Barney Frank--realistic timeframe?

jschaud · #1 03-17-2007, 01:12 AM

Hey guys. I'm the unwavering optimist through all of this, and i already have visions of a repeal/unenforcement in my head. Could one of you guys that actually follow all of this and understand what is involved here put together a realistic timeframe of what may possibly work out?

If he is in the thinking stage>write up proposal>introduce to subcommittee>voted on in house type thing with realistic time between each. I have no idea what we are looking at.

crzylgs · #2 03-17-2007, 01:40 AM

s

Dennisa · #3 03-17-2007, 03:48 AM

I dont know a lot about this kinda stuff. Best timing would be an attachement to an important funding bill right before a scheduled adjournment.]

I see no way a bill like this could survive without being attached since Bush would likely veto it. It will be hard enough to get a majority to pass, let alone a veto overide.

donkeylove · #4 03-17-2007, 05:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I dont know a lot about this kinda stuff. Best timing would be an attachement to an important funding bill right before a scheduled adjournment.]

I see no way a bill like this could survive without being attached since Bush would likely veto it. It will be hard enough to get a majority to pass, let alone a veto overide.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm no expert in legislation either, but this strikes me as the path of least resistance. Seems like less hoops to jump through, and the most likely successful course. I wish Mr.K would post on this because I always found him right on point with these things.

Berge20 · #5 03-17-2007, 11:01 AM

If Chairman Frank really wants to roll back part or all of the UIGEA he'll work to add it to a must pass measure. However, those types of moves take significant political capital to pull off (particularly when you aren't leader/speaker) and my guess is that he has bigger items that he'd want to save that move for.

The standard path for a bill to move is:
Idea/Drafting (relatively simple)
Introduction
Hearings (Subcommittee/Committee)
Markup (Subcommittee/Committee)
Floor Consideration

Part of that process can be circumvented at will in the House (ie you don't have to hold hearings on a bill), but since he is the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee he can move a bill of his choosing through hearings/markup quickly if he wishes.

Floor consideration is determined by the Speaker/Leader, so then he loses control of the process (even though he has some influence). There are countless bills that move through committee and never receive a floor vote.

Grey · #6 03-17-2007, 11:11 AM

Good news is Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi are on very good terms. And being Chairman of the Finance Committee is about as powerful position as you can have in the House besides being Speaker. Any money our government spends essentially has to go through him.

Senator7 · #7 03-17-2007, 11:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
And being Chairman of the Finance Committee is about as powerful position as you can have in the House besides being Speaker. Any money our government spends essentially has to go through him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to be a know it all jerk (I'm actually a political consultant), but I believe you are mistaking the Financial Services Committee (which Rep. Frank chairs) for the Appropriations Committee (chaired by Rep. Dave Obey).

Being chair of the Appropriations Committee is, in some ways, better than being Speaker. Less responsibility and almost as much power.

Grey · #8 03-17-2007, 11:40 AM

Yeah I did mix up the two. Finance is still really nice though.

CaptVimes · #9 03-17-2007, 11:59 AM

To Berge or anyone else who might be in the know: Has the US banking industry made any noise about the UIGEA yet? Wouldn't it be easier to get the bill overturned if bankers instead of poker players were the ones applying pressure? Basically, wouldn't a better argument for getting the bill overturned be the overburdening on the banking industry? Should we be turning banks into regulatory and enforcement agencies?

Just a thought, sorry if it has been discussed before

Senator7 · #10 03-17-2007, 12:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah I did mix up the two. Finance is still really nice though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Finance is really nice and Rep. Frank does have a lot of influence and political capital as well. All he needs is a strong voice in the Senate. Russ Feingold (D-WI) would be perfect for this. Frank could even find a freshmen Dem Senator to make this their first major legislative accomplishment. I don't expect they will find a lot of GOP resistance to this repeal because the people who were influential in getting it passed aren't there anymore.

We shouldn't have even attacked this bill on the gambling or poker grounds, rather on Internet censorship comparable to what's happening in China and Russia.