Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

This is an Admin / Moderator NO GO ZONE. You're on your own.

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9381
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by 1989TransAm » Wed Jun 20, 2018 2:47 pm

You will notice that no dimoKKKRATS voted to claw back spending. They were joined by a few RINOs. [-X Hopefully we can get some real Consevatives elected in the next election.

"The Senate on Wednesday narrowly rejected President Trump's plan to clawback roughly $15 billion in spending approved by Congress earlier this year.

In a 48-50 vote, senators failed to discharge the measure from committee. A majority vote was needed.
GOP Sens. Richard Burr (N.C.) and Susan Collins (Maine) joined 48 members of the Democratic caucus in voting against bringing up the bill.

"My belief ... is that it's the job of Congress to comb through these accounts and that's what we do on the appropriations committee," Collins said.
The vote is a blow to conservatives and the White House, who pushed the package in response to backlash from the GOP base over a mammoth rescissions package passed in March.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/s ... k-spending

mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5368
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by mk e » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:03 pm

It wasn't ever supposed to pass, it was a show and as many repubs as needed to be certain it failed would have voted against it. They ALL just voted FOR the spending and Rump signed it so why on earth would you think they'd now voted against it?
Mark
Mechanical Engineer

RevTheory
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4997
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:45 am

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by RevTheory » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:52 pm

Yeah, we've got to send the RINOs packing. The demonrats are a lost cause so we need to pick up seats and go "nuclear" on things that require a 60-vote threshold.

1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9381
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by 1989TransAm » Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:25 pm

mk e wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:03 pm
It wasn't ever supposed to pass, it was a show and as many repubs as needed to be certain it failed would have voted against it. They ALL just voted FOR the spending and Rump signed it so why on earth would you think they'd now voted against it?
How come no dimoKKKRATS voted for it? Not one. Nada. Zippo.

mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5368
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by mk e » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:29 am

1989TransAm wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:25 pm

How come no dimoKKKRATS voted for it? Not one. Nada. Zippo.
The claw back? Why would they? The dems get punts with there case for voting against Rump, this was an easy opportunity. It was a show, nothing more just like the 60 or so time the house voted to repeal Obamacare knowing full well nothing would come of it.
Mark
Mechanical Engineer

1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9381
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by 1989TransAm » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:06 pm

mk e wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:29 am
1989TransAm wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:25 pm

How come no dimoKKKRATS voted for it? Not one. Nada. Zippo.
The claw back? Why would they? The dems get punts with there case for voting against Rump, this was an easy opportunity. It was a show, nothing more just like the 60 or so time the house voted to repeal Obamacare knowing full well nothing would come of it.
Nothing show about it from President Trump's stand point. You may have a point in regards to dimoKKKRATS and RINOs.

mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5368
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by mk e » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:31 pm

1989TransAm wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:06 pm


Nothing show about it from President Trump's stand point. You may have a point in regards to dimoKKKRATS and RINOs.
Really?
If he didn't like it he could have vetoed it. Also it's a $1.3T spending bill and he only questions $15B of it? ....if that's not a show I don't know what is.....
Mark
Mechanical Engineer

1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9381
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by 1989TransAm » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:13 pm

mk e wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:31 pm
1989TransAm wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:06 pm


Nothing show about it from President Trump's stand point. You may have a point in regards to dimoKKKRATS and RINOs.
Really?
If he didn't like it he could have vetoed it. Also it's a $1.3T spending bill and he only questions $15B of it? ....if that's not a show I don't know what is.....
So, you do not care about the $15B? Apparently it is only "crumbs" to you.

mk e
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5368
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:19 pm
Location: Elverson, PA

Re: Senate rejects Trump plan to clawback spending [vote fails 48-50]

Post by mk e » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:25 pm

1989TransAm wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:13 pm
mk e wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:31 pm
1989TransAm wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:06 pm


Nothing show about it from President Trump's stand point. You may have a point in regards to dimoKKKRATS and RINOs.
Really?
If he didn't like it he could have vetoed it. Also it's a $1.3T spending bill and he only questions $15B of it? ....if that's not a show I don't know what is.....
So, you do not care about the $15B? Apparently it is only "crumbs" to you.
It's enough to make a good show but not enough to dent the problem. If it came with a plan that showed this was just the beginning it would be something, but it didn't, it was a 1 time ask making it just a political stunt.
Mark
Mechanical Engineer

Post Reply