Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: One Step at a Time Bill is a TRICK

Posted 2 years ago on March 30, 2012, 2:47 p.m. EST by GumbyDamnit (36)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/one-subject/

How should anyone here know this?

It is supported by (R) Ron Paul, who OWS insists is a nut case lunatic AND IS NOT a (D).

How can anyone argue with such clear logic?

66 Comments

66 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (28261) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

OSTA : https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/one-subject/

Good policy supported by a member of a currently anti-people party. Perhaps someone is trying to give their party some respectability or is giving the legislation the kiss of death by supporting it.

This is good legislation to support:

https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/one-subject/

I do not care about parties - I Do Care about good legislation.

[-] 2 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

This is an interesting bill; I'd like to see the text of this bill to see exactly what is or is not allowed to be packaged in one bill before I make up my mind for sure, though. Here's why:

In theory, there are two different kinds of omnibus bills that a legislature may assemble. The first kind is when legislative measures that can't really stand on their own for whatever reason (be it because they're unpopular with the people, poor policy, or simply not particularly popular with the president) get tacked onto the coattails of something that is either ridiculously popular or pretty much has to go through to avoid loss of essential services.

Take, for instance, the 2012 NDAA that has had a lot of people up in arms recently. The NDAA itself is a perfectly normal bill that gets passed every year; the initials stand for "National Defense Authorization Act" and the bill itself is just the budget for DoD and the military. Not only is that harmless, but it's actually necessary for the continued function of the military and there's been one passed every year for quite a while.

The attached Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF), however, is another matter entirely. As has been hashed out all over the internet several times, that bill basically codifies into law the worst of Bush II's policies on detainee treatment and should never have passed, let alone been signed. However, because it was attached to the military budget for the year there would have been all kinds of nasty consequences for shooting it down and thus it is now law. This sort of thing is exactly what OSTA is intended to prevent, and I have no doubts that it will succeed in doing so.

There is, however, another kind of omnibus bill that does in fact need to be allowed through: the budget-related bill. Laws that directly and primarily affect our national revenue (tax cuts, tax hikes, and major changes to spending programs, including the military) that were designed as a package need to remain a package and the package has to be required to make a reasonable attempt at revenue neutrality (or revenue positivity). The reason I make this comment is that if you take a omnibus with a mix of tax cuts in some areas, tax hikes in others, and spending reallocations, and then you chop it up and only the tax cuts go through then you've got a problem. Other than that, I like this bill.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

tax cut should be separate bills

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

On that I'm going to disagree; if you want to cut federal taxes (considering how low they are already) then it lands on you to figure out where you're going to make up the extra revenue from. Thus, we shouldn't be floating tax cuts by themselves, but rather revenue-neutral or revenue-positive bills that balance whatever tax cuts you want to make with a mix of hikes elsewhere and certain limited spending cuts so we don't go bankrupt, and then those bills should stand or fall based on the merit of the overall proposal and not who wants to get out of paying taxes.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

except some will get exempt from paying taxes

I understand the need to budget based on tax revenue

It's just a bit of a knot

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

My thoughts exactly!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28261) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Thanks.

Issues are what is important. I am trying to promote that recognition.

Then to get others not only to participate but then also forward/circulate.

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Of course the bi-party thing is all you care about.......why lie here when you've made it very clear so many times in other posts.

DC needs to be made much larger, more powerful, and wealthier. I do not lack reading comprehension and certainly know that many here, including you, constantly promote ideas to do so and are rabidly against even taking a file to DC's fangs.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28261) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

As your name suggests - You GumbyDamnit live in a fantasy world.

If there is not much in the way of selection of petitions that I have provided in links to this site it is due to your not looking.

If it is republican stuff you are looking for , for me to have provided, perhaps there is not much here as they have not offered much.

Hard to supply what does not exist.

Gumbo.

[+] -5 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Of course bi-party/sexual addict boy, DKAtoday is the non-fantasy name on your abstract and collaterlized birth certificate, owned chattel.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28261) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Was that garbled spew supposed to mean something?

It must be hard for you to translate thought from your fantasy world and present something coherent to reality.


-1 points by GumbyDamnit (5) 1 minute ago

Of course bi-party/sexual addict boy, DKAtoday is the non-fantasy name on your abstract and collaterlized birth certificate, owned chattel. ↥like ↧dislike reply permalink

[-] 4 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

paul has some good ideas but unfortunately his bad ideas far out weigh the good

[-] -3 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

You can't read or understand, OWS is certain Ron Paul (R) is a lunatic nut job, therefore there is NOTHING good about him. You cannot be for ANYTHING Ron Paul, or any (R) is for.......

[-] 3 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Downsize DC seems to have some very good and clean ideas. I'm not sure this wording is optimal but it's a long-overdue issue and something is way, way better than nothing. Also, that Downsize DC supports Wikileaks seems to be an indicator that this isn't astroturfing. I'm going to look into them more but so far, so good.

[-] -3 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Oh but no.... DC just isn't powerful enough to suit most who want much bigger government stuck up their, and everyone's asses and even total control of all breathing.

[-] 2 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Yes, I can't wait to regulate your breathing. It's exactly the kind of micromanagement that makes life worth living. Dontcha think?

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

I'll admit it is a good bill, and Ron Paul makes a good house member, just not a good president. lol.

[-] -3 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Oh you're bad wrong, there is simply no such thing as anything good about anyone having an "R" remotely affiliated with their name. Can you not read what the forum gods/puppets here write?

You'd have to be a stupid (D) to not know know this is a trick, somehow it has to be.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Your American sarcasm is top notch. It resonates even over the inter webs. I'm not a party hack. It is just that Republicans have not done much for the nation as a whole since George H W Bush. Maybe if they continue writing bills like this one they can start getting new recruits.

[-] -1 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

I'm completely opposed to the bi-party system, especially D's and R's.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

I understand it is garbage, but it is the only system we have. You know, refusing to participate in the system only hurts you. I don't know how well you know history, and what transpired right before the Korean war, but Russia and the world learned you can't boycott a system no matter how apposed you are to the outcomes.

[-] 0 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Well for most that may hold somewhat true, but, some of us know who we are and how many systems there are to either boycott or support.

Participating in a known corrupt and fraudulent system, and giving implied consent by casting your condoning vote, is far worse that deferring.

It should be obvious that DC's government should be denied any and all consent. Now how do you go about doing that?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

If you like Ron, google "ayn rand william hickman" which is irrelevant to what seems like a good idea at this link

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Mr. P = trickbag personified.

Hard to believe they're back again, or maybe they never left........:)

[-] -1 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Don't worry about what I like and I've zero interest in remotely considering anything typed by a DNC hack like yourself.

Now you know good and well if any R has anything to do with any piece of legislation, it has to be a trick, especially Ron Paul.

Independents put your boy in office and will vote him out, even if that means being stuck with another R elitist.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

the trick is ron has no clout so can represent issues

that the republicans won't support anyway.

So the republican's can play lip service

[-] -1 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Guess what, the Dems will seldom support those issues either.....

just like they won't support this one or it would have happened years ago.

They are all the same and in cahoots.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Definition of CAHOOT : partnership, league —usually used in plural <they're in cahoots>

Origin of CAHOOT perhaps from French cahute cabin, hut First Known Use: 1829

yes, they do work with each other

[-] 0 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

More accurate, they are partners in the same league with all the most fraudulent paper magicians and money changers.

Did you learn about the three US's?

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

There's plenty of areas where I agree with Ron Paul. I mean, in a basic sense, all anarchists are libertarians, but where many OWS supporters depart from the ideology of Ron Paul, is we acknowledge that private power can become just as problematic as government power. Indeed, the concept of "power" represents a concession to pure liberty. Maybe it was a compromise humans made out of expediency, but if we acknowledge that liberty is good, then anything less than pure liberty is at maximum second best.

[-] 0 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Obama will not be re-elected.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Who was talking about Obama? I mean, it's fantastic that you have a crystal ball you're so confident in, but why are responding to my post, which didn't say a word about Obama? :)

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

So it's Mr. Flipflop for you then?

[-] -1 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Obama will not be re-elected, eat shit DNC shill.

Fool, I never voted for him and I know plenty that never will again. He's out and the only way he'll have a chance to stay in will be by attempting to declare official martial law per his nazi exec order.

So one flipflopper has slightly whiter skin than the other, the current one is well beyond out of control and lied about everything he said he would do.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Feeling a bit testy today gumby?

Did Pokey run away again?

Poor gumby. Stuck with Mr. Flipflop.

And that used to be one of the (R)epelican't memes about Dems.

