United Liberty
Senate
Porkulus III Passes Senate With Republican Help
Wed, 02/24/2010 - 4:05pm | posted by Kevin Boyd
The Senate passed Porkulus III by a vote of 70-28 with 13 Republicans demonstrating their party’s new found fiscal conservatism by crossing over to vote with every Democrat present for the bill. Like the first Porkulus signed by George W. Bush in 2008 and the Porkulus II passed last year, Porkulus III forks over billions of borrowed dollars to fund various special interest projects and tax gimmicks in the name of “creating jobs”.
The gimmicks funded in this lastest round of Porkulus include a tax holiday for the remainder of the year on Social Security payroll taxes, but only if the company hires someone out of work for more than 60 days. In addition, Porkulus commits to billions in in more mass transit spending and more highway projects (ie. more pork barrel spending).
The Senate’s version of Porkulus must be sent over to the House where it must be reconciled with the House’s much more expansive $154 billion Porkulus bill. However, the Senate plans to pass more items in the House’s bill one at a time so that Senate Majority Harry Reid and other Democrat leaders can find out how much the prices of the votes of “fiscally conservative” Republicans are.
Included are proposed Senate bills giving away corporate welfare to ethanol producers, which is expected to be supported by farm state Republicans. In addition, there is another planned Senate bill to keep Americans out of work longer by extending unemployment benefits and COBRA.
The RINOs who supported Porkulus III today are:
Podcast: Liberty Candidate - Marlin Stutzman (U.S. Senate - Indiana)
Wed, 02/17/2010 - 11:15am | posted by United Liberty Staff
Continuing our “Liberty Candidate Series” of interviews, Jason and Brett talk with Marlin Stutzman, discussing the retirement of Evan Bayh (D-IN), Hoosier jobs, energy policy, and fiscal conservatism. Stutzman is one of five Republican candidates seeking the Republican nomination for Indiana’s U.S. Senate seat this year.
This special edition podcast is the seventh in a series devoted to showcasing liberty candidates nationwide.
You can download the podcast here. The introduction music is “Silence is Violence” by the always lovely Aimee Allen.
You can subscribe to the RSS of JUST our podcasts here, or you can find our podcasts on iTunes here.
Bayh’s Retirement Not Hurting Democrats As Much As Most Think It Will
Tue, 02/16/2010 - 4:53pm | posted by Brett Bittner
After absorbing the news from every outlet on earth yesterday, even our own editor’s take, on the “surprise” retirement of Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh, I have to say that analysts are not considering all the “good” that can come from his retirement from the U.S. Senate. It seems that everyone predicts a Republican to pick up his seat in November. Lately, I have been among the few to see some things that ebb against the accepted flow in analyzing races and situations. This is another such ebb.
I think the reason that Bayh waited until Presidents’ Day to announce his retirement was to prevent someone relatively unknown, like Tamyra d’Ippolito, from garnering the nomination without a primary election AND without their seal of approval by collecting the requisite signatures necessary to get on the primary ballot. The Democrats have an opportunity to select a candidate, since it seems that d’Ippolito did not achieve the 4500 signatures necessary to get on the ballot. If she had, that is the WORST CASE SCENARIO for Democrats. By waiting, Bayh almost assured that the state Democrat Party could spend time vetting, choosing and fundraising for someone “moderate” enough to win the state, but “progressive” enough to fully support the agenda of the party for the next six years. While d’Ippolito likely fills out the latter, there is no chance she can accommodate the former.
Podcast: MA Senate Race, Airport Security, Council of Governors, Guest: Pete Eyre
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 9:33am | posted by United Liberty Staff
Jason and Brett broke from the traditional news discussion this week, as they talked with Pete Eyre, former Crasher-In-Chief at Bureaucrash, and currently working with the Future of Freedom Foundation, discussing political philosophy while also touching on a few news stories from the week:
Podcast: TSA, Yemen, Filibuster, Ben Nelson, Guests: Jason Cecil, Jimmie Bise PART ONE
Mon, 01/04/2010 - 8:20am | posted by United Liberty Staff
Jason and Brett jump into 2010 with a podcast, joined by two guests, Jason Cecil, current Southeast Director for Young Democrats of America and immediate past president of Young Democrats of Georgia, and Jimmie Bise, political and pop culture commentator at The Sundries Shack blog and The Delivery podcast.
The discussion went so well (and long), they split the podcast into two installments, with the second part publishing tomorrow available here.
In the first part, they discuss:
Choice for the GOP
Tue, 11/11/2008 - 11:11am | posted by Matt Wittlief
Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the former Democratic Vice Presidential candidate with Al Gore and ardent John McCain supporter, is considering a move to the GOP. According to this story from Politico, Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has approached Lieberman and discussions have taken place.
Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D-NV), is apparently upset at Lieberman’s support for McCain which was cemented with his speech at the Republican National Convention in September. Lieberman, who has served in the Senate since 1989, had to run as an independent in 2006 after losing in the Democratic primary. He has continued to caucus and align himself in the Senate with the Democrats.
No “deem and pass” for Democrats
Sat, 03/20/2010 - 2:41pm | posted by Jason Pye
News is breaking that Democrats plan to have separate votes for the Senate version of ObamaCare and the reconciliation package:
House leaders have decided to take a separate vote on the Senate health-care bill, rejecting an earlier, much-criticized strategy that would have permitted them to “deem” the unpopular measure passed without an explicit vote.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said Saturday that the House would take three votes Sunday: first, on a resolution that will set the terms of debate; second, on a package of amendments to the Senate bill that have been demanded by House members; and third, on the Senate bill itself.
This tells me that they probably have the votes to move forward, though I guess anything is still possible and there are enough members who are publicly undecided to swing it. I just think that’s unlikely at this point.
Enjoy ObamaCare, America.
Signs Of An ObamaCare Backlash In November
Fri, 03/19/2010 - 4:01pm | posted by Doug Mataconis
From the latest Rasmussen Reports poll:
Fifty percent (50%) of U.S. voters say they are less likely to vote for their representative in Congress this November if he or she votes for the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey taken Wednesday night finds that 34% are more likely to vote for their Congress member’s reelection if he or she supports the president’s health care plan. Eight percent (8%) say the health care vote will have no impact on how they vote this November, and another seven percent (7%) are not sure.
Thirty-three percent (33%) of all voters favor the creation of a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone. Fifty-four percent (54%) oppose such a system. These findings are unchanged from the end of last year. Support for a single-payer system plays a huge role in whether someone will support a Representative who votes for the health care plan.
Sixty-six percent (66%) of those who favor a single-payer system are more likely to vote for a member of Congress who votes for the health care plan. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of those who oppose a single-payer system are less likely to vote for a health care plan supporter.
With every Republican in Congress opposed to the health care plan, it’s not surprising to find that 79% of GOP voters are less likely to vote for someone who supports it. Fifty-five percent (55%) of Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to vote for a member of Congress who votes for the plan.
Ex-Senate Parliamentarian on Rules of the Senate
Sun, 03/14/2010 - 10:09am | posted by Luke Brady
The whole idea to remove the Filibuster from the Senate is to make it more like the House of Representatives because the Senate, supposedly, isn’t working.
It’s not that the Senate doesn’t work, it does work, but it works in a very different way than the House of Representatives.
[…]
The Senate is not ruled by it’s majority leader. It’s ruled by a consensus which has to be built by both the majority leader and the minority leader.
This is not a shot taken at Harry Reid or any Democrat based on their position on an issue, it’s an opinion of how ineffectively the current leadership is building a consensus.
I do not think the problem is the rules, I think the problem in the Senate is the Senators.
Democrats planning hearings on doing away with filibuster
Wed, 03/10/2010 - 3:07pm | posted by Jason Pye
It appears that Senate Democrats are planning to move forward on eliminating or reducing the number of votes required for a filibuster:
Senate Rules and Administration Chairman Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) is planning a series of hearings on changes to the chamber’s filibuster rules in response to Democratic concerns over GOP obstruction.
Schumer will announce the hearings during a meeting between Democratic leaders and the Conference’s 22 freshman and sophomore Members on Wednesday, according to a Senate Democratic aide.
[…]
Schumer decided to hold the hearings after witnessing increasing frustration from his colleagues over GOP filibusters of their agenda this Congress. “Tom Udall and [Sen.] Carl Levin [D-Mich.] have discussed with Schumer a desire to hold hearings on the various filibuster reform proposals that have been introduced by Democratic Members,” an aide acknowledged.Despite the hearings, Democrats would have a tough time enacting changes to the chamber’s rules as they would require a supermajority vote.
They don’t like the rules that have been traditionally used in the chamber, so they want to change them. The point that many Democrats are missing is that making law is supposed to be a hard, difficult process.The Founding Fathers placed checks and balances, one of which was allowing states to appoint Senators. Unfortunately, that was removed with the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment.
