• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

What the hell is a super congress?

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
As soon as I posted the debt limit thread, I went back to Market Ticker and found a link to this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/23/super-congress-debt-ceiling_n_907887.html

Kar's discussion here:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=190615


Haven't finished my reasearch yet, but any attempt to bypass the people and do this would be reason for shutting down the governmnet as it exists, completely.

Sorry, mods and owners, just the politicians talking about it is treason. I stand by my statement.
 
Last edited:

okboomer

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
1,164
Location
Oklahoma, USA
WOW! There are a lot of things in that that I have an issue with, but this one really frosts my toes "... and the public's unwillingness to let go of benefits such as Medicare and Social Security that have been earned over a lifetime of work ..." Excuse me, I thought most of us PAID into Social Security (FICA mean anything) and have not "earned" the benefits (and that isn't what they are anyway) but have PAID for those benefits with a lifetime of work.

IIRC, Social Security was to be used for people who had worked all their life, and the company (usually only one at that time) did not provide retirement for their employees (as was accepted practice then) or would fire the employee rather than let them retire which devested them from the retirement benefits the company was supposed to provide.

As it is, I have sent emails to both my Congressmen: Coburn, R-OK, Inhofe, R-OK, and my Representative: Lucas, R-OK urging all of them to have this removed.

Get busy folks!
 

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
Howdy OK

Yep, the discussions must be held, in Washington, on CSpan, not in some committee room.

We can keep funding Social Security and other social programs. Not forever, and not at the current rate of increase, but for some time. We would have to cut out almost all other government to do so, however. This is the debate we need to have now.

I have been thinking about this for over 30 years, since I was a teenager and asked my dad about it. We were visiting my mom's parents in rural Kansas. They were living mostly on SS. Dad informed me then that it was a program in trouble and that when I started working full-time, I would be contributing to my grandparents income. He asked me "Are you willing to cut off your grandmother's Social Security check? And will you let her come live with you?"

Valid questions then and now; and questions like this concerning all government spending need to addressed now, in public.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
"What the hell is a SuperCongress?"

A subversion of the constitution and usurpation of power.

Really just a committee that can bypass the standard process. Better named "Super Committee." Kinda like the Politburo of the Central Committee of the USSR or China. More control. Control of the rest of the controllers.

Today the SuperCongress will just do debt limit stuff. Later, as more contentious legislation arises--contentious because none of the looters want to be held accountable for what they want to do--the "need" will be found for the SuperCongress to decide more and more issues. It will become functionally the equivalent of the Politburo, which to me makes sense since those in power always want more power and more looting. Doesn't matter what name they hang on themselves--socialist, communist, Congressman--the essential elements don't change--power, money, ambition, control.

In as much as the fedgove has already shredded the constitution, I sometimes wonder if it should just be burned so the looting expropriators can't make a pretense out of it.

I found out about it at this informative little blog: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/
 
Last edited:

jammer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
85
Location
, ,
Social Security

Yep, the discussions must be held, in Washington, on CSpan, not in some committee room.

We can keep funding Social Security and other social programs. Not forever, and not at the current rate of increase, but for some time. We would have to cut out almost all other government to do so, however. This is the debate we need to have now.

I have been thinking about this for over 30 years, since I was a teenager and asked my dad about it. We were visiting my mom's parents in rural Kansas. They were living mostly on SS. Dad informed me then that it was a program in trouble and that when I started working full-time, I would be contributing to my grandparents income. He asked me "Are you willing to cut off your grandmother's Social Security check? And will you let her come live with you?"

Valid questions then and now; and questions like this concerning all government spending need to addressed now, in public.

Our gov. stole money from Social Security over the years, which by the way was never suppose to happen [our gov. being able to take or bower form Social Security ] It was against the law, and is against the law. Now Social Security has [ IOU'S FOR THE STOLEN MONEY INSTEAD.] Which Social Security will probably never get back. If the gov. were to pay back what they stole then, Social Security would be solvent again.
 

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
Our gov. stole money from Social Security over the years, which by the way was never suppose to happen [our gov. being able to take or bower form Social Security ] It was against the law, and is against the law. Now Social Security has [ IOU'S FOR THE STOLEN MONEY INSTEAD.] Which Social Security will probably never get back. If the gov. were to pay back what they stole then, Social Security would be solvent again.

It would be nice if the SS funds had been in a "lockbox" and drawn interest as well. It would be flush with cash. Of course for that to work we couldn't have politicians buying votes from parasites in exchange for welfare benefits.
 

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
Citizen....

...after posting this, I went out and l had a coupla' beers with some friends.

I was searching for a term and POLITBURO popped into my head.

