Remember Camaraderie and Decorum?

They finally got cloture on the Agriculture appropriations bill. The usual suspects voted against it. No one much cares. The only reason I even mention it is because the cloture vote was preceded by votes on 14 amendments over four days, most of them stupid grandstanding amendments intended to make Democrats look bad rather than to fix any problems with the Agriculture bill. You can view the sad saga here. It was definitely not a high moment for the U.S. Senate. Yet, The Hill writes it up as a “nobel experiment,” and Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid say it made them feel nostalgic for the good old days when the Senate actually functioned. What a couple of dicks!!

All that happened is that Harry Reid allowed an open rule, meaning senators had the right to bring as many amendments as they wanted to. And so they brought them. Tom Coburn brought three. One of them even passed. I love how Coburn crafts his statements of purpose. I just love it. He says his amendment will “end lending schemes that force taxpayers to repay the loans of delinquent developers and bailout failed or poorly planned local projects.” Who wants to vote against that? But what’s his amendment actually do?

SA 796. Mr. COBURN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2112, making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Sec. __. A person or entity that receives a Federal loan using amounts made available under division A, division B, or division C of this Act may not repay the loan using a Federal grant or other award funded with amounts made available under division A, division B, or division C of this Act; Provided further, a grant or other award funded with amounts made available under division A, division B, or division C of this Act may not be used to repay a Federal loan.

The jackass doesn’t even have a section in mind for this amendment. And it doesn’t do anything. Money is fungible. You can’t tell me that I can’t pay off a federal loan with a federal grant unless I’m not allowed to have both a loan and grant at the same time. But he wasted a ton of everybody’s time by introducing this ridiculous amendment, and then he scared 73 senators into voting for it.

Yeah, Mr. Reid and Mr. McConnell, pat yourselves on the back. It’s just like the good old days!

8 Comments

BooMan on October 21, 2011 at 10:53 pm

Now, more than ever, we need the Jedi.

Quaker in a Basement on October 21, 2011 at 10:55 pm

As long as Reid is teeing up jobs bills for the GOP to knock down, how about a jobs program for US service men and women returning from Iraq.

Let’s see the GOP vote that one down.

BooMan on October 21, 2011 at 10:59 pm

See this:

MICHELLE OBAMA:…So, for all of you troops, veterans, and military spouses here today, we’re proud of you, and we want people to know that you have so many skills that are just second nature to all of you — things like time management, organization, people skills, complex decision-making, and so many other incredible skills.

And that is really the reason why we’re here today — because those are precisely the skills that we need in workplaces across America. But the truth is that sometimes employers may not always know about all that you have to offer. They might have trouble understanding a military resume. Or they might see a spouse who’s lived in five cities in seven years as a red flag rather than a reality of military life.

But today, I am proud to announce that the American Logistics Association has said they’re going to step up and do something about that. So today they’re committing to hiring 25,000 veterans and military spouses in the next two years. (Applause.) They do not want to miss out on your potential. They want America’s businesses to have the best, most talented, most hardworking employees around.

Now, this announcement is a huge deal — which is why the President is here. It’s huge enough for you to even be involved. (Laughter.) This commitment includes 270 companies of all shapes and sizes, which makes this the largest coordinated effort by the private sector to hire veterans that we’ve seen in years. (Applause.) And this commitment puts us a quarter of the way toward reaching the President’s challenge to the private sector to hire or train 100,000 vets and military spouses by the end of 2013. (Applause.)

link

Phil Perspective on October 21, 2011 at 11:36 pm

Is this even going to become law? Or are they going to have to hash crap out with the drunk(Orange Julius) and the coward(Cantor)?

