Trump's Team

seems like the ball got rolling today
Besides Sessions/Tillerson
Also looks like Mulvaney Committee votes this am too (unclear)
also Shulkin hearing at 2pm
and perhaps Mnuchin/Price too
 
Joe Fan said:
OK, so this is whats going on

Click to expand...


The Senate rules require that a member of each party be present when a committee takes any action. The committee amended its rules to remove that requirement, with no Democrat present. A court will decide how this turns out.

Are there no adults in the room? Sigh.
 
NJlonghorn said:
The Senate rules require that a member of each party be present when a committee takes any action. The committee amended its rules to remove that requirement, with no Democrat present. A court will decide how this turns out.

Are there no adults in the room? Sigh.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why they would do this. They have the votes whether Democrats are present or not.
 
horninchicago said:
Very adult of the democrats to no show yesterday.
Click to expand...

It was certainly not an adult move but, regrettably, it seems to be just another step in an escalating battle of pure partisanship. It's hard to say who "started" it, but one of the biggest steps was taken by the Democrats when they were the first to invoke the nuclear option. They are going to rue November 21, 2013 for a long time, because the Republicans will recall that day over and over as they repeatedly amend the Senate rules to do whatever they damn well please.

For years, I've said that the thing I most want to avoid is having either party in total control. It happened briefly in 2009 when Spector switched parties, but that was short-lived and didn't result in much. Now, in 2017 and presumably 2018, the Republicans are in total control.
 
Longhorn Rex Tillerson CONFIRMED

(final vote may sill be pending)

update -- 56 yes votes, four Dems
56-43
 
Last edited:
NJlonghorn said:
It was certainly not an adult move but, regrettably, it seems to be just another step in an escalating battle of pure partisanship. It's hard to say who "started" it, but one of the biggest steps was taken by the Democrats when they were the first to invoke the nuclear option. They are going to rue November 21, 2013 for a long time, because the Republicans will recall that day over and over as they repeatedly amend the Senate rules to do whatever they damn well please.

For years, I've said that the thing I most want to avoid is having either party in total control. It happened briefly in 2009 when Spector switched parties, but that was short-lived and didn't result in much. Now, in 2017 and presumably 2018, the Republicans are in total control.
Click to expand...
I agree with your thought of needing adults in the room. Both sides are childish when they don't get their way.
 
Two Repub Senators say they will vote nay on Devos for Education, Collins of Maine and Murkowski of Alaska. That might be a tough one to get through.
 
Clean said:
Two Repub Senators say they will vote nay on Devos for Education, Collins of Maine and Murkowski of Alaska. That might be a tough one to get through.
Click to expand...
Because most people think public education is in such great shape, we should definitely keep putting the same type of people in charge of the DOE that we have had for at least the last 8 years. They have done such a great with all their public education experience. Translation: Caving to the teachers' unions.
 
Clean said:
Two Repub Senators say they will vote nay on Devos for Education, Collins of Maine and Murkowski of Alaska. That might be a tough one to get through.
Click to expand...
Murkowski of Alaska is not unusual. I can see how school choice there doesn't make sense. I don't think there are a lot of private schools in Alaska. And putting your kid in the few private schools or a public school of your choice, I assume, would be logisticaly prohibitive for families.

Are there tax deductions for home schooled kids? If not, there should be. Liberals/teachers unions would absolutely go crazy over that.
 
Murkowski of Alaska is not unusual. I can see how school choice there doesn't make sense. I don't think there are a lot of private schools in Alaska. And putting your kid in the few private schools or a public school of your choice, I assume, would be logisticaly prohibitive for families.
Click to expand...

You do not HAVE to take the voucher, you can just have your kid go to the public school they would normally attend. I don't get how these possible logistical problems in Alaska are a reason to deny this choice to other parents who don't live in Alaska.
 
Phil Elliott said:
You do not HAVE to take the voucher, you can just have your kid go to the public school they would normally attend. I don't get how these possible logistical problems in Alaska are a reason to deny this choice to other parents who don't live in Alaska.
Click to expand...

Because that isn't the real reason. Vouchers or tax credits have the potential to break the financial and ideological monopoly that public education (and therefore the Left) have on educating American children. That's the real reason they oppose vouchers and ridicule DeVos.
 
Because that isn't the real reason. Vouchers or tax credits have the potential to break the financial and ideological monopoly that public education (and therefore the Left) have on educating American children. That's the real reason they oppose vouchers and ridicule DeVos.
Click to expand...

I know that but that does not explain Republicans breaking ranks on this.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Because that isn't the real reason. Vouchers or tax credits have the potential to break the financial and ideological monopoly that public education (and therefore the Left) have on educating American children. That's the real reason they oppose vouchers and ridicule DeVos.
Click to expand...

That's a jaundiced view, IMHO. Voucher/tax credits starve the public school system of resources/funding. Charter Schools have mixed success. Of course, choosing your students is something the public schools don't have the benefit of.
 
Phil Elliott said:
You do not HAVE to take the voucher, you can just have your kid go to the public school they would normally attend. I don't get how these possible logistical problems in Alaska are a reason to deny this choice to other parents who don't live in Alaska.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying I disagree. I am very pro voucher. But Alaska isn't like the lower 48. Alaska doesn't have the critical mass of students, public schools, and private schools that other states have to make it as effective. In Alaska variable costs go down, but fixed costs are still the same and average costs per student rises. The many benefits (including reduced fixed costs) of increased competition aren't realized in Alaska because skilled education labor is much more sparse.

A few families take their tax dollars somewhere else, and the impact is much much greater on the system because the whole state economy is effectively subsidized by the government already.

It really should be a state issue. And I believe that's what the Trump admin believes also while promoting the benefits of vouchers.

If folks are worried that this could become a Constitutional issue, we should have vouchers and Alaska should obviously not get an exception. But Dept Ed grants should provide some backstops to their public schools given their unique situation. The state population is tiny. The costs would hardly be material.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top