What legislation attempted to satisfy the southern demand to maintain a balance in the Senate between free sta?

Kansas-Nebraska Act

Fugitive Slave Act

Citizens Choice Act of 185

Nebraska Compromise





2.) What theory promoted by Stephen Douglas would allow the people of a territory to allow or forbid slavery?

Legislative options

Popular sovereignty

Territorial rights

Northwest OrdinanceWhat legislation attempted to satisfy the southern demand to maintain a balance in the Senate between free sta?there is no such legislation.

kbb used car value

calculate percentage

What legislation requires all first aid treatment to be recorded?

How long do records need to be keptWhat legislation requires all first aid treatment to be recorded?This type of Legislation is generally State or local. In most areas, there isn't any such legislation that specifically requires ALL "first aid" to be recorded. Usually, any such requirement is targeted to specific health care entities, such as Hospitals and EMS (emergency medical services / 911), and sometimes even then, only certain interventions are recorded (giving someone a band aid for a hang-nail doesn't usually require documentation).

The most common misconception is EMS is the medical record being a "legal document". In reality, it is not. A "Lea; document" has specific legal definitions, such as a document signed by a judge or court clerk. While it can certainly be used in court, it is used in a similar way as any piece of evidence. This is why much of the requirement for documentation rests with the policies of that particular service providing the care.

An individual for example (in most states, with "good sam laws" varying widely) has no such requirement, though the care they provide will likely be recorded by EMS if they take over care.

Good luck with your research, if you find anything I haven't, please post it, I'd love to read it.

What is the name/act of legislation that required employers to hire women over men because they were women?

I'm writing some study notes for school and i vaguely remember our teacher telling us about at one point in history (it may be only Australia :S), where if there were a number of candidates for a job, women had to be selected just because they were women (and had the same qualifications etc. as the other candidates). Does anyone know what this law was called or anything about it?What is the name/act of legislation that required employers to hire women over men because they were women?Not sure about Australia, but in the US it's called Affirmative Action or Quotas. Many places are starting to outlaw such practices.What is the name/act of legislation that required employers to hire women over men because they were women?In the United States, it is called "affirmative action," and quotas (or, euphemistically, "targets") are often used as a way to force the desired results. In Britain (and, therefore, in many Commonwealth countries), it is called "POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION." So, that term might be what is used in Australia.

Legislation for sexual acts that result in a Disease that kills?

Do you think in todays day and age the law needs to set legislation against sexual acts like anal sex that produces diseases like aids that kill just like street drugs?.Do you think if there where jail terms for sexual acts that harm society that the rate of disease would drop dramatically? If the law was to bring in legislation into the adult entertainment industry do you think it would save lives ?.Legislation for sexual acts that result in a Disease that kills?You're too late, dude. The Supreme Court just 3 1/2 years ago said that anal sex is a constitutional right.



Should they reverse that decision? Yes, they should. They should do so because they lied about the Constitution. Sex is NOT a constitutional right, ..... like abortion is NOT a constitutional right. But will they reverse it? Who knows.Legislation for sexual acts that result in a Disease that kills?AIDS is not passed by anal sex alone. You can catch it from non sexual contact as well, dirty needles. What does need to be done is more programs to inform people like yourself who no nothing on the subject at least the basics.Legislation for sexual acts that result in a Disease that kills?No. It's the responsibility of adults to regulate their sexual behavior, not the state. Everyone knows the risks of unprotected sex - anal, vaginal, or oral - they all carry risks.



If a person deliberately set out to infect others without telling them they had HIV, and with malice, then they can (and have been) charged with crimes and ended up in prison. For most people though, it is not a malicious thing. Many don't even know their status when having sex.



Let's keep the law out of our bedrooms.



There are plenty of other things that are deadly that we could have laws about - how about banning McDonalds and smoking? Both are known to killLegislation for sexual acts that result in a Disease that kills?
I believe it is a law, and has been for some time, that if you have a communicable disease you have to disclose it to the other party involved. If the other person was not informed, and gets the disease, it is a criminal offense.

Wisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?

Why are liberals screaming like school girls that Wisconsin is now Mississippi of the 1950's?Wisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?The liberals are just that way. common sense escapes them. They fail to realize they have to present an ID to buy a beer. A vote is more important then a beer.Wisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?
In OK you don't have to present a photo ID card to vote, although many do. Your voter registration card is just as good as a driver's license or state ID. I have a valid LA state ID as well as a valid OK driver's license.

What Wisconsin is doing is violating federal laws. You do not have to pay anything to register to vote. Poll taxes are illegal, yet that's exactly the Wisconsin governor signed into law yesterday. Liberals know United States history. It's very, very obvious that conservatives do NOT know United States history and are totally incapable of learning ANY lessons about government from it.
It's the conservatives in the USA that are screaming the loudest, not the liberals.

Drivers' licenses ARE NOT FREE. You PAY for a driver's license. Part of what you are paying for is the technology and machines that take that photograph and put it on your driver's license or state I. I PAID for my LA state idea, but less than what a driver's license would cost - about $10 less. I paid less than that to have my OK driver's license re-issued. How do I know this? I lost my OK driver's license on Christmas Eve in Greater New Orleans. It's quite obvious that some one is not old enough to have gotten a driver's license yet.Wisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?It's really a shame republicans never have any economic legislation ideas, you're only focused on how to keep the doors open to the tea party types and shut out younger and city type people, who typically swing democrat. Here is a fact. 1 in 3 people in NY don't have a driver's licenses or a car. How is it fair to say he or she can not vote?
All it does is deter the people from voting. Not everybody has an ID. So for the population of people that don't probably wont spend 40 bucks to get one so therefore less people will vote. Secondly the republicans are paranoid that people are going around to different cities and voting twice which is absurd. Who would waste time trying to vote twice, 2 votes wont make a difference any way.Wisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?Man, you gotta love Scott Walker and the Wisconsin Congress.



And you know, I'm sure, why the loser libs are screaming like school girls (with that real shrill screech of the loser lib loon) about this. They know that each bogus voter registration that groups like ACORN scum and the other community disorganizers bring in will need to have a photo ID matched to it. Let's hope every State adapts that method of voting.



I wouldn't be surprised if eric 'butt' holder tries to sue them somehow and jam things up. You know the democrap mantra -%26gt; "Vote early and vote often"Wisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?
liberals don't like it because it will crack down on voter fraud,and it is constitutional,no one is required to pay a tax to vote,they just have to prove they are who they say they are. i highly doubt there are many without some form of id,and those that need one can probably get one free of charge
The liberals are very active in voter fraud as we all know.



And only a liberal child would really believe that seniors don't have ID"S. That notion really

brings to light, how out of touch they are from reality. Someone told them that nonsence and they

might really beleive it%26gt; WHat a jokeWisconsin just passed common sense legislation calling for a photo ID to vote?
is it a poll tax? those are unconstitutional. an american citizen cannot be required to pay a fee in order to vote.

"At the ceremony in 1964 formalizing the 24th Amendment, President Lyndon Johnson noted that: "There can be no one too poor to vote.""
Some illegal alien that somehow migrated to Wisconsin, might be able to get a picture ID and be disenfranchised.
The Texas Legislature just passed the same thing. I love listening to the "liberals" screaming!
The Unions will be out in protest
It's been that way in Conn. for years.
1. College Student IDs do not count in your "Common Sense" law



2. Not everyone has a photo ID. Your "Common Sense" law will keep most seniors and working poor from voting.

Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?

Most Americans with a pea of a brain can figure out that when Democrats have both the majority in the House and the Senate and they can't pass stuff its not because of the Republicans, its because several members of its own party know the ideas stink.Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?Obstruction by filibusters. you're either a moron or knowingly denying that cons filibuster everything.Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?
You seem to be UNFAMILIAR with Senate rules put into place while Republicans were in the majority. Lots of legislation cleared the House...like financial reforms and even a PUBLIC OPTION for health care, only to be S L O W E D down in the Senate. There are all sorts of parliamentary rules and procedures that make watching C-SPAN2 really b-o-r-i-n-g, and there are dirty tricks that the minority party (in this case, the GOP) can pull to BLOCK things (like CANCELING meetings on vital issues...sort of EXTORTION, but "legal"). More than 200 consumer-protecting or jobs-creating legislations were PASSED in spite of the dirty tricks and filibustering of the SAY NO Republicans, and were then signed into LAW by the Democrats (liberals included). See whitehouse.gov and also recovery.gov for more details.



