Patterico's Pontifications

12/23/2009

Senate Bill to Ban Future Earmarks Fails (Updated)

Filed under: Government,Politics — DRJ @ 2:56 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Hot Air reports Senator DeMint’s amendment to ban vote-buying with earmarks fails, 53/46:

“Interestingly, while most of the GOP’s amendments today — like the vote on whether the bill is constitutional — were knocked down along party lines, this one earned seven Democratic votes. The seven? Bayh, Feingold, McCaskill, Merkley, Warner, Webb … and Ben Nelson.

Note also: The amendment would have applied only to future bills, not to this one, so no one was giving up anything by voting against it except the promise of pork to come.”

Washington is addicted to pork. It needs an intervention.

— DRJ

UPDATE: Erick Erickson at RedState catches Ben Nelson voting against it before he voted for it. Erickson is right: Nelson is a tool.

H/T jim2 with my thanks.

11 Responses to “Senate Bill to Ban Future Earmarks Fails (Updated)”

  1. Nelson voted against it and changed his vote when he saw the Dems had enough to defeat it w/o him.

    RedState caught him “red” handed:

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/12/23/we-have-the-actual-roll-call-sheet-nelson-was-for-it-before-being-against-it/

    jim2 (96d10c)

  2. Oh, good, Jim2 is on it. I was going to post Sen. Ben “Perfidy” Nelsons vote against it before he was for it actions.

    I wonder what he thought he would get for that vote?

    Vivian Louise (643333)

  3. Thanks, jim2. I’ll add it in an update.

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  4. An ambassadorship to someplace tropical, Vivian Louise. Because this fellow isn’t going to get re-elected, and he knows it. He is just “paying it forward” to get goodies later.

    And as jim2 shows, he isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer.

    Eric Blair (ddbceb)

  5. Somebody is surprised at this ?

    This is the worst political class since the Kansas – Nebraska Act. Come to think of it, Nelson is from Nebraska. Probably pro-slavery.

    Pass it on.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  6. This is off-topic, but DeMint is on a roll:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/22/video-demint-objects-to-supermajority-protection-in-reids-obamacare-bill/

    So my understanding is the Dems are making it so that future Congresses cannot overturn this bill.

    And now this “transparent” government is allowing earmarks and bribery for votes. Nice. 2010 is coming.

    Audacity (2fd5ad)

  7. There is no constitutional way to “make” a bill such that future Congress cannot overturn it.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  8. When the fit hits the shan, is there any possibility that SCOTUS will go 6-3 in declaring the various unconstitutional portions of this thing… unconstitutional?

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  9. Come to think of it, Nelson is from Nebraska. Probably pro-slavery.

    — He was pro-slavery before he was against it. Just like Robert “my white sheet now serves as my diaper” Byrd.

    Icy Texan (dc0d34)

  10. I’m not sure if Obama has every worried about being constitutional, but after reading it it seems like it may not pertain to the whole bill as a commenter on HotAir also brought up.

    Audacity (2fd5ad)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0888 secs.