E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSHouse Republicans have introduced their version of a bill to ban insider trading by thousands of federal officials, and have added provisions to bar lawmakers convicted of a felony from collecting their government pensions.
In a provision aimed directly at Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, the bill, introduced late Tuesday, would ban lawmakers from using their positions to invest in initial public offerings of stock. Pelosi has denied that she did anything like that.
The Republicans wiped out a key provision in the Senate version of the bill that would have required so-called "political intelligence" firms to register and file disclosure reports, as lobbyists must. These are companies that try to pick up information from lawmakers, then pass it on to investment firms and their clients.
The growing political intelligence industry had lobbied hard to get the Republicans to either modify or eliminate the provision, arguing that the language was too broad. Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., substituted a congressional study of these firms — essentially taking no action. The reporting requirement was inserted into the Senate's bill by a Republican, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa.
Recommended: Some Democrats seeking reversal on contraception decision
Under the House bill, new stock transactions would have to be reported either 30 days after a covered individual was notified of a transaction in his or her account or 45 days after the transaction. The bill would apply, according to Cantor, to about 30,000 employees in the executive branch. It would cover the president and vice president, and President Barack Obama has said he would sign the legislation.
While the Senate passed its version of the bill 96-3 last week following bipartisan negotiations, House Democrats were furious that Cantor never consulted them about the provisions of the bill.
In addition, Republicans were considering bringing the bill to a vote Thursday under a procedure that would not allow any amendments.
That was especially galling to Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., who has been trying to get an insider trading bill passed for six years and has close to 300 co-sponsors, including nearly 100 Republicans.
Sponsorship of the bill by Slaughter and Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., soared after a recent CBS "60 Minutes" segment that reported current and former members of Congress used information received during their official duties to invest in the stock market.
The show reported that Pelosi's husband invested in a large Visa IPO in 2008 around the time the House — then under Democratic control — was considering legislation to lower credit card fees. Pelosi denied any wrongdoing, and said there was no connection between the investment and the legislation.
The bill passed two years later, and Pelosi voted for it. It did not pass in 2008, a Pelosi aide said, because it came to floor at the end of the session — when the House was passing the biggest bailout of financial institutions in the nation's history.
The aide, who was not authorized to be quoted by name to discuss the investment, said Pelosi's husband made the IPO purchase through his existing broker at Wells Fargo.
The aide pointed out that the Visa IPO was among the largest ever at $17.9 billion.
The "60 Minutes" program also raised questions about stock purchases by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., the current chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Both denied any wrongdoing.
The House is expected to pass the bill overwhelmingly, and it almost certainly will end up in a conference committee to reconcile the differences with the Senate.
Leave a Comment:
-'have added provisions to bar lawmakers convicted of a felony from collecting their government pensions.'
By all accounts, that is the majority of Republican office holders.
-'The Republicans wiped out a key provision in the Senate version of the bill that would have required so-called "political intelligence" firms to register and file disclosure reports, as lobbyists must. These are companies that try to pick up information from lawmakers, then pass it on to investment firms and their clients.'
And Nancy Pelosi was brought up in this article for what? It sounds like the AP is doing a little insider trading for the GOP with veiled swipes at the next Speaker of the House while burying the obvious crimes taking place 'right' in front of their brown stained noses.
sounds like someone is a little ill-informed into crazy pelosi's background.
typical lefty... all fabrication... no facts.
I went to a movie once and someone said, 'Did someone hear a baby crying in the audience? Could someone please give the baby a pacifier please... thank you.'
two words alex... FOX NEWS... secondly just because some on the left aren't as informed doesn't mean all are. same goes for the right but the truth IS that FOX NEWS repeatedly misinforms its viewers and their viewers are very right leaning
How slimy. Even when they try to give the impression of doing something right by eliminating insider trading in Congress, they remove the most important provision that would register the flow of information to private companies. GOP tactics at their finest. Protect their big business overloads, who line their pockets.
Doesn't match reality Lewis J.
Historically Democrats edge out the Republicans in numbers of members accused - and when court day comes, democrats end up with more convictions.
WTF House Republicans, why was this removed? Lets ban insider trading, but you can still pass on information to Wall Street, so they can do insider trading. Wonder if there will be any kick backs to Swiss or Cayman Island bank accounts in exchange. They better put this back in during the conference between the House and the Senate.
Here's a simple solution, make congress have to bow to the same laws the rest of us are subject too.
hey DB how many Democrates are at this time either being reviewed convicted or investgated by the fbi as opposed to republicansI do know of at least 2 republican officals that are with out even using google
You should go to Congress to help America, not get rich. Being elected to congress is like being issued a license to steal. If I were the republicans I would have launched an ethics probe on Nansi Pelosi, the richest member of them all.
How about a bill to roll back super rich tax loophole too? Why are GOP talking about concerning federal deficit, but they don't mind borrow China $700 billion to pay for super rich tax cut like Mitt Romney.
Wake up now!
Even though FOX NOISE reports that Pelosi is the ubber richest member in congress. In fact Pelosi is the twelfth richest member in congress. The richest members are two Republicans by hundreds of millions of dollars compared to Pelosi.
www.Rollcall.com/50richest/the-50-richest-members-of-congress-112th.html
More than half of the previous democratic administration of Detroit are either in prison or on probation. Another 3 or 4 have pending Federal racketeering charges pending. look up Kwame Kilpatrick if your feeling real froggy check out Mr Conyers wifes residence.
A federal judge has denied ex-Detroit councilwoman Monica Conyers' request to withdraw her guilty plea in a corruption case and sentenced her to three years and one month in prison.
As guards cleared the courtroom, Conyers yelled that she planned to appeal. She suggested she was the victim of "badgering" last summer when she acknowledged a conspiracy to take bribes for her support of a Houston company seeking a sludge contract.
But U.S. District Judge Avern Cohn says her plea deal was voluntary.
Conyers, the wife of Democratic Detroit congressman John Conyers, quit her council seat after pleading guilty last June.
The government urged the judge to consider other alleged crimes Wednesday. Prosecutors say Conyers and an aide collected $69,500 from people seeking help from the city.
I heard house republicans say they were going to have stronger provisions on this legislation than the Senate. That means they will weakent the bill. They must fear Pelosi getting back into power, or they wouldn't be pushing this just now.
Fracking Nuts
According to that link, the top 7/10 members on that list are Democrats.
I do not care whether they are Democrats or Republicans . . . to be honest, Congress should be held to a HIGHER standard than that required of Joe Six-Pack. Loopholes are created by cheating azzholes for those cheating azzholes who believe that ethical standards should not apply to them. [Boehner and Peloisi take note.]
DB Akron
Doesn't match reality Lewis J.
Historically Democrats edge out the Republicans in numbers of members accused - and when court day comes, democrats end up with more convictions.
------------------------
DB (and Lewis) ...in all fairness, please cite your sources and data for your respective claims.
"The Republicans wiped out a key provision in the Senate version of the bill that would have required so-called "political intelligence" firms to register and file disclosure reports, as lobbyists must. These are companies that try to pick up information from lawmakers, then pass it on to investment firms and their clients.
The growing political intelligence industry had lobbied hard to get the Republicans to either modify or eliminate the provision, arguing that the language was too broad. Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., substituted a congressional study of these firms — essentially taking no action. The reporting requirement was inserted into the Senate's bill by a Republican, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa."
I believe the question should be this...what are the republicans getting for taking this issue out of the bill? ANd why are not all lobbying of any kind being stopped..other than the huge funds they throw at all politicans .
Well it is a crock that they took out a very key provision, but I guess it is a start. Hopefully, they don't stop here. Maybe pass it with the provision to expand the kind of things covered. Stock is a good start but what about existing holdings and other investments besides stocks?
I suppose we should take what we can get, but stay on them to continue to expand it to clear out any loopholes.
LouisJ
I bet you looked funny, sitting up in that theatre with a pacifier in your mouth !
LouisJ
I bet you looked funny, sitting up in that theatre with a pacifier in your mouth !
Hmmm ...Congress makes the laws. Anyone who thinks they will hold themselves to the same standards as the rest of us is naive.
I cant figure out why anyone would be complaining about this no matter what side you are on. Same as Obama reversal on the the contraceptives. Its still proved and the churches dont have to pay for something that is against their beliefs. I'm not an Obama fan but feel he did the right thing on this one according to the Constitution.
Louisej- It shows it doesnt matter to you what the best thing for America is as long as its from the left we should follow. Sheep.
lmao...the republicans are only interested in embarrassing Pelosi...Chuckie Grassley is a king of pork and barrel spending...Iowa gets far more from the rest of us than they give back...I'm sure he has gotten some great stock from ADM...what a bunch of Nazis these republicans have become with their selection of Fetus Man as their latest flavor of the month
lol... are you kidding me... Pelosi is an embarrassment
Pelosi is a hard working representative of her district. She outshines Mr. Orange and his gang and will soon be in charge again. Thank goodness because America cannot handle anymore of this "do nothing" congress. And I think reversing benefits for those charged with felonies is a great idea. Let's start with W and Rove.
lol
hard working... pissing myself laughing.
is that you Nancy... get of the boards and get to work... the Socialist will need you in November
Pelosi is a greedy pig who used her position of power to enrich herself and her family.
hey Common, pretty sure you could say that about 98% of Congress
Rick-546746
And ADM is related to Grassley how? They are headquartered in Obama's home state of Illinois...
Regarding federal money to the state versus taxes paid, Iowa ranks 24th out of 50 states. That sounds more like middle of the road than your conclusion.
King of Pork? Have you been to the State of Byrd, I mean West Virginia lately? Pelosi is the worst form of political scum and the fact she is still in office shows what little people in her District care about moral and ethical behavior from those elected and paid for by taxpayers. Remember her famous line about ObamaCare, we need to pass it so everyone can find out whats in it. Yeah that piece of legislative garbage is a thrill a minute to find out what is in it. Congress and all of Washington for that matter is a joke, do as I say not as I do pretty much sums it up.
"...Iowa gets far more from the rest of us than they give back..."
That mentality is a huge part of the problem. Neither state nor individual can "get back" what is "put in" by way of government in all places at all times--it's economically impossible. By, hey, as long as I get mine...right?
Quo Vadis USA?
That's different from every other politician how?
It's funny how Pelosi hasnt been SOTH in 2 years, while Boner has had the reigns and done nothing. Yet, the wingnuts keep harping on her like she still has any power in the House.
No, Republicans have a right to call out Pelosi. As a "Left-winger", I also think she is as dirty as the rest. But on the same note, your sh!t does stink too, Republicans. I think ALL people who run for ANY office should be forced to sell off their private investments, and put that money in a clean, non-party 401k for government employees AND have no say in how it is used.
And Ruken are you willing to accept that from a politician because they promote or favor your favorite position?
Pelosi doesn't need any help embarassing herself....she's got it down to a science.
Pathetic little right wingers out today. These are the same people who probably had NO problem with Newt when he was in office but just can't stand Pelosi - who clearly doesn't have the issues most of the GOP - like Boehner have. But, it's the far right, we expect no less!
Nancy Pelosi represents the 8th District of California. Apparently her constituency believe she represents them - because - they elected her. If you are not a resident of California 8th district - your opinion about Pelosi's 'worthiness' to be a member of Congress is baseless. Only the voters in the 8th District of California are allowed to decide whether Pelosi serves or not.
If you really do not like Pelosi that much - move to the District she represents so you can participate in the selecting someone else.
Whining from the sidelines is dishonest and cowardly ...
Lately I have been stuck voting for who sucks less, as opposed to someone I like.
Anyone remember "We have to sign it first before we know what is in it". ? She is by far the worst SOH we have ever had.
Nancy Pelosi represents the 8th District of California. Apparently her constituency believe she represents them - because - they elected her. If you are not a resident of California 8th district - your opinion about Pelosi's 'worthiness' to be a member of Congress is baseless. Only the voters in the 8th District of California are allowed to decide whether Pelosi serves or not.
Well Nerm, I guess your post also applies to all the liberals on here that consistently belittle and attack any GOP Congressman, Senator, etc. I guess you will never come on here and critcize any other politician other than those in your district. I find it a little hypocritcal on your part that you would post this about Pelosi and not do the same about Boehner.
To Rick""
""""Remember her famous line about ObamaCare, we need to pass it so everyone can find out whats in it.""""
Funny if nobody read the Health care bill how'd the repubs come up with so many amendments to it.....
What do the GOP amendments to this Senate health care bill actually say?
By Christopher Beam
Thursday, July 16, 2009,
""That said, some context: Of the 788 amendments filed, 67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical. """
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescriptions/2009/07/this_is_what_bipartisanship_looks_like.html
The immature rhetoric on this topic is staggering! Since when does Ms Pelosi have anything to do with gutting this bill? This was done by REPUBLICRAP "LEADERSHIP" specifically to make this bill ineffective. Now that is progress to some, yet the same old crap for the majority of us.
socialism is "a social and economic system (or the political philosophy advocating such a system) in which the economic means of production are owned and controlled collectively by the people.
"the people" is everyone. With all the criticism / defense of the 1%, how does this define our society as socialist? If that scenario is true, that 1% of our population controls most of the wealth, then we are NOT a socialist nation.
Oligarchy, on the other hand, is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, corporate, or military control. Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who pass their influence from one generation to the next. In our society, more and more, it is the wealthy that direct policy either through lobbying to pass legislation or by the fact that our political leaders are themselves "wealthy" and profit most by the legislation they pass.
The right tends to throw the title of "socialist" around as a means to eliminate "social programs". Which are setup in an attempt to improve the lives of those less fortunate than others. Public education, health and food assistance programs, job skills programs, etc., mostly used by one segment of our population, the non-right, are seen as a waste when are probably the only means of survival for most of those using these programs. More and more, those that do not know, and don't CARE to know, the true meaning of socialism buy into this rhetoric
alexinPA, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
Anyone remember when Pelosi was bitching about W. She said "gas has tripled under him it was a dollar something now its two dollar something". With math like that no wonder Dems put us deeper in debt.
Pure and simple posturing. Not out democracy at work. Just dickheads playing politics and pandering to their money sources. If the Republicans want to demonstrate good faith politics, then demonstrate they can work in a bipartisan manner to effect legislation. Demonstrate that they can put in legislation that doesn't stink of the slime they've rolled in to make it less effective.
what democracy? lol
we moved into a socialist entity where only a very few pay for the mass indolence of the many.
free healthcare for all, free food stamps, housing... etc.
Mass indolence or the many? Picked the wrong week to stop smoking crack? Sad, just sad.....
yea do realize food stamps, housing, and all those other "socialist" programs have been around way before President Obama took office. Secondly due to the recession more people had to use those services in order to keep their families off the streets. So to think people are "happy" to be living in poverty is a stupid notion. Im a liberal and Ive been working since I could work and I work hard in order to be able to live a good life that "I" can pay for.
where you are right now... you put yourself there.
no violins here.
i'm sorry to hear about your disease... liberalism... were close to finding a cure.
Now if we can only find a cure for idiocy because, despite our educational system, you don't seem to have learned anything other than hate, ignorance and close-minded intractability.
first off I have never used government assistance programs, as a matter of fact I make a decent pay for someone not married with a family. I am stating that I know many people who have had to use those programs in order to give them some foothold on their life. By the way, I really don't see how being a liberal is disease, it just means I'm not so narrow-minded in my thinking. I'm sorry but I have a family member who is gay so I will not support a party that hates gays, I believe that women have a right to their bodies, I feel that instead of telling people who are less fortunate, in your words "where you are right now... you put yourself there...no violins here" we should be doing what we can to help them be able to stand on their own feet so they can also have a chance to make good for themselves. I don't believe in a party that took a man and tried to paint him as a muslim, kenyan, foreigner just so they get their racist constituents to come out and vote. If you think that is disease thats your call but its what I believe
Mannie.
How are we not helping them?
We are.. and it's not working.
You don't motivate or encourage people with more giving.
I'm all for a helping hand... but I think we've moved a little beyond that..
PS - I'm not targeting you... just a little levity.
What's truly sad about alexinpa's comments is a lack of understanding or recognition or the history around progressive and conservative movements.
After WWII, during one of the more progressive eras in US politics, the middle class swelled and the country boomed. As conservatism started to gain traction in the 70's, etc., the middle class as a group came under more and more pressure and a gradual decline.
This country really didn't run a deficit until that great conservative in the sky (Ronnie Rayguns) and under each successive GOP president, deficit spending accelerated and Jr Bush doubled the national debt while wiping out Clinton's work to start paying down the debt. We can also certainly thank Jr for taking a country that was booming and dumping it in the toilet.
It was under Bush where K Street lobbyists turned 100% republican and pandered in force to conservative hypocrisy and so we got bridges to nowhere and one of the most pork-centric governments this country has seen.
All hail conservatism in all it's glory!!!
"When Reagan took office in January 1981, the national debt was at 33.4 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)"
reallllyyyy.
thanks for the history lesson libby... but i'm pretty well versed in the area.
PS - what's really sad about my comments is there validity.
National debt has reached 92.6 percent of GDP, predicted to exceed the 100 percent mark in 2012.
70% for BUSH... which is horrendous but the Socialist has taken it to a new level.
Mannie KinnSkywalker
Not sure how this thread has anything to do with the article, but an interesting point none the less.
As a conservative, I agree with some of your sentiments, although not the methods.
We do need to help people get on their feet, although giving handouts doesn't provide much help. I believe that to help, it would be better to provide indirect assistance like daycare, or training which would help provide an improved lifestyle that can help the individual contribute to society rather than take from it. Foodstamps and welfare only reward the status quo.
The vast majority of Republicans do not hate gays, just the mandate from government pushing their agenda. For example, while I do not support gay marriage, I do support civil unions that would include all the same rights. This is the view shared by Obama during his campaign in 2008 - doesn't mean he hates gays.
Again, I agree, although I believe that there should be limits. For example, should abortion be permitted an hour prior to birth? I hope everyone agrees that there must be limits to these decisions. As a conservative, I oppose that the current system of abortions is not based on laws, but rather on a court decision. I believe that new laws should be created, whether at a national level or a state level and if not found constitutional, an amendment to the constitution is required that would settle the laws.
Neither do the vast majority of Republicans. The same extremes lie on both sides of the aisle.
Alex, we are far closer to an oligarchy than we are to socialism, which should gall you even more. Run along now and look up those two words. I think you'll find I'm right.
lol
no we aren't.
Entitlements now consume 56 percent of federal spending, 14 percent of GDP. (65% in case you missed it)
That's pretty much a socialist entity.
If you meant write what we are supposed to be then... it's a representative
democracy.
nice try... play again when you're more informed
Sounds like you should be eating your own words.
Thanks to the scum in Washington it is crony capitalism for those politically connected, and socialism for those funding it. Those we continually elect to serve in Washington do a great job of making money off from taxpayers, while taxpayers do a great job of ensuring they do. Keep sending the same people back to Washington but expect different results. Yeah, that is likely to work well for taxpayers. The real idiots are not those in Washington, the real idiots are the ones who vote for them.
alex, your "facts" on GDP certainly don't seem to jibe with any actual facts out there. Please reference sources and let's hope they are reasonably legitimate.
When I look at sources from government and even Wiki, I see a different story. Especially telling is how federal debt has increased as a percent of GDP from 2000 to now. I can forgive spending during a recession as a way to help boost the country out of recession but I can't forgive spending like Jr did during good times. If we learned one thing from the great depression, it's that we spend to get out of recessions/depressions and we pay down during good times.
Now answer me this one question, when Jr took office and had a booming economy, did he spend like crazy or pay down our debt?
Sick -
This has less to do with progressive policies than you imply. The 1st world countries were devastated after the war, especially Europe. Our economy boomed because the mainland USA had not really felt the effects of the war in terms of destruction and civilian lives lost. It became the leading producer in the world simply because there was really no one else to do so. Manufacturing in particular. As Europe and Asia began to recover in the 60s and 70s, they began to gain a competative advantage and the USA no longer had a relative monopoly on production. Other countries like China, Japan, and Germany took over manufacturing. So the post war boom had little to do with politics, rather it was a consequence of the war.
Similarly, the dotcom boom in the 90s really didn't have much to do with political policies, it was all about new businesses springing up and taking advantage of a new tool (the internet).
Main point is that conservatism is more to blame with the decline of the middle class and with ballooning debts. The belief that supply side economics actually works is like believing in the tooth fairy. To blame democrats and call them socialist, etc. is nothing more than a partisan muckfest and ignores all the ills heaped on the country by the other side.
I blame the right for much of the ills but I do not agree with the actions of the left either. If I believe in anything, it's the center. The only hope for this country is a return to more centrist politics. Certainly the tea party and the conservative movement have moved dramatically further away from the center. Paramount to that return to centrism is a need for the right to do away with the term RINO. In all politics, etc., dinging someone for not goose stepping to the party line is neither appropriate nor a reflection on the diversity of beliefs and opinions which has made this country great.
Sick
This country really didn't run a deficit until that great conservative in the sky
Wrong!
Total Budget deficits started in 1970, One year after the last installation of The democrats and President Johnson's Great Society. These continues until 1998 and 1999, You had Democrat and Republican Presidents and controlled Senates throughout that entire period. The only Republican controlled houses were from 1995 - 1999.
On budget (federal budget) deficits started in 1961
Second
Reagan sent a his first budget to the House in 1981. Democrats gave him the the tax cuts, but refused to do the requested dollar of cuts for dollar of tax cut. At the time the Republicans controlled the Senate and were able to get $1.00 of the $3.00 of cuts requested. Your deficit problem was the Democrats - not Reagan.
And that continued the entire Reagan presidency and others.
alex and DB - just go ahead and make up all the "fact" you want. (Clearly spending too much time watching Fox). The GOP has proved to be obstructionists - as they said they would. It was their one goal when Obama was elected. To hell with our country - just defeat Obama. And, alex, when you throw out the "socialist" word, you should know no one will take you seriously. It just shows how little you know or care to know. Please - just grow up.
Exactly Sanity. The right has embraced "facts" like they throw the term socialist around. Neither alex ro db have any grip on facts as exist in this space/time continuum. The government data just doesn't remotely resemble their delirium induced misconceptions.
To alex and db, I suggest you go to Google and search using the following:
national debt as a percentage of gdp
The various wiki articles are quite good. There are some others which also have value but I would stick with pure government data or wiki (which gets vetted/peer reviewed).
I have never used the term socialist when it comes to Mr Obama's administration. But I do live in Detroit, and on any day you can sit on my porch and take in the entire 4 sq blocks around the area of John R and Telegraph to 8 mile rd. In this small area you would rarely see anyone going to work as they mostly dont work. And once the children reach the ages of 12 to 15 they almost no longer go to school. You can also stroll down to the local minimarket (We dont have supermarkets, people here robbed them out of existence) You can trade Food stamps or bridge cards 50% on the dollar for Crack or Medical grade Marijuana. The best this to happen here in a long time was Gov Snyders 4 year max rule for welfare. Now you can only do that for four years before your cut off.
We prospered after ww2 because we were the only manufacturing country. Politics had nothing to do with it.
Hey sick of you. How do you know the govt data is accurate? Wiki is even worse. The govt. has an agenda, sure they will lie to stay in power. Best you check all sources rather than those that have an agenda.
jolly, do you realize that welfare reform happened at the national level? This occurred in the 104th congress with Clinton signing the bill on Aug. 22, 1996. The PRWORA (personal responsibility and work opportunity reconciliation act) placed limits and conditions on welfare recipients and gave states more autonomy in how they deliver welfare.
Now, I suppose Detroit is its own little cosmos but it is still subject to the same welfare laws as the rest of the country so Snyder had no affect on any specific eligibility limits as they were already defined in the national law.
kevin, wiki is far more reliable than conservapedia (FAR, FAR more reliable). You can, however, refine the google search to the following:
cbo national debt timeline
which results in data from the CBO which is non-partisan and is pure and simple government data. It is not subject to the whims of either right or left. In addition, it still supports the wiki articles.
The CBO is there to issue non-partisan data to congress, regardless of which group of ding dongs are in power.
Well, that certainly leaves out Fox...
AlexinPA,
I love your spin on the Reagan budget. When he took office the annual deficit for on budget outlays (spending) was $74 billion and when he left office it was $278 billion. Moreover, two thiirds of the entitlement spending you are whinning about being 56% of the federal budget is paid via dedicated offsetting social insurance receipts and is off-budget.
DBAckron
Dear stop telling RW fables. Here are copies of all presidents' budget submissions prepared in accordance with OMB circular A-11. This is what is submitted to congress before they revise or have their cut at it. It does not appear that congress added much to Reagan's initial budget proposals. You do know that the president initially submits a budget to congress, which generally is the basis for each federal annual budget. Accordingly, its based on and combined from submissions from all the executive agencies. Remember, the Obama 2012 budget submission that was rejected this year????
To sum it up, what you said about the democratic congress forcing Reagan's hand to drastically increase the budget is a lie as evidenced by the Reagan budget submissions to congress. For example, Reagan's submission was about $1 billion and congress only added $40 million to it, which was probably their usual pork.
To..DB Acron"""
And we see what happened and the mess created when repubs controlled the congress ..the senate and the White house from Jan 2003 to Jan 2007...
The report makes it sound like this will be a no-brainer to get through to Obama's desk. It is a great start.
I'm sure Pelosi did nothing wrong.
wink... wink... either did Martha
lol
alexin
are you sure about
too?
Wow AlexinPA, you just take the whole right-wing troll thing to a whole new level. Socialist, libs, lefty's, you seem to know all the thinly veiled insults by heart and you've got the lack of providing facts and not treating people with respect down to a science. You know, it's people like you that have turned the political discourse in this country so sour. Of course I'd love to see you keep on making an ass of yourself, after all you're hurting your own party by doing so and I'm a proud liberal (you may want to look up the true definition of that word by the way, since you've let the Tea Party do your thinking for you by telling you their untrue definition of it), but I just thought I'd do the classy thing and try to help you sound credible - not that it would do much good considering conservative positions these days....
Evil - alex doesn't have anything else going. But the ass part - he's really good at!
LOL a proud liberal. Guess your proud your party destroyed the economy on purpose in order to gain power. I would love to go back to the Bush days when we had $1.80 gasoline. Unemployment at 5% and everyone was working. And a middle east that was not in turmoil.
Martha got jail time, and there is a RAFT of crooks in the House and Senate who need to see the inside of a corrections facility for a year or two AND be STRIPPED of their ill-gotten gains. Can the RICO statutes be applied?
For the House to create loopholes that anyone could drive a semi-trailer of loot through is DISINGENUOUS. Do they really think that the ordinary guy or gal in the street cannot see through their SLEAZE?
"The Republicans wiped out a key provision in the Senate version of the bill that would have required so-called "political intelligence" firms to register and file disclosure reports, as lobbyists must. These are companies that try to pick up information from lawmakers, then pass it on to investment firms and their clients."
What a short sided article from AP. Does it mention the fact that Eric Cantor is rumored to have taken a short position during the debt ceiling crisis? What about the fact that Boehner is suppose to have a position on some of the companies that are involved in the XL keystone Pipeline projects? These are just a few examples. Of course, nothing of these were mentioned in a mainstream media AP article.
djj.....nice of you to blow off the FACT that Pelosi is the one that made MILLIONS when she was in charge of what Bills would come forward for a vote and stopped the one that would have PREVENTED her and her husband from making those millions.
As for what Cantor did, since he is an intelligent individual, and even Bush had said that if Fannie and Freddie weren't regulated there'd be a finanacial crisis, where is the problem? EVERYONE could see that the housing bubble would eventually burst.
And it's not a "fact" that Boehner is suppose to have a position on some companies..." That's called a RUMOR, not a fact.
The Cantor revison to "not" require political intelligence firms to have to report is basically, the right setting itself up a loophole whereby they can say they've done something when if fact they've done nothing...without that reporting process they can just work behind closed doors...maintain their insider advantage and continue taking advantage of the law...just because something is legal, doesn't make it right... they are setting us up again... don't let them water down the bill...make it real. sneaky bastards...snakes every one...kick um out...OBAMA 2012
djj, Are you sure they didn't mention anything about the orange man and Cantor? If you are correct, it just goes to prove the tea baggers are lying when they call the media liberal.
And before you baggers get all up set, do you really THINK a liberal site would forget that? I think not. But keep spinning the lies that the media is liberal.
SallyAnn:
djj was criticizing the AP for not being thourough enough about Bohner and Cantor. He most definately wasn't sticking up for them.
The GOP has perpetrated this myth that the media is somehow liberal for about a hundred years now. Do you really believe the executives at GE sit around in thier boardrooms asking how can we give more power to the people and pay more taxes and get more regulation and pay higher wages and benefits?
Salon is liberal. NBC is corperate. Fox is propoganda. Any news organization approaching unbiased reporting will be branded with the scarlet L. Reality and facts are not a big hit with the powerbase of the conservatives.
They are good additions to the bill but more needs to be done.
The bill also needs to apply to property. It should also apply to staffers and anyone who works for the government including state and local. There should also be a claw back to allow money to be recovered by those greedy government officals like Pelosi who have manipulated the system for their own personal greed.
Who is kidding who, when the final version of this bill finally gets passed and signed, it won't be able to float there will be so many loopholes in it. Congress never really passes anything that inhibits their ability to do what they want. This is a perk for those that can write their own perks, and it will not be going away any time soon.
Common Man - your post was good until you centered on Pelosi. What about Cantor and Boehner? Oh wait, you just forgot them, right? Yeah! Right!
Seeking Sanity, I only mentioned Pelosi because she is the greediest of the greedy. But insider trading laws should apply to everyone including government royalty.
UGH I hate Bohner
So do most liberal women....oh wait your talking about the Congressman!
I live in MN and my Republican Representative Mr Kline has assured me that there is no reason to have this insider trading bill. It is just more government regulations that people need to worry about. I don't think he has my vote of confidence in November.
The provision, one of a number of changes drafted by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, aims to shine a spotlight on Pelosi's husband's purchase of shares in the 2008 initial public offering by Visa Inc as Congress was considering new credit card regulations.
Within two days of the Visa offering, the 5,000 shares purchased by Paul Pelosi had risen $20 each. And THAT is how you make a very quick, $100,000 profit.... Coincidence?
That sounds real good except for one small problem. It was the right that was fighting against capping interest rates for credit cards. They said it was an infringement of states rights to set interest rates and exessive regulation. Mitch McConnel had already told Reid that they would filibuster the bill in the senate.
This is one more example of the wealthy fighting to stay that way by cheating. This law will be circumvented by the expensive lawyers that will be brought in to disect it and find the loop holes that the wealthy in this nation are so very privileged to have. BOTH parties are guilty. The corruption on this one is thick and the criminals will get away with it. In DC, for the wealthy in all the political parties, its all too common.
I have a better idea. How about if they introduce a bill that removes all congressional exemptions to US laws, and aligns their pension and benefits to that of all other civil service employees?
Congress isn't about to pass a law that actually impacts the way they do business, it will just change how the get to cover it up. How can anyone blame congress for lying, cheating, and stealing from the American taxpayers when there is no law against it? What would you do if you could pass laws that didn't apply to you? What would you do if you could give yourself a raise or add more perks and benefits? We need a law that removes their ability to do such, yeah like that would ever pass. The only way to change Washington is start kicking out the incumbents.
Think this will end up to be as effective as the Super Committee? Just wondering....
It is strange the way the wing nuts keep screaming Nancy. When it is Cantor who is writing and adding provisions to allow lobbying firms to run intellingence gathering on members for business purposes. Even tho Grassley a republican senator from Iowa put the provision to stop them in the Senate version. This is one right winger out right winging the other one. It passed the Senate 96 to 3...stop playing with it and pass it.. wont happen tho and the committee negotiations won't draw much attetion. Besides now they want to get back to contraception, gay marriage and their other "important issues that out weigh the economy and Amercian issues around the world. Way to go republican controlled congress no wonder you are favorable 13 %... Un-favorable 87%,,,If our kids scored that badly in school we would be livid..
Way to go "republican controlled congress" no wonder you are favorable 13 %... Un-favorable 87%,,,If our kids scored that badly in school we would be livid..
PLEASE Educate yourself to the FACTS, Congress consists of the House AND the Senate. The House is under Republican control and the Senate is under Democrat control.
BTW, the Democrat controlled Congress HAS NOT passed A BUDGET for over 1000 DAYS!.
FYI,Senate Democrats abandoned their official duty to prioritize Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars and tackle our nation’s most pressing economic challenges—dealing a painful blow to fiscal progress that may be felt for some time. This contrasts sharply with the record of the House Republicans. Last spring, the new House Majority publicly produced a budget plan before the nation, brought it forward in committee, and passed it on the floor. The budget’s principled solutions honestly confront our nation’s most difficult challenges, putting the budget on a path to balance and the country on a path to prosperity.
ssssmith...you are spouting fox news talking points...again! Just because they came up with a budget proposal doesn't make it the right thing for the nation. House republicans have nothing to point to proudly - no major accomplishments. They continue to put forth highly partisan bills aimed at muddying their opponents, knowing full well that the proposed legislation has no chance of being adopted in a bi-partisan way. Since when did partisan politics supplant bi-partisan cooperation in congress? Your lord and saviour Ronald Reagan would be considered TOO liberal to be part of the current republican party. Shame on them for putting party before country!!!
NO BUDGET from the Democrat Senate in OVER 1000 DAYS.
SHAME on THEM for NOT FULFILLING Their OBLIGATION to American TAXPAYERS.
To..ssmith"""
Record republican filibusters...blue dog dems...ring a bell ..blue dogs didn't do to well in 2010 did they ...
The House provision exempting lobbyists from insider trading rules has already made the bill worthless. It figures Cantor and the teabaggers would kiss the hand that feeds them.
sharky, Denial is a mental illness, I guess that explains why there are Democrats.
The provision, one of a number of changes drafted by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, aims to shine a spotlight on Pelosi's husband's purchase of shares in the 2008 initial public offering by Visa Inc as Congress was considering new credit card regulations.
Within two days of the Visa offering, the 5,000 shares purchased by Paul Pelosi had risen $20 each. And THAT is how you make a very quick, $100,000 profit.... Coincidence?
Why is it only Pelosi is the villan here sssssmith??? If she or her husband committed an illegal act, she should be held accountable (and perhaps she will be). That does not exclude Cantor, Boehner or any other congressman or woman of either party from being investigated. I think Cantor's actions (this is my belief here - no one else's) might mirror the actions of Newt Gingrich when as speaker of the house castigated President Clinton while engaging in the same behavior. Your partisanship and hatred of all things liberal make your arguments less effective.
Speaker Gingrich did not LIE UNDER OATH to Congress, Clinton DID.... and THAT my friend is why he was IMPEACHED by the U.S. House of Representatives.
To ssmithlg""""
Well they did do a study and Psychologists say conservatism is a mental illness
Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition
28 Aug 2003
Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:
Fear and aggression
Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
Uncertainty avoidance
Need for cognitive closure
Terror management
"From our perspective, these psychological factors are capable of contributing to the adoption of conservative ideological contents, either independently or in combination," the researchers wrote in an article, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin
.
The paper is on line as an Adobe PDF document -> Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition PDF 600 KB ... and there is also a Google HTML cache version of the document online here -> Google Cache
The researchers set as their goal the synthesis of many previous methodologies of research in the hopes of coming up with a broad definition and analysis of Conservative thought and behavior.
Conclusion
They list eight elements that fit into any one of these three categories...
We consider evidence for and against the hypotheses that political conservatism is significantly associated with
(1) mental rigidity and closed-mindedness, including(a) increased dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity(b) decreased cognitive complexity, (c) decreased openness to experience, (d) uncertainty avoidance, (e) personal needs for order and structure, and (f) need for cognitive closure;
(2) lowered self-esteem;
(3) fear, anger, and aggression;
(4) pessimism, disgust, and contempt;
(5) loss prevention;
(6) fear of death;
(7) threat arising from social and economic deprivation; and
(8) threat to the stability of the social system.
Definitions of Conservatism
To..To ssmithlg"""
That's why bush/cheney never testified under oath about anything ever...cause if you can impeach a president over lying about a hummer ...can you imagine what those to could of been impeached for ...that's my only fault with gangstA girl Pelosi ..taking the bush/cheney impeachment off the table
To.. To Amucka. You're a funny guy, most likely selfish, like most libs.
-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.[15]
To..ssmithlg"""
Huh ...? love conservapidia an impeccable source for information ..
Conservationism is a failed regressive ideology that constantly tries to rewrite history in an effort to reinvent itself...
ssmithlg,
May I ask where did you get your data so that I may factcheck it. Next, here is something that you can easily factcheck. Of the ten richest people in this country, only the top 3, who are liberals, have pledged more than 50% of their wealth to charities. The remaining of the ten are all conservatives, with the exception of George Soros. Funny that all of the conservatives on the ten richest list are all giving millions to Newt's or Mitt's campaigns in pursuit of firmly establishing an Oligopoly like in China, Russia, Mexico and Brazil here in the US, but when it comes to charities they are less generous.
smithlg,
That would be former Speaker Gingrich who was forced out amid PAC contribution issues. This was in addition to his 84 ethics violations among other things. Gingrich is the one person who you as a right winger should never compare to anyone on an ethical basis. If you really peel back the Gingrich onion, it is pretty corroded. look into his bedside antics with his first wife while she was cancer stricken and on heavy duty pain medication. Oh that's right, Crox News forgot to mention that to you. Pick the right battles as politics is a dirty game. It is rather ludicrous using Gingrich as a moral compass. That is the equivalent of trying to put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it.
Gingrich is also the single most responsible person for the highly polarized environment in the House of Representatives. He spawned the "it is us against them" mantra for the Republicans in the 1990's and it is still going strong today.
I know that you very likely won't do the homework suggested. If you do, it will be a real eye opener as long as you are not completely brainwashed politically.
Lil (eric cantor) Cheese, always with something up his sleeve.
I wonder what reason, if any, Cantor gave for exempting the "political intelligence" firms from the proposal. What IS a political intelligence firm anyway? The article describes them as "companies that try to pick up information from lawmakers, then pass it on to investment firms and their clients."
In the next paragraph, we find that political intelligence firms were "lobbying hard" to get Cantor to exempt them. (They succeded.)
Let's see. Lobbyists influence legislators by wining and dining them, which is a kind of bribery. And political intelligence firms work the other way around, taking information from legislators and passing it on to clients for a fee, which is a kind of spying.
So -- if political intelligence firms can both lobby legislators and pass on information from them -- isn't that somehow a combination of both bribery and spying?
In any case, it seems to unlevel the investment playing field in an obvious way, doesn't it?
Only Congress needs to pass laws against behavior you and I would find unethical for any US Citizen.
what is amazing is the fact that they have to pass a law that will make those in congress follow the same laws that the rest of the people have too follow! anyone not in congress or the house would be jailed for years for insider trading
One small step for Man, One giant leap for Congress.
Good luck getting them to retract one of the main perks....er benefits... for being a DC politician.
Republicans always leave a back door open to evade compliance, then take credit for the facade. They know the problems, but rig the solutions. Harry Truman said, "Show me a rich politician, and I'll show you a crook."
Tax breaks for "job creators" preceded 10+% unemployment and raised four trillion dollars of debt.
Getting government out of our lives led to Wall Street deregulation and economic collapse
Finding WMD yielded the deaths of over 4,000 Americans and 100,000 Iraqi civilians, as well as another trillion dollars of national debt.
Now the arsonists are claiming to be the fire department, but are carrying the same incendiary devices. They are also obsessed with regulating sexuality and reproduction and destroying the unions that built the middle class of wage earners.
Let them run on their record and their ideology. Their only strategy to date is to offer platitudes and gang bang President Obama. They cannot possibly win on the issues. In 2010 they won on "jobs, jobs, jobs", then hid every bit of jobs legislation under committee rugs in order to accuse the president of not creating jobs. Fortunately, they can't obstruct the private sector's progress, so recovery has been gaining for sixteen straight months.
Capitalism still works, and so does America. It is the Republican Party that is failing.
Although i understand your liberalism view...but obama is going to lose this next general election and the American people know it is not just the republicans but also the democrats, so get on the same page as most Americans who realize all congress and the senate do not care about Americans they just want to take care of themselves and their inner circle of cronnies. This include obama and his boys.
Obamausm, you can't just divide the government into those who are "corrupt and those who are not, and then claim that they are all corrupt.
Well, I guess you can if you want, but that's not the way the real world is structured. Few things are "either/or". Most things, including congress, is made up of different degrees.
That is, yes, everyone in congress is corrupt, but then so are we all. But some of us hold up banks, while others only steal towels from fancy hotels.
Binary thinking like yours leads to a view of the world that's just black and white and doesn't allow for any other differences. It doesn't get us very far in understanding what's going on. Just the opposite.
"The growing political intelligence industry had lobbied hard to get the Republicans to either modify or eliminate the provision, arguing that the language was too broad"
Please. We need to get these people away from the politicians. Why would we not want these people to have to register and file disclosure reports. They are basically spying on Congress to get inside info on legislation so they can make billions for their rich clients.
The Senate bill included registering these crooks too. Leave it in.
This is a good piece of legislation. Politicans shouldn't benefit financially from knowledge they receive while in office. Hopefully, both parties can iron out the remaining differences and get it passed. Maybe they can pass term limits while they're at it.
I'll bet the loopholes in this bill are huge! And enough to negate
the intent of actually restricting anything unethical that these
jokers want to do to enrich themselves.
That includes BOTH parties!
Let's be honest, it is a huge problem on both sides, greed knows no party. Money runs Washington. Made all the worse by citizens united. They need to fix this now. And Nancy, time to retire in the lap of luxury!
Every last one of these lawmakers democrat and republican should be replaced they are all greedy cheaters to the core every last one of them is on the take. Start over with term limits and lower the pay of these greedy all for myself cheaters!
Obanism,
Nice idea, the entire congress needs to be torn down and restructured. As it stands now, only congress can pass laws or restrictions on themselfs. And you know that's never gonna happen. Start with term limits, and limits on perks and NOT owning stocks or allowing insider trading of any sort.
I deeply distrust the houses version of this bill, it'll be used on Nancy, who will spend years defending herself from every rumor they can make. Sorta like the birthers for Obama.
Then it'll be put aside and ignored. Under we will not use it if you don't.