Full Version: Busy Congress?
QUOTE(BoF @ Mar 27 2008, 05:29 PM) 
QUOTE(scubatim @ Mar 27 2008, 05:15 PM)
Bush is vetoing a lot of bills? How many bills has he vetoed versus how many have made it to his desk since the beginning of the Democratic control? How many is "a lot of bills"?
According to this source, Bush has vetoed nine Bills in seven + years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unite...idential_vetoes
He vetoed only one bill during the six years of his term, when Republicans controlled congress, but has vetoed eight since Democrats took over in January, 2007.
What constitutes a lot, will have to be left to individual judgment.
According to the information that was used when I opened this thread, 130 bills passed. That was Dec. 1, 2007. Nine vetos and >130 approvals. I know it is up to individual judgement, but that doesn't sound like a lot to me.
QUOTE( @ Mar 27 2008, 05:15 PM)
Bush is vetoing a lot of bills? How many bills has he vetoed versus how many have made it to his desk since the beginning of the Democratic control? How many is "a lot of bills"?
Well maybe what I should have said was "threat of veto." I don't follow the exact stastistics, but every time a bill came up that would require a timetable to exit Iraq, or something, Bush would threaten to veto it. That kind of counts as a veto in my book. The point I was trying to make was that there seem to be polar opposites between Bush & Congress but that's no excuse for not getting anything done.
QUOTE(njdave @ Mar 27 2008, 07:16 PM)
QUOTE( @ Mar 27 2008, 05:15 PM)
Bush is vetoing a lot of bills? How many bills has he vetoed versus how many have made it to his desk since the beginning of the Democratic control? How many is "a lot of bills"?
Well maybe what I should have said was "threat of veto." I don't follow the exact stastistics, but every time a bill came up that would require a timetable to exit Iraq, or something, Bush would threaten to veto it. That kind of counts as a veto in my book. The point I was trying to make was that there seem to be polar opposites between Bush & Congress but that's no excuse for not getting anything done.
I would have a lot more respect for the Democrats that control Congress right now if they just stuck to their guns and pushed their agenda that they ran on in 2006. I wouldn't agree with their policies, but I would have much more respect for them. At least then there would be a definite line in the sand showing that they at least tried to follow through with their promises, or at least some of them. Principles go a long way in my book. Looking back over the past couple of years, I see what can be described as either lies, or broken promises. Not sure either one is better than the other.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.