Jump to content
Dan I agree that both sides do it. That does not make it acceptable.
The Federal Court System is currently authorized to have 860 Judges with 9 Scotus Appointments, 167 Regional Appeals Justices, 12 Federal Appeals Justices and 663 District Judges. RIight this second there are 84 vacant positions that Congress has approved and the Justice Department claims are badly needed yet Congress sits on their hands and refuses to confirm anyone.
Their actions are a deliberate attempt to make sure that the Judicial system does not function properly. The current SCOTUS fiasco is just icing on a $&^! Sunday.
Quoted From the Federal Bar Association:
"The rising number of judicial vacancies prevents the prompt and timely administration of justice in the federal courts–where FBA members practice. This is causing unnecessary hardship and increased costs on individuals and businesses with lawsuits pending in the federal courts.
The judicial vacancies problem has reached crisis point with more than one-third of the current 103 vacancies in the U.S. Courts of Appeals and the District Courts have existed for at least 18 months. The Judicial Conference, the policy making body of the federal judiciary, has designated these vacancies as “judicial emergencies.”
Ken, to my way of thinking, this is not about whether the Supreme Court should have 6, or 8, or 9 justices. Both parties have argued this at different times throughout history.
The real question is can the Senate be allowed to simply ignore their constitutional responsibilities?
In 1947-49 the 80th Congress was nicknamed the "Do Nothing Congress" because they only managed to pass 906 bills which was the smallest number of bills pass by any congress ever. The current situation is even worse. Since 2010 Congress has managed to pass fewer and fewer bills with each subsequent session passing even fewer. In pursuit of their stated goal to make Obama a one term President they have forgotten that they actually work for the American people (All of them.) After losing the Presidential election in 2012, Republicans now take the tact that the American People must have a voice in the process. Just what in the heck was the election in 2012?
This is my problem with them in a nutshell. We pay them 100's of thousands of dollars each for them to sit on their respective butts and do absolutely nothing. Unacceptable!
Again, if you do not like the nominee then vote NO but at least do your job and hold the dang vote.
Ken, how can the Senate give "Advice and Consent" when they refuse to even talk to the nominee? They act more like 1st graders with fingers in their hears singing na na na na na na na! Also, how many budgets has Mitch McConnell passed again?
If the nominee is not acceptable, to me that means the Senate either Filibusters or votes down that nominee and tells the President to try again. Many nominees in history never made it to a full Senate vote because the committee voted no to sending that nominee on to a full vote. Sure there have been epic fights by both sides over these issues, but simply refusing to do anything is unacceptable IMO.
Ken writes "The only positive that I see is that waiting to elect delegates ensured that delegates weren't pledged to candidates that had dropped out of the race."
How does removing any route to an actual vote of the baseline Republican citizen end up being a "positive?" This process was a sham and invokes memories of the back room deals of previous generations. The GOP leadership in Colorado should be ashamed and replaced.
Primary Cost Drivers - Like the MRI machine at YVMA costing over $2500 for a Lower Lumbar screen when you can get the same exact test in Denver for $450.
How about a Tylenol administered to a in hospital patient that costs $12 when the same patient could bring one from home for about 25 cents but that is simply not allowed.
If you are on prescription medication of any sort when you happen to stay in the hospital overnight, they will not allow you to bring your already purchased medication. The hospital then proceeds to give you the exact same dosage at exorbitant prices.
Broken, you bet, and the ACA failed to address those concerns. Do any of you trust the current political system to correct that?
Part of the problem with ever increasing Health Insurance costs is that the insurance companies are allowed to break consumers into ever smaller groups so the actuarial tables create higher risks and generate higher premiums to cover the risk.
If the health insurance companies were required to measure the risk across their entire pool of insured individuals the premiums would drop for everyone.
This bill is a good idea that needs to be implemented.
Did not play much volleyball did you Scott? I have seen many a shorter person dominate their respective competition even against the one in a million 6' 8" blocker. In addition, the best beach players are the smaller, quicker players and that is where most of the money is. Sure, it always helps to be tall and fast, but those players do not always win.
I like the way that CHP manages to place the blame on the pedestrian. It is my understanding that as the driver of a vehicle, you are required to avoid hitting anyone or anything in front of you right? If any normal citizen hit this pedestrian there would be traffic or criminal charges to the driver, but when a policeman hits a citizen, they automatically assume that the citizen is at fault. Come on CHP, this officer was not paying attention or the accident would not have happened. A traffic citation is due to the officer at the very least.
Uhhh, you are now south of Oak Creek Rhys .........
One would think that the staff of the Pilot would have a heart to heart talk with Mr. Hartless. He gets more comments deleted than everyone else added together. How many times will he be allowed to violate your posting standards with personal attacks?
Last login: Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |