I see tribalism is alive and well as usual with cheek and RRR. Lol
Republicans vote against Veterans bill
- Thread starter TechFan88
- Start date
Coming from you, I will take that as a compliment. The OP is a radical libtard criticizing the right over a bill that will eventually be passed. Even you though you don't support a party, you fall in line with the libtards.
That's hilarious coming from you. How many threads have you started crying about the mean ole Republicans? You and nyc are 2 of the biggest libtards in here.
Dude you saying “libtard” all the time makes you sound extremely ignorant and completely discounts any substance you bring to any conversation.
Republicans and tards believe they are fighting over something valuable as well-- America. One party hates America and other 1 loves America. I agree politicians suck but I want the ones in DC who love America. That damn sure isn't the idiots on the left. They are too busy trying to turns kids into trannies, burning flags and putting feminine products in Oregon boys bathrooms.
If you support killing babies, turning kids into trannies, queer teachers teaching kids what it's like to be queer in elementary/jr high school plus high inflation, high gas prices, high grocery prices etc, I consider you a libtard.
If people find that offensive, that's their problem, not mine.
And you sound like an idiot. Actually you sound like the dude that makes fun of gays all the time only to have more scars on your knees than a carpenter
Cut him some slack. He has no self-awareness whatsoever. None. Zilch. Zip. Nada.
I'm not the one killing babies and teaching kids about puberty blockers. If I sound like an idiot, how stupid do those idiots and their supporters sound? nyc said I was obsessed with kids genitals but I'm not one trying to get a small boy to chop off his nuts because he has girl feelings. The rest of your post is garbage
Rut roh--- the other internet police hall monitor showed up swinging his little stick.
I'm sure you think nyc, mika, robert and callier all have self awareness.
He seems to be obsessed with @NYCRedRaider too. He mentions him in 95% of his posts.
They want to turn kids into trannies and teach kids about being queer. Were you misgendered when the Dr delivered you? That's what the party you supposedly don't support teaches and believes.
Pot meet kettle. You may not mention me but you damn sure follow me round like a love sick little puppy.
The issue is you have no idea how to communicate in a rational manner. Your social IQ is close to 0
Coming from an internet police hall monitor, I will take that as a compliment.
So in your opinion, if you don’t take a hard stance with one side or the other, you are a hall monitor? Anyone that points out the extremes in someone’s posting style is said “hall monitor”?
Haven’t we already established that Jack Pasobeic is a white supremacist and right wing disinformation propagandist (and established I can’t spell his name)?
“Far-right commentator Jack Posobiec is a current host on One America News Network (OANN), an information network widely known to distort facts and which has been embraced by President Trump. Posobiec — a Trump favorite — has collaborated with white supremacists, neo-fascists and antisemites for years, while producing propaganda that Trump and his inner circle have publicly celebrated.
“Jack Posobiec’s extensive ties to white supremacists should serve as a wake-up call for anyone who hasn’t made the connection between Trump’s MAGA movement and hate,” said Michael Edison Hayden, the SPLC senior investigative reporter who uncovered the story about Posobiec and his ties to white supremacy and the White House.
Posobiec has used his prominence on Twitter to promote Russian military intelligence operations. He helped lead the “Stop the Steal” campaign, which cast doubt on the integrity of the 2016 and 2020 American presidential elections. He has also collaborated with white nationalists, antigovernment extremists, members of the Proud Boys, and neo-Nazis in his capacity as an operative.”
Last edited:
Some Cruz bullshit for you guys to willingly swallow despite it being bullshit. You know, because he's a great guy (not a Democrat).
Pointing out Posobiec is a white supremacist Russia supporter is just giving him street cred.
I can’t argue with you there except for the ass kicking. I just want Cruz punched in the face once.
What Beto pulled in Uvalde was grandstanding and complete and utter chickenshit.
What is it with these pigs and their nose rings? Does any normal human out there think that is a good look?
I don't care what yall say this is one of the funniest lines in EEF history.
I can’t tell what happened with this bill, and I’ll need to look into it to have an opinion. But it looks like the same type of thing that goes on in Washington all the time, and it makes me absolutely insane. You’re not going to find any bigger supporter of veterans than me, and if there is anything to this that would indicate Republicans didn’t care about them, I’d be mad as hell about it and would vote against any Republican for whom I was eligible to vote.
But what I sense may have happened here is that the Democrats had something they wanted to pass that they knew wouldn’t be able to pass standing on its own, so they stuck it in a bill dealing with veterans, and dared Republicans to vote against it under the threat that they would tell the world that Republicans hate Veterans.
there are a lot of differences between me and the left leaning people on this site, but probably the biggest one is that I hate it when either side, either party, does this kind of crap. I think it is absolute bullshit. i’ve seen Republicans do it, and it makes me equally angry. But you’ll never see liberals calling out Democrats. They just won’t do it.
i’ve reached the point or I feel like pretty much all politicians suck. Regardless of their party.
But what I sense may have happened here is that the Democrats had something they wanted to pass that they knew wouldn’t be able to pass standing on its own, so they stuck it in a bill dealing with veterans, and dared Republicans to vote against it under the threat that they would tell the world that Republicans hate Veterans.
there are a lot of differences between me and the left leaning people on this site, but probably the biggest one is that I hate it when either side, either party, does this kind of crap. I think it is absolute bullshit. i’ve seen Republicans do it, and it makes me equally angry. But you’ll never see liberals calling out Democrats. They just won’t do it.
i’ve reached the point or I feel like pretty much all politicians suck. Regardless of their party.
Last edited:
Fair points but this is a really, really bad look for the Republicans. Especially when Ted Cruz is the mouthpiece.
I guess you didn't read my other post before replying.
Republicans vote against Veterans bill
This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.
texastech.forums.rivals.com
What makes you say that? I don't hate Americans or Vets. I currently don't care for Republicans much because they pull stunts like this.
Veterans are dying and not getting treatment for toxic exposure because Republicans have held up this bill. The only thing that changed from when the Senate voted 84 yea - 14 nay - 2 no votes was a sentence was deleted from the bill. Nothing was added.
The reason for the two different CBO scores is they are scoring the Feb version and the second is the June version.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate - February 28, 2022
Estimated Budgetary Effects of Rules Committee Print 117-33 for H.R. 3967, Honoring our PACT Act of 2021, as Posted on the Website of the House Committee on Rules on February 18, 2022
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate - June 6, 2022
Estimated Budgetary Effects of H.R. 3967, Honoring our PACT Act of 2021, as Passed by the House of Representatives on March 3, 2022, and as Amended by the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
CBO Score is dated June 6, 2022. The June version with the $400 billion passed the Senate on June 16, 2022 84-14 with Texas Republican Senators Rafael Cruz and John Cornyn voting yea on it. But they are pretending like a change was made recently which is a lie.
If you look at the score on the 2nd page on the June CBO score > Total Direct Spending > Budget Authority $679.4 billion.
If you look on Twitter Sen. Rafael Cruz said he's fine with that. "The bill gives a $400B blank check—separate from vets care—for unrelated pork that will supercharge inflation. I support the PACT Act & the $679.4B it would dedicate to vets."
If you look again at the June 6 - CBO score it also says this on page 3.
"f. Section 805 would establish and authorize appropriations for the Cost of War Toxic Exposure Fund for the increase in costs, over the fiscal year 2021 amount, that would arise from the act. The fund would be used to pay for health care associated with environmental exposures, expenses incidental to the delivery of that health care, disability claims processing, medical research, information technology programs, and other services associated with environmental exposure. Under current law, those costs are generally classified as discretionary. At the direction of the Senate Committee on the Budget and in keeping with section 805 of this act, CBO has classified those expenses as direct spending."
That's the so called "budget gimmick" Republicans are complaining which was in the version they voted for June 16. They were for it but now they are against it.
Again they knew it was in the bill and voted for it in June anyway.
Congressional Quarterly News (CQ News) - June 9, 2022 5:00AM
"Lawmakers and others familiar with the bill said the drafters' intent was to ensure that new spending for health care benefits — about $113 billion over a decade, the CBO estimated — would be appropriated without regard to discretionary spending caps.
The bill would create a new Treasury fund that would pay for toxic exposure-related health care services that exceed what Congress appropriated for fiscal 2021. But since the VA is already paying for similar services through discretionary funds, the CBO concluded that there was enough overlap in the programs that the new Treasury fund would simply pay for those existing services as well.
Accordingly, nearly $400 billion in new budget authority would shift from discretionary to mandatory, including over $25 billion in fiscal 2023, the CBO said, on top of the money specifically estimated to flow from the new presumption of service connection language. That's part of where some of the concerns lie with creating the new mandatory Treasury fund to pay for the new health benefits.
Sen. Boozman said, “CBO is interpreting that in a very conservative way. They don't want to understate. I think most people feel like they're dramatically overstating this.”
And backers also push back against the characterization of the bill's mandatory funding stream as somehow weakening congressional oversight or appropriators' traditional jurisdiction over the veterans health care budget.
