Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

House Dems Turn Out the Lights On the GOP

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Fri Aug 01, 2008 01:38 PM
from the not-quite-like-throwing-a-blanket-over-the-birdcage dept.
Politico is reporting that while GOP leaders opposed a motion to adjourn the House, the Democrats have closed up shop and even turned out the lights. While the lights and microphones have since been turned back on, it makes for an amusing mental image and possibly even a few dark YouTube video spoofs. "Only about a half-dozen Republicans were on the floor when this began, but the crowd has grown to about 20 now, according to Patrick O'Connor. 'This is the people's House,' Rep, Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.) said. 'This is not Pelosi's politiburo.' Democratic aides were furious at the GOP stunt, and reporters were kicked out of the Speaker's Lobby, the space next to the House floor where they normally interview lawmakers."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 01 2008, @01:38PM (#24437855)

    It's great that C-SPAN covers kindergarten now.

    • by philspear (1142299) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:03PM (#24438389)

      At least they're not engaging in fisticuffs.

      like they did around the civil war
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Brooks#Sumner_Assault [wikipedia.org]

      and again in 1902:
      http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_Fistfight.htm [senate.gov]

      Or like they do in Bolivia:
      http://www.blinkx.com/video/fist-fight-in-bolivia-congress/BUTRtHbu7LQxO1wF [blinkx.com]

      And we can at least be glad no one got shot by the vice president.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Brooks#Sumner_Assault [wikipedia.org]

      Er... uh... well, rather at least no one was MURDERED by the vice president in this instance.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 01 2008, @01:56PM (#24438267)

          Oil prices are high because speculators think future supply will be low. If we drill, speculators may think future supply will be higher. This will lower current prices even though the oil won't be immediately available.

          • by gnuman99 (746007) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:15PM (#24438671)

            Why do amateurs, non-traders (in anything) keep thinking that this is all "speculators" or "commies" or some other bullshit that is driving oil prices high?

            Commodity traders CANNOT affect long term oil prices if there is no problems with supply. The reason is if you buy oil, you have to take delivery of that oil. If supply outstrips demand all the time, the price will only go up if the traders pile up oil like crazy. But then what?? They have to SELL it on THE SAME market as the suppliers anyway. So, at some point in the future you end up with A LOT of extra supply getting pumped in and commodity traders end up LOSING A LOT OF MONEY!

            Fortunately, these people are NOT so stupid to lose hundreds of billions to make oil prices go up for few weeks.

            And don't even start to bring out the denier points about "record rentals of oil tankers", "oil tankers 4x price what they used to be" and similar crap that the global warming deniers bring up ("mars is warming" and similar horseshit). Smoke and mirrors, not reality people.

            The REAL cause of the high prices is NOT the traders, it is the problems with supply. Supply cannot keep up with the DEMAND. So, prices go up. Prices go up until there is more supply, which will just not going to happen any time soon no matter what, or the demand drops. So far, the demand dropped a LITTLE. So, prices are coming down.

            In commodity trading, you never think years in advance, you think days or maybe weeks in advance. The largest ??? regarding supply is still Israel/Iran issue. Then there is the problems with Nigerian supply. And finally, the demand for oil inside a lot of the oil producing countries is INCREASING VERY FAST (thanks to heavily subsidized fossil fuels there), meaning their exports are suffering. See Mexico as one very good example of that.

            If Republicans were serious about an energy policy of the country, they would first mandate that ALL new pipelines between urban centers be able to carry both natural gas and hydrogen. And then they would fix the fiscal budgetary issues and start to invest in translating this economy from carbon to hydrogen. That's what they are there for - *strategic* planning, not reactionary shit they dreamed up because they are up for election in few months.

          • Well most speculation isn't 5 or 6 years in the future. It's done a few months ahead.

            If Congress said "drill wherever you want" right now, we would see exactly 0 barrels of that oil this year.

            • by ArcherB (796902) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:10PM (#24438551) Journal

              Speculators aren't idiots and know exactly how little oil is in the US reserves. Which still doesn't explain the sneaky and underhanded antics of the conservatives. Having the lights turned out on them is exactly what they deserve, they shouldn't try to sneak in and enact legislation while everyone is on vacation.

