Senate Republicans may change rules to pass Arctic drilling

[LynneSin]

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/122005/news1.html

Senate Republicans prepared a targeted version of the so-called “nuclear option” yesterday as they tried to ensure adoption of a defense-spending conference report that includes a controversial provision opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas drilling.

The tactic promises to make the consensus-based Senate temporarily resemble the majority-dominated House.

The ANWR provision leaves the measure open to a point of order because it runs afoul of Senate Rule 28, which requires that conference reports contain only provisions that were included in either the House- or Senate-passed versions of the bill.

The president of the Senate, who rules on parliamentary questions, would be expected to uphold the point of order. But Republican leaders plan to appeal that ruling, allowing 51 senators — rather than the 60-vote majority typically needed to waive points of order — to allow the ANWR provision to stand.

[fooj]

1. These rat bastards need to be held accountable for this!

:grr:

[LynneSin]

2. Don't like Democracy? NUCLEAR OPTION

they sicken me!

Edit Note: Or maybe they realize that they might not have the ability to get this passed if democrats get the majority in 2006

[merwin]

3. I hope they try it. That will raise hell.

[OregonBlue]

4. Can't Dems demand a full reading of this bill? Can't they demand

a full reading of Patriot Act bill? Can't they slow the Senate down to a crawl. Don't let them go home for Xmas!!

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

6. Maybe they need another closed session to see how the second half of

the Intelligence report is progressing, like I'm sure it is moving right along, oh yea.

[unblock]

9. the 'nuclear option' permits the majority to completely rewrite the rules.

basically, they 'interpret' up to mean down and and then vote on that interpretation, which cannot be filibustered and only requires a simple majority. once they do that, they can 'interpret' the rules to mean anything they want, including for instance, preventing democrats from speaking altogether or voting period. not that they'd actually do that; too obvious. but they can use this criminal mechanism to completely ignore the democrats.

[OregonBlue]

18. Call Senators Lott, Hagel, Santorum and Spector. NOW!!

Senators Lott, Hagel and Sentorum are on the Senate Rules Committee. Contact them and ask them if they're willing to declare open warfare on Senate Democrats by changing the rules for the DOD bill vote. Let them know that it WILL BE OUT AND OUT WAR!!

Senator Lott - 202-224-6253 Fax - 202-224-2262
Senator Hagel - 202-224-4224 Fax - 202-224-5213
Senator Santorum - 202-224-6324 Fax - 202-228-0604
Senator Spector - 202-224-4254 Fax - 202-228-1229

[Redneck Socialist]

5. Thank you for the link

I've been searching for ANWR related news all morning, but my google fu is weak and I haven't found much up to date.

This is the best explanation of what is happening that I've seen so far.

[catmandu57]

7. Fuck you ted stevens

I hope you suffer the same living death that st. ronnie suffered, fuck you and fuck anybody that looks like you.

[Jim__]

8. Does the conference report require a vote for approval?

And, can the dems filibuster that vote?

[sugapablo]

10. Cartman knew what was up!

I think we need a hippie jam-band festival at the ANWR site!

Think of it! It'll be like corporation, Republican repellant! Hundreds of thousands of hippies dancing their ungodly dances, smoking dangerous drugs, and living their sinful lifestyle, dancing to heathenistic, un-christian music!

I bet if Phish were to re-unite, there's be a TON of people there!

(Animals don't mind loud music, do they?)

[More Than A Feeling]

13. How about a little respect for the rules and some accountability

from the Republican Party? I can't enjoy the jam-bands otherwise. The GOP harshes my mellow;-)

[LynneSin]

11. Did you see this little contingency plan for the 'Nuclear Option'? OMG!!

Back when Clinton was president it use to require both senators from the home state of a nominated judge to 'blue-slip' a nomination. Blue-Slip was a way of saying that a senator didn't approve of a judge. If both senators did a "blue-slip" then the nomination ceased to exist and disappeared.

When Orin Hatch became judicial chairman he changed the rule to where only one senator was needed for 'blue-slipping'. That way more judges nominated by Clinton could be shot-down even if the democratic senator was ok with the nomination. By requiring both senators, it prevented partisan politics since a large portion of the states are represented by senators from both parties. But by switching it to just one senator then they would also have control not only over states with 2 republican senators but also those states with just one republican senator.

This was all fine and dandy until democrats got control for a short period of time after the Jeffords defection. Because now the new "blue-slip" rule created by Hatch could be used against them and could shoot down a few more of Bush's judicial nominees (however, Democrats never played that dirty).

So, Ted Stevens wants to create a modified "Nuclear Option" that could finally get his beloved ANWR drilling even though he doesn't have what it takes to get around the filibuster. And because of Senate Rule 28 he can't get around it so he wants to change that rule so ANWR gets through.

But if you read the rest of the article you'll catch this lil gem:

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), the chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and the chief proponent of ANWR drilling, included a provision to ensure that the precedent set by the move would not become permanent. Under that language, the Senate would revert the precedent that existed at the start of the 109th Congress.

So in a nutshell - change the rules to get what he wants but make sure that the rules he changes can never be turned around and used against him in case Democrats get the majority.

Asshole Fucker - I cannot stand him!!!

[Nutmegger]

17. Man, I can't stand these people.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[AlCzervik]

12. i saw Ted "Boeing bridge to nowhere" Stevens on the floor stammering

and stuttering and turning red in the face.

[OregonBlue]

14. Again, can't the Dems decide that the bill be read in it's entirety.

The language in these bills is accepted by agreement. Can't they demand that all the bills before them be read, word for word!!

[AX10]

15. When the Democrats are back in the majority.....

we will do the same back to them.

[Up2Late]

16. What a great example these jerk-offs are teaching the children...

...in this country, if you don't want to play by the rules and if it's your ball, change the rules so your team can win. :banghead: :mad:

[RazzleDazzle]

19. They just won't take no for an answer, will they? MY WAY OR ELSE.

Such spoiled, juveneile little fascists.