The folks I was talking to ended up upset that I was discussing a "serious" subject. Oh well. I'm not really in it to make friends. I live my life.
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
"What the hell is a SuperCongress?"

A subversion of the constitution and usurpation of power.

Really just a committee that can bypass the standard process. Better named "Super Committee." Kinda like the Politburo of the Central Committee of the USSR or China. More control. Control of the rest of the controllers.

Today the SuperCongress will just do debt limit stuff. Later, as more contentious legislation arises--contentious because none of the looters want to be held accountable for what they want to do--the "need" will be found for the SuperCongress to decide more and more issues. It will become functionally the equivalent of the Politburo, which to me makes sense since those in power always want more power and more looting. Doesn't matter what name they hang on themselves--socialist, communist, Congressman--the essential elements don't change--power, money, ambition, control.

In as much as the fedgove has already shredded the constitution, I sometimes wonder if it should just be burned so the looting expropriators can't make a pretense out of it.

I found out about it at this informative little blog: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/

They've done this before, Citizen. The Base Relocation and Closure Committee (BRAC) was formed to make the hard decisions about which military bases would be closed or which units would be shifted (along with all of the civilian jobs that supported those units) to another base. Once the BRAC List was formulated, the House and Senate had to vote to approve or kill the entire list without the ability to amend it.

What this does is to insulate the vast majority of Representatives and Senators from having to accept responsibility for the decisions that might affect the people in the district or state that they represent. It's done because if 535 politicians had to come up with an approvable list of closures and relocations, it would never get done.

Still, it should be regarded as a breakdown in the committee system and a shirking of representational responsibility ... and it should NEVER be used on major issues such as the budget, debt reductions and tax increases. EVERY representative must be made to stand on his principles and vote those issues up or down ... IMHO.
 
Last edited:

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
A truly super Congress would be one that spent four years condensing the grossly over-bloated U.S. Code into a manageable, book-sized document.

Yeah, I know. I can dream, can't I? :rolleyes:
 

ldsgeek

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
103
Location
New Hampshire
Book sized?

A truly super Congress would be one that spent four years condensing the grossly over-bloated U.S. Code into a manageable, book-sized document.

Yeah, I know. I can dream, can't I? :rolleyes:

You mean you don't like your books with upwards of 30,000 pages? Come on, that's just a good nights read:eek:
 

tim12232

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
131
Location
Charlotte, NC
According to Timapedia :D

A Super Congress is a seperate congress that is unconstitutional and has not been approved by a vote of the people of the United States. :mad:

When in doubt...make another congress to to fix the current congress and make it up of the same people running both of the congress' :question: I think?:eek:
 

metalman383

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
282
Location
Eau Claire WI, ,
I don't think I like the Super Congress! I got this from the G.O.A

Urgent Action Needed!

Congress to decide whether Super Congress could impose gun control


Gun owner registration … bans on semi-automatic firearms … adoption of a UN gun control treaty -- all of these issues could very well be decided over the next 24 hours.



Both houses of Congress will be voting on a debt ceiling bill that establishes a legislative committee with TREMENDOUS powers. Fox News is calling this committee a SUPER CONGRESS, because its legislative proposals (which could include gun control provisions) CANNOT be filibustered or amended in the Senate or House.



To understand what a huge deal this is, consider that House Speaker John Boehner is able to keep a mountain of gun control bills from coming to the floor of the House. That’s the power of the Speaker.



And in the Senate, we have been able to kill much of the gun control agenda by filibustering legislation (that is, requiring the Majority Leader to get a supermajority or 60 votes in order to pass gun control).



The most recent example of this occurred earlier this year when we defeated a radical, anti-gun judicial nomination (Goodwin Liu) using the filibuster. The filibuster has been our saving grace in the Senate, but that could be tossed within the next 24 hours.



Regarding the debt ceiling compromise, here’s what one legislative analyst (inside a Republican office on Capitol Hill) had to say:



Right now, we have limited protection from the schemes of the left – even if they have some Republican support, we have a speaker who wouldn’t bring horrible bills to the floor, and we have the Senate filibuster.



Both of these are rendered moot by the Super committee. There is NO Senate filibuster on the product they report. The Speaker CANNOT stop a vote in the House….



[Hence], 22 liberal Republicans can join the Congressional Democrats and the President in: Closing the gun show “loophole,” banning semi-automatic weapons, creating a national handgun registration, or ordering state gun laws moot.



A super highway for gun control legislation? This is incredibly unconstitutional! We don’t elect a Congress, which can then turn around and elect a SUPER committee. We need to make sure this never lands on the President’s desk.



ACTION: Please email and call your Representative and Senators. Urge them to vote NO on establishing this SUPER CONGRESS with unconstitutional powers
 
Top