You have a biased view and it’s readily apparent by each of your posts. Your side choose to go it alone as they will for two more years. Let’s just hope the country isn’t broke or ruined in that short period.
Next up infrastructure green and tax hikes.
- Thread starter HJCane
- Start date
You have a biased view and it’s readily apparent by each of your posts. Your side choose to go it alone as they will for two more years. Let’s just hope the country isn’t broke or ruined in that short period.
We believe in voting ID I can tell you that. We don't believe in mass mailings to non-updated voter rolls or ballot harvesting again, I can tell you that.
2016 -2018
Enacted Bills with Bipartisan Support at 20-Year High | Quorum
To date, 70 percent of the bills signed into law in this Congress have been bipartisan bills—the highest of the past 20 years.
www.quorum.us
The Outdoor Act
Trump signs bipartisan conservation legislation
The legislation provides nearly $3 billion annually to conservation projects and addresses the maintenance backlog on federal lands.
www.cbsnews.com
First Step Act Prison Reform
Trump signs bipartisan criminal justice overhaul First Step Act into law
First Step, which earned support from Kamala Harris and Ted Cruz, expands rehabilitative opportunities for inmates
AND even funding for The Wall was bipartisan
Congressional lawmakers reach deal on border wall funding
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional negotiators reached agreement Monday night to prevent a government shutdown and finance construction of new barriers along the U.S.
apnews.com
Actually no it wasn't. Your article here is misleading. Republicans wanted 5.7 Billion Dollars for a border wall. Dems did not give them that....so this is wrong. The settlement was 1.4 Billion Dollars. This isn't bipartisan. Dems aren't worried about border walls which is why they didn't agree to it. That are okay with 1.4 Billion dollars.AND even funding for The Wall was bipartisan
Congressional lawmakers reach deal on border wall funding
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional negotiators reached agreement Monday night to prevent a government shutdown and finance construction of new barriers along the U.S.
Yes, Prison reform is bipartisan. Has been for some time.....that's not really an amazing thing. Congress is divided and it is winner winner chicken dinner. This issue is not an issue that is divisive but neither was immigration. Look at it now. There is no trust among these parties and the last straw was when Mcconnell used the filibuster to block a legitimate supreme court nominee. These actions have consequences. You will see payback by dems and it isn't going to be pretty.First Step Act Prison Reform
Trump signs bipartisan criminal justice overhaul First Step Act into law
First Step, which earned support from Kamala Harris and Ted Cruz, expands rehabilitative opportunities for inmateswww.theguardian.com
Watch your name calling. I have told you this several times and you will be blocked. I won't continue to put up with it. Learn to have a discussion as an adult.
No, they didn't negotiate. Everyone familiar with this issue understands this was no negotiation. Dems don't care about 1.4 Billion dollars for this issue. If you call this a negotiation then I would say the right isn't very good at it. It's barely a quarter of what was asked for.
The outdoor act? really a no brainer that almost died 12 times in the senate. This isn't really groundbreaking legislation. There is no bipartisanship in any real meaningful legislation.The Outdoor Act
Trump signs bipartisan conservation legislation
The legislation provides nearly $3 billion annually to conservation projects and addresses the maintenance backlog on federal lands.
The equality act for example. Talk to me when that is bipartisan.
The most recent president to ruin this country was Trump. Before him, W. There appears to be a pattern of Republican screwups and Dems bailing them out.
So boys can participate in girls sports? Boys with female hormones? I'm all for proper equality always have been.
Deregulating the banks so that anyone and everyone could get a house regardless of if they could afford it was real fiscally responsible. Who could have seen that policy not working out?
You mean the Republican lead repeal of Glass-Steagal? Or are you talking about the fact that Clinton, against the majority of his caucuses', Senate and House, signed the law?
Perhaps you mean the predatory lending that happened? Not entirely sure. I know that when I was a Banker there were walls between NationsSecurities, NationsMortgage and NationsBank. They literally couldn't even have a permanent space at my branches. Afterward, not so much.
I think conservatives, fiscal conservatives, thought allowing the free market to consolidate was the best plan available. Sure a Dem famously said "it will create institutions too big to fail", was he prescient? perhaps, was he fiscally conservative, not by the laissez-faire model I believe in.
Still remains, relative to Bush, Obama, Trump, that was the last admin. I guess it's arguable that Carter's austerity was if you choose to make that argument.
Neither side has been without fault and I've been consistent with that. Your reply assumes just the opposite and infers all things Dem are good and all things Rep are bad, without any critical thinking.
Any American who has taken even a few moments to critically look at the most recent "Covid Relief Bill" should be appalled and concerned for our country. You just can't spend Trillions of dollars without consequences.
The economy is already on the mend with unemployment at 6.2%, a level most administrations have had to deal with, and should be transitory with a reopening.
*Why does a family earning $150k that has not been financially affected by lockdowns or lost a job need a stimulus check? Especially as we are coming out of this? Wouldn't it make more sense to increase the benefits or stimulus to those effected through a pay cut or loss of job? We could have sent REAL $$$ to a family that lost wages or a job to try and make them whole, instead of a $1400 check.
* Why are we paying the Kennedy center 2x their annual budget, when it was already given a full years budget in the first bill?
*Why are we granting only "Socially disadvantaged" farmers 120% of ANY loan without a cap, when grain prices are some of the highest they've been in years? It would be nice to have someone pay off my debts, but why should I pay someone else's?
*Why are we making whole private union pensions that have been mismanaged for decades, continue to be managed by those same unions knowing that there has been graft and fraud? We have a Fed Pension Benefit and Guarantee Corp. that takes those pensions over when they are underfunded. Why did taxpayers just fully fund them?
There was actually $850B in relief, which as I argued above could have been better spent, and should have. Most that lost a job in the past year did so as a result of mandated lockdowns, and we should have done everything in our power to make those people, and businesses whole. Instead the bulk of the most recent bill went to paying favors, which is why it found zero bi-partisan support. That is the polar opposite to the first relief bill that had as many Dem sponsors as Rep.
The entire country Democrats and Republicans alike should be angered by this wasteful use of taxpayer dollars. That is except those getting a check who feel some form of payback. This will simply lead to higher taxes, and the resulting permanent loss of jobs that accompanies that.
That was the House when Dems took it back. Thought it was unfair that people weren't getting loans who didn't deserve loans.
All good and true. There was also nearly 1 TRILLION unspent from the previous bills.
Do whatever you want with the numbers. IF the virus had not shut down the country the GDP would be there to cover the expenses and the expenses would not have been as high. Spending is not a bad thing...believe it or not....borrwoing is not a bad thing. Without either we would still be in an agrarian society.
First of all these numbers were ugly before we knew a virus existed. They are the numbers. Not people doing anything with them. He gave massive cuts for the rich. Obviously that was going to happen. Where else would our country get revenue?
Second of the impact the pandemic had on this economy was his own doing. Nobody elses. He essentially kept it to himself for 3 months. Fired Obamas pandemic response team prior to all of it...and now you have an unmitigated disaster on our hands.
The country isnt ruined. Why would you say that. This country is far better off than it EVER was. Pick a date and lets compare.
How about this numb er...
Bidens first two months..$2 Trillion. that is more per month than everyone. You like numbers figure that one.
Similar threads
