Consequences of Lame Duck Sessions

Commentary by Rachel Pulaski - The Senate has proven to America that lame duck sessions should be banned. One controversial moratorium that was up for vote Tuesday was the earmark ban. This ban would stop elected officials from appropriating funds for special projects without approval from the executive branch. More importantly, it would stop some of the political games played between our elected officials. For instance, H.R. 847 the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act which guarantees healthcare to 9/11 responders was tossed around in congress for years lacking bi-partisan support mostly because of the large amount of earmarks. Instead of the Democrats passing the bill through a simple majority they demanded a two-thirds majority vote. Democrats decided to pull a “procedural gimmick “ and forced Republicans either to eat humble pie or to oppose the bill and be open to charges that they were abandoning the heroes of 9/11. The Senate had a chance to end this madness but instead they decided to vote against the two year ban on earmarks. Only 42 Republicans have Senate seats in the lame duck session and most of the anti-earmark Republicans will not take their seats until January so this vote may not come as a surprise to some. The moratorium on earmarks was included in SB 510 the Food Safety Modernization Act and the Senate voted in favor of this giant FDA power grab today. This atrocity could make sharing food from your own private garden a “national security threat”. This bill would also lead to a much larger, powerful and overgrown FDA. The roll call session is available here. Clearly lame duck sessions are for the self indulgent politicians to stuff their pork filled bellies. We as voters should never allow politicians who have been defeated at the polls to continue to raise taxes, set policy or spend money that the electorate has decided someone else should be doing.

Consequences of Lame Duck Sessions