              Maybe those people that I elect and pay shouldn't be on vacation while I'm looking for second job so I can pay for the gas to get to my first job!

                • by Sloppy (14984) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:46PM (#24439403) Homepage Journal

                  That simply won't lower the price of gas, all it will do is put more money in the oil companies' pockets when they are already making record profits.

                  As you can see from replies, the extra stuff you threw in at the end of that sentence, only distracts people. The fact that the oil companies are making record profits, is utterly irrelevant to your point. But then it gets people to complain about that part (the irrelevant and unimportant tangent) of your statement, and then they're no longer listening to what you really said.

                  If people want to bitch about the proposed drilling changes, they should focus on the costs of the drilling (environmental, I guess? or is there a government subsidy here too?), and compare that to the expected benefit (nearly null). Throwing in additional snipes at the oil companies just turns it into an us-vs-them bitchfest, instead of the cost/benefit analysis that it should be.

                  I swear, every single thing I've read about this topic, has included this irrelevant bullshit, and the result of it has been the same every time: complete lack of communication.

                  • by vux984 (928602) on Friday August 01 2008, @03:14PM (#24439977)

                    What if my business isn't sustainable with a 5% profit margin?

                    Why exactly wouldn't it be?

                    If your business isn't sustainable after ALL your expenses are paid, including your salary, r&d costs, and any other costs you might incurr and there is still money left over (hint - that's the 'profit'), then you are completely incompetent.

                    In a small sole proprietership, where the owner doesn't draw a wage, but rather just 'keeps the profits' as his compensation, then sure, if the profits aren't high enough to adequately compensate him, he will close the business. But it would be more accurate to say in that situation that from the perspective of the business, that it is actually unprofitable, because its not covering the cost of keeping its most important 'staff member'.

                    Corporations aren't run like this. Profits are used to grow the business (and growth, by definition, implies that it has already been 'sustained'. and in some cases, paid back to shareholders as dividends.

                    So in the case of big-oil, record profits are just that: an opportunity for them to grow and to further line the pockets of shareholders and investors.

                    So quit harping on the "record profits" of the oil companies. It just demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of economics at the most basic level.

                    While you just demonstrated your complete lack of understanding of business at the most basic level.

                  • by mweather (1089505) on Friday August 01 2008, @03:46PM (#24440481)

                    http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/news/economy/oil_cuba/index.htm

                    US companies didn't bother to submit a bid because legally they couldn't drill that close to US shore. China has no such limitation.

                    I think they didn't submit bids because they didn't want to go to prison for violating trade sanctions against Cuba.

        • by Archangel Michael (180766) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:00PM (#24438329) Journal

          Actually, it is both sides acting childish.

          Democrats for taking their ball and going home. Republicans staying around whining like a 4 year old.

          Those people who think one side or the other is acting properly while the other side isn't, is just ... well stupid.

          They get paid for working full time, I suggest that they work like the rest of us "regular" people and take only two weeks per year vacation.

          I know, silly me to expect the public servants to act like servants rather than bosses.

          • by Wildfire Darkstar (208356) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:04PM (#24438407)

            Elected representatives are supposed to remain in touch with the districts they represent. Having them remain in Washington, D.C. 11 and 1/2 months a year makes it difficult to do that.

            Not, of course, that every representative uses his or her vacation time to keep in touch with his or her constituents, mind you. But that's part of the point, at least.

          • by Svartalf (2997) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:08PM (#24438511) Homepage

            Actually, the House moved to Adjourn at the scheduled time- because what was being proposed wasn't actually pressing business (Like a WAR...). That's not taking their ball and going home- that's just doing what ends up happening each and every year since the beginnings of the current form of Government we have in the US. It's far from the same thing as the antics going on right now from the Republicans.

            • by Archangel Michael (180766) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:23PM (#24438827) Journal

              So the energy and oil crisis isn't pressing? Then let the Democrats explicitly say so, and give the (R) campaign fodder for the Nov elections.

              I'm not defending the (R) either. They do the same sort of crap all the time too. I'm sick of both parties.