"Point of Order" (to quote a Senator), your insistence on assuming that Democrats are synonymous with Liberals (or "Libtards" as you so mockingly and erroneously suggest) is yet another inaccuracy in your query. Most Democrats are a combination of liberal, moderate, progressive, and conservative---all of which usually adds up to Moderate. We are better with budgetary matters than the always-run-us-into-deficits-and-job-outs鈥?Republicans, and Democrats succeeded in doing something totalitarian-controlling Republicans FAILED: They reduced the deficit as of June by 8%---you know, that deficit that the GOP caused due to their FAILED fiscal policies from 2001 through to 2007!Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?Every party has to pass the buck to someone else, and lay blame on someone other than themselves, reps dems everyone. If you ask me, they're all a pack of screwups and need to be excised from government completely. Personally, I think we need to reboot the constitution and start from scratch and remove EVERYONE in office and hold brand new elections. Of course that will never happen, but it is what NEEDS to happen.



PS: In response to the filibuster, you do know that a filibuster can be voted down right? Owning the house, senate and executive office, you would think they hold enough votes to shut down a filibuster. Don't think that just because you're smart and know political workings that you're the only one who does. ALL POLITICIANS ARE CROOKS!! They lie cheat and steal for your votes and then do WHATEVER they want when they're in office. Learn that and learn it well, because until we break this cycle of Dem Rep Dem Rep Dem Rep, WE WILL NEVER BE FREE and we will ALWAYS be in debt.



That's right vote down the answer that actually makes sense and gives the power back to the people where it belongs. But I guess it's better to let politicians run our lives than for us to live for ourselves right?
Unfortunately these Libtards are narcissistic and therefore project the negative qualities that they have about themselves onto others. They don't want anyone to know that they are at fault. Hence, this is why they have the "Blame Bush" policy. Also they like to insult our intelligence by trying to see how much they can get away with.Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?Are you STILL pretending not to know what the filibuster is? Do you think we're stupid?



Every single Republican helps filibuster every single bill and nominee that comes up for a vote. Apparently you think everyone in America is so deeply idiotic that we cannot figure out what that means.Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?
That must be the working class (uneducated) assessment of the situation.



Ideas stink. Ah, that's the basis of politics in the world.
Have you ever heard of the term "filibuster"? Or "sixty seat majority"?



Ah, what's the point, just another hopelessly ignorant conservative. You can't cure stupid.Why do Libtards keep blaming the GOP for not getting their legislation passed when they controlled Congress?
The filibuster dumbo. Now You ARE the pea brain. The Publicans are masters of obfuscation and delay with their pious faces. Most of our economic problems originated under George (What? Me worry?) Bush.
You must be one of those Americans with a pea brain. Democrats will pass nothing until the Repukelicans stop calling them Libtards.
Have you never heard of the filibuster? Republicans have used it far more often than the Democrats ever did against the last president.
They have to blame someone else for their failures, and deflect attention.
WARNING: The following answer is full to the utmost brim with sarcasm.



It's all Bush's fault.



(Why not, that's what the president keeps saying.... he knows what he's talking about right?)
Why should I take your question seriously when you use name-calling and rhetoric?
Filibuster
They can't do *anything* right.
Great question.
cuz they need someone to blame.
The Party of No isn't called that for no reason.
Don't you know the Libtards never take responsibility when things go wrong

book club recommendations

german english translation

Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?

The state of Ohio only recommends children to be the age of 12 years of age to be home alone or 8 years old, but for only a very little amount of time. Would you make this an actual law?



Things to consider:

-How can we enforce it?

-What are the pro's?

-What are the con's

-Is it worth making a law?Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?The state does not make recommendations. It passes laws. Most child endangerment type laws are done by each county, as it is the county's child protective services who enforce them. If you check into it further, the general guideline is that an 8 year old can be left home alone as long as an adult checks in with them every 3 hours. Checking in does not mean see in person. A phone call suffices. A child can not be left with other children until they are 12-13, depending on the county. You can check with your county government to find out what the age requirements are for your county.Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?There are too many laws now. I would support eliminating most of them.

Did the recent student loan legislation eliminate cash-back incentives for consolidation?

Or does it just seem that way?Did the recent student loan legislation eliminate cash-back incentives for consolidation?I cannot speak for other lenders, but at Sallie Mae we are working extremely hard to balance the legislative cuts' significant economic impact on our company with our commitment to serve students, parents and higher education institutions.



Recently, Sallie Mae announced that student loan consolidation customers who have an initial consolidation loan balance of $10,000 or more disbursed on or after Oct. 1, 2007 are eligible to receive a rate reduction of 0.25% if they make payments using automatic debit. Those who are interested can visit our website or call 1-800-448-3533.Did the recent student loan legislation eliminate cash-back incentives for consolidation?Sallie Mae and others, including Wells and Wachovia have reduced or taken away their consolidation benefits. As the loan rates begin to decrease back to the near 3% level in a few years, there wont really be a need for the consolidation loans. There also will be alot fewer lenders in the industry. Check with each lender to confirm. It should be on their websites.

What were important issues and legislation when James Monroe was president?

for 1817 and 1825. also, a brief description? thank you so much!What were important issues and legislation when James Monroe was president?http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presiden鈥?/a>

Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?

Got a link? I heard a little bit about this, but could not find any info.



Thanks!Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?i鈥?/a>



http://votetrustusa.org/index.php?option鈥?/a>





sickening.



http://williamsonrepublic.blogspot.com/2鈥?/a>Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?
thank you wish i could have found more!

Report Abuse

Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?It'll be good to have the troops back home, I think were gonna need them.
Now that sounds simply unAmerican and absolutely ludicrous. I would not believe that for one second.



I could see the McCain campaign doing it to Democratic voters.Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?I've never heard anything about that. And I would hope not.



I'm an Obama supporter, and know that most of our troops support McCain. But all of our service members should be allowed to vote and have their votes counted.Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?
Obama hates the military. He knows how they will vote. Now you go figure it out all by yourself.
No. There was a problem with some of the voting because to vote for president all you were supposed to have to do was fill out your ballot and send it back, but some of the individual states required a witness signature and address. There wasn't even a space on the form to put it in. Virginia has already discarded votes. It's going to be a huge fiasco if they don't get it figured out soon.Is there some sort of legislation in progress to block overseas troops from voting?
No, as long as they registered in the state listed as their home of record. Some make the mistake of trying to register in the state of their home base and not their home of record. Others also fail to register as an absentee voter in time as per their state law despite the military's best efforts to get the word out. There is no legislation barring any US citizen from voting in a general election except for maybe prisoners. What was stopped was legislation intended to improve the system but not to stop the process altogether.

Would it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?

Why or why not and what are some advantages and disadvantages?Would it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?on the one haand, we may get more reasonable, less corrupt admissions, but the system would be tied up for 1000 years with just one year's worth of sumissions.Would it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?
ABSOLUTELY NOT... California is so screwed up because they have the initiative process, in which many passed resolutions end up in endless challenges and lawsuits... BAD IDEA



Elect competent REPRESENTATIVES*... if they don't do their jobs FIRE THEM!... simple, yes?



Take one look at the Axis of Idiots and tell me that ANY of them are competent... Pelosi, Reid, Rangell, Waters, et al... Would you hire ANY of them to work for you in ANY capacity?Would it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?They do. You write your congressperson and they usually read it and if they like the idea, they will make a bill. There are way too many people in their districts to make a bill over every suggestion though.
In California, voters already have the right to do that, through the initiative and referendum process.Would it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?They already do. We all vote for representation of our local districts. A voter can petition the representative in their district any time.Would it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?
No because it would be to easy to change the law and since most people are idiots, this cannot lead to anything good.
No. The United States is a representative republic not a democracyWould it be a good idea to allow voters to propose legislation and constitutional amendments?
Where do you think laws come from?
i dont see why not

barometer

travel trailers

Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?

The state of Ohio only recommends children to be the age of 12 years of age to be home alone or 8 years old, but for only a very little amount of time. Would you make this an actual law?



Things to consider:

-How can we enforce it?

-What are the pro's?

-What are the con's

-Is it worth making a law?Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?Something like that should be left to each parent as each child is different and the parents would know their limitations best.Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?
I'll have to check what the latest polls say.Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?no, this really depends on how mature and responsible the child is, not the ageWould you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?
Here in the UK it is 14. I think that is ok.Would you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?enforcement- snitches, when something happens to the child and police are called well then it's to late etc

pros- we can fine the parents just what we need more taxes ya

Cons- parents work there are a lot of key latch kids around so parents and kids can starve and parents can stay home

not enforceable but good intentionedWould you pass a law/legislation for children to be a required age to stay home alone?
No I would never make this a law. It infringes upon people's liberties and freedom, too much government regulation is a bad thing.



Also, it would be terrible to enforce and require an even more ridiculous amount of money from the tax payer's pocket.



While home alone children are not in a direct state of danger therefore it is not the government's job to intervene.

What forces eventually led to legislation governing the workplace?

Feminism played a big part. It's total BS that the federal government can regulate how you interact with your employees. It's obvious the federal government is trying to do too much already and yet they're regulating work behavior.What forces eventually led to legislation governing the workplace?Dead workers.What forces eventually led to legislation governing the workplace?greedy lawyersWhat forces eventually led to legislation governing the workplace?1. Outraged consumers

2. Outraged workers

3. A string of highly-publicized incidents that showed workplaces and work standards unsafe for both workers and consumers

When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?

