Here is an interesting story. It sounds like the Democrats tried to piggy back and amendment on a spending bill and the GOP found enough votes to block it.
CNN GOP Blocks Gay Rights Amendment
Democracy may not be pretty, but it is still the best system on earth.
I kind of like Ryan's view. "House Speaker Paul Ryan, at a news conference immediately after the vote, denied knowledge about the vote-switching. "This is federalism. The states should do this. The federal government shouldn't stick its nose in this business," said Ryan, R-Wis. GOP aides said adding the amendment would have jeopardized passage of the underlying spending bill for military construction and veterans, imperiling the House appropriations process just as it's beginning."
CNN GOP Blocks Gay Rights Amendment
Democracy may not be pretty, but it is still the best system on earth.
I kind of like Ryan's view. "House Speaker Paul Ryan, at a news conference immediately after the vote, denied knowledge about the vote-switching. "This is federalism. The states should do this. The federal government shouldn't stick its nose in this business," said Ryan, R-Wis. GOP aides said adding the amendment would have jeopardized passage of the underlying spending bill for military construction and veterans, imperiling the House appropriations process just as it's beginning."
7 comments:
The federal government shouldn't determine its own procurement policy? Seems odd. (Oh, and the notion that the Speaker of the House didn't know that his leadership team was whipping folks to change their votes is too precious for words.)
I think the federal government should be able to do as it wishes.
However I don't think the President should be able to do as he wishes. (ie remember that in case trump wins...)
And this case apparently the House disagreed with the President.
Therefore the checks and balances worked.
That's fine that Congress checked the President. I was referring to Ryan's "federalism" comment which makes no sense in this context, though. What do the states have to do with this?
Well the money comes from people who live in States.
Then the money is sent back to the States to be spent.
I assume Obama was trying to set rules on how the States used the money.
Of course I would prefer if the Feds collected a lot less and skipped that whole up and down money moving step...
No, the bill in question was in reference to Obama's executive order that required federal contractors not to discriminate against LGBT employees. Do you read your own links?
Yes...
"Maloney’s amendment would have voided a provision in the defense authorization bill passed Wednesday by Republicans which provides broad “religious freedom” exemptions for religious and religiously affiliated organizations that receive federal contracts. Those exemptions can be used to discriminate against LGBT people." TowleRoad
Again... Obama and crew wanted to force States and their citizens to comply with their beliefs... Thereby ensuring that religious based organizations would punished for their beliefs.
Sorry... Lot's of people still think LGBT is a chosen behavior that does not qualify for special protection like Religion or Race.
Post a Comment