              Vote Third Party in November.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 01 2008, @02:14PM (#24438637)

            What? You think *talk* of drilling brought oil down $20? Really? You mean it wasn't the fact that the economy is falling like a rock, unemployment is up and that for the first time in memory americans actually drove less?

            It was talk about drilling?

          • Tell people you are drilling and yeah, the oil won't enter the stream for 10, 15 years but the speculative properties alone will drop crude by another $20 or $40, easy.

            That is, and I'd hope you agree, completely irrational.

            If you were an oil trader and knew that if we started drilling today and that oil wouldn't get used for another 10 years, why in God's name would that affect your bidding on contracts for September delivery?

          • by Woundweavr (37873) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:25PM (#24438873)

            Your argument is essentially that they acted inappropriately because their adjournment was premature and was therefore a premature adjournment.

            There was a perfectly valid vote where a majority chose to adjourn. Republicans wanted to take control of the agenda. They were not allowed to. The Senate had adjourned the day before. Its grandstanding by a party too used to being able to bully Democrats.

  • I'm missing the story other than Boehner and gang are trying to make a fuss about nothing.

    The motion to adjourn passed, so the Speaker banged the gavel and they went home. Am I supposed to think that the Democrats are somehow disregarding the rules of the House and refusing to let Republicans speak?

    • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday August 01 2008, @02:03PM (#24438387)
      Apparently Republicans have forgotten that they're in the minority now (an easy mistake to make, considering how Democrats have spent most of the last two years on their knees). Republicans have also apparently forgot how THEY treated Democrats when they were the majority (forcing them out of hearings, refusing to debate bills, shutting down Democratic filibusters, etc.)
        • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday August 01 2008, @02:32PM (#24439063)
          Yes, because Newt Gingrich and Dennis Hastert were *SO* well-known for their kind-hearted efforts to make peace with the opposition party and affect bi-partisan legislation. Nope, no heavy-handedness with those guys.
    • Oh the irony... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ivan256 (17499) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:30PM (#24438989)

      If the Republicans cut off debate on the Democrats and went home for vacation, I can guarantee you that this story would have been about the Republicans censoring the Democrats.

          • Yes I can (Score:5, Informative)

            by Woundweavr (37873) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:51PM (#24439511)

            Changing a bill after it had been passed [adn.com]

            One aspect of the pending FBI investigation centers on Young's role in securing a $10 million earmark in the $286.5 billion highway bill passed in 2005. The earmark, which was inserted in the bill after final passage by the House of Representatives and Senate, was for a study of a highway ramp sought by a Florida real estate developer. At a fundraiser while on a trip to Bonita Springs, Fla., to inspect the site, Young received more than $40,000 in donations.

            Holding open vote [cbsnews.com]

            CBS News correspondent Bob Fuss reports there was chaos on the Hour floor as Republican leaders passed the bill by holding a five-minute vote open for almost 50 minutes until they could convince two Republicans to change their votes.

            They buttonholed lawmakers for last-minute lobbying as Democrats complained loudly that the vote should be closed. Finally two GOP lawmakers switched from "no" to "yes," giving the bill's supporters the margin of victory.

            (additional examples [thinkprogress.org])
            It is against House rules to keep a vote open in order to alter the outcome.

            a recorded vote by electronic device shall not be held open for the sole purpose of reversing the outcome of such vote.

            "Abusive holds" is difficult to quantify but I'd point towards Tom Coburn's extensive holds [politico.com].

  • That's not all! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 01 2008, @01:42PM (#24437921)

    The summary didn't state everything. Pelosi was trying to stop a vote concerning foreign oil drilling. The REP's are currently mad and speaking to the public who have gathered in the upstairs gallery, arguing (one-sided, of course) their concerns and solutions for rising gas and energy prices.

  • by eviloverlordx (99809) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:43PM (#24437937)

    'This is the lobbyists' House,'

    I think that's closer to what he was trying to say.

  • by clonan (64380) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:43PM (#24437945)

    As I recall in 2003 the GOP chair of a committee refused to allow the Democratic members of the committe to speak, ignored a motion to continue the hearing and stormed off WITH the gavel in hand...all this beacuse the dems wanted to call some witnesses for testimony.