If gays are so intolerant of christians, then surely there must be some examples of this?When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?That was the argument the Mormons used for Prop 8.

"It takes away our religious freedom if those people get to have freedom."

It's so bizarre to me that anyone can care THAT MUCH about the personal lives of people they've never met.When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?
One would have to show a government body that is comprised of gays who rule in the majority that has passed legislation. Then look at what they have passed. I don't think you will find any.



I feel it is a sweeping statement to claim that gays are somehow anti-Christian. They simply want equal treatment as human beings. And not all Christians are anti-gay.When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?Some gays(not all some are very libertarian and good people) have not directly attacked Christians but they do persecute them for some of their beliefs. For instance, if a Christian likes the Manhattan Declaration, then some gays will not allow them to express their opinion on it.



There are good people and bad people in every group, don't generalize.
Not all gays are not intolerant of Christians, just as not all Christians are intolerant of gays. Just to be clear, the banning of gay marriage was not done by the Christians. It was done by the country.When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?I try my very best to be gay,

Not a slime ball. (sodomist)

they are not gay.they should learn what they are and not make up a name that nothing to do with them.

If they could be gay, happy,joyus,jolly, and more, that would be a start.When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?
First of all the 'gay community' does not pass legislation. But I also do not believe that they are intolerant. They, as an overall group, are the most tolerant.
I'm not anti-gay at all, but to be perfectly honest, I've never known of a gay community that could pass legislation. Enlighten me.When was the last time the gay community passed anti-christian legislation?
its the other way around if you kep your so called christians ideas out of politics all would be fine
Well stated.
They have never been in the position to do so.
Abortion.... led by the Lesibian agenda of planned parenthood. Roe vs. Wade.

Should politicians and their families be allowed to profit from the legislation?

They work on. Al Gore is getting filthy rich off his carbon credits. Has he used his influence over the stupid unfairly.Should politicians and their families be allowed to profit from the legislation?You bet ya. Al Gore's Global Warming is a fallacy!!! Until people begin to realize this, this world is doomed. Al Gore OWNS major portions of ALL THE COMPANIES THAT WILL IN EFFECT PROFIT FROM THE CAP %26amp; TRADE FAD!!!!



And our Politicians are falling right behind this corrupt Al Gore. Actually it MAKES ME SICK. It will be the end of this country.Should politicians and their families be allowed to profit from the legislation?Quite frankly, there'd be no way to enforce this. After all - your legislators also give you tax breaks, which they themselves benefit from. They give you benefits (like public services) as well. They benefit from those services too. If you don't like a particular politician, don't reelect him/her.Should politicians and their families be allowed to profit from the legislation?You raise an interesting point, but Al Gore is not, technically, a politician anymore. He is just a fat guy with a boring monotone making a buck like anyone else.Should politicians and their families be allowed to profit from the legislation?
ITS CALLED FREEDOM!!! Al Gore is another subject and he will have to face his decisions in the long run. I just say he should have been the real ROBIN HOOD that came to America and did the rich thing. IF the Democrat Congress don't act now against Global Warming and making Mr. Gore and his friends richer then it will a Republican ruled Congress come next year. Time will tell and hope gas doesn't get be over $10. a gallon like in the UK before they do something about AL GORE'S Global Warming. The Nobel Prize money that he got for that cause wasn't given to help any thing but pad his and his peoples pockets. ETC.... " THE PEOPLE WILL SPEAK IN NOVEMBER"

What is a piece of legislation that is currently being debated?

In the United States?What is a piece of legislation that is currently being debated?Nada.



Congress is on vacation until September.What is a piece of legislation that is currently being debated?Legislation to determine the spending cuts and revenue. Its being created by a bi-partisan committe of 12 and will be presented for vote sometime in the 3rd or early 4th quarterWhat is a piece of legislation that is currently being debated?Probably the one about the governments support (at 卐 bequest) of the Libyan confederacy.

flyff

used boats

What year did the 12bhp legislation come in for 125 motorbikes?

i had a 21bhp cg125 but can not remeber if it was a 74 or 76 model any help ?What year did the 12bhp legislation come in for 125 motorbikes?if your on about the bhp u can have on acbt it is about 15 not 12 and u can still buy 125 bikes with well over 15What year did the 12bhp legislation come in for 125 motorbikes?I assume this question is for the English market, as best as I can remember the 12hp rule was implemented in May 1982 but you could ride 125's that produced more than 12hp if they were manufactured and registered before that date.

Due to the Cap& Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?

A direct deposit in the bank, maybe?Due to the Cap%26amp; Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?No, if you turn on a light, drive a car, or buy anything, you will pay more.Due to the Cap%26amp; Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?
So what if they do? If the government returns the money to taxpayers that cap and trade costs, won't most taxpayers use the money to pay their higher bills? How will Cap and Trade reduce emissions if it passes the money back to consumers? It won't. So either the bill is about nothing more than taxes, or it is seeking to redistribute wealth to poor people. It, owing to competition(trade) between nations, cannot actually reduce emissions because higher costs for goods and services means foreign goods will be used more, and since foreign goods will lack the desired environmental controls, the bill will only create taxes on American firms. The Democrats are seeking this for two reasons: to satisfy the environmental lobby (despite the previous analysis) and to create a new revenue stream to help offset their increasing budget deficit problems.Due to the Cap%26amp; Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?Everthing to do with energy will cost more! No exemptions. A select few will benefit greatly on the consumer and private sectors dime under the guise of global... whatever they are calling it today. Feed on the fear of the masses. The masses do not have to be forced into developing and implimenting alternate sources of energy. We've been doing it with incredible and unpresidented progress for years and look how far we've come! Cap and Trade is a eco-spin to generate more money for the beautiful people. Sad.........Due to the Cap%26amp; Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?
No, research done back in March estimates Cap and Trade will cost Americans $184 Billion. These are the smart people making these decisions for us.Due to the Cap%26amp; Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?yes, dear.......be nice and go stand in the rain and wait for your rebate..... just pay your electric bill on time or you will be sent to the Gulag and your family will be tortured and killed.......Due to the Cap%26amp; Trade legislation, some people pay more for electric,but will others receive a rebate?
Of course not. The government NEVER gives money back. If they did, it would LESSEN their influence, and therefore their power.....
keep dreamin!

Do you think political bipartisanship to pass legislation is important or even necessary?

It seems Congress and political newspeople don't realize that we know it only requires a majority vote to pass legislation!



You only need 50 and the VP's 51!



YOU DON'T NEED 60!Do you think political bipartisanship to pass legislation is important or even necessary?In order to break a filibuster in the Senate you need 60 votes.Do you think political bipartisanship to pass legislation is important or even necessary?It is when it is a major rehaul of our nation's way of doing things, Kelly. They want to get re-elected, and of course, they don't want the blame if it crashes and burns, which is why the health care plan doesn't even begin until 2013.



You must be more liberal than I thought, if you think Obama is being in any way bipartisan.Do you think political bipartisanship to pass legislation is important or even necessary?Wouldn't it be rather more authoritarian if the President stopped being bipartisan? I don't like republicans, but a system that doesn't second guess itself is dangerous.

What 37 states are planning legislation to try to stop health care reform?

I am not just talking about the states that are suing, I already know that it is a little above a dozen for that.What 37 states are planning legislation to try to stop health care reform?want 2 c answersWhat 37 states are planning legislation to try to stop health care reform?37 is way off.

What is reconciliation and how was it used to pass health care legislation?

No partisan answers please!What is reconciliation and how was it used to pass health care legislation?I thought 'reconciliation' meant respecting black rights or something.What is reconciliation and how was it used to pass health care legislation?The reconciliation rules in the Senate allow budget matters to be passed by a simple majority. The filibuster rules don't apply. With the current filibuster rules, a so-called "super majority" of 60% may be needed to pass any non-budget legislation.



The original Senate healthcare legislation was so packed with budget-busting sweetheart deals that it was unpalatable to virtually everyone regardless of your party affiliation.



In an epic and unprecedented maneuver, proponents of the healthcare legislation in general convinced the House to pass both the terrible Senate bill AND a reconciliation bill that reversed out the budget-busting sweetheart deals. The Senate had enough votes to pass the reconciliation bill (they needed 50 with Biden as a tie-breaker but had about 55 or so) since it could not be filibustered by opponents since it was limited to budget matters only.What is reconciliation and how was it used to pass health care legislation?To make or show to be consistent or congruous;

battlefield 3 forums

auto auction

What website would list congressional legislation and info on voting?

