Jump to content

9.11 First Responders Bill


Clyde
 Share

Recommended Posts

The articles I read had quotes that said they were not going to vote for it unless it was paid for.

 

The ones I read said that they weren't going to vote for any bill until the tax cuts passed. Then, they didn't want to work much over the Christmas holiday, because most Americans are Christians and expect them to observe the holiday.

 

I'm glad that our first responders feel that it is their duty to work 365 days a year, 24 hours a day to help those in need and recover those who are lost, so that their loved ones can have closure. Did we close Ground Zero on 12/25/01?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm waiting on a more righty posters to show some outrage. Stewart is right, Republicans have "owned" 9/11 and used it to their political advantage for the last 9 years. Now, when the first responders need help, they're practically turning their back on them.

 

Here was my favorite Daily Show take on the situation though:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Lame-as-F@#k Congress
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me dip my toe into the cold pool.

 

There are 5 versions of the bill. All of them call for re-opening the 9/11 Compensation Fund, not just creating a special 9/11 responders fund for toxins. As each of you know the Compensation Fund was rife with fraud in spending, and nothing in the Zadroga bill limits the spending to health care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me dip my toe into the cold pool.

 

There are 5 versions of the bill. All of them call for re-opening the 9/11 Compensation Fund, not just creating a special 9/11 responders fund for toxins. As each of you know the Compensation Fund was rife with fraud in spending, and nothing in the Zadroga bill limits the spending to health care.

 

Which version of the bill are republicans responsible for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm waiting for someone to present a valid defense of the filibuster.

 

The arguments I heard against it were:

 

1) Wasn't paid for

2) Didn't go through normal committee process

3) Pork riders attached by the Democrats

4) Opportunity for fraud

 

All seem legitimate concerns no matter what the bill. I hope the concerns were all addressed in the bill that passed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The arguments I heard against it were:

 

1) Wasn't paid for

2) Didn't go through normal committee process

3) Pork riders attached by the Democrats

4) Opportunity for fraud

 

All seem legitimate concerns no matter what the bill. I hope the concerns were all addressed in the bill that passed.

 

#1 is the main concern I heard and it's obviously a valid concern.

 

#2 was just Sen. Coburn blowing hot air. It went through committee in June but he missed the meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.