Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I don't understand the Stupak-Pitts amendment

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 07:47 PM
Original message
I don't understand the Stupak-Pitts amendment
rather, how comes a Republican - Pitt - makes an amendment for a bill for which he did not vote.

How common is it for members of Congress to push for a bill or an amendment that pass but without their votes?

I really don't understand this. No sarcasm there.

Any experts in the political process?

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sl8 Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. I thought that Pitts did vote for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The amendment, but not the final bill where only one Republican
from Louisiana voted.

This is my question. He forced this amendment to the final bill but did not vote for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sl8 Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Ah. I misinterpreted the question.
I don't know how often that occurs, sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think sometimes they do these things in an attempt to kill the final bill
The reason sex discrimination was added to the 1964 Civil Rights act was because of a Dixiecrat jerk who thought it would kill the entire bill or, at least, keep from being taken too seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Makes sense. And we fall for that hook line and sinker
I think that I will email both Franken and Klobuchar and ask them to at least try to remove this amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-14-09 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
6. Poison pill
Democrats had the choice once it was passed.

Either kill the bill or pass it and take heat for putting restrictions on something that is constitutionally legal.

Win - win for the republicans who will have successfully done what they have claimed they wanted to do for years with out ever voting for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC