Senate Republicans Block Jobs Bill for Veterans

[Diving Mullah]

I love the Republicans in the house and Senate. It must be very liberating to be devoid all sense of compassion, morality, decency, sympathy and patriotism. I mean to Shait on Veterans few months before the election is whole new ball game. But of course Veterans are part of the 47% so according to Romney's Doctrine they matter not.

The Republican Party has made 'jobs' the central them of their party and Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, but today they blocked a vote on a veterans jobs bill with a filibuster in the Senate.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) led the filibuster against the the bill, claiming that the nation’s debt was more important than helping U.S. veterans get jobs,
5 Republicans voted to proceed, but the Democrats were two votes short of the 60 required to move the bill to a vote.

Ramsay Sulayman, of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, told The Guardian: “A very small group of people that are standing for principle to block the bill from even coming to a vote. That’s what we object to. If people say ‘We don’t like the bill’ and stand up and get up and vote and go on the record … that is different. It’s sad to see a few people holding a bill to hostage."

Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, who has been seeking amendments on bills that would cut off funding to Egypt and to Pakistan until Pakistan freed Shakil Afridi, the doctor who helped the United States find Osama bin Laden.

Only republican Senators have the gaul to look into eyes of Veterans and thank them for their service and then Shait all over them when their backs are turned.

That is why I love the republican party

Diving Mullah

 

[Risky Thicket]

This really angers me. I heard about this on the radio driving home.

First, it's just plain wrong. We all know men and women who have given so damned much to America, many tours, wives and families going through untold sacrifice and when they finally return home the GOP says, "**** you very much." That's one way to increase retention. Send them a message that if they get out their chances of finding good work are jacksquat.

Second, the way the GOP is going about it is absolutely inexcusable. If they want to screw over America's best, they should stand up and say so one by one so everyone knows who they are.

 

[Einzige]

I'm not opposed to this in principle. I dislike the way we treat soldiers as a privileged class; I think that there's a lot of pork that could be cut out of military benefits without harming the overall quality of service.

Politically, though, this is an incredibly dumb move on the part of the GOP. Obama is already relatively popular among soldiers - moreso than his two immediate Democratic predecessors, at least - and, outside of the small, vocal conservative contingent in the military, this isn't going to go over very well. It'll be spun, however wrongly, as unpatriotic.

 

[Kr1ll1n]

Did you bother to actually read the bill?
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s3429pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s3429pcs.pdf

Basically, 2 pages in, you get to the nitty gritty. It's a bill that says we will award grants to the following entities (all those listed are managed by state and/or federal government) if they employ a veteran.
I'm sorry, but that isn't a jobs bill. If you are ex-military and can't even get a job from the government without someone paying for it out of the tax-payer's pocket, than you should be looking into a mirror.

Don't get me wrong, our veterans deserve a ton more than what we give them. The federal government owns enough property that if we were to quit the game of nation building, and only engage in wars that require us to act in defense, they could provide each veteran their own plot of land, tax-free, once they have served. The veterans should also be entitled to a zero to reduced cost version of the Congressional medical plan.

 

[beerftw]

just read atleast half the bill,and its an absolute joke.it ives grants to local police and firefighters to hire veterans,even though the police and firefighters already hire veterans first by preferance and law.the other 2 jobs it grants money to are cemetaries who hire veterans for grounds maintanance,and restoration of historical monuments.its such a great jobs bill itpays money to cemetaries to hire vets at minimum wage to mow lawns,and pays to have veterans assistant programs to go next veterans assistance programs,that already existed.

and then part of the bill includes building facilities to house computers with internet for vets to do job searches,problem is both the uso and vfw do that already,as well as many va centers.

Text of S.3457 as Placed on Calendar Senate: Veterans Jobs Corps Act of 2012 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress

 

[Einzige]

Don't get me wrong, our veterans deserve a ton more than what we give them. The federal government owns enough property that if we were to quit the game of nation building, and only engage in wars that require us to act in defense, they could provide each veteran their own plot of land, tax-free, once they have served. The veterans should also be entitled to a zero to reduced cost version of the Congressional medical plan.

This is, frankly, an awful idea. The last time we saw such a Federally mandated redistribution of land was the Homestead Act under Lincoln, and there's a lot of evidence to suggest that the mishandled way the government went about distributing the land was a major contributor to the Dust Bowl some decades later.

 

[Kr1ll1n]

This is, frankly, an awful idea. The last time we saw such a Federally mandated redistribution of land was the Homestead Act under Lincoln, and there's a lot of evidence to suggest that the mishandled way the government went about distributing the land was a major contributor to the Dust Bowl some decades later.

It's not redistribution. The Fed already owns it. Currently, it is sitting dormant. And besides that, the veteran's could place it on the market if they so chose and take the cash.

 

[Einzige]

It's not redistribution. The Fed already owns it. Currently, it is sitting dormant. And besides that, the veteran's could place it on the market if they so chose and take the cash.

Anything that transfers ownership from one person to another is redistribution; in this case, you're redistributing it from taxpayers to private individuals.

I'd favor a fully monetarized scheme, in which individuals pay market value for the land. But simply handing it out willy-nilly is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Kr1ll1n]

Anything that transfers ownership from one person to another is redistribution; in this case, you're redistributing it from taxpayers to private individuals.

I'd favor a fully monetarized scheme, in which individuals pay market value for the land. But simply handing it out willy-nilly is a recipe for disaster.

Then, as taxpayers, let's go drive up and check it out. we own it, right?

Wanna guess how quickly we would be arrested for trespassing on it?

291 - Federal Lands in the US | Strange Maps | Big Think

The United States government has direct ownership of almost 650 million acres of land (2.63 million square kilometers) – nearly 30% of its total territory.

Try to remain intellectually honest about this. I am not talking about land that they are actively using. Beyond that, is the Federal Government paying property taxes on it? to whom?
Currently, our definition of ownership of land comes with it the requirement that a property tax is paid to the controlling state. I highly doubt they are doing that.

 

[lizzie]

Ummm, revenue bills are supposed to start in the house, not the senate. I'm thinking this was just a political ploy intended to make Republicans look like jerks during an election year.

 

[Keridan]

Ummm, revenue bills are supposed to start in the house, not the senate. I'm thinking this was just a political ploy intended to make Republicans look like jerks during an election year.

This is exactly what it was. They made an absurd bill that had to be blocked and called it a veteran's jobs bill (along the same idiotic line that Obamacare is actually known as Affordable Care Act) and then put it up for a vote. They knew it had to be blocked and would look good politically.

At the same time, dozens and dozens of republican jobs bills are ignored and not put up for vote because it doesn't fit the ridiculous narrative of the "party of no".

It may be a political game, but the Democrats sure won a deceptive ... err ... decisive point today.

 

[StillBallin75]

This is exactly what it was. They made an absurd bill that had to be blocked and called it a veteran's jobs bill (along the same idiotic line that Obamacare is actually known as Affordable Care Act) and then put it up for a vote. They knew it had to be blocked and would look good politically.

At the same time, dozens and dozens of republican jobs bills are ignored and not put up for vote because it doesn't fit the ridiculous narrative of the "party of no".

It may be a political game, but the Democrats sure won a deceptive ... err ... decisive point today.

Republicans are responsible for "jobs bills" that have been just as idiotic that they know have no chance of passing, and Congressional GOP leaders have continued whining about how Democrats have blocked all their proposals, when in fact their ideas are what I like to call "weaksauce." In other words, GOP jobs legislation is akin to pouring ketchup onto a bowl of pasta because you don't have any real tomato sauce.

 

[Keridan]

Republicans are responsible for "jobs bills" that have been just as idiotic that they know have no chance of passing, and Congressional GOP leaders have continued whining about how Democrats have blocked all their proposals, when in fact their ideas are what I like to call "weaksauce." In other words, GOP jobs legislation is akin to pouring ketchup onto a bowl of pasta because you don't have any real tomato sauce.

The jobs bills are largely stupid. However, they are what those republicans got into office by promising to put in. If they are so weak, why not put them up for a vote? I mean, at least let the debates hit the floor. A small minority of the bills make sense and could make a difference.

If the goal was to create jobs, why not actually discuss the jobs proposals being put forth? The fact that they don't even allow it for vote and keep pretending there were no ideas even put forth is very telling. Put them up and vote them down. In the process, explain why.

I'm just not a fan of deceptive tactics ... from either party.

 

[cpwill]

Ummm, revenue bills are supposed to start in the house, not the senate. I'm thinking this was just a political ploy intended to make Republicans look like jerks during an election year.

what?!? surely you can't think harry reid would stoop so low!?!