Part 7: Why I refuse to play with and to talk to anyone in the sand box. WE GOT OUR FUNDING!

[legalboxers]

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-victim-compensation-fund-zadroga-maloney-rand-paul-pete-king-20190723-beu5i6xijjgs7lx46e27d24lgu-story.html

Senate passes $10B 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund, 97 to 2, only Rand Paul and Mike Lee voted against it

Congress can never do anything about the growing numbers of people still dying from 9/11, but the Senate voted Tuesday to ensure the words “Never Forget” will never be just a slogan for the cops, firefighters and everyone else who ran towards the twin towers after the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history.
The Senate voted 97 to 2, to pass the "Never Forget the Heroes: James Zadroga, Ray Pfeifer and Luis Alvarez Permanent Authorization of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund Act,” and send it to President Trump whom is expected to sign it into law Friday.

Douche 1

Douche 2

Two Douches in a pod.

The Senate PASSES the 71-year reauthorization of the 9/11 victim compensation, 97-2.

WOMP WOMP!

NEVER! EVER! FORGET September 11,2001, THE 1ST RESPONDERS AND THOSE WHO WORKED ON THE PILE!!!

[nightdrot]

As a former Capitol Hill staffer, I have to say that I have never seen more noise over something that was so inevitable as this. There was no way that the 9/11 legislation was not going to pass. They would have taken the Rotunda off the Capitol before they would not pass this legislation. That is just the simple fact of it.

The media coverage of this was unbelievably sloppy and showed an almost total ignorance of the process. The program was NOT running out of money. Rather, the program's authorization - which is different from its appropriation - was due to expire.

Indeed, just to acquaint the reader with how things work. Strictly speaking, the 9/11 program at this moment still does not have one dime more than it had before the 9/11 bill passed. Indeed, it will not have a dime until the appropriations bill passes - likely some time this Fall assuming, more on faith than history, that the appropriations bill passes on time.

(Fear not, though, pass it will. Otherwise you will get some form of government shutdown. As there is now a budget agreement - with its massive debt increase - there will be no government shutdown. That solves that little problem.)

The screaming over Senator Paul's amendment - an amendment which was about as politically idiotic as any in recent memory - was similarly disproportionate. The amendment simply required offsetting spending cuts elsewhere to pay for the 9/11 program.

Now Senator Paul's libertarianism is not exactly my cup of tea, but given the public's howling for "fiscal responsibility" and balanced budgets, even as it objects to tax increases and/or spending cuts, this episode says more about the public's staggering hypocrisy than it does about Paul's amendment.

Perish the thought that we should pay for anything - especially when there are pictures of orphans and mighty heroes on the television screen to obscure the math with the nobility of our intentions. Throw another billion on the fire.

Bottom line, Pau'ls amendment did NOT, contrary to the media coverage, block funding of the 9/11 program. Indeed, it is an amendment that he routinely offers on all authorization bills involving funding. The fact that the media and the public reacted to it this time as if they were Cortez seeing the Pacific for the first time speaks more, in the former case, to their penchant for sensationalism, and in the latter, to their ignorance of the process, than anything else.

Passage of the 9/11 program was as inevitable as the sunrise. (As indeed, the bipartisan margin of passage in both Houses of Congress amply demonstrates.) For all the grandstanding and howling, this issue was never - ever - in doubt.

Really, it is all well and good that the 9/11 program passed. That anyone ever thought it would not is simply comical. The public - and thus the politicians - have one absolutely inflexible rule: If it's a good idea, one should not be bothered about how it will be paid for.

Suffice to say, we have the national debt to prove it.

[legalboxers]

Sir with all due respect, at the present standing of the national debt, the sheeple, heard, flock of the Messiah blamed Obama for it, when it fact it wasn't, this hole is going to be only bigger.

[nightdrot]

My apologies, I don't follow you. Let me just say for the record that the national debt is the fault of no one but the American people - flat out.

They howl about debts and government, but the howlers have the following profile: 1 in 6 who works, works for government (Federal, state or local.) 1 in 7 is a Social Security recipient. (That number is destined to grow.) 1/3 of all households will receive some form of transfer payment.

There the fault lies.

My only point was that the notion that this issue was ever in doubt was pure theatrics. This was going to pass. No doubt of it. All the rest was show.

[legalboxers]

it is always theatrics. Pop Corn must be bountiful

[nightdrot]

Not always. More so in a populist age like we are now in, to be sure. However, in this case, there was an inverse ratio between the chances of passage and the shouting that it could not pass.

[legalboxers]

I dont think people in my city would be happy if it dont pass...

[nightdrot]

That's just it, it was never NOT going to pass. As Senator Paul found out, anyone who wants to vote against this bill, please signify by saying, "I do not choose to run again."

It would be like saying, "I vote against widows and orphans." Not gonna happen and never was. Although, this points to the degree to which the issues are being driven by emotion rather than logical analysis.

Be that as it may, there are some issues that are close calls. This was not one of those.

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Hopefully these two never run for US President cause they can't support the fund for 9-11 victims
and thanks for sharing this MyTake.

[legalboxers]

To the Downrate person. Get a life!

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Yes the dowvote is from someone who is loser
and won't last long on GAG that's how i see things.

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Thanks For Most Helpful Guy :)

[douchebag27]

Rand Paul is not a douche. Are you an idiot? He's actively fought his entire career for individual liberties and cutting back government spending. He was one of the first republicans to support gay marriage legalization. Problems do not get solved by more government. Rand Paul is a great man.

[ZeussLightningBolt]

I don't think they should compensate families of police and firefighters for doing the job they volunteered for.