Losing Gracefully in the US Senate
Reuters reports that aides to Senate Republican leader Bill Frist say he is still trying to find a way to pass a bill to outlaw most forms of Internet gambling, but offered no guarantee that a deal could be struck before lawmakers recess at the end of September.
The report said Frist would like to bring up the bill under unanimous consent. Under this process, leaders from both parties agree to bring a bill to a vote on the Senate floor.
My own opinion is that if Frist is looking for unanimous consent as a condition under which he will bring this bill to the Senate floor, he is essentially doing so to give himself an out. He won’t get unanimous consent, and he knows it. And knowing it allows him to gracefully sidestep this bill while concentrating on other legislation he considers a priority.
It also allows him to bow out gracefully without ruffling the feathers of the bill’s sponsors. By failing to bring the bill to the Senate floor this way, he can take the loss without seeming like it’s a loss at all. Sounds very senatorial to me. What do you think?







4 Comments:
Ya hit the nail on the head. Frist wants this issue to go away as do more then a few Republican Senators.
Being a staunch Pubbie and an even stauncher Online Hold Em player this was done to appease the Religious Right of my party. Most Republicans who were signing on I bet did so just to keep them happy only to find that they were pissing off a whole new generation of Republican voters that they need to continue to expand the base.
Basically they were ready to steal the blinds only to find someone had a real hand.
OOOOOP's!
Been following it closely and doing my part Lou. Let's all hope you're correct and this thing flops.
Call your Senator Tuesday from 0900 to 1730 Eastern time!
1-800-289-1136 and be patched through to one of your two U.S. Senators in Washington D.C.
I'm not all that up on American politics, but if I'm reading it right - he's basically resigned himself to the fact that the bill isn't going to go through, so this is an effort more for show than anything else?
If so, it's nice to see that internet "geeks" have some clout in the political world. :)
There is a corridor that leads into an empty room.
The room is completely empty except for a lamp in one of the corners.
On the other side of the corridor are three switches.
You know that one of them turns on the lamp, the other two don't do anything.
You can play around with the switches turning each of them on and off as much as you like, then you can go into the room one time to check whether the lamp is on or off (there is a door so you can't know without entering the room).
Leaving the room, you have to know which of the 3 switches works and which 2 don't. The question is: How do you do it?
.
Post a Comment
<< Home