Secret hold on Transparency bill in Senate

Quite frankly, if a congresscritter has to excuse themselves to take a crap during a session, it should be public.

I was unaware that they could "anonymously" block bills from consideration--that's outrageous. Anonymous legislation should be a contradiction in terms.
 
Congressional "holds" of any kind, anonymous or not, are a disgrace. Senator Blow doesn't like Judge Schmoe, from Blow's home state? Senator Blow can put a "hold" on his nomination to a federal judgeship and Schmoe won't even get a hearing. Happens all the time. Utter perversion of democracy and the democratic process. :mad:
 
The irony inherent in anonymously blocking a bill that calls for transparency is just staggering.
 
BPSCG said:
Congressional "holds" of any kind, anonymous or not, are a disgrace. Senator Blow doesn't like Judge Schmoe, from Blow's home state? Senator Blow can put a "hold" on his nomination to a federal judgeship and Schmoe won't even get a hearing. Happens all the time. Utter perversion of democracy and the democratic process. :mad:
Click to expand...

I agree. No one person should ever be able to "hold" something from being considered. The only exception I could see would be that being part of the duties of an elected chair, which could then be overruled.
 
Apollyon said:
http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2018089
Anonymously blocking bills is a senate rule that needs to be changed. If a Senator or a group of Senators wants to block a bill, fine, but their identities should be made public.
Click to expand...
So, how do we get Congress to change that law, whose provision each member of either house can make use of when it is politically advantageous?

"Who will bell the cat?" asked the mouse. :confused:

DR
 
I wonder if this is a ploy to bring attention to the bill. Someone proposes a bill to make the process more open, and a friend puts a sneaky invisible hold on the bill to draw attention to the things that are done in secret right in front of our noses.
 
Apollyon said:
The irony inherent in anonymously blocking a bill that calls for transparency is just staggering.
Click to expand...

You ain't seen nuthin'. People in Congress will actually sponsor a bill because they want the brownie voter points for it, but when it comes time to vote for it, they will actually vote against it because they didn't actually want it to, you know, pass, because, you know, usually it's something that reduces, not increases, Congressional control over things.
 
Beerina said:
You ain't seen nuthin'. People in Congress will actually sponsor a bill because they want the brownie voter points for it, but when it comes time to vote for it, they will actually vote against it because they didn't actually want it to, you know, pass, because, you know, usually it's something that reduces, not increases, Congressional control over things.
Click to expand...
And that's why members of congress so rarely get elected president. Because invariably, someone will point out, "He voted for this appropriation, before he voted against it."

Unless the candidate blurts it out himself, not that anyone would be that clumsy.
 
BPSCG said:
And that's why members of congress so rarely get elected president. Because invariably, someone will point out, "He voted for this appropriation, before he voted against it."

Unless the candidate blurts it out himself, not that anyone would be that clumsy.
Click to expand...

As much of a schmuck as Kerry is, in fairness, he was discussing two different pieces of legislation. He cosponsored a measure to provide $87 billion for the war, which temporarily reversed Bush's tax cuts to pay for it. That measure was defeated, and Kerry voted against a measure that just threw down the money as a blank check.

Also, a lot of times a congresscritter can actually be justified in voting against their own legislation depending on the massive amounts of amendments and pork added to it.
 
Last edited:
Cleon said:
As much of a schmuck as Kerry is, in fairness, he was discussing two different pieces of legislation. He cosponsored a measure to provide $87 billion for the war, which temporarily reversed Bush's tax cuts to pay for it. That measure was defeated, and Kerry voted against a measure that just threw down the money as a blank check.

Also, a lot of times a congresscritter can actually be justified in voting against their own legislation depending on the massive amounts of amendments and pork added to it.
Click to expand...
All understood. now all you have to do is get the average voter, who has the intellectual discernment of a flea and the attention span oh look, a seagull!!!
 
BPSCG said:
All understood. now all you have to do is get the average voter, who has the intellectual discernment of a flea and the attention span oh look, a seagull!!!
Click to expand...

Dammit, seagulls aren't all that shiny.
 
Darat said:
Could someone explain to non-USAians exactly what you are are all going on about?
Click to expand...

It's a procedural thing in Congress.

Suppose Congresscritter A introduces a bill declaring January to be Staple History Month.

Congresscritter B, however, hates staples, but doesn't want to give the impression of being a Staple Bigot. Under the current rules, Critter B can issue a "block" to keep the bill from ever being considered by the larger body--without anybody knowing who issued the "block."

So there are two reasons we're peeved:

1. That a single congresscritter can block consideration of a bill
2. That they can do so without anybody knowing it was them--so that they never have to answer for it.
 
Cleon said:
1. That a single congresscritter can block consideration of a bill
2. That they can do so without anybody knowing it was them--so that they never have to answer for it.
Click to expand...
Darat, you're probably familiar with its spiritual ancestor - the Star Chamber. Except that a hold only places a figurative secret death sentence, usually on a nomination, rather than an actual one on a person.
 
It's a way of making sure there are no loose cannons on deck. Any Senator who doesn't toe the line will find himself/herself unable to get any legislation through, and if they can't show the folks back home some accomplishments, they might not get reelected. It guarantees that no Senator will go haywire and do something crazy, like telling the common people some straight truths about where their money goes.
 
Thanks. Can I just check something - any member of Congress can block any piece of legislation and also remain anonymous when the do so?

Are there penalties for breaching this anonymity - are there any restrictions to this power?
 
Cleon said:
As much of a schmuck as Kerry is, in fairness, he was discussing two different pieces of legislation. He cosponsored a measure to provide $87 billion for the war, which temporarily reversed Bush's tax cuts to pay for it. That measure was defeated, and Kerry voted against a measure that just threw down the money as a blank check.
Click to expand...

When Bush says something stupid, the circus know as reporting (along with commentary on by Jon Stewart, et al) is what he said, not what he meant. Admittedly Bush says many more stupid things than the schmuck, but when you're running for president you have to either choose your words more carefully or be lucky enough to be running against a worse schmuck.
 
For anyone interested in the text of the bill being tabled, go to

http://www.thomas.loc.gov

The bill under discussion (or lack thereof) is HR 5024 RH

Given my profession, I'm very interested in where this ends. While all but a very few contracts are already available through fedbizopps, and even more available through services such as Input.com, they all lack the detail a competitor really needs. Some parts of me would would dearly love to see individual delivery orders placed publically for inspection. Other parts of me would cringe at the thought.

I can get any delivery order through a FOIA, but by the time I get it, the competitive value is generally zero. I admit there is a comfort in maintaining the status quo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom