columbia from using its own funds to set up regulatory systems for marijuana legalisation

-measures that would significantly weaken new regulations about risky financial instruments called swaps

That's all bad, except for 4th one. And as critical I've been of Obama, even I would have thought that he wouldn't be a total joke and sign something like this. Joke President!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Republicans won the election, so let them drive the agenda. Excellent job, Obama, for putting the national interest ahead of petty feuds over minor partisan grievances and compromising like a statesman to avoid a government shutdown.

The Republicans won the election because Democrats didn't stand for things enough. If Obama signs this, it won't even matter who wins the elections any more, unless we can get President Sanders.

In other news of Democrats sucking hard, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that an employer can choose to not pay you for half an hour of mandatory security screening a day.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Republicans won the election, so let them drive the agenda. Excellent job, Obama, for putting the national interest ahead of petty feuds over minor partisan grievances and compromising like a statesman to avoid a government shutdown.

The Republicans won the election because Democrats didn't stand for things enough. If Obama signs this, it won't even matter who wins the elections any more, unless we can get President Sanders.

In other news of Democrats sucking hard, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that an employer can choose to not pay you for half an hour of mandatory security screening a day.

No, the Republicans won because the stopped nominating nut bag tea party candidates who wanted to shut down the government over every minor slight. Which is exactly what you want Dems to start doing so they can lose even harder.

LOL, the Republicans took a hard-line a year ago, and then did well in the last elections. Are you going to claim to me that Ernst and Tillis are some sort of moderates?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So did Democrats get anything out of this "deal", or did they completely give away the store? Because from skimming it, it seems as though Republicans got 99% of what they wanted. Hell, they even included Boehner's immigration gambit that only funded the DHS until February so they can begin more extortion in two months. This is just going to embolden them to do the same exact thing again...and again...and again. Somewhere the line has to be drawn.

Yes, Democrats will draw the line in not giving the Republicans 200% of what the Republicans want.

Great Cory Booker speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh2RW9PX6zc

Ironically Obama could take a clue on being tougher on Wall Street from the guy who said he was too mean to Wall Street. Fine, my opinion of Booker has gone up slightly.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Of course it didn't defund ObamaCare or the immigration executive order, but either of those two things would be a break from the status quo rather than a continuation of it.

It appears as though those are the only breaking points in terms of right-wing legislation actually becoming law. The only thing I've been and am sure of about President Obama is that he will not sign anything that limits or otherwise thwarts the ACA. I think his recent immigration action is also something he'll be extremely protective of. In other words, you shouldn't be expecting any Congressional action attacking the ACA or his immigration order to make it into law. I'm certain President Obama would risk shutdown over those issues. As for what is given up in return for that, I have no idea.

The bill does gut the pooling of risk from the ACA.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

And the Senate passes it.

Cloture was 77-19. Here are the 19. I would assume Brown, Franken, Warren, and Sanders voted nay because they are FFs, while the others voted nay for other reasons.

Brown (D-OH)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Franken (D-MN)
Heller (R-NV)
Lee (R-UT)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Risch (R-ID)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sanders (I-VT)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warren (D-MA)

Final vote was 56-40, still waiting on the roll call.


Interesting how the top 5 Senators mentioned as Presidential candidates were all among the 19.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Democratic caucus voted 32-22 in favor.   Feinstein didn't vote.
Here are the 22 nays.

2 of the nays (Harkin and Levin) are retiring, but the others up this year were all re-elected. Peters voted for in the House. So the Democrats in the next Senate will be 25-20 in favor.

Blumenthal (D-CT)
Booker (D-NJ)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
Markey (D-MA)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Reed (D-RI)
Sanders (I-VT)
Tester (D-MT)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Oh god, now even Brian Schatz isn't far left enough

He voted for a bill written by Citi to put taxpayers on the hook for $300 trillion worth of derivatives.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

8/10 minnesotan congress critters voted nay on this bungle.  I am proud of them!

I'm honestly shocked that Klobuchar voted "no".  Very interesting!

Out of our two Senators, she was certainly the one I was more worried about. Could not be prouder of her (and Franken) right now.

Franken, Brown, Sanders, and Warren were the 4 left of center Senators vote against cloture.