BooMan on October 22, 2011 at 1:35 am

will it even matter if it does?
- The Voice In The Wilderness on October 22, 2011 at 9:12 am
  
  I think this is a more serious amendment than you think. It says that you cannot pay back a federal loan unless you can prove that you had sufficient funds outside of federal sources to do so. So if you are rich, no problem. And yes, I agree with the fungibility of money. i.e. you have a $100K loan and a $120K grant and $299K in non-federal oil revenue. No problem paying back. But if you had a $100K loan and a $120K grant and no outside revenue, the amendment bars you from paying back, so the feds confiscate whatever you got that loan for.
  - BooMan on October 22, 2011 at 10:17 am
    
    I doubt it. It has no mechanism for arbitrating such disputes. It’s empty language. Some lawyers at Agriculture will have to figure what it means for grants. Probably, it means nothing beyond that you will not get a grant if its purpose is specifically to pay off a loan.

Teacher Toni on October 22, 2011 at 9:08 am

It’s a ridiculous waste of time as most federal grants have strict perimeters as to how the grant money can be spent and the grant proposal must be very specific in how the money will be used. After the grant is awarded, there is a lengthy reporting process and usual an audit once a year. That’s generally how it works for Title I funding for schools.

BooMan on October 21, 2011 at 10:53 pm

Now, more than ever, we need the Jedi.
Quaker in a Basement on October 21, 2011 at 10:55 pm

As long as Reid is teeing up jobs bills for the GOP to knock down, how about a jobs program for US service men and women returning from Iraq.

Let’s see the GOP vote that one down.
- BooMan on October 21, 2011 at 10:59 pm
  
  See this:
  
  MICHELLE OBAMA:…So, for all of you troops, veterans, and military spouses here today, we’re proud of you, and we want people to know that you have so many skills that are just second nature to all of you — things like time management, organization, people skills, complex decision-making, and so many other incredible skills.
  
  And that is really the reason why we’re here today — because those are precisely the skills that we need in workplaces across America. But the truth is that sometimes employers may not always know about all that you have to offer. They might have trouble understanding a military resume. Or they might see a spouse who’s lived in five cities in seven years as a red flag rather than a reality of military life.
  
  But today, I am proud to announce that the American Logistics Association has said they’re going to step up and do something about that. So today they’re committing to hiring 25,000 veterans and military spouses in the next two years. (Applause.) They do not want to miss out on your potential. They want America’s businesses to have the best, most talented, most hardworking employees around.
  
  Now, this announcement is a huge deal — which is why the President is here. It’s huge enough for you to even be involved. (Laughter.) This commitment includes 270 companies of all shapes and sizes, which makes this the largest coordinated effort by the private sector to hire veterans that we’ve seen in years. (Applause.) And this commitment puts us a quarter of the way toward reaching the President’s challenge to the private sector to hire or train 100,000 vets and military spouses by the end of 2013. (Applause.)
  
Phil Perspective on October 21, 2011 at 11:36 pm

Is this even going to become law? Or are they going to have to hash crap out with the drunk(Orange Julius) and the coward(Cantor)?
- BooMan on October 22, 2011 at 1:35 am
  
  will it even matter if it does?
  - The Voice In The Wilderness on October 22, 2011 at 9:12 am
    
    I think this is a more serious amendment than you think. It says that you cannot pay back a federal loan unless you can prove that you had sufficient funds outside of federal sources to do so. So if you are rich, no problem. And yes, I agree with the fungibility of money. i.e. you have a $100K loan and a $120K grant and $299K in non-federal oil revenue. No problem paying back. But if you had a $100K loan and a $120K grant and no outside revenue, the amendment bars you from paying back, so the feds confiscate whatever you got that loan for.
    - BooMan on October 22, 2011 at 10:17 am
      
      I doubt it. It has no mechanism for arbitrating such disputes. It’s empty language. Some lawyers at Agriculture will have to figure what it means for grants. Probably, it means nothing beyond that you will not get a grant if its purpose is specifically to pay off a loan.
Teacher Toni on October 22, 2011 at 9:08 am

It’s a ridiculous waste of time as most federal grants have strict perimeters as to how the grant money can be spent and the grant proposal must be very specific in how the money will be used. After the grant is awarded, there is a lengthy reporting process and usual an audit once a year. That’s generally how it works for Title I funding for schools.

Remember Camaraderie and Decorum?

About The Author

BooMan

8 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments