On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 09:18:14 -0400, Simpkins, Terry <Terry.Simpkins@MEAS-
SPEC.COM> wrote:

>Brice correctly (ain't it a shame) observes:
>
>"The pork goes in, or the bill does not get enough votes to pass."
>
>Whatever happened to being honorable and 'doing the right thing' for the
>country?

That mixes with politics like oil and water, or maybe sand and air.

>If we could just make a 'rule' that a bill can only address 1 thing.  If
>you want to add spending, it has to go on a separate piece
>of legislation all by itself.  At least we'd get visibility, and a vote
>would have to be taken on that single issue.  No room to hide and say 'I
>was voting on the bigger issue....'  (blah blah blah)

Can you say, 'unfunded mandates'?  There is no cure for this short of
a Balanced Budget CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, with very specific
unambiguous language stating what exceptions may be allowed (such
as wartime).

>
>Terry W. Simpkins
>office: +1 757-766-4278
>[log in to unmask]
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *