|
3mnkids1
|
 |
« on: February 26, 2009, 11:09:40 AM » |
|
http://www.povertyscorecard.org/The Poverty Scorecard rates every Member of Congress on how they voted on anti-poverty legislation. Click on a state to the left to see how its representatives rate. interesting. It shows the population, poverty rate and how senators and representatives from your state voted on poverty related legislation. I think my state of IL did pretty well actually. Most of the grades were C and up. only one F and two D's. see how your state is doing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
garmer
SA Member
SA Bronze Member
 Offline
Posts: 54
aMember user
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2009, 11:42:17 AM » |
|
Looks like just republicans in my state got bad grades.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2009, 12:02:38 PM » |
|
New York got mostly A's. No way, no how are those scores right. With the cost of living, foreclosures, loss of jobs, the homeless problem, etc., in this state, I can only imagine where they came up with those scores.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2009, 12:09:58 PM » |
|
In order to get any perspective of these votes, each piece of legislation needs to be viewed in full to understand what exactly they voted for or against.
Just saying who voted anti-poverty isn't telling us much without seeing what is in the actual legislation.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2009, 12:23:32 PM » |
|
Oh, and I just remembered another thing. These guys who got A's for voting for alleged anti-poverty legislation also want to impose an 18% fat tax on us in New York for consuming certain foods and drinks!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2009, 12:48:16 PM » |
|
 looks like pretty much all republicans are heartless. Shame that's not really the way it is.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2009, 12:55:50 PM » |
|
looks like pretty much all republicans are heartless.  Which ones? The conservative republicans (not many of those around), the liberal republicans, or the ones in the middle; or those ones who call themselves democrats but decide to call themselves republicans when it's the flavor of the hour! Obviously, this report card is really too vague to actually know what was voted on. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2009, 12:59:54 PM » |
|
looks like pretty much all republicans are heartless. Which ones? The conservative republicans (not many of those around), the liberal republicans, or the ones in the middle; or those ones who call themselves democrats but decide to call themselves republicans when it's the flavor of the hour! Obviously, this report card is really too vague to actually know what was voted on. Well the ones in red I'm pretty sure there's more to this than we are seeing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2009, 01:07:49 PM » |
|
Wait a minute. I know what they voted on! Anti-poverty legislation to ensure the rich don't become poor! They're hiking up everything on us big time this year! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
3mnkids1
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2009, 01:22:08 PM » |
|
http://www.povertyscorecard.org/methodology/In consultation with our national advisory board and other antipoverty experts, we selected the most significant votes on poverty issues in the U.S. Senate and House in calendar year 2008. The votes we selected cover a wide range of subject areas, including affordable housing and homelessness; labor, employment and unemployment compensation; health care; higher education; consumer protection; rights of the disabled; and veterans.
Each member of the House is scored based on 17 selected votes and each member of the Senate is scored based on 9 selected votes. If a member did not cast a “yes” or “no” vote on a particular measure (for example, if the member was absent), that vote was not considered in determining the member’s score. Each vote is given equal weight. We did not score members who did not vote enough times for the score to be a fair assessment of their performance.
We ranked 428 of 435 members of the House of Representatives, each of whom voted on at least 12 of the 17 votes we selected. We ranked 96 of 100 senators, each of whom voted on at least 6 of the 9 votes we selected.
Unless otherwise indicated, we used the vote on final passage. Where multiple votes were cast on a bill, we selected the vote that was the most significant in fighting poverty, either the clean vote, meaning the vote before extraneous provisions were added or after they were stripped away; the decisive vote, meaning the vote that decided whether the bill or amendment would move forward in 2008; or the compromise vote, meaning the vote on the version that had the best chance of becoming law. Our reasons for selecting particular votes are further explained in the bill summaries.
While we were deciding which votes to use, we did not review the roll call on any vote, nor did we review any other material that would have indicated how a particular member voted. http://www.povertyscorecard.org/everything/How every Member of Congress voted on the bills important to fighting poverty. Click on any bill, state or legislator to learn more. lots of information if one will take the time to actually look.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2009, 01:34:17 PM » |
|
It has to be the actual full-version legislation, not the overviews that are less than Cliff Notes.
Actions always speak louder than words, and the New York politicians are going to make us poorer this year and increase the homeless population. You wouldn't believe the electric rate hike they approved for this year! We're also supposed to take a major hit on property taxes too which are already some of the highest in the country.
Nothing they have been voting on and trying to pass in this state has shown that they are anti-poverty!
They're making everything harder on us.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
3mnkids1
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2009, 01:50:39 PM » |
|
Like I posted earlier. lots of information if one will take the time to look. once you click on a bill on the right is Visit govtrack.us Detailed information about the bill, including full text, floor speeches, sponsors and more . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2009, 11:31:34 PM » |
|
don't you know there will only be two classes. the filthy rich and the poverty stricken poor. Guess which one I'll fall in.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
3mnkids1
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 27, 2009, 12:07:28 AM » |
|
I dont think poverty is a laughing matter. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 27, 2009, 12:11:29 AM » |
|
I dont think poverty is a laughing matter. really. I don't think you see our future and if you can't laugh what else will you have. But of course again you are free to feel how you wish. I'm laughing at myself I'm on the way to the poor house. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 27, 2009, 12:13:36 AM by cin »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #15 on: February 27, 2009, 12:38:26 AM » |
|
What I see referenced as "full text" isn't the full legislation. It's just the undetailed outline/reference of the potential changes to the actual legislation. One would have to go into the actual legislation referenced and read through that first to understand what changes they are really making which, of course, requires a good brunt of quiet time.
As it is right now, I am suspect of what they're basing our New York politicians as being anti-poverty on given the recent actions they have taken on the people of the state of New York which will increase home foreclosures, increase our tax burden, increase our utility rates, increase homelessness, and put a further burden on the welfare system. These are not the actions of people who are anti-poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
3mnkids1
|
|
« Reply #16 on: February 27, 2009, 12:53:30 AM » |
|
The full text is just what it says.. This version: Introduced in Senate. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the Senate for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill available on this website. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-3604 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #17 on: February 27, 2009, 12:58:43 AM » |
|
The full text is just what it says.. This version: Introduced in Senate. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the Senate for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill available on this website. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-3604I see that, but it's only the full text of the bill which is only an outline of the amendments to the actual legislation. The legislation would be a binded book. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2009, 01:00:46 AM » |
|
Maybe some of them voted present heartless I tell you. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #19 on: February 27, 2009, 01:07:43 AM » |
|
Maybe some of them voted present heartless I tell you. I keep saying "last one off of Long Island turn off the lights"! You want to know heartless, live out here. It's not just that we don't want to live here anymore, we have to move. The only ones left on the Island will be the rich and famous. It's almost like they're purposely trying to drive us out. Would you believe they even have a fire department tax on our property tax bill, and Long Island fire departments are elaborate as it is with the most expensive trucks and equipment in the nation. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
