[Mr.K]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing's for sure -- if we make it through the year without internet gambling language being enacted, we will owe a big thank you to Senators Warner and Specter.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true.

As for the other elements of your analysis, I think right on throughout. I am very curious about this effort to re-open the DHS Approps conference report, since that report has been signed and is technically not open to further amendments. I gather the Senate Democrats on the DHS Approps conference will withdraw their signatures on the conference report if this nonsense continues, and then we're in a stange spot.

But don't underestimate the power of leadership. Lets say that Frist and Hastert decide to play hardball and insert their pet language into the DHS Appropriations Conference Report. Lets further say that enough Senators withdraw their signatures from the DHS approps conference report after that happens to stop it from proceeding. Guess what Frist and Hastert would probably do? Yup, they'd create an new bill, H.R.xxxx, stick in the text of the DHS Appropriations conference report plus their pet provisions, and then put it on the floor for a vote. Now, I don't see how that would get blocked in the House, but such a move COULD draw a filibuster in the Senate... though it would take balls the size of church bells to filibuster a DHS package this close to elections (something Frist would be banking on when making such a power play).

The intrigue continues!