LibriumArcana.Games

Posted: **Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:15 pm**

So the generally less asinine of the two houses of congress began the rolling. There's a SHITTON of these things.

We'll start with those done already.

Murray(+3 Bill infrastructure): Exemption fails(It would add more spending without offsetting, and thus needs a supermajority to add to the bill.)
Coburn(Flush 246M for filmmakers): Passes.(I disagree; films might be the one thing we export at decent profits)
Mikulski(Deductions for certain kinds of vehicles. Relatively sure it's hybrids.): Passes on voice vote + exemption.
Boxer(Tax deductions for dividends and other corporate shennanigans): Exemption fails(DIE, CORPORATE SHILL, DIE.)
Vitter('To eliminate unnecessary spending.' Go on, guess how much of the spending is 'unnecessary' to the Lousiana hyper-Republican who decided to be the one dissenting vote on several of Obama's sec nominees.): Fails.(Go back to your whore!)
Isakon(Modify tax code for a deduction for first time home buyers. MIGHT be only for existing homes, to deal with the inventory glut.): Passes on Voice Vote(Glut bad, encouraging people to take blighted vacancies good!)
Cardin(Waive budget rules for DeMint amendment. DeMint amendment probably the one I posted earlier): Fails.(Suck it, 3.1T boy.)
McCain(Strip 'Buy American' preference text): Fails.(Shouldn't we stimulate, like, OUR economy first?)
Bunning(Stop the 1993 tax increase on SS payments. Wait, what? I don't pay taxes out of mine..): Failed.
Cornyn(Reduce tax on alll workers(NOT the payroll rollback already there)): Failed.
Inhofe(Five billion re-readiness for military with offsets. Wonder what program he wants to kill to add even more to the military budget): Failed.
McCain(Return rules that require deficit reduction and spending slashing upon two quarters of positive growth. Not full recovery, just the hint of it.): Failed.
Thune(THIS BILL CANNOT EXPAND GOVERNMENT, RAR!): Failed.

Things look extensive enough that Reid has struck the day-off on Monday and decreed they will all be back, bright eyed and bushy tailed, that morning.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:54 pm**

I loathe Barbara Boxer, but a corporate shill? Odd, that's not what I normally get from her.

McCain proposed his first amendment because Europe is up in arms over fears that we're going to become all protectionist, and are threatening to retaliate. It's not inherently a bad idea. His second one is a bad idea, but something of that sort should be considered then.

Could you explain what the Thune, Vitter, and Coburn amendments actually were? I can't figure it out from what you posted.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:44 pm**

Coburn: 246 million in tax credits for filmmakers was in the Senate draft. Coburn killed it off.

Thune: It's literally an amendment to prevent the stimulus from growing the size of government. Nothinig more.

Vitter.. Well, from the legalese. Here's what he wants to defund:

FBI CONSTRUCTION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of division A construction for Federal Bureau of Investigation under the heading ``Construction'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $400,000,000.

(5) NIST CONSTRUCTION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of division A for National Institute of Standards and Technology under the heading ``Construction of Research Facilities'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $357,000,000.

(6) COMMERCE HEADQUARTERS.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of division A for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the heading ``Departmental Management'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $34,000,000.

(7) DHS CONSOLIDATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VI of division A for Department of Homeland Security under the heading ``Office of the Undersecretary of Management'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $248,000,000.

(8) USDA MODERNIZATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title I of division A for Department of Agriculture under the heading ``Office of the Secretary'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $300,000,000.

(9) STATE DEPARTMENT TRAINING FACILITY.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title XI of division A for Administration of Foreign Affairs under the heading ``Diplomatic and Consular program'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $75,000,000.

(10) STATE DEPARTMENT CAPITAL INVESTMENT FUND.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title XI of division A for Administration of Foreign Affairs under the heading ``Capital Investment Fund'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $524,000,000.

(11) DC SEWER SYSTEM.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title V of division A for District of Columbia under the heading ``Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority'' and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $125,000,000.

(12) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of division A for Economic Development Administration under the heading ``Economic Development Assistance Programs'' , and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $150,000,000.

(13) AMTRAK.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title XII of division A for Federal Railroad Administration under the heading ``Supplemental Grants to the National Passenger Railroad Corporations'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $850,000,000.

(14) DOD HYBRID VEHICLES.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title III of division A for Procurement under the heading ``Defense Production Act Purchases'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $100,000,000.

(15) NASA CLIMATE CHANGE.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of division A for National Aeronautics and Space Administration under the heading ``Science'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $500,000,000.

