Congress Slips Controversial Measures into Spending Bill

[1979Shocker]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/sneak-attack-congress-slips-controversial-measures-spending-bill-n265391

You've heard of 5:00 pm ET news dumps on a Friday, right? Well, on Tuesday night we saw what amounted to a Lame-Duck Congress news dump: As the political world was busy flipping through the pages of the graphic and headline-grabbing Senate Intelligence Committee report on Bush Era torture practices, Congress snuck in two measures to its must-pass spending bill -- all without formal debate. The first was a rider that essentially overturns the District of Columbia's ballot initiative legalizing marijuana, which passed by a more than 2-to-1 margin last month. (Remember, D.C. doesn't even have elected House or Senate members.) The second measure Congress snuck into the spending the [sic] bill will be more galling to some, because it amounts of [sic] a pay raise for the two unpopular political parties: It raises the $32,400 maximum that donors could give the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee to a whopping $324,000 per year, gutting what's left of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law. The Washington Post says this was inserted on page 1,599 of a 1,603-page bill (!!!). These two measures -- and probably more like them -- will become law because they were jammed into a must-pass spending bill to keep the government open. Remember all the grumbling about transparency? All the grumbling about gigantic bills that many members of Congress never read? Given that, what happened last night was mind blowing.

[wu_shizzle]

Weed and Political Donations? I wonder what's in there that would never get reported on?

[Kung Wu]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/firs...g-bill-n265391

Respectfully, your alarmist post was a link to one of the most boring alarmist blog posts ever linked to on the political forum ... however, we should all be very concerned about this ...

http://www.infowars.com/congress-passes-bill-which-grants-unlimited-access-to-communications-of-every-american/

[MoValley John]

I just want to see a chicken in every pot.

[SHOXJOCK]

I just want to see a chicken in every pot.

I just want a little pot in every chicken.

[RoyalShock]

I just want a chic.

[shocka khan]

In the interest of being 'fair and balanced' on this board, what the republicans have done is really nothing more than what Obama did during his tenure as president.

Have you seen any banksters in jail? No. Why? Because our AG, Eric Holder, was more interested in pursuing voting rights lawsuits than prosecuting banksters.

And how about the Treasury undersecretary that Obama appointed? Worked on inversions for an investment bank. More gifts to corporate America while we rape, burn and pillage the middle class.

Probably the most egregious thing the republicans put into the bill was allowing federal money to be used in the bank casino (banks can now use FDIC-guaranteed money to invest in derivatives). Seeing that unregulated derivative investment was a prime driver in the great recession, I would say that this was not a particularly bright thing to do. Sort of like giving a 4 year old a loaded gun with the safety off and one chambered. Banks ought to be barred from investing in derivatives with the money that you and I as taxpayers would have to cough up to bail them out.

And the most egregious part of it was the provisions were written pretty much word-for-word by Citi lobbyists.

But back to my point, BOTH political parties seem to excuse and cover up for bad behavior in the banking system, so why single out the republicans. In my mind, they're no different than democrats. Neither has the stomach to take the banking lobby on NOR to prosecute the characters who almost brought our banking system down.

[shocka khan]

Respectfully, your alarmist post was a link to one of the most boring alarmist blog posts ever linked to on the political forum ... however, we should all be very concerned about this ...

http://www.infowars.com/congress-pas...very-american/

Two comments:
1) Alex Jones is a crank, he has the IQ of a box turtle. His opinions and delivery put him in the 'Theater of the absurd hall of fame'.
2) I would be very careful about being so dismissive regarding the banking provisions. In my mind, better to have a little money and a job and have government goof balls sifting through way more data than they can analyze (even with the big data tools they have) than to have clever bankers betting money they don't have at the casino and when the music stops having no money AND no job because the banking system melted down.

Here's a little fact: AIG was bailed out because they were counterparty on $31 billion of derivatives with Goldman Sachs and if they want down, GS went down too. All of the players, for both Bush and Obama (I'm talking Fed Chairmen and Secretaries of the Treasury) were Goldman alums.

Under this legislation, if it implodes tomorrow, the banks are guaranteed a tax payer bailout because they can now use FDIC insured funds for their derivative investments.