    I forget the details but google knows all.

    • by Insightfill (554828) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:13PM (#24438611) Homepage

      As I recall in 2003 the GOP chair of a committee refused to allow the Democratic members of the committe to speak, ignored a motion to continue the hearing and stormed off WITH the gavel in hand...all this beacuse the dems wanted to call some witnesses for testimony.

      Ah, yes. That was quite an event. Check wiki [wikipedia.org] for the June 17th event where it happened. There was also a case where the Dems held an 'unofficial' gathering which was so unofficial that they couldn't use any titles, such as 'chairman', as the GOP held the majority then. Regardless, Jim S. crashed that party and pulled the same stunt. Still looking for the story of the second case.

  • by unity100 (970058) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:47PM (#24438061) Homepage Journal
    wait until you see the singapore or korean parliament footages. circus doesnt describe it.

    even in turkish parliament there has been a lot of fights, and one representative was killed even, by a stray fist landing unintendedly.
  • by swschrad (312009) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:54PM (#24438229) Homepage Journal

    all it is is flames in both directions. we have more important things to discuss. like, for instance, goatse.cx

  • on topic? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by owlnation (858981) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:03PM (#24438373)
    News for Nerds... er, ok.. how is this?

    Were the lights turned off by robot running linux?

    Seriously editors, the best way to compete with Digg is not to compete with Digg. People will come.
  • Selective outrage (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kenrod (188428) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:13PM (#24438605)

    Politics is mostly theater, faux outrage, and pandering. Why would a stunt like this cause the average Slashdot reader's blood to boil?

    Because it's the GOP pulling the stunt. I don't recall much scoffing at Dennis Kucinich's attempt to hold impeachment hearings on President Bush. No, I guess that was all about a righteous avenger shining a spotlight on The Greatest Evil Our Planet Has Ever Known.

    These kinds of stunts get the media's attention and some coverage for issues one party or the other thinks is important. The fact that the Democrats didn't even hold a vote on domestic drilling despite overwhelming public support is something that ought to be mocked.

    • Even if the offshore drilling is allowed it will be many years before we see any benefit from it

      That was their excuse ten years ago. It would take ten years to see any benefit, so why bother?

      • by NiceGeek (126629) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:49PM (#24438095)

        Then I guess the vote could wait a few weeks without the economy imploding yes?

      • by jayveekay (735967) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:06PM (#24438453)

        The value of crude oil has gone up considerably in the last 10 years. All the oil that was not pumped out of the ground under the U.S. and burned in the last decade is now much more valuable, and if you can avoid pumping and burning it for another 10 years then it will be still more valuable.

        Given that Americans are handing huge bills to future generations, including a $10 trillion debt and another $80 trillion in unfunded liabilities (Medicare, Social Security), it is nice that some valuable resources can be passed on too. It is unfortunate that many Americans seem to think "If we don't drill and burn this crude oil now, *I* won't benefit from it! Drill Drill Drill, Burn Burn Burn! It's MY crude oil and I want to BURN it NOW!"

        • by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:14PM (#24438625)
          You're expressing the WORST argument for not drilling. Oil companies know better than ANYONE precisely how much it costs to get a drop out of the ground. Do you really think they would be pushing to drill in other areas if drilling where they already have leases were cost effective - particularly at the pace prices have been growing for the past 3 years?

          Do you REALLY think that those "evil" oil companies just want to be mean to everyone and run rampant and pillage? They're out to make the most cost-effective dollar by drilling for oil.

          Think about it this way - they AREN'T drilling on those leases because they WON'T make any money doing it....and I would trust their word on how much money they make off of oil than yours, unless you're some sort of petro-economic engineering expert.
        • Unwashed Masses? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by DesScorp (410532) <DesScorpNO@SPAMGmail.com> on Friday August 01 2008, @02:22PM (#24438805) Homepage Journal

          "The point is that more drilling isn't a fix. More drilling in the US will provide a relatively small amount of oil which will delay our energy problems for months, maybe a few years at best."

          More drilling alone isn't a fix by itself, but it's patently stupid and dishonest to say that more oil in the supply line won't help prices.

          "The Republicans are putting on a show today because it looks good to the unwashed masses, but getting their drilling won't solve our energy problems."

          I notice that, to liberals, when the issue is liberal and popular with Americans, then they're a great and wise people, righteous in their anger at the Republicans. But when the issue is conservative and supported by Americans, they're stupid unwashed masses.

          If you were really concerned about us solving our energy problems, you'd actually let us solve them. We've got plenty of ways to do it... more drilling, more shale, more coal to gasoline, more nuclear... liberals just don't like those options. What you're really mad about is that we won't do it your way... with nothing but biofuels and electric cars.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 01 2008, @01:55PM (#24438253)

      You didn't need to cheapen your post with the silly, biased commentary.

      "It may work. If the Democrats did this, the media would be happy to portray them as whiny little losers who didn't know when to go home. (Which would basically be accurate.)

      But since it's Republicans doing it, the media -- including Slashdot, in this case -- will find amusement in what the Dems "did" to the GOP."

      Seriously? You think the media and slashdot have republican bias?

    • by CorporateSuit (1319461) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:57PM (#24438279)
      Maybe when the country is headed full-force into a recession, it's not time for a 5-week vacation when there are laws to be passed. It's time to roll up the sleeves and get to work. The United States isn't ok right now. It's fragile and crumbling. Those elected officials want to spend their August kicking up their shoes when unemployment is at an all-time high?

      The Republicans are acting childish. It reminds me of what I would see in highschool when the teachers would strike -- but the Democrats are running away from the problems that need to be solved. It's their job, and it's not done yet, so they deserve no recess in August, no matter how long they've planned it. This isn't a retail job at Wal-mart where the company will be ok if one worker leaves for 6 weeks.

      But after everything is said and done, after seeing at least 4 major laws passed that grossly violate the constitution in the last 2 weeks, it's almost a reprieve to see them out for a few weeks. The only reason I'm sure they don't use the constitution as toilet paper is because some of them would actually read if that were the case.
      • Re:Protest (Score:5, Insightful)

        The whole thing was done to protest the Democrats' plan of adjourning the Congress so that there would be no more calls on the House floor to open up oil expoloration, something that, despite your opinion on the matter, the public overwhelmingly supports.

        The public is wrong. The price of crack has gone up and instead of trying to get off, they're demanding increased supply.

        The motion to adjourn passed? Of course it did. Right along party lines.

        Yeah, that tends to happen in the House, where the majority tends to do whatever it wants. In the Senate, the minority has more rights. And your party has played the Senate rules and Harry Reid like a fiddle. Seriously and with no sarcasm, well done. If the Democrats had 1% of the balls your guys have, we'd have never been in Iraq. THAT would have kept oil prices down.

        What's the approval rating of Congress now? 9 percent?

        Mostly because the Democrats promised all sorts legislation on which they couldn't deliver. Again, your party has done a good job of using the Senate rules to keep popular Democratic bills from getting passed. Republicans know most people don't care (or even know) about cloture motions or other arcane parliamentary procedures. All your average person knows is that Democrats promised they'd fix everything the Republicans screwed up and they're not doing it.

        The Democrats "Dogma Du Jour" is you people are just going to have to do with less and pay more for it. I'll take our position over yours all day long.

        I wish they had the balls to say that. The American people need to be told the score without any fluff. The age of cheap oil is over and it's going to take some sacrifice to get our economy switched over to renewables. We can't drill our way out of this even if we wanted to. India and China took our advice and liberalized their economies which made them a competitor for the same oil we are using.

    • by clonan (64380) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:57PM (#24438277)

      You are assuming that everyone is going to go hang out at their own 1000 acre ranch.

      Congress adjourns BECAUSE we are a representative democracy. Most congressmen go to their home districts and then spend all their time meeting with the people (YOU) to better understand what you want and represent you better.

      This is congress doing their job.

      What really tells is how active Congress is when they are in session. This Congress has been very active even though all the important legislation has been vetoed. Personally I am looking forward to meeting with my representative (Jim Marshal D-Ga) without having to fly to Washington.