(16) NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title XII of division A for Public Housing Capital Fund under the heading ``Neighborhood Stabilization Program'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $2,250,000,000.

(17) HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VII of division A for National Park Service under the heading ``Historic Preservation Fund'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $55,000,000.

(18) FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCE CONSTRUCTION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VII of division A for United States Fish and Wildlife Service under the heading ``Construction'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $60,000,000.

(b) Under Prioritized Spending That Should Be Budgeted for.--

(1) COMPARATIVE RESEARCH.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VIII of division A for Healthcare Research and Quality under the heading ``Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality'' may be available for comparative research, and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $700,000,000.

(2) HEALTH IT.--Title XIII for Health Information Technology shall be null and void and none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VII of division A for Information Technology under the heading ``Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology'' may be available for health information technology, and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $5,000,000,000.

(3) PANDEMIC FLU.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VIII of division A for pandemic influenza under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund'' may be available for pandemic flu and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $870,000,000.

(4) SMART GRID.--None of the funds made available in this Act for Smart Grid shall be made available.

(5) BROADBAND.--None of the funds appropriated or other made available in title II of division A for Broadband Technology Opportunities under the heading ``National Technology Opportunities Program'' may be available for broadband and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $9,000,000,000.

(6) HIGH-SPEED RAIL CORRIDOR PROGRAM.--None of the funds appropriated or made available in title XII of division A for the High-Speed Rail Corridor projects under the heading High-Speed Rail Corridor Program may be available for the high-speed rail corridor and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $2,000,000,000. Section 201 of title II of division A shall be null and void.

(7) PRISON SYSTEM AND COURTHOUSES.--None of the funds appropriated or made available in title II of division A for prison buildings and facilities under the heading Federal Prison System may be available for buildings and facilities and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $1,000,000,000.

(c) Under General Provisions.--

(1) DAVIS-BACON ACT NOT APPLICABLE.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provisions of subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Davis-Bacon Act) shall not apply to any construction projects carried out using amounts made available under this Act or the amendments made by this Act.

(2) PROHIBITED USES.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in this Act may be used for any casino or other gambling establishment, aquarium, zoo, golf course, swimming pool, or Mob Museum.

All of that is what he views as Unnecessary Spending. Why.. You'll have to ask him.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:41 pm**

Well I mean, whether or not those are necessary spending, I fail to see why any of the stimulus package money should be going to programs that plainly have nothing to do with economic stimulation.

Or was he suggesting existing money be taken away from those programs?

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:49 pm**

General Havoc wrote:Well I mean, whether or not those are necessary spending, I fail to see why any of the stimulus package money should be going to programs that plainly have nothing to do with economic stimulation.

Or was he suggesting existing money be taken away from those programs?

*Shrugs* Government spending which did nothing but build a large money statue will increase the GDP one-for-one, minimum. The argument that investing in all these programs is not part of 'economic recovery' requires one to pretend that this is not so. It might not produce recovery immediately, but this is like complaining the New Deal's investments continued to produce results decades later.

His amendment is purely stripping money from these provisions.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:59 pm**

I really am having trouble figuring out how a half billion dollars for the State Department's Capital Investment fund has anything to do with economic stimulus. Nor a quarter billion dollars for the "Office of the Undersecretary of Management" of the Department of Homeland Security.

Granted, some of these look like they may have some relation to economic growth, but this is an economic stimulus package. I don't agree with all of these restrictions (What in the hell is a "Mob Museum"?), but some of them seem to make perfect sense to me. The Stimulus Package is not supposed to be an excuse for senators to line up at the trough and balloon the deficit even further.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:23 pm**

How, exactly, is the USAID program not economic recovery? Or modernizing the US Dept Of Agriculture?

I have no idea what a mob museum is, but the flat and simple is that all of these make jobs and need suppliers.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:42 pm**

Excuse me, the USAID program is not economic recovery, and the specific program in question, the State Department Capital Investment Fund, goes towards building structures for the State Department in other countries. None of the money is spent domestically. And furthermore, I cited the Department of Homeland Security, not the Department of Agriculture.

Now I'm sure those things are important and all, but I do not see how either of the programs I pulled out of that list have the first thing to do with economic recovery. Just because a given program "makes jobs" does not make it a valid program to finance through the stimulus package. The infamous Bridge to Nowhere also "made jobs", but I would not cite it as the sort of thing we should have in this package. This is supposed to be a stimulus program, not a "let's throw money at anything we can think of" bill.

