I Come Here For The Truth

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Let me lay down a predicate:

Before a bill becomes law the language approved and passed by the House and Senate must be exactly the same...


Now there is some dispute on the law that overturned the Glass-Steagall Act...Some DUers are saying it ultimately passed 54-44 and some are saying it passed 90-8...These are mutually exclusive propositions...


Who is correct?

[cali]

1. Here you go:

From Wiki:

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA) in 1999. The bills were passed by a 54-44 vote along party lines with Republican support in the Senate<8> and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives<9>. Nov 4, 1999: After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bipartisan bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. Without forcing a veto vote, this bipartisan, veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999. <10>

[Hugin]

5. Thanks cali.

From what you posted I learned that it was passed by a veto proof margin.

What was the make-up of the Senate and House at that time? Do you know off hand?

[cali]

6. you're welcome. Both houses were controlled by the republicans, as I recall.

[JuniperLea]

8. Then Bill had no choice but to sign it into law

Interesting. This was one piece of the puzzle I missed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Unless Somebody Can Point To A President Vetoing Legislation That Passed The Senate 90-8!

~

[JuniperLea]

17. I've had that damn bill thrown in my face more than I care to admit

I have three very high profile clients in crisis mode... ha... surprising, no? I haven't had time to do research... so I'm relying on DUers with a lot of time on their hands. I'm glad I ran across this thread!

[harmonicon]

24. I think Bush II has

.... just to be a dick. Maybe not 90 - 8, but I think some things were 70 - 25 or something, and he still vetoed them.

[ProSense]

20. Bill wanted to sign it. He pushed for it. n/t

[Duppers]

21. and on the View he said he had no regrets about signing it

WTF?

[wyldwolf]

22. bzzzt! Wrong

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7152445

[JuniperLea]

25. Got something to support that? n/t

[Doremus]

27. And even if he didn't want to veto it he could have just NOT signed it.

The "he had to sign" argument is disingenuous at best.

[blm]

26. Bill WANTED to sign it, and was the force behind pushing Dem lawmakers to get on board

you know....like he did for Bush before the IWR vote.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Thank You

~

[jesus_of_suburbia]

2. I'd say never come to 1 place for the truth. Listen to as many sides as possible and then decide

for yourself.



Sorry I had no answer for your question... just my own advice.

[wyldwolf]

3. it was veto proof

The bills were introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA). The bills were passed by a 54-44 vote along party lines with Republican support in the Senate<1> and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives<2>. Nov 4, 1999: After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. Democrats agreed to support the bill only after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns.<3> The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This veto proof legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999. <4> The banking industry had been seeking the repeal of Glass-Steagall since at least the 1980s. In 1987 the Congressional Research Service prepared a report which explored the case for preserving Glass-Steagall and the case against preserving the act.<5>

1. The Republicans controlled the Congress.
2. There was a significant difference between the original Senate and House versions
3. The Senate was deeply divided on the original version on a 54-44 party line vote.
4. The House was not so divided on its version, voting 343-86, so many Democrats voted for it.
5. The bill went into Conference and it was the Conference Report version that was eventually approved, 90-8-1 in the Senate, basically erasing Democratic opposition, and 362-57-15 in the House, making some small gains in Democratic support.
6. It was a veto proof vote.
7. It was signed on November 1999. Bills of this complexity usually take several months to become effective and several years because the implementation needs to be worked out.

more..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7152445

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. How Can Anybody In

How can anybody in good conscience slam a Democratic or Republicant president for signing a bill that passed the House 362-57-15 and passed the Senate 90-8-1?


He is she is not an autocrat and must pay heed to the will of the people as expressed by their elected represenatatives?

[PerfectSage]

11. It's easy, when you don't have a conscience.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. 90-8 Isn't Even Close

~

[PerfectSage]

23. I'm implying the slammers don't have conscience, not President Clinton. ;)

[Balderdash]

15. Veto proof! He had no choice. nt

[wyldwolf]

13. Because the Clenis is to blame for everything, facts be damned

[JuniperLea]

16. We're supposed to be blaming the Clenis and racists

Instead of the GOP who control all...

It does fly against common sense, does it not? Yet, I have hidden no less than 15 Clinton hate threads today... and we have the nerve to call others lemmings or sheeple... sheesh.

[SoonerPride]

19. signing statements haven't stopped chimpy

[ShortnFiery]

4. Is there an echo in here? eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Just For You

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2F4VcBmeo&feature=related

[wyldwolf]

18. kick