What Congress is voting on while your gas bill has been rising

[SUBMAN1]

Not suprising by the way:

-S

http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/1097/gasuj6.gif

[Stealth Hunter]

Fuel has actually gone down by a sh**load. I'm paying $3.52 for it right now. I WAS paying $4.08 for it... maybe I should move in with my brother and his family in Missouri.:hmm: It's under $3.40 there, or so I have been told.

However, in the long run, let us raise our goblets and toast to George W. Bush and the Republican-Controlled Congress of 2005. That was when the prices started to rise. Then they came down, then up, then down, then they went back up after this deal with Iran. Now they've started to go down. Will they come back up? Probably, but we can't be sure.

And your source is biased towards the Democrats (see the bottom folks):

Compiled by the Office of the Republican Whip [national average of gas from the EIA]

Roy Blunt's site take jabs and puts crap out about the Democrats all the time.:roll:

The American political system of today consists of senators campaigning and raising money for themselves (not to mention, giving themselves raises). The whole lot is a rotten bunch.

[Q3ark]

The American political system of today consists of senators campaigning and raising money for themselves (not to mention, giving themselves raises). The whole lot is a rotten bunch.

That sounds like our lot over here in the UK. I think politicians are the same no matter where you go, they're only in it for themselves.

[Platapus]

This graphic only illustrates that Congress votes on several different issues at the same time.

BTW the Democrats only have a majority in the House of Representatives (53%)

The Senate is tied

49 Democrats and 49 Republicans with two independents Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman.

Independent of which party has the actual majority, there are offices and positions that must be filled by the "Majority Party". Therefore the Senate has adopted rules for the selection of the Majority Party, when there is no clear majority of seats held.

It is important to recognize the difference between being the Majority Party and having a majority in Congress. The two are different.

For the purposes of designating which party would be the Majority Party one of two methods are used.

In the 110th Congress:

1. If any of the independents agree to caucus with one party, and that caucusing would bring the number to the simple majority than the "majority" goes to the caucusing party. In this case since Senators Liberman, and Sanders agreed, at the start of the 110th Congress, to caucus with the Democratic Party, The Democratic party is the Majority Party in the Senate.

2. If the Independents decide to caucus with neither party, or split their caucus to bring the numbers to 49+1 to 49+1, the Senate would be tied. In this situation, since both parties are tied, the political party of the President of the Senate (Vice President of the United States) would determine which party would be the Majority Party. In this case Republican.

If Senator Liberman would stop, or not be allowed, to caucus with the Democratic party we could find ourselves in the 49+1 to 49+1 situation.

So there is a common misconception that in the 2006 elections that the Democratic Party took control over the Congress. This is only true in the House of Representatives as the Democratic Party holds 53% of the seats

It is not true in the US Senate where the Democratic Party holds 49% of the Senatorial Seats. The Democrats and Republicans are tied with each holding 49% of the seats so neither party holds a voting majority.

The 110th Senate is neither a Democratic nor Republican controlled Senate.

With the wacky Senatorial rules it is possible for a political party to be the Majority Party but not have a majority in the Senate.

So when parroting the phrase "The Democratic Congress has done nothing since 2006!" keep in mind that the Democrats still do not have a majority of the seats on the Senate.

So referencing that chart: One could ask, what were the Republicans doing with their 49%???

Pots and kettles, gooses and gandars

[UnderseaLcpl]

I would actually prefer that congress not muck with gas prices. Last time they did that we had a shortage.

In fact, I'd like to see them stay the hell away from any kind of market subsidies or taxes.

[August]

49 Democrats and 49 Republicans with two independents Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman.

Both independents have strong ties to the Democrats and have both aligned with them. 49 R vs 51 D.

So referencing that chart: One could ask, what were the Republicans doing with their 49%???

More to the point why didn't the GoP do more while they had the majority? Maybe had they not screwed around the Dems wouldn't have taken the majority in the first place.

[mrbeast]

The word specious comes to mind in reference to that diagram :hmm:

Specious describes that which presents a fair appearance to the view and yet covers something false. Specious refers more definitely to the act or purpose of false representation........An argument may by specious when it is not plausible because its sophistry is so easily discovered.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/specious

[Digital_Trucker]

While I would be a long ways from being described as a Democrat, I can't agree that that chart has any real meaning (other than propoganda). There are too many factors that drive the cost of oil up and economic decisions take years to cause changes.

I do, however, agree that liberal opposition to drilling for oil off the shores of, and in our country and opposition to the buildng of more nuclear power plants has partially led us to where we are. Alternative energy sources are also needed. If they would put windmills in DC and let all that hot air produce electricity we'd probably have enough to power ourselves and our Northern and Southern neighbors:rotfl:(at least when Congress is in session).

[1480]

I wonder what kind of attachments were linked into the great cats bill. :lol:

I agree with DT, placating tree huggers has put a serious crimp into the economy, not only ours but the rest of the world.

The country has been conditioned to believe that nuclear = evil. I love it when actors shill for the "green movement", do they realize the consumption of resources it takes to make a movie, to have people go to theaters to watch it and then buy the dvds when they are released. Yikes, holy contradiction Batman!

I totally agree with looking into and implementing alternative energy sources, but the need for relaxing conservation acts to get to the untapped oil resources can carry us over the hump, till the time that alternates can be norm rather then the exception.

[Digital_Trucker]

It just dawned on me, since gas prices have gone down significantly since the end of the chart, does that mean that the "Monkey Safety Act" was the reason? If so, I propose we have a "Whale Safety Act" enacted. Since whales are humongous compared to monkeys, the cost of gasoline should go back down to about where it was when I started driving (about 35 cents/gallon).:doh:

[SUBMAN1]

It just dawned on me, since gas prices have gone down significantly since the end of the chart, does that mean that the "Monkey Safety Act" was the reason? If so, I propose we have a "Whale Safety Act" enacted. Since whales are humongous compared to monkeys, the cost of gasoline should go back down to about where it was when I started driving (about 35 cents/gallon).:doh:You just hit on practically why I posted this! The Monkey safety act is helping us all! :D :p That cracked me up when I saw that!

-S

[1480]

Once again, monkeys selfless sacrafice to help out humanity is finally rewarded and everyone benefits!!!! much rejoicing.....:yep:

[JetSnake]

I would actually prefer that congress not muck with gas prices. Last time they did that we had a shortage.

In fact, I'd like to see them stay the hell away from any kind of market subsidies or taxes.


This. End of thread.

[Frame57]

Congresses approval rating is self evident of how well they are doing in the eyes of the people. I think they are at an all time low. To Congress I ask you resign and become televangelist or something fitting to your paper mache' spines. You do not hearken to the voice of the people who put you in office. The day is coming when when we will no longer tolerate this tripe being passed off as service to the people and national interest of America. You gutter snipes sicken me by blaming each other for not being able to supposedly do your jobs. You make corporate attorney's look like alter boys. Our system is broken! We need refromation in the Congress and Senate to limit terms on these bums that make a career out of insanity. Pay raises? For what? I would rather see Al Capone or the likes running this joint. At least he would get the job done. Retirement? Are you friggin kiddin me? Not a penny to your kind. Not by my tax dollars. Only a handful of you deserve the title "The honorable..." The rest of you are a disgrace and I am ashamed that somehow someway you managed to become Congressmen and Senators. The cream does not rise to the top in America anymore. Pelosi and Frankenstein are proof of that along with Reid and that drunken bum from Mass who keeps holding his office. :damn:

[Platapus]

Since congress is elected to office by the people, it is the people who must ultimatly accept responsibility for the state of congress.

Congress is like the weather, everyone complains but no one does anything about it. Clearly congress is doing just fine if the incumbents have a 90%+ chance of being reelected. By reelecting the same congress members we are sending the clearest signal we possibly can -- everything is OK with us.

Wanna know what is wrong with Congress?

First look in the mirror
Second look outside your house.

That is what is wrong with congress. The citizens continue to reelect the wrong people to office and think they can make it better by complaining about it.

We do not need a constitutional amendment limiting terms for Congress. The citizens have that power already. It is called a ballot. We just choose not to use it.