I would like to see which senators voted for or against the $410 billion dollar bill that passed today....is there a website that shows information on bills that are up for voting and the outcome of the voting (with detail as to how people voted)??What website would list congressional legislation and info on voting?http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congr鈥?/a>



http://www.citizen.org/congress/voting/

What are the key pieces of legislation related to older people in the uk?

i know about the nhs and community care act but what others are they? did they work well?What are the key pieces of legislation related to older people in the uk?Retirement Pension Act 1906,

National Health Service Act 1948,

National Assistance Act (Forerunner of Social Security Acts) 1948.What are the key pieces of legislation related to older people in the uk?None that one can point to. The political parties really do not pay much attention to old people any more. There have been tons of legislation aimed at helping children and young people though. E.g. child poverty has been targetted extensively, but they do not care if help the nation's OAPs are slowly dying of malnutrition and hypothermia and are some of the poorest in the world. Gordon Brown and David Cameron are raising young children and not looking after old parents.What are the key pieces of legislation related to older people in the uk?Kick the old buggas down, if that fails hope the cold freezes them stiff, always keep them needy, Never make an application form,easy to fill in. Those with savings,must never be praised,and assisted with spending of the same. Believe me my friend,there is not a lot for us.!What are the key pieces of legislation related to older people in the uk?
To keep them in poverty. FACT!!

Can anyone explain the 40% surtax on high premium health plans in the health legislation to me?

I'm reading news articles on the new health care legislation and it said something about a 40% surtax on high premium health plans. 40% on who - the user or the provider?Can anyone explain the 40% surtax on high premium health plans in the health legislation to me?As I understand it those who receive this health plan free at the moment would have to pay tax on it as part of their income.



Seems reasonable.Can anyone explain the 40% surtax on high premium health plans in the health legislation to me?The user. Go ahead and bend over now because you know what is coming next.Can anyone explain the 40% surtax on high premium health plans in the health legislation to me?I am not sure. Also, is it just based on the premium? What about a family of 6? That could get close to $27,000... Would they have to pay the tax? When and how much?

How to change the legislation on keeping domestic rabbits in qld?

I have been trying to reserch why the rabbit is outlawed in Qld especially since CSIRO case studdies have shown that domestic rabbits can not survive in the wild. Does any one have any idea?How to change the legislation on keeping domestic rabbits in qld?The reason they are outlawed in Queensland is because it is the only state that still has the rabbit proof fence in operation.

Apparently rabbit numbers in Qld are relatively well under control in this state, and they do not want to jeopradise the situation by allowing people to keep them as pets, and risk introducing the pests into the rabbit proofed area.

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/4790_8288.htm

You're not going to have any luck arguing with this kind of legislation. Rabbits are an introduced pest, which destroy crops, outcompete native animals, and dig up the soil. I wouldn't mind not being able to have them as pets if it meant that there weren't any feral ones in my state.

What is the process and steps I have to go through to get a law passed through legislation?

The story about that 6 year old boy in Georgia pissed me off. I am tired of sex offenders. They are truely the scum of earth. I want to get a law passed in regards to the length of time they stay in prison.What is the process and steps I have to go through to get a law passed through legislation?I think you'd need to write out your ideas, and then get one of your congress men/women to sponsor it and take it to the hill (It would probably help if you had a signed petition, too). Write lots of letters asking them to introduce/support legislation that increases the sentencing for offenders. And, vote for the politicians who also take a strong stand against sex offenders.



Or, you might want to consider running yourself, if you're that interested in policy and laws - that's the best way to make a difference!

trade in value

magellan roadmate

Why is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?

Why don't vet techs fight for bigger pay and demand more like human nurses do?Why is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?Veterinary technicians have been fighting for better legislation and oversight of the profession for many years. In fact, the fighting has been going on for more than 20 years in some states and there have been laws passed to govern veterinary technicians and the practice of veterinary technology in many states in the last few years. However, this fight has been slow going because typically it has been the veterinarians who credential technicians until the laws finally pass and they quite often don't want to feel like "someone is telling me how to run my practice". Veterinary technicians also typically don't have the money for lobbyists or the ability to go spend days waiting to speak before their state legislators and they don't get the public backing that other private interest groups do.



Even with legislation, you won't see an automatic increase in pay because the laws don't govern that. Pay is governed by the perception of value of the veterinarian towards credentialed veterinary technicians. As long as veterinarians can hire anyone regardless of skill/experience/education and label them a veterinary technician or allow them to perform the same duties all while the clients are kept in the dark, pay and respect will not increase. And as long as owners are exposed to uneducated/unskilled/untrained individuals who are passed off as "veterinary technicians", we will garner little public respect or support because the public doesn't understand the difference and see vet techs as unknowledgeable or unskilled.



This is of course not to say that all on-the-job trained staff aren't good at what they do, but when you have so many people working in veterinary facilities for summer jobs or just a job then you end up with a large portion of the workforce that is typically not highly skilled or knowledgeable and that is what the clients see. These are the kinds of individuals who don't see a need for getting an education or going to continuing education lectures because they "don't have to, so why should I?" and these give the rest of us a bad reputation.Why is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?
Actually there's a lot less legislation than you might think for nursing, and almost none of it has to do with their pay or benefits. What's there is mostly about increasing the supply of nurses, and a little in a few states about staffing levels. Both of those are aimed not at making the nurse's life better but at ensuring a minimum level of patient safety. In general, though, hospitals are pretty well on their own in most of the country in deciding how they staff, and many are willing to stretch well past the point of safety or good sense in order to improve the bottom line.Why is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?Probably because the patients can't say how well they were treated.



And for the poster that said other wise, vet techs work hard.Why is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?
Because their patients don't sue.Why is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?I wish I knewWhy is there huge legislation for nurses but not vet techs aka vet nurses?
Easy...they don't do squat.

Why Is Tie Barring Allowed In Legislation?

I've been wondering why "tie-barring", or attaching bill B to bill A in order to get bill A passed, is allowed and performed in legislation. Is there any benefit to this system? From what I can tell, all it leads to is more legislation getting passed, regardless of if that legislation is good or bad.



Why can we not keep it simple? Vote on one bill at a time rather than a package of bills? Keep the good, get rid of the rest. All by vote. Separately. It makes perfect sense, but isn't practiced.Why Is Tie Barring Allowed In Legislation?We could all save a lot of drama and disgust if we just had the legislative branch show up for one day in January each year and either vote "yes" or "no" and then leave.



Even though the bills haven't been written at the time they were voted on, it would be no different than the situation we have now. No one reads the bills anyway, and this method would reduce the carbon footprint of our government by at least 90%.

How did the republican governments change legislation in southern states?

reconstrucion in the south.

how did the republican governments change legislation in southern states?How did the republican governments change legislation in southern states?HOW AM I SUPPOSE TO KNOW?

If One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?

If one group of Legislators can approve legislation without voting on it, just 'deem it passed' and move on as has been suggested by Ms Nancy, what purpose does it serve to have the rest of Congress even in the building?If One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?I hope the Botox Witch is not delirious enough to think that the Slaughter Rule will pass muster with the American people. If they try that stunt there will be a constitutional challenge to it. Of course if something like that is allowed to stand then there is really no need for the "people's house".If One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?
Good point. They all need to be fired.



lpIf One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?I agree. I wish conservative congressman would just go home. C Street.If One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?
They have to make their arguments to the American people so that they'll be the majority after mid term elections. If the American people don't buy it then they'll remain the minority, if they do then the republicans will be representing us. That's the way the two party system works.If One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?Here's an analogy:

If it only takes a certain percentage of American voters in order to elect a president, what purpose does it serve to allow all the other people (who ultimately would vote for the losing candidate) to vote?



The reason for it is, we don't have crystal balls, we don't know in advance who or what will get the majority vote, or which people will vote for what.If One Group can pass Health legislation with no vote in Congress, what purpose does it serve to have the rest?
There is still a vote. The "Slaughter rule" is better known as "deem and pass" or "the self executing rule." Instead of voting directly for the bill, members vote the bill to be "deemed as passed." Then they can tell their constituents they never voted for the bill. Under republican Speaker Newt Gingrich, 30% of all rules were passed as "self executing." Under republican Speaker Denny Hastert, about 28% of all rules were passed as "self executing." Now that republicans are out of power, suddenly it is unconstitutional to use self executing rules?? The very same people now rending their garments about "deem and pass" were using it heavily a few years ago. How soon they forget!

See http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/03/…



"When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules."



----------- update -----------



@prusa1237: There already was a constitutional challenge to "deem and pass" for one of the approx 200 times the republicans used it. It was ruled constitutional. See http://openjurist.org/486/f3d/1342/publi… and http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinio…

.
Kinda like passing the Patriot Act without anyone bothering to read it isn't it?

What information about european legislation which covers medication?

I.m not sure about european legislation but there are standards in the U.K. Try this website: cski, and look at cski professional,there is some information on there that might be helpful

pocket bikes

professor layton

Do polar bears require endangered species legislation?

With the effects of global warming, are polar bears becoming endangered? Should they now require endangered species legislation?? Why or why not??



Need to be able to defend both sides on a debate.



Thanks.



P.S. Good sites needed for bibliography!Do polar bears require endangered species legislation?Polar Bears are flourishing world-wide...their numbers are breaking records in some habitats.



Alaskan Bear numbers are falling slightly due in part to melting sea-ice and illegal hunting said to kill 150-250 bears per year. That's pretty significant given the total world population is around 20K-25K.



However, the bears have recovered from numbers in the 50's hovering at about 5,000 to 20,000-25,000 according to a 2005 measure.



Check Fish and Game websites

Use googleDo polar bears require endangered species legislation?
Please use Google. Here's some good sites:



http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/ PBI



http://www.nwf.org/polarbear/ NWF



http://www.savebiogems.org/polar/ NRDC



http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl… SA



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear#… WikipediaDo polar bears require endangered species legislation?Yes Polar Bears are becoming endangered, because it is getting warmer, and the ice is melting, so we need to cut down on pollution, they should require helping.



Hope this helps ;)



ABSTA BABE xDo polar bears require endangered species legislation?
Polar bears should be considered an endangered species.Do polar bears require endangered species legislation?No .......... they are flourishing just like people do when its warmer outside.

Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?

I ask this question because I read a lot of leftists crying about "greedy" people and such who are sitting on a huge pile of cash and not "creating jobs" like they should be doing. So, I ask, if private citizens willingly choose to sit on the sidelines and not do the right thing and "create jobs", should government force them to do so? Furthermore, if government mandates that they do so and they refuse, should government simply confiscate that idle cash for the common good?Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?I like it. We know who is a registered Democrat in this country. I say we empty all of their bank accounts and use the money to "create jobs". Bunch of greedy bastards, why are they hoarding all of that cash and not investing in our country?Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?
I do not consider myself a "leftist" whatever that is supposed to mean. I am a democrat.



To answer your question, no, I would not support mandates to invest capital.



Nevertheless, you are grossly misstating the liberal position. The GOP mantra since 2001 has been to reduce taxes so that the top 2% of income earners could invest and create jobs. Well, 8 years and $2 trillion dollars of tax cuts later, we are still waiting for this magical creation of jobs.Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?What do you consider " idle" capital?



Even if all you do is keep your money in a bank account, the bank takes that money and invests it in personal and business loans and other investments. Therefore, there is no "idle capital" unless you are hiding your money in a matress.
No, the government should not. But their consciences, I think is well trained they should help. It is called kindness, co-operativeness, love of neighbour, and love of country.Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?Well we were always led to believe that supply side economics would rain prosperity down on us.. I see a lot of clouds, but the ground around me is parched.Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?
Considering the recession bush created and left behind, there are not many Americans that have "idle capital".
Let's just confiscate all their property and have the government create jobs. I mean it.Leftists, would you support legislation that mandated citizens invest their idle capital?
Looks like you're on to something.
sure!
I think you are confusing multiple issues. People say the president should do something to help the economy, and to create jobs. That the unemployment %26amp; GDP growth rate is his fault. Others are pointing to corporations who are paying little in taxes as not creating jobs either. Also - there are those who say stimulative bills don't actually create jobs, just work, and that is done by private business. You can't have it both ways.



Thus you are creating a false situation that doesn't exist to push a narrow political idea. The reality is that we lived in a mixed economy and have since the end of the second world war (and is the source of being a world power, not weapons). It is much more complex than you seem to realize, though you are stuck in a "left" vs. "right" mind state, so much so that you are making things up like "leftists" calling people "greedy" and so forth. I believe you are brainwashed into thinking that taxes hurt the economy, that government mandates anything like you imagine or that we are somehow heading to socialism or even communism (while private industry is free to hire or not hire, and has been shedding regulation since the late 1970's).

Should We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?

In this country we have a big problem with drugs. Most of the drug problems are in low end urban Neighborhoods. A lot of crime in the cities is linked to drug activity, I'm not saying all but a lot. If the price of Cocaine didn't rise so rapidly in the late 70s early 80s crack would probably not exist. The drug industry is a multi-billon dollar industry. So I'm asking should the United States and the rest of the democratic nations legalize drugs?Should We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?Do y'all see heroine and cocaine lumped with marijuana in this question? Getting past the awful question; do you mean legal or illegal? The prohibition on Marijuana should be lifted. Drugs like cocaine and heroine are legal in their pharmaceutical form. Not marijuana. Think about that!Should We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?
I say yes since ppl are doing it anyway regardless of what the law says, so we might as well tax them for doing so like we do with smoking



BUT i do think we should control the use in public, like one cannot do it in a public place like what we do with smoking too. Because seriously, drug smells really bad and is just as harmful as second-hand smoking.Should We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?Definitely yes. It needs to be treated as a medical condition, not a crime. In fact, Portugal actually legalized ALL drugs in their country, with astounding results. They can be seen here http://www.time.com/time/health/article/鈥?/a>
Yes we should legalize it, but, we should sell it 100% pure and not let the scum know that it is pure, that way they all go out and OD. Problem solvedShould We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?yes definitly. if drugs were legal, we could study them extensively and find cures for addiction, or even other unknown benefits. plus the hemp industry would dramatically revolutionize this countryShould We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?
Heroin, Cocaine, Marijuana were only made illegal because the Government couldn't figure out a way to tax them..
No. We need to decriminalize it. We need other kinds of penalties/controls for hard drugs.



Weed: people should be able to grow their own small quantity for personal use.Should We Reverse the Legislation that made drugs like Heroin,Cocaine and Marijuana Illegal?
No, no, no.
No and this is about the worst argument Ive ever seen on the subject.
yes
for sho

Do you think special legislation makes it difficult to fire people with drug problems and mental illnesses?

As well as harassers, etc.Do you think special legislation makes it difficult to fire people with drug problems and mental illnesses?if you have a person harassing you that is no where near a mental illness; now see thats the problem right there, i am a person with a mentral illness and these days you have so many people that take advantage of what it really means to be mentally ill. being mentally ill doesnt mean that you are crazy its a lesser severity of being crazy, now being psychotic thats kinda up there but anyway legislation felt that it was necessary to make the laws that they did due to people justgoing all willynilly with firing someone just bcuz they may have stated that they have a mental illness and im sure it was alot of signatures collected for that one. just like i always have to tell my family and their friends just bcuz i may have to take meds that doesnt make me crazy; its just like if a diabetic has to take their insulin; or if a person with heart problems have to take their heart medication; its just something that has failed in our bodies that just dont work the way it use to or we were born with it working differently for others. and as far as i am concerned if a person isnt doing their job mentally disable or not then they have to be let go if they are not productive in what they do, using a mental illness just to keep a job is like marrying someone just bcuz you knocked them up!!!hahahaha.

Does anyone else remember how angry Republicans were about the proposed amnesty legislation over the summer?

Yet you guys are nominating John McCain, one of the people who proposed the legislation you opposed so much?Does anyone else remember how angry Republicans were about the proposed amnesty legislation over the summer?To be fair... none of the candidates is exactly OPPOSED to that legislation. All politicians thought it was a fantastic idea. it's the PEOPLE who thought it was bad.



So if we're determining candidacy based on that one fact, none of the candidates left in the race should be running.Does anyone else remember how angry Republicans were about the proposed amnesty legislation over the summer?he so far has nominated himself, his only wins have been in liberal rupublican ares anad where liberal and independent could vote republicanDoes anyone else remember how angry Republicans were about the proposed amnesty legislation over the summer?Yes, and we still are. McCain's rise is certainly painful to Conservatives because outside the war in Iraq and spending, McCain is a Liberal......Does anyone else remember how angry Republicans were about the proposed amnesty legislation over the summer?
The Rebublicans in general aren't against amnesty--that applies only to the extremists on the right wing--the "neoconservatives" and the racist elements of the GOP--the ones who have been controlling the GOP for years ( and whoose grip is finally slipping). But studies show tha t70-80% of the American people favor some sort of legal status for the immigrants (which those same extremists define as "amnesty")



In fact, their objections last year had nothing to do with giving "amnesty" to the illegals--because that was not part of the proposed legislation.



HUH?



I'm serious--there were NO provisions for amnesty in th ebill. Under US law, being in this country illegally is a civil violation--not a criminal one. In other words, the kind of offense tha tis NORMALLY punished by a fine. And that's exactly what the bill called for--levying a stiff fine that had to be paid if the immigrant were to be given legal status.



The anti-immigrant forces made a great deal about their "respect for the law"-but in fact, it was they who were disrespecting the law--because they didn't want to follow the proper procedures tha tthe law requires.



So what was their motive for opposing the bill? Well, its really very simple--and very ugly. Bigotry. Period. They didn't want the law applied fairly and inaccordance with how the law is supposed to work--and that PROVES their motives had nothing to do with upholding the law.



Why are they backing of now? Simple--no one is listening to them anymore. Their control of the GOP is collapsing--and they have nno options. Votors are NOT going to nominate--or elect--another one of their extremist politicians. So they can either support McCain--or stay home.



Of course, they could always vote for Hillary or Obama! :)

acura tsx

book club recommendations

What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?

Standing up to the Obama tyranny. We let BO and the liberals know that they're not going to take down America without a fight.What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?Hey genius.... it was Democrats fighting AMONGST THEMSELVES for a YEAR, Republicans have no part in this dumb sh**.



I know you want to lie to yourself, but I had to hit you with a little reality there.What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?
It only proved that conservatives are racist, misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic, anti-American, %26amp; hate filled.What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?1 year of whining.
About as much as the last few months of liberal's trying to force an unpopular bill on a public that doesn't want it.



Actually I take it back...they are the opposite



The conservative "whining" let the public know the conservatives are on their side...while the liberal "force" tactics let the public know the Democratic party doesn't give a rat's butt about what the people think.What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?Awareness of the despotic ways of our Chief Executive and the lack of ethics of those in charge of Congress..What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?
Did you know the fed has increased the adjusted monetary base 125% the last 18 months? this is from the saint louis fed website.



Under Carter the Fed increased the adjusted monetary base 12-13% and when he did interest rates went to 18-19% and inflation went to over 20%. What will happen when the velocity of money picks up and banks start lending?



Can you say Obama = Carter on Steroids?
Sorry, the dumbocrats own 100% of this POS and they're going to have to own up to it. See ya in November. Bwahahahahahahahahahah!!!What did a year of conservative whining about health care legislation really accomplish?
Republican corporate handouts the last 13 years, and the last three years of Republican obstructionism and Wall Street shilling have damaged this country, maybe beyond repair.

I hope the public does not forget this for a LONG time to come.
Saving our great nation from slipping into the hopeless abyss of Socialism.



~Dr. B.~
Exposed the corrupt democratic machine for what it is. Call it whining if you will, but it will continue as long as the "progressives" pursue their agenda of bloating the deficit, the bureaucracy and the intrusion of the federal government into our daily lives.
It showed conservatives just they just don't understand common facts or give a damn about anyone other than themselves..it sure did not stop any progress, it showed the world just how racist and full of hate they really are.
It awoke a nation that was oblivious to much of the goings on of Washington and politics, and let our leaders know that there are more men and women who view themselves as conservatives than as democrats or republicans. If you don't believe that then check the ratings of liberal news organizations compared to those of fox and talk radio. Those "whining" conservatives are far more informed and active than their liberal/progressive counterparts who deem themselves "intellectual" yet can't seem to grasp the fact that they themselves are the ones out of touch with the American people as poll after poll has shown.
If it goes south they can say I told you so vote for us.

WIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?

Instead of actually engaging in good faith they turned health care into a political football. When the plan goes into effect, will they wish they had given real negotiation a shot? What's the point of getting voted into office if you're not going to do what the voters put you there for?WIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?one means landfill bs and nope!!! America is not about socialism!!!WIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?
Ask this question again in November, mm'k?WIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?No matter how awesome you think it is, it doesn't change the fact that it violates the U.S. constitution. They are on the right side of history on this one.



To the answerer above that cited Medicare - um, isn't medicare broken and bankrupt or did that magically change?



I hope this helps.
All the senators and congressman are put there to do THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. Not to wheel and deal for their own political gain. The GOP will not negotiate on the will of the people which is.... WE DO NOT WANT THIS BILL....period.WIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?Probably not.



Americans have short memories.WIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?
You could never ever be wrong following the peoples will. I just hope it was less a political move and more of things to come.
Well they are the political party of No .

It really depends upon what Limbaugh and Beck tell them to thinkWIll the GOP regret their refusal to contribute to landmark legislation?
i am sure of that the money they got from the insurance co. kept hem nice an fat for Meany years, but this time they going to loos Wait for sure thanks to mr Obama.i ame very grateful to him

this is the biggest thing that is don in this country,

remember this,Republicans NEVER don nothing for the american people all are don by democrats
I am sure they will. but also demagogically they will try to take credit for the legislation
No. You have to have a conscience to regret.



Do they regret not voting for medicare?



I doubt it.

What specific items do you think should be a healthcare legislation bill?

and: What items should be specifically left out?What specific items do you think should be a healthcare legislation bill?Not sure what should be in a bill. But take out penalties on people without insurance. Take out new taxes. Take out penalties on employers that provide insurance plans. Remove restrictions on providers for coverage. Do not create a public option that will compete with private insurers.



Read the first 200 pages of that bill. Wont help.

Did Congress ever pass that legislation that was going to curb fast trading?

I believe it was Senator Charles Schumer (Democrat of NY) who first proposed this.

You know trading allowed where flash orders allow certain people who have exchange access to buy and sell order information for milliseconds prior to that info being available to the public.

It would be nice if ordinary people could start investing again with some trust in the markets, "some" being a key word.Did Congress ever pass that legislation that was going to curb fast trading?http://invest-faq.com/articles/exch-circ鈥?/a>



http://www.nyse.com/press/circuit_breake鈥?/a>Did Congress ever pass that legislation that was going to curb fast trading?No one listens to Schumer anyway...and Congress doesn't have the authority to regulate that either.

I am doing a report and need to know what legislation's differ in Ireland to in the UK in regards to vehicles?

I know some differences are VRT, VAT uk has miles ireland has KM. I just need some more info about this and any other things that might vary between coutries.I am doing a report and need to know what legislation's differ in Ireland to in the UK in regards to vehicles?Have a look at: http://www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles.aspx



it should tell you everything that you need to know, good luck

nada boats

traffic cameras

Why does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?

When he and his party engaged in the same actions against the Republicans during the Bush years.

Democrats then created the Bush budget and confirmed the expenditures during the last 2 Bush years that help start the recession. Democrats passed bailouts, TARP and the auto bailouts with Pelosi %26amp; Reid heading their party in leadership.Why does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?It's just another lie he thinks people are dumb enough to believe.Why does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?
Bush had the support of the Democrats in office for a very long time especially after 9/11.

Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation .

--------------------------------------鈥?br>
Here is an example that really made me angry at Republicans %26gt;

--------------------------------------鈥?br>
Have you ever noticed how anti small business Republicans ...

Republicans kill small- business lending bill | The Salt ... Republicans kill small- business lending bill ... fund to leverage up to $300 billion in loans, helping to ...

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=2鈥?- Cache

#

Republicans kill small-business lending bill | The Salt ...

Republicans kill small-business lending bill ... fund to leverage up to $300 billion in loans, helping to loosen tight credit markets. Some Republicans ...

www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/50018742-7鈥?- CachedWhy does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?Because the Republicans will not let anything happen and then say that the Democrats are not doing anything to help the economy. The only reason they aren't doing anything is because Republicans won't let them. They are getting paid over $100k a year to sit on their hands and do nothing.
Republicans can't block anything right now - the dem's control all levers of power. Obama can't admit that it's moderates in his own party that are blocking his crazy legislative agenda because they know that the people don't want any of it.



See you in November!Why does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?Because they ARE blocking it.



Bush was the champion of TARP and bailout. And thank goodness. Can you imagine what the unemployment numbers would be if those massive companies failed?



Much of the money has already been paid back, anyway.Why does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?
Well unfortunately all politicians do it and blame the other guy as much as possible the revolving door of the political mind.
He's gotta blame somebody..........

It's unliberal like to accept responsibility......

DID HE NEED REPUBS TO PASS OBAMACARE???Why does Obama claim that Republicans are engaged in blocking legislation and nominees?
Because the problems with America is its is filled with a bunch ignorant of the facts Americans, bluntly put...
Republicans are setting new filibuster records daily.
partisan "patriot" obstructionists obstruct for partisan reasons!
Just another of Obama's droning propaganda speech full of lies
He's got to blame someone.

How can a governor's message power affect legislation in a State?

Can someone please give me an answer of at least 3 complete sentences, much thanks appreciated and will pick a best answer ASAP. Thanks a lot!How can a governor's message power affect legislation in a State?Of course a Governor's msg power affects legislation.



A Governor has an enormous amount of power over a state.. .much like a president over the federal government. He or she gets unlimited press time for that state to get his msg out and also accrues a lot of supporters in doing 'favors'.

Is the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?

Filipinos who fought in ww2 (whether American citizens or not) will be getting a healthy sum of money from the government. (why pick just Filipinos, I have no idea)



Car companies after being bailed out have to increase their standards in terms of being more eco friendly, so we can financially stress them out again.



Among of some of the other organizations Obama plans to donate some of his money to.



Do you guys find some of these items weired?Is the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?It is so mind boggling - But ya know when I read the Bible it all makes sense



and remember the King of all lies will tell 100 truths to get you to believe 1 lie



I think the Bill can aborb that ideal



oh and the patriot act - Please please it is not like this was something Bush came up with it has been a round for a while and the left loved it when clinton used it for the war on drugs



I just wish people had more dignity to learn the truth before they spoke - I am sorry if that seems harsh or mean but the fustration is overwhelming at timesIs the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?
Marx and Lenin would be so proud.Is the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?You mean the spending bill that is trying to be passed off as 'stimulus'?

Most of what is contained in the bill are spending programs that have failed to get passed over the last dozen years or so.Is the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?
The backing is one sided!!!Is the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?I think the Patriot Act was rather Bizarre since it seems to target US citizens.Is the stimulus package the most bizarre piece of legislation you have seen?
Bizarre? Darn right offensive! It has nothing to do with the economy! It's a freaking spending mandate, and a death warrant of our liberties.
I think the word for it is duplicitous.

What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?

Honestly, I cannot think of one. Does this mean conservatism is vacuous as a belief inspiring change or vision?What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?The prescription drug benefit for seniors is the greatest conservative legislation. It will only cost the taxpayer between 500 and 800 billion; it got out the elderly Republican vote, it enables more government spending and the proliferation of an unneeded bureaucracy, and most of all, it is a wonderful windfall to big pharm. I am really not being sarcastic because that is what I believe conservatism today is about -- getting elected, and corporate welfare.What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?
None, there has not been a conservative to pass any conservative legislation in DC for over 30 years.What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?Should that Executive toilets have 2 rolls of toilet paper at each throne.



Big fat a**es they have to wipe.What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?
Answer: Tax Cuts! Reagan and now Bush...Tax Cuts for the working class.

And the first thing America got from socialist traitor Bill???

The largest tax increase on the working class since FDR!

When you stated "Honestly, I cannot think", You should have stopped then as that sums you up in entirety.What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?tax cuts if i have to pick just one.



what you can or cannot think of does not reflect on conservatism at all. it is just a reflection of vacuousness of what you can think of.What is the greatest piece of "conservative" legislation passed in the last 30 years?
Tax cuts for everyone.



Kept the Senate from passing a very bad immigration bill.



Drug program for seniors



Changing vision of a country is not what government is all about. It is about efficiently running a country. Not giving things away to all of its citizens who are too lazy to get a job.
George Bush Senior passed The Americans with Disabilities Act, an act the conservatives still revile and rail against today, Thanks for something Bush senior!

Is it true that most of the health reform legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists?

Please answer yes or no and we will all see who is informed on this issue.Is it true that most of the health reform legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists?Yes, insurance industry lobbyists have been intimately involved in shaping the legislation from the beginning. Their fingerprints are all over it.



Consider Section 2712 (page 16-17) of the Senate bill, which bans the despicable practice of rescinding insurance coverage when a customer gets an expensive illness. Sounds good, until you read this rather large loophole:



"...except that this section shall not apply to a covered individual who has performed an act or practice that constitutes fraud or makes an intentional misrepresentation of material fact as prohibited by the terms of the plan or coverage."



"Fraud" and "intentional misrepresentation" are precisely the excuses insurance companies use now to cancel policies, and this loophole, which was probably written directly by an insurance industry lawyer, indicates they have no intention of ending that practice.Is it true that most of the health reform legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists?
I don't see how anyone could doubt that they had a hand in some of it. How coincidental is it that the bill includes a mandate for everyone to buy insurance, then the public option is "taken off the table"? My opinion, though is that Obama is playing them just like he's playing his followers. The public option will be back as soon as the insurance premiums are so high only the rich can afford them, or the insurance companies go broke trying to comply with all the restrictions.Is it true that most of the health reform legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists?I'm unsure how much of it was written by them, but I would bet that they had a hand in it. One thing is for certain though, our paid, elected representatives did not write it.Is it true that most of the health reform legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists?
Yes.Is it true that most of the health reform legislation was written by insurance industry lobbyists?...You mean Baucus was just the drunken middleman ?

vance and hines

stage stores

Why do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?

Especially since the benefits don't start until 4 years after we start paying taxes for it?



Whats the emergency? What are Democrats afraid of?Why do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?They are afraid of the light of day



This is the 3rd time on this bill alone they have had a vote in the middle of the night



At first i thought it was because Pelosi could not stand the sun



But that would only effect the HouseWhy do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?
Because the bill is loaded with pork for the democrats and the two independents.Why do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?Because all of the dirty work has to be done fast, fast, fast.

they know that the electorate has a short attention span. by the time their boy Obammy is ready for the next election he can put on his smiley face and we will all have forgotten the anguish of today.

and we will be used to the change.



What the heck. We can get used to anything. the kids are being taught to love Obama and to be good little lefties. And all of us old geezers will die off soon, so he's got it in the bag.
Because that is the only way liberals can impose their flawed ideas on the American people.Why do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?They do it on weekends, nights and holidays because the Republicans are too drunk to either know what they're voting for or to filibuster.Why do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?
All congressional Democrats will be looking for a job come 2010. People are sick of this Democratic Congress, they will be gone soon.
Because they are doing it Undercover. Who's going to be paying attention or doing vigilance at those times? This being just before Mid term Elections. Get it done by hook or crook now before next year when we have to go back to our states to try and convince the Unwashed Masses that we have their best interests in mind. People forget or get the attitude, "Well, the Idiots did it and now we're stuck with it." Reid and Pelosi conjured up this crap because they know they can whip their party members in line because those congressmen(women) and senators want to go home for Christmas and New Years and enjoy the fruits of Leadership.Why do Democrats feel a need to cram through legislation on weekends, nights, and holidays?
In my opinion, it is about time the Congress actually spends time doing their job. For far too long, Democrats and Republicans in Congress have spent their time doing anything but legislating.
well they could have done reconciliation like the Republicans did when they were in power. i guess Republicans have a short term memory
as with all liberalism,if done out in the open ,it would be rejected...
They are afraid another 90 years will go by if left to do-nothing conservatives. The conservatives can go home if they don't like working weekends to get the peoples work done because of the obstruction of slugs.



Here's one for the DAs - is it really in secret if everyone knows about it and your representative is present? And wouldn't it have been done under the lights %26amp; publicity of the media (which they all love) if the slugs were not dragging it out into the wee hours - I would say ask the obstructionist not the doers.
Because Democrats have a work ethic. That's something conservatives know nothing about.



Democrats are hard at work earning their salaries while insurance lobbyist shill Lieberman is back in Connecticut stuffing his zionist face with matzo balls and gefilte fish.



observe: Contard loons giving thumbs down to work ethics.
They're just copying an old GOP trick

Anyone else tired of Bushs tantrums and vetoing important legislation?

Is has gone off the deep end. I hope this moron is impeached and put in Prison with Rice and Cheney.Anyone else tired of Bushs tantrums and vetoing important legislation?Yes, Bush whines complains and moans about everything now that he doesn't have a rubber stamp congress to help him destroy the USA.Anyone else tired of Bushs tantrums and vetoing important legislation?LOL! Bush keeps telling those people he will veto unless they make their "legislation" reasonable. Thats his hint to them.

All they do is keep sending their overinflated nonsense to him.

Now, who are the morons?Anyone else tired of Bushs tantrums and vetoing important legislation?I am sick and tired of that whole administration.Anyone else tired of Bushs tantrums and vetoing important legislation?
I haven't seen any "important legislation" yet. Only a bunch of whiny, grandstanding, do nothing Dems. I'm glad President Bush is finally showing some backbone and telling them off.

What do you think of Obama most likely signing legislation to extend the Bush Tax Cuts?

And what party do you belong to?What do you think of Obama most likely signing legislation to extend the Bush Tax Cuts?Update: He signed it and why would he not have?

Answer:
First, it has not passed! It only passed "Cloture" allowing it to go to the floor for debate and a final vote likely to pass tomorrow. It must then go to the House of Reps under Pelosie who has vowed to fight it to the bitter end.

Now if it gets passed in the House over the Wicked Witch's desire, then, it will go to Obama for signature and he has said he will sign it. Why not, he negotiated it. To not sign it would be Political Suicide after twisting so many arms to get it passed.

Are you asking if he will go back on his deal with the GOP?

I am Republican, What does that have to do with the Question? Maybe Republicans pay more taxes than Democrats?

Edit: @Reality: Stop and think a little. This does not increase the Debt since the Tax cuts have been in affect for many years. This stops them from expiring and therefore prevents giving the Liberals a De facto Tax increase by doing nothing, they were counting on it when they started giving away Billions in Pork. Better to stop increasing taxes and cut Federal spending by several Hundred Billion and that would be doing something good for the country. This administration has wasted more money than this in just two years instead of the five you quote. Let the Govt. get their grubby paws out of my bank account. I earned it not them and certainly not the bums they want to give it to in order to buy votes.

