SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
07-31-22, 08:22 AM | #3781 | ||
Rear Admiral
|
Quote:
What do you mean “Why would they now”? It’s been over a month and a half since bill has been passed in the Senate, but the Senate wanted changes concerning among other things one or more of those ‘significant concerns’ and sent it back to the House on 16 June 2022. What’s suddenly “now” after a month and half is all the sensationalism and howling in unison how “they just don’t care, it’s just about the money, they’re lying about loopholes, and hating veterans etc etc. https://www.usmedicine.com/clinical-...on-over-years/ Interesting paragraph Quote:
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 07-31-22 at 10:41 AM. |
||
07-31-22, 08:50 AM | #3782 | |
Ace of the Deep
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,046
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
Anyway, my point is that even innocuous changes in the language of a "bill" can completely change it's scope. |
|
07-31-22, 10:26 AM | #3783 |
Lucky Jack
|
The only change to the text between the two Senate votes was the removal of this line:
902(e): Not a taxable benefit. — A contract buy out for a covered health care professional under subsection (a) shall not be considered a taxable benefit or event for the covered health care professional. Otherwise, they are identical. No changes to anything the Republicans are claiming. |
07-31-22, 12:09 PM | #3784 | |
Rear Admiral
|
I wish it was that easy.
Quote:
* “…allow ‘Democrats” to effectively spend…”. In my book this is political hay in reality it means who ever is in congress democrat or republican because it all depends who is voted in at the time when spending bills are decided. I think, it’s not a bad idea to keep expenditures under discretionary spending. And response? Even more political hay “ They voted for all of us to suffer. They are endorsing our suffering,” I’m still confused. But I am quite certain it will get passed, eventually, in one form or another. Until then we will suffer through more partisan politics.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 07-31-22 at 01:05 PM. |
|
07-31-22, 01:17 PM | #3785 |
Lucky Jack
|
Yes and this is why I don't understand Toomey's opposition to the bill. If $400B is reallocated from the discretionary funds to this act as mandatory funding, there won't be another $400B magically filling the void. The Congress needs to approve any new spending. So, trying to blame the Dems for some budgetary gimmicks is misleading.
|
07-31-22, 01:31 PM | #3786 | |
Rear Admiral
|
Quote:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/117-2022/s272 A cloture vote is, essentially, a “let’s-go-ahead-and-get-this-over-with” which apparently neither Toomey or Schumer were prepared to clear the deck for a final vote. This cloture vote did not in anyway kill the Pact Act it allowed it to be left open for debate. Like I said it will eventually be passed.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 07-31-22 at 01:57 PM. |
|
07-31-22, 02:03 PM | #3787 |
Shark above Space Chicken
|
It would prevent spending for the bill being unfunded on a future budget. Those oh so patriotic senators don't want to be on the hook having to fund the bill for it's full ten years. Heartfelt thanks for your service should be good enough...
__________________
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light." Stanley Kubrick "Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming." David Bowie |
07-31-22, 02:17 PM | #3788 |
Lucky Jack
|
|
07-31-22, 02:37 PM | #3789 |
Rear Admiral
|
Good for Schumer. Like I said before, this bill will eventually pass and everyone Republican and Democrat alike will be out there declaring victory.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 07-31-22 at 03:30 PM. |
07-31-22, 02:46 PM | #3790 |
Fleet Admiral
|
By reading your latest comment indicate for me that your politicians has almost of not same unwritten rules as we have here in the Danish Parliament-Never change, work for or against a law the politician(Congress/Senate) has voted yes or no to.
Example Politician A in Congress vote for a bill-Some years later when this person has been elected to the Senate this bill return and now this politician vote against what he voted for in the Congress-s/he has thereby broken an unwritten law if it had been in the Danish Parliament. (Sorry can't get it right nor grammatic nor spelling.) Markus
__________________
My little lovely female cat |
07-31-22, 08:19 PM | #3791 | |
Rear Admiral
|
Quote:
Once passed the PACT Act would obligate an additional 280 billion (over ten year) to cover the act. Everybody's happy. Where it seems to go wrong according to Toomey is when Democrats want to move the VA’s 400 billion dollar operating expense from discretionary funds to mandatory funds. That he says will leave a 400 billion dollar hole in discretionary funding. By moving that already obligated 400 billion (over ten year) from discretionary to direct funding. Democrats would fill the void with another 400 billion (over ten years) to cover the ever expanding discretionary spending. That’s a crap ton load of pork if you ask me, it’s more than I’ve ever heard of. I’d think even the most ardent party fanboys would be pissed off anyone in government tried to do that. At least that’s what I got out it, so ya it does sound a bit gimmicky. Like trying to sneak in a 400 billion dollar slush fund kind of gimmicky. Now I know what you’re thinking. The government will over the next ten years just deduct 400 billion from 2023 discretionary funds. That makes sense, however having worked for the federal government for over 24 years. You can hope, you can wish, pray, dream government would do that. But then reality slaps you up along side the head and says that’s not how government works. The FED will have to print another 400 billion more dollars to cover. It’s like COVID vaccine shut-up, don’t ask questions just take your medicine. Now we’re at shut-up, don’t ask questions. just pass the bill so we can spend another 400,000,000,000 of tax payer dollars and put everyone even further in debt. https://www.toomey.senate.gov/newsro...t-floor-speech
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 07-31-22 at 10:32 PM. |
|
08-01-22, 04:13 AM | #3792 | |
Lucky Jack
|
Quote:
|
|
08-01-22, 08:23 AM | #3793 |
Rear Admiral
|
You might think that, anyone would, it makes sense. As I said earlier then reality slaps you and you realize that’s not way the government works. The 2023 discretionary funding cap has already been approved by congress and it stands by law at 1.6 trillion dollars. Come hell or high water 1.6 trillion will be spent regardless if 40 billion was designated direct spending.
__________________
Guardian of the honey and nuts Let's assume I'm right, it'll save time. Last edited by Rockstar; 08-01-22 at 08:46 AM. |
08-01-22, 08:41 AM | #3794 | ||
Wayfaring Stranger
|
Quote:
For those who do not know how our system of government works yet still feel qualified to opine upon it's workings: Quote:
__________________
Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see. |
||
08-01-22, 09:55 AM | #3795 |
Shark above Space Chicken
|
The bill is for additional funding for vet health problems. Are we supposed to believe the senate didn't understand that when they voted for it?
__________________
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light." Stanley Kubrick "Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming." David Bowie |
|
|