No Action This Year! Ship it!

ZBTHorton · #1 07-20-2006, 04:28 PM

http://today.reuters.com/business/newsAr...G-SENATE-DC.XML

IronDragon1 · #2 07-20-2006, 04:30 PM

There are still (at least 4, much likely at least 8 more) legislative weeks after the end of the August recess and the end of the 109th session.

LearnedfromTV · #3 07-20-2006, 04:31 PM

This only says no action before the August recess. I believe they come back for six weeks in September and October.

DVaut1 · #4 07-20-2006, 04:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There are still (at least 4, much likely at least 8 more) legislative weeks after the end of the August recess and the end of the 109th session.

[/ QUOTE ]

stormy455 · #5 07-20-2006, 04:35 PM

We've got dueling Reuter's stories. This one says that the first one is wrong.

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtm...uk/internetNews

mrhat187 · #6 07-20-2006, 04:42 PM

um......no, 8 weeks puts the session right into election time I don't think so. Recess break is aug. 6th - sept. 7th, target adjounment oct. 6th and call me crazy......but I don't see the senate putting in extra time for internet gambling. The fact that the bill is facing resistance tells me democrats will not allow kyl to have a victory before his re-election, so the bill will probably never even hit the floor.

damaniac · #7 07-20-2006, 04:47 PM

Isn't there also a lameduck session after the elections? I don't know that they get to many substantative issues (ChrisAJ and the others on the Hill could tell us what they do), but it would be possible, no?

Hince · #8 07-20-2006, 04:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We've got dueling Reuter's stories. This one says that the first one is wrong.

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtm...uk/internetNews

[/ QUOTE ]

This one was posted this morning. The other one was posted at noon.

stormy455 · #9 07-20-2006, 04:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We've got dueling Reuter's stories. This one says that the first one is wrong.

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtm...uk/internetNews

[/ QUOTE ]

This one was posted this morning. The other one was posted at noon.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are correct. However, the relevant quote in this article (apparently posted first) is:

[ QUOTE ]
Earlier on Thursday, another Frist aide said lawmakers were still working on the bill, but would not be able to vote on it before the Senate heads off for its month-long vacation.

Ueland rejected that characterization, saying Frist had not given up on getting a vote before the August recess.

[/ QUOTE ]

MicroBob · #10 07-20-2006, 04:58 PM

Addressing the original article: Hello?!?! No action 'soon' is not the same as 'no action this year or at all'.

You don't even need to understand all the details of how congress works.

All they were saying was that getting to it BEFORE AUGUST 4TH appeared unlikely (which they are now denying).

Next issue - I thought the congress was still in some lame-duck session somewhere between Nov and Jan as well. So they could conceiveably get to this matter during that time couldn't they?