Reply #37: I read on MSN ...

[Kweli4Real]

That one of the Democratic supporters of the bill said that the bill would benefit her constitutency "that work hard, pay their bills and live within their means." Okay, fine. That's the lobbyist bought and paid for line.

But what about those that worked hard, lived within their means and paid their bills ... until they suffered a heart attack while working mandatory overtime during this jobless recovery and then lost their job (i.e., health insurance) when their 13 weeks of Family Medical Leave expired and the company they worked for refused to provide them with a light duty assignment?

But I got angry when she said that she had been threatened by other Democrats for her support of the bill. She went on about how her peers were attacking the wrong target. They should have been attacking the Republicans that wrote a bad bill and then refused to allow amendments.

Wait a minute ... it would seem to me ...

A responsible legislator:

1) would not vote for a bad bill. Even if parts of it "benefited his/her constituency."

2) Would not vote for a bad bill where amendments are disallowed.

3) On principle, would not vote for any legislation that was pushed through in a decidedly undemocratic fashion.

When are we going to wake up and hold our legislators accountable for their votes? The corporate interests certainly do.