Although the bill technically would move such benefits into the category of "appropriated entitlement," similar to programs like food stamps and Medicaid, the CBO acknowledges that toxic exposure-related health care services work differently in the new legislation. The agency said appropriators would retain control over the funding, and that the major difference was simply that it wouldn't be subject to discretionary spending limits.
Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., the ranking member of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees VA funding, said while he would prefer to keep the veterans health funding in the discretionary appropriations process, it won’t change the fact that Congress will fund what’s needed either way.
“I don't think it makes a lot of difference,” he said. “Those dollars are going to be paid. Because once we pass a law, we obligate ourselves to come through for our veterans.”"
Republican Senator John Boozman voted for the bill in June with Sen. Rafael Cruz and Sen. John Cornyn. He also voted for the cloture motion in July while Cruz and Cornyn changed their votes citing the thing they already voted for in the June version.
Republicans are throwing a fit because they want to be able to amend bills with poison pills. Toomey's amendment wouldn't just move funding from mandatory to discretionary. It would cap the fund lower every year and sunset it after 10 years. Forcing veterans to lobby Congress again in 10 years. Toomey's retiring to be a lobbyist though so he doesn't care. Meanwhile other Republicans are worried about their scorecards from their billionaire owners aka donors and various conservative organizations.
Last edited:
I don't understand why people purporting to be fiscal conservatives are going after Veteran healthcare spending for everyone from Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange (Like my best friend's dad) to Afghan/Iraq veterans exposed to toxic burn pits (Like my cousin).
You want to after pork and government waste? Tell Sen. Rafael Cruz and Sen. John Cornyn to end the OCO slush fund.
The Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) fund - sometimes referred to as war funds. The OCO was known from 2001 to 2009 as “the supplemental” and is now considered a de facto slush fund. Since the OCO fund has very little oversight and is not subject to the sequestration cuts that slashed every other part of the budget in 2013, many experts consider it a “slush fund” for the Pentagon.
www.defensenews.com
The DoD has received approximately $2 trillion from the OCO since 2001. Were it considered to be a federal agency, the $70.7 billion provided for the OCO in fiscal 2020 would make it the fourth largest, dwarfing spending at all other agencies except the DoD as well as the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Between 2001 and 2018, the OCO has constituted on average of approximately 20 percent of the Pentagon’s annual budget.
Beyond the problems associated with using a loophole to fund the DoD, as a supplemental appropriation the OCO does not allow the Pentagon to factor its funding into the normal budgetary process, which involves planning for multiple years. For this reason, top DoD officials have expressed their disappointment in the system and have argued for the incorporation of OCO funding back into the DoD baseline budget.
Fun fact all the Republicans who are against the veteran spending. Vote to keep the OCO Slush fund going even though its subject to little to no oversight. Meanwhile the Sec of VA will have to ask Congress for funding every year for the toxic exposure fund.
You want to after pork and government waste? Tell Sen. Rafael Cruz and Sen. John Cornyn to end the OCO slush fund.
The Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) fund - sometimes referred to as war funds. The OCO was known from 2001 to 2009 as “the supplemental” and is now considered a de facto slush fund. Since the OCO fund has very little oversight and is not subject to the sequestration cuts that slashed every other part of the budget in 2013, many experts consider it a “slush fund” for the Pentagon.
End the Pentagon’s OCO slush fund
End the Pentagon’s OCO slush fund
After 19 years of conflict in Afghanistan, the notion that funding for war fighting cannot be planned for in the regular budget is laughable.
www.defensenews.com
The DoD has received approximately $2 trillion from the OCO since 2001. Were it considered to be a federal agency, the $70.7 billion provided for the OCO in fiscal 2020 would make it the fourth largest, dwarfing spending at all other agencies except the DoD as well as the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Between 2001 and 2018, the OCO has constituted on average of approximately 20 percent of the Pentagon’s annual budget.
Beyond the problems associated with using a loophole to fund the DoD, as a supplemental appropriation the OCO does not allow the Pentagon to factor its funding into the normal budgetary process, which involves planning for multiple years. For this reason, top DoD officials have expressed their disappointment in the system and have argued for the incorporation of OCO funding back into the DoD baseline budget.
Fun fact all the Republicans who are against the veteran spending. Vote to keep the OCO Slush fund going even though its subject to little to no oversight. Meanwhile the Sec of VA will have to ask Congress for funding every year for the toxic exposure fund.
That’s a small price to pay for Republican senators to “own the libs.” The party of supporting the troops, my ass.
Similar threads
