Anyone who doesn't understand why a majority party holds all the cards in the US congress need only research what happened today with HR 3893 to realize how unfair the situation is if it is abused. Just interested in what anyone has to say about this naked abuse of power. Heck I'd even be willing to discuss the resolution itself.

I believe you are going to have to educate us a little Ironhorse. Is Resolution 3893 the energy bill that was passed today?

I'm with Doody, what's the scoop?

I found this site with the text of the resolution:
http://www.cq.com/corp/flatfiles/edi...-SAPHR3893.pdf

No problem. Here's a copy of the email I sent off to my representative, the Honorable Jim Ryun. It should shed some light. I'll pull up a link to the actual resolution and comments about it also.

To the Honorable Jim Ryun,

I was at first confused and then shocked at what I watched on C-SPAN this afternoon. I occasionally flip past that channel and try to figure out what is being voted on. This afternoon I caught the end of debate on HR-3893 and what was slated to be a 5 minute vote on the issue. It was immediately apparent that the vote was close, so I sat and watched. I was intrigued to see that while the majority of the votes fell along party lines, more republicans voted nay than democrats voted yea and after the voting time expired, the resolution was voted down.

Then I noticed some more votes being placed, which is fairly normal from what I've seen, but I also noticed that elected officials began to call for the vote to be closed and they were continually put down or ignored by the chair. I coached debate at the high school level and taught parlaimentary procedure, so I understand that process fairly well. When votes suddenly began changing, my confusion turned to shock as I realized that pressure was being applied to elected officials who had voted their conscience and constituence to change their votes along party lines.

Eventually, the voting shifted to a 1 vote difference, 210 for, 212 against. Then, after repeated attempts to close the vote over a half hour after the vote should have closed, the votes shifted to a tie and to a 1 vote difference in favor. At that point, the chair called the vote closed, announced passage of the resolution, and then moved straight into a vote on honoring Simon Wiesenthal, effectively quelling any discussion without dishonoring that great person.

What use is my vote in an election if my elected officials are coerced to change their heartfelt and considered vote to pass legislation that is abhorent to folks like me? This is the government that I'm supposed to trust with the welfare of my children and my parents? What a disgrace!


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-3893
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...otehouse_x.htm

The whole voting thing was part of that energy refinery bill

The vote, which was supposed to be taken in five minutes, lasted more than 40 minutes as GOP leaders searched for the last two votes they needed to get the bill approved. They buttonholed lawmakers for last-minute lobbying as Democrats complained loudly that the vote should be closed. Finally two GOP lawmakers switched from "no" to "yes," giving the bill's supporters the margin of victory.

for all who wany more info on this. Go to

GOOGLE NEWS

for more info. I will read more before I say anything. From the first look. it seems real fishy to me.

Doody

Parlaimentary procedure doesn't limit the time of a vote, it simply sets a minimum amount of time that a vote must be open. The speaker of the house or acting speaker is given latitude to determine when, after that minumum period, all representatives who wish to vote have voted. Speaker Jim Wright actually started the current trend of holding votes open to ensure enough votes for passage when he held a vote open for over 20 minutes. During the past decade, however, the republican majority has developed a disturbing trend of holding votes open while whips cajole members who have already voted against the party line to actually change their votes. No votes are recorded until the vote is announced closed, so there is never any record of who changed his/her vote unless someone on the floor personally records it.

This whole process shows how entrenched party politics and career politicians have grown.

Originally Posted by ironhorseredleg

Parlaimentary procedure doesn't limit the time of a vote, it simply sets a minimum amount of time that a vote must be open. The speaker of the house or acting speaker is given latitude to determine when, after that minumum period, all representatives who wish to vote have voted. Speaker Jim Wright actually started the current trend of holding votes open to ensure enough votes for passage when he held a vote open for over 20 minutes. During the past decade, however, the republican majority has developed a disturbing trend of holding votes open while whips cajole members who have already voted against the party line to actually change their votes. No votes are recorded until the vote is announced closed, so there is never any record of who changed his/her vote unless someone on the floor personally records it.

This whole process shows how entrenched party politics and career politicians have grown.

The process won't change with a party change. We elect Representatives to go to the floor and change minds about a bill they think is right. That won't change. If we don't like the bill, we can call, write, or email our Repsresentatives and at least let them know that there is support or not.
You did the right thing by contacting your Representstive. If they know that people are watching, maybe they'll think a little longer before voting or changing their vote. The American Legion publishes legislation items for the members to call or write if they object. I send emails almost constantly to my Senators and Representatives.