Proud VetWhat do you think of Obama most likely signing legislation to extend the Bush Tax Cuts?
I think it says that he's admitting defeat. When the Dems. were in charge of the House, they pushed for everything they wanted w/o Republican support, but now that the tables have turned, and the Republicans are in charge of the House, he knows he's going to have to work with them on this if he wants them to vote in favor of extending his umemployment benefits later. His own party rejected the bill he and Republicans proposed on the tax cuts. That speaks volumes! They're not happy with him folding over to them. But in a way, he is doing the mature thing. He's taking heavy criticism from his party and extreme liberals by working with the GOP, but he's doing it so that when it comes time to vote on extending the unemployment benefits, it won't get killed. Could you imagine the payback Republicans would want if they don't get their bush tax cuts? They would take it out on the unemployment benefits bill...I guess what irks me is that he should have been trying to work w/ them from the beginning, not just as a result of them being in control. It shouldn't have been like that... And I'm a Democrat.What do you think of Obama most likely signing legislation to extend the Bush Tax Cuts?I think him doing so would be the smartest thing he has done since being in office. And just for your information, it really is not a 'tax cut' .. it is merely an extension of the present tax rates. That 'bush tax cut' word is all a media created buzz word, to try and stir up feelings against the bill. The rates stay the same as they have been for several years, if it gets passed and signed.



Simply stated, Obama sees plainly that if he didn't sign it, he is most assuredly kissing a second term goodbye!What do you think of Obama most likely signing legislation to extend the Bush Tax Cuts?
I think it's humiliating for him. LOL
Did you see the votes for/against? Everyone was against Obama. :)

It's keeping the economy going by not taxing to death the people who create jobs. They'll never get it ....What do you think of Obama most likely signing legislation to extend the Bush Tax Cuts?He didn't have the votes.



I hope Cons are happy about increasing the Debt a few hundred BILLION dollars.

Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?

Why is cap and trade on hold? Every year hurricane season is more and more a threat. Did you see the Emmy's last night???? Not one political statement. Not one. I remember when everyone had something to say about oil, environment, etc. We are in recovery from Bush but aren't running away fast enough.Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?We need a carbon tax even without global warming. In the end fossil fuels are a tiny source of energy. They are weak and limited when compared to the available energy from sunlight just here on earth. When politics limits people's imagination to what can be only in the present and immediate future, we'll never move forward. I want megascale projects in space-based solar, dammit.Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?
There were no political statements last night because Hollywood knows it's angry about Obama's lackluster response to the oil spill, Hollywood knows it's angry about the ground zero mosque comments out of the President and Hollywood knows it's hurting financially because of the impending tax cuts and how it's prompting potential movie/TV investors to hold onto their money rather than sink it into camera-rolling projects.Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?Cap %26amp; Trade will not fix climate change.

The polluters will pay the difference, continue to pollute and the only difference you'll see is the cost being handed down to the consumer. This means the offender will see no change in profit and the poor will suffer, while the Earth sees no benefit.
Maybe you should learn a little about the weather and then you would know that Al Gore's "global warming" hoax has nothing to do with the formation of hurricanes.



By the way, one subject per question please and nobody cares about a bunch of actors jerking each other off...aka the Emmy's!Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?"Recovery" usually doesn't include causing the problem and making it worse and worse..



But thanks for playing anyway.Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?
Gosh, prior to the industrial revolution, we never had weather of any kind, so this is a crisis and we need to surrender all our money, our freedom, our way of life to obama. Quick.
i think we should take the word of sarah palin on the subject of climate change.

shes been studying it all morning.

its all a liberal hoax.Now that hurricanes are threatening, do we need CO2 legislation to combat climate change?
Every year hurricane season is more and more a threat? Facts really don't mean that much to you do they?
No, you need flood protection infrastructure.
Put up some proof. Hurricanes have been recorded for a long time.
Another BS post from you.
Wow, this is recovery?



Good luck getting a junk science bill passed.



lp
bla bla blah no gives a shi.ttt

you aint changing nothing
large ice sheets keep breaking of iceland



when it does hit north canda will look good
Global warming is more like termites in the basement. No one cares until the damage is severe enought to be obvious and the cost to fix is overwhelming.

Anyone know what rape and sexual violence policies and legislation is around at the moment?

Preferably in last 10-20years and in the UK. I'm wondering what laws and sentencing are around and whether this affects the rate of rape and sexual violence and criminal acts or government policies?Anyone know what rape and sexual violence policies and legislation is around at the moment?Hi (again) Hollie Rae,

that's some assignment you're working on. Below are some links to rape crisis centres in the UK. I'd suggest looking at their sites, particularly their links section to see if they have links to UK sites of use. Have found the following for what it's worth.



Michael Howard's announcement may have indicated the government's intention to accept a more woman-centred definition of violence by recognising the harm done to the woman in court. However, it took a change of government and another three years before legislation was introduced to prevent defendants in rape cases cross-examining the raped woman. This 'right' was taken away under the Youth Justice %26amp; Criminal Evidence Act 1999

http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/law/court.h鈥?/a>



Ahh, I've just found this:



The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (the Act) came into force on the 1 May 2004. It repealed almost all of the existing statute law in relation to sexual offences. The purpose of the Act is to strengthen and modernise the law on sexual offences, whilst improving preventative measures and the protection of individuals from sexual offenders.

http://www.campaigntoendrape.co.uk/



I hope you get an A for this assignment :)Anyone know what rape and sexual violence policies and legislation is around at the moment?I'll let you know when we do get some legislation...that is to say IF we do.

sailboats for sale

book clubs

Will the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?

I am following the elections now. Everyone says that the Democrats will try to ram through unpopular laws in the lame duck session, such as cap and trade, card check, and amnesty. Looking at these threats, the Democrats are starting to remind me of the guy who gets evicted from his apartment and takes a crap in the sink out of spite before the sheriff comes to throw him out. I still can't see them doing this though. If they try that, the voters will punish them again in the next cycle. What do you think will happen in the lame duck session?Will the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?Look at Reid for the perfect example of what the Democrats are capable of trying. He attached an amnesty AND Don't ask, Don't tell Bill to the Military Budget approval. Now THAT takes some serious brass. For the first time the Military funding was not automatically rubber stamped, until those were taken off.

I'm sure there will be enough people watching closely, but trust the Dems NOT to try something ? Not again in this lifetime.Will the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?
My hope as a conservative is that Republicans don't get too carried away with celebrations after Election Day, even if there is a massive Republican landslide that leads to both houses of Congress coming under Republican control. There is clearly a significant possibility of Democrats doing exactly that during the lame duck session - to go for an aggressive all-out attempt to enact pieces of unpopular legislation before the next Congress convenes.Will the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?Don't know what but it will happen that some Bills will be put through that at this point will not be popular but will be done just as many lame duck congresses have done in the past but some will say it is just another trick done only by the Democrats which of course willl be wrongWill the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?
I think they'll try to take a crap in the sink (or on the rug).Will the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?Both parties do that crap. Politics.Will the Democrats really try to ram through unpopular legislation in the lame duck session?
Oh yes, that will be certain.

Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?

Why should illegals be able to have legal offspring in the US?



The 14th amendment was not meant for this at all. It was written in regards to freed slaves.Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?Actually it WAS meant for that very thing.



When the 14th Amendment was up for discussion, one of the main arguments against it was the influx of illegal Chinese into California and the opponents didn't want Chinese breeding US citizens. That argument was rejected.Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?
Because most recognize the inherent dangers of creating a two class civilization, one of citizens and one of non-citizens, who being of in-determinant parentage could not be said to be of either country. One must ask if abandoned children would be deported wholesale. Or if a child of rape would still be an American. Who would pay for such testing? Would there be a national data base usable for kids who only knew their Dad as some guy in prison?



Now lets look at several parallels to slavery.



Who was a slave? Anyone born of a slave. Who is an illegal under your new system? Anyone born to an illegal. Interestingly, the same rule is applied, the mother's status is conveyed upon the baby.



Who has labor conditions closest to slavery today? Illegal aliens.





So despite the courts having ruled that the 14th Amendment applies as written, you and your activist judges would suddenly change the accepted meaning to create 2nd class citizens.Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?This is a serious issue. America can't sustain the levels of spending on programs for the poor and elderly. More and more anchor babies and their families are on welfare and don't contribute to the bottom line.Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?
Nothing better to do. It will never pass.



We've practiced birthright citizenship since Jamestown was founded in 1607. The 14th Amendment was just enacted to say "we meant for non-whites too."Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?Because most of those marching are illegals.Why are hispanics marching in the streets protesting pending legislation ending birthright citizenship?
They want something for nothing and the illegal chicks for free.