Along with being weak militarily.

What goes around, comes around.

Flipping and Flopping like a (R)epelican't out of air.

[-] -2 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Such a lame, pale and monochromatic moron with no creativity, or even usefulness. I bet it has sucked to be you every day of your life.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Sorry to disappoint you, but no it doesn't suck to be me.

In fact, it's pretty nice. You on the other hand?

All your negativity, will have an effect.

All that goose stepping with your cohorts? That shit is hard on your knees.

It shows in your painful posts.

[-] -2 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Oh yeah, it has always sucked to be you.

A pathetic and mindless UAW career leading to your current internet addiction and posting during all of your waking hours as a pitiful DNC troll.

I'm sure you think you are admired and have quite the life. We both know neither is true.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

That was the most pathetic attempt at an insult I've ever heard.

You must really miss pokey............:(

now all you have left, is voting for Mr. Flipflop, that does all the things you used to hate about Dems.

That makes your life pathetic.

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Some other common sense ideas.

I particularly like #8 - Members should make no pledge but the pledge of allegiance and their formal oath of office.

Also, #5 is kind of a no brainer - Make Members Come to Work.

11 - Congressional party leaders should form a bipartisan congressional leadership committee to discuss legislative agendas and substantive solutions. - Gee, I thought that was their job. But what do I know??

http://nolabels.org/

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

Just posted it on twitter, fantastic find homie.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

a line item veto puts a lot of power in the presidents hands

Stop Congressional leaders from passing unwanted laws by attaching them to popular, but unrelated, bills.

Require each bill to be about ONLY one subject, and to stand or fall entirely on its own merits.

Make it easier for your elected officials to represent you by allowing them to vote on specific proposals, instead of on groups of bills containing divergent measures.

Create a de facto "line item veto" by putting only one measure under the President's pen at any one time.

Give you expanded influence by making bad legislation more vulnerable to public opposition.

the rest I agree with it

in fact, a line item veto wont be necessary if the other rules are followed

[-] -2 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Oh, I simply disagree. The People clearly lack representation and the current system will never give them what they lack.

When The People have NO immediate trumping power over a wrong and/or renegade congress/POTUS, but to wait until the next election.... the failures will only continuing accruing.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

erk?

what failures?

[-] -3 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

there are no failures, everything is just fine

you people just need to get SCOTUS seated correctly.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

awe yes the fine print and loopholes

laws should not be so long that those ruled by them can not understand them

[-] -2 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

So everyone must earn a law degree and various Phd's?

That must be what you are saying and even that wouldn't fix the raping of the people by artful use of English which is clearly evidenced by the fact that SCOTUS and myriads of legal "experts" disagree over interpretations.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

don't know the acronym

[-] 0 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

Supreme Court of the us......

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

hm

US Supreme Court

[-] 0 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

http://www.supremecourt.gov/

Yes, the one you mention is the article III court, not article IV.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

what

there's two court systems ?

[-] 0 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/index.htm

You may find chapter four, all or none of this interesting.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

He's just another (R). That should be clear enough.

[-] -2 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

bad bill

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Bad politician.

[-] -1 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

OF COURSE! Horrible politician and human being even though if he had a "D" by his name, you'd support and defend anything he did.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

If's??

That's all you have is if's?

What if pigs could fly?

[-] 3 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

well, i've seen a lot of police helicopters..... ; )

[-] -3 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

You must fervently campaign against any bill supported by Ron Paul, otherwise, you're just a pretend "D".

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Oh gumby.

Your response had nothing to do with the comment and made only assumptions.

Mr. P is just one more phony among many. He is an (R).

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

weird

I like the one subject at a time for congressional law

the challenge is to determine the scope of a particular subject addressed

I doubt the bill has the majority of republican support

so I wouldn't call it a republican bill

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Weird is a good description of the enigmatic Mr. P.

A subject that's been done to death around here, and I'd rather not get back into it..

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

hardly

maybe i can find a forum to examine congressional law

[-] -1 points by jimmycrackerson (940) from Blackfoot, ID 2 years ago

I'm voting for Ron Paul. 'Cause who the hell else would I vote for? Seriously?

[-] -2 points by GumbyDamnit (36) 2 years ago

He's the closest that even the anarchist will be offered to empower the people by pruning the overloaded and intrusive branches of DC's tyrannical machine.