"Men at some time are masters of their fates:
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings." --Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

[SUBMAN1]

http://www.hsus.org/wildlife/wildlife_news/monkey_business.html

-S

[Frame57]

Since congress is elected to office by the people, it is the people who must ultimatly accept responsibility for the state of congress.

Congress is like the weather, everyone complains but no one does anything about it. Clearly congress is doing just fine if the incumbents have a 90%+ chance of being reelected. By reelecting the same congress members we are sending the clearest signal we possibly can -- everything is OK with us.

Wanna know what is wrong with Congress?

First look in the mirror
Second look outside your house.

That is what is wrong with congress. The citizens continue to reelect the wrong people to office and think they can make it better by complaining about it.

We do not need a constitutional amendment limiting terms for Congress. The citizens have that power already. It is called a ballot. We just choose not to use it.

"Men at some time are masters of their fates:
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings." --Shakespeare, Julius CaesarThe people are complacent. Yes, there should be term limits. I cannot vote outside of my district. The problem is the choices that are available, which is crap 9 out of 10 times. So people do not even bother to vote, so one of the bilge rats will get in. Until the Constitutional party gains momentum I will complain about the system, because it is broken. Gridlock is a perfect example of this. A Congressional seat should not be filled because of lack of voters. Each state and every citizen should be required to vote. I consider it a duty to this country as well as a right. We get conjured u[p for jury duty, then i think citizens need too vote. Another consideration would be to reject a candidate fully. Meaning if I do not like my parties rep. what can I do? Not vote for them, so then by sheer logic the vote really goes for the other guy. Nonesense! A ballot rejection option should be available for each candidate. Then if a majority vote of rejection come up, that seat remains open until a fitting candidate is accepted by the people, rather than the crap that rises to the top of our political chain as it stands. A man or woman who wants to seek public office has to be a millionaire by todays standards, again a huge flaw in the requirements for public service. Think what you wish, this is not a problem of the people, but is a disfunctional and abused system that Americans are lulled into thinking is the only way. Nonesense! There is always a better way and this Country needs it as never before.

[1480]

The Recall Process should be made a bit easier to do, or encouraged more often.

[FIREWALL]

Fuel has actually gone down by a sh**load. I'm paying $3.52 for it right now. I WAS paying $4.08 for it... maybe I should move in with my brother and his family in Missouri.:hmm: It's under $3.40 there, or so I have been told.

However, in the long run, let us raise our goblets and toast to George W. Bush and the Republican-Controlled Congress of 2005. That was when the prices started to rise. Then they came down, then up, then down, then they went back up after this deal with Iran. Now they've started to go down. Will they come back up? Probably, but we can't be sure.

And your source is biased towards the Democrats (see the bottom folks):

Compiled by the Office of the Republican Whip [national average of gas from the EIA]

Roy Blunt's site take jabs and puts crap out about the Democrats all the time.:roll:

The American political system of today consists of senators campaigning and raising money for themselves (not to mention, giving themselves raises). The whole lot is a rotten bunch.


U think gas prices have dropped !!!

U are a feckin idiot.:doh:

[ASWnut101]

Fuel has actually gone down by a sh**load. I'm paying $3.52 for it right now. I WAS paying $4.08 for it... maybe I should move in with my brother and his family in Missouri.:hmm: It's under $3.40 there, or so I have been told.

However, in the long run, let us raise our goblets and toast to George W. Bush and the Republican-Controlled Congress of 2005. That was when the prices started to rise. Then they came down, then up, then down, then they went back up after this deal with Iran. Now they've started to go down. Will they come back up? Probably, but we can't be sure.

And your source is biased towards the Democrats (see the bottom folks):

Compiled by the Office of the Republican Whip [national average of gas from the EIA]

Roy Blunt's site take jabs and puts crap out about the Democrats all the time.:roll:

The American political system of today consists of senators campaigning and raising money for themselves (not to mention, giving themselves raises). The whole lot is a rotten bunch.


U think gas prices have dropped !!!

U are a feckin idiot.:doh:

Mabye not where you live, but yeah, prices are dropping (dropped) quite noticeably.

P.S. What you said is probably not going to go over well...