I understand that there's more to stimulating the economy than short-term spending, and many of these programs are things I agree with spending money on, but there are at least half a dozen programs on Senator Vitter's list that look suspiciously like pork-barrel waste to me, and it's perfectly legitimate to request that we axe some of those, and take a good long look at the rest.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:58 pm**

Yes, USAID does come from the Capital Investment Fund. Thirty seconds and the internet. It goes through government officials before building, which stimulates the US economy, it builds the stuff, which stimulates another nation(Which, as reality sharply informed the world, is tightly connected), and then there's a US State Department facility that needs personnel. Personnel for the State Department are not, in fact vat clones. Shocking but true.

Read the damn quoted text on the DHS/USDA. Or read any of the other peices and reports where they work hand-in-hand. The GAO specifically praised the efficiency of this partnership in protecting agriculture from disease and parasites.

Making and retaining jobs, modernizing industries and government to reduce waste, and R&D are all stimulative. Making jobs is specifically Obama's goal, along with laying down long-term investments in the country. I cannot fathom how producing jobs is not stimulative. Perhaps not optimal stimulus, but it takes a great deal of naivete to think something ideal can be passed when one party is going to categorically obstruct it and the other is infighting between Neo-Hooverites and people who've no idealogical conflict with the nonpartisan studies which all say spending is the best use of stimulative dollars.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:36 pm**

Just because spending is the best way to stimulate the economy does not mean that all spending is created equal. I cite, once again, the Bridge to Nowhere, which I'm sure did create some jobs. We do not have an infinite amount of money to spend here, and the assertion that it stimulates the US economy to pay contractors in other countries to build buildings using foreign jobs is, in my opinion, extremely thin. By that logic, the War in Iraq was a stimulus to the US economy. Surely there are better things to be spending that money on than the State Department Capital Investment Fund, particularly if the purpose of this package is to create American jobs.

You were the one who was arguing this morning that John McCain was in the wrong for proposing that we repeal the "Buy American" clause. I believe your words were "Shouldn't we stimulate, like, OUR economy first?"

And I read the damned quoted text on the USDA/DHS. It was as follows:

(7) DHS CONSOLIDATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VI of division A for Department of Homeland Security under the heading ``Office of the Undersecretary of Management'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $248,000,000.

(8) USDA MODERNIZATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title I of division A for Department of Agriculture under the heading ``Office of the Secretary'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $300,000,000.

The Office of the Undersecretary of Management for the DHS (again, 30 seconds on the internet)is responsible for budget, appropriations, expenditure of funds, accounting and finance; procurement; human resources and personnel; information technology systems; facilities, property, equipment, and other material resources. He has nothing to do as far as I can tell with liasons to the USDA or any other governmental organization. If I'm mis-reading this, please let me know, but it looks to me like DHS wanted new office furniature.

Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't spend money on these things. All I'm saying is that pathologically declaring any spending activity to be sacred and good is going to get us nowhere. We should be taking a long, hard look at where the money goes for these programs, not just throwing it at every half-brained idea that has a tenuous relationship to job creation. I agree with you, Nitram, that we need to spend money to make the economy recover. I do not agree that it therefore follows that any spending is therefore justified just because it involves spending.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:52 pm**

General Havoc wrote:Just because spending is the best way to stimulate the economy does not mean that all spending is created equal. I cite, once again, the Bridge to Nowhere, which I'm sure did create some jobs.

I repeat my earlier answer:

Perhaps not optimal stimulus, but it takes a great deal of naivete to think something ideal can be passed when one party is going to categorically obstruct it and the other is infighting between Neo-Hooverites and people who've no idealogical conflict with the nonpartisan studies which all say spending is the best use of stimulative dollars.

So your rebuttal to my assertion it's not the best stimulus is to harp on the fact it's not the best stimulus.

We do not have an infinite amount of money to spend here, and the assertion that it stimulates the US economy to pay contractors in other countries to build buildings using foreign jobs is, in my opinion, extremely thin. By that logic, the War in Iraq was a stimulus to the US economy. Surely there are better things to be spending that money on than the State Department Capital Investment Fund, particularly if the purpose of this package is to create American jobs.

Yes. There are. Amtrak. Food stamps. Unemployment benefits. State Aid. Infrastructure. What a good thing I already asserted it's not optimal stimulus.

You were the one who was arguing this morning that John McCain was in the wrong for proposing that we repeal the "Buy American" clause. I believe your words were "Shouldn't we stimulate, like, OUR economy first?"

Again, not ideal stimulus, but I already said this. It is time for you to take the strawman and put it away.

And I read the damned quoted text on the USDA/DHS. It was as follows:

(7) DHS CONSOLIDATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title VI of division A for Department of Homeland Security under the heading ``Office of the Undersecretary of Management'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $248,000,000.

(8) USDA MODERNIZATION.--None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title I of division A for Department of Agriculture under the heading ``Office of the Secretary'', and the amount made available under such heading is reduced by $300,000,000.
The Office of the Undersecretary of Management for the DHS (again, 30 seconds on the internet)is responsible for budget, appropriations, expenditure of funds, accounting and finance; procurement; human resources and personnel; information technology systems; facilities, property, equipment, and other material resources. He has nothing to do as far as I can tell with liasons to the USDA or any other governmental organization. If I'm mis-reading this, please let me know, but it looks to me like DHS wanted new office furniature.

The note on which section of the bill it affects.. 'USDA Modernization' is not a joke title. Note that the list of his duties would include modernizing equipment used in the partnership. There's other sections of the bill that deal with the procurement of furniture, and it's not terribly flexible.

Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't spend money on these things. All I'm saying is that pathologically declaring any spending activity to be sacred and good is going to get us nowhere. We should be taking a long, hard look at where the money goes for these programs, not just throwing it at every half-brained idea that has a tenuous relationship to job creation. I agree with you, Nitram, that we need to spend money to make the economy recover. I do not agree that it therefore follows that any spending is therefore justified just because it involves spending.

No, not all spending is justified. Large increases in military spending(As opposed to the planned 3% increase in DoD funding that Obama is onboard for), for example, did not prove useful for increasing the economy through the years it doubled recently.

Your argument seems to be that this stuff isn't ideal. But I already answered that.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:04 pm**

Well yes, Nitram, the point is that this stuff is not ideal. For the fourth time, I'm not objecting to the stimulus plan, I just want it to be more ideal than it is. And I think that by cutting out some of these spending programs, it can be made more ideal. Apparently, Senator Vitter agrees with me. I fail to see how it is obstructing anything to propose such things in an amendment. If he then turns around and votes against the Stimulus package (which, in fairness, the republicans all did in the House), then he's indeed just trying to be an ornery bastard toeing the party line. But there's nothing wrong with wanting to fix what's broken with this non-ideal stimulus package.

So if I am understanding you right, you don't object to McCain proposing that we repeal the "buy American" clause? That's fine, I don't object to it either, but I just want to make sure. From the tone of your first post you seemed pretty dead-set against the notion that we should repeal it.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:16 pm**

Actually, Vitter doesn't: He didn't object on the grounds of 'Not stimulative', either in the text of his amendment, or the Senate Floor(Unless he's speaking in a rare dialect of Politician inaudible to C-Span speakers). He simply decreed 'wasteful'. I don't think topping off the State Dept's funds when we're starting to begin person-to-person diplomacy with Iran is wasteful.

As to stimulative but still useful, I'm going to outline why it doesn't bother me. Obama has a shit-ton to do, and his honeymoon will die early because the D.C. Media and the GOP hate the idea of him and his ideas being popular. Every single thing he can slam through while he has the latitude to should be done, though this is from my utilitarian ethics model.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:20 pm**

Just when I think there's some Republican politician I can agree with nowadays... *Grumbles*

Well I can't fault your logic on the honeymoon and so on. And most of these programs aren't as flagrantly stupid as the Bridge to Nowhere (I hope). Hopefully this will be over with soon enough and he can move on.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:29 pm**

General Havoc wrote:Just when I think there's some Republican politician I can agree with nowadays... *Grumbles*

Republican Governers are your best bet for a GOPer worthy of your respect and loyalty. Since they are actually having to deal with this, they're not playing stupid and are actually trying to be sensible.

Vitter.. Is making alot of moves which make me think he's eyeing the idea of becoming a force to be reckoned with in the conservative movement. I'd suspect his move to come in a year or two, especially if Steele remains, well, Steele.

Well I can't fault your logic on the honeymoon and so on. And most of these programs aren't as flagrantly stupid as the Bridge to Nowhere (I hope). Hopefully this will be over with soon enough and he can move on.

Biggest waste I could find were the business friendly tax cuts added in, wasteful both in terms of stimulus, and in terms of trying to entice GOPers. But yes, I hope it's over soon, but this isn't over, sadly, until we check the law it becomes for signing statements.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 7:39 pm**

Discussion with Havoc suspended, because more comes down the line.

McCain(Waive budget rules for his substitute bill): Failed.
Feingold(More earmark disclosure): Failed.
Dorgan(Taxing imports by foreign controlled companies... I think? Not clear.): Withdrawn.
Dodd(Additional oversight and implementing recompensation limits on firms bailed out by TARP before the rule-change by the administration): Passes on Voice Vote.
DeMint('Allow religious freedom' in federally funded higher education. Usage of same phrase to defend discriminatory hiring and firing practices makes me think it's more of that): Fails.
Harkin(Auto-trade in program for taxpayers making less than 50k(70k if filing jointly) of a superior MPG, US made vehicle): Failed.
McCaskill(Retroactive cap on compensation to TARP bailed out's): Passes on Voice Vote.
Ensign(Waive budget rules for his amendment to make the government try and set the 30-year fixed home loan interest rate): Failed.
McCaskill(Waive budget rules for her amendment funding inspector generals): Passes.
Thune(Waive budget rules for his subtitute, mostly tax changes, mostly to the higher ranks): Failed.
Boxer(Ensuring funds are used in ways consistant with National Enviromental Protection Act to protect the public): Passes on Voice Vote.
Barasso(Expediate reviews from National Enviromental Protection Act): Denied by voice vote.

According to the government website, debate was still in session to table a move by Coburn on competitive contracts.

McCain was pretty stubborn and insistant they get through his substitute early. The biggest thing changing in it was a provision that would automatically kill everything in it once two quarters have positive GDP growth. He and the GOP argue it's pragmatism. Others argue it's killing the bill once it proves it's gonna work. I simply state We Know What Happens When You Do That: Link to image Graph created by US Dept Of Commerce.

That dip you see is when Roosevelt thought we were in the clear and started reigning in the spending.

Coburn, on the other hand, simply wants to make everything harder:

When we bring a $900 billion spending bill to the floor, and we've accepted one amendment to cut $246 million out of it. We have had votes, both voice votes and recorded votes on less than 20 amendments. And we're told by the majority leader that we have to finish up, so we can get to conference.

This bill ought to have a thousand amendments on it, if we're truly going to do the work of the American people. We ought to debate this bill line by line.

I will not agree to any unanimous consent until the next 15 amendments that I've got have a scheduled time to be brought up, so the American people can hear of all the stinky stuff in this bill.

Death of a thousand (paper)cuts.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:25 pm**

Your link is broken

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:33 pm**

General Havoc wrote:Your link is broken

Huh. Works for me.

Though it's a blog editorializing on the 'FDR made depression WORSE' myths, the graph and it's source are present here.. Link

Try that.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:54 pm**

That one works fine.

McCaskill/Dodd's surprise me. A retroactive cap on compensation for all companies that took the money? Youch.

Not that I disagree or anything...

I don't see what the hell Boxer's has to do with anything, but whatever.

Coburn's an idiot. Let him prattle if he likes.

Posted: **Thu Feb 05, 2009 11:11 pm**

I honestly couldn't tell you what exactly what Boxer's does, but I THINK it basically enforces public health oversight of expenditures.

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:46 pm**

More amendments.

Sanders(Strict limits on H1B visa holders hired instead of Americans by TARP companies): Agreed by Voice Vote.
Coburn(Eliminate spending on all low-priority infrastructure): Passed.
Udall(Increasing number of vets who can get a specific tax cut): Passeds on Voice Vote.
Coburn(Require competition on contracts from this): Passed.(Poor Halliburtorn!)
Conrad(Strikes mortgage/foreclosure prevention): Failed.
Dodd(Foreclosure mitigation): Passes on Voice Vote.
Grassley(Increase medicaid matching federal funds): Failed.
Cantwell(More energy-based incentives.): Budget rules waived, passed.
Vitter(ACORN is a criminal enterprise, therefore no funding for them): Failed.

Sunday session.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2009 2:15 pm**

Udall(Increasing number of vets who can get a specific tax cut): Passeds on Voice Vote.
Coburn(Require competition on contracts from this): Passed.(Poor Halliburtorn!)

I actually like these two

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2009 2:24 pm**

frigidmagi wrote:
Udall(Increasing number of vets who can get a specific tax cut): Passeds on Voice Vote.
Coburn(Require competition on contracts from this): Passed.(Poor Halliburtorn!)
I actually like these two

They're not as mind-numbingly stupid as some of the stuff welded on, yes.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:16 pm**

Honestly, not much of the stuff that has passed meets with my explicit disapproval

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2009 8:43 pm**

General Havoc wrote:Honestly, not much of the stuff that has passed meets with my explicit disapproval

Coburn's low-priority infrastructure ban strikes me as very foolish, but given the jawboning infrastructures gotten, it's not like there'd be excess.

LibriumArcana.Games

Stimulus Amendments II: It Came From The Senate!

#1 Stimulus Amendments II: It Came From The Senate!

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17

#18

#19

#20

#21

#22

#23

#24

#25