Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Obama admin silent as USPS lays off 35,000 workers...with more layoffs to come [View all]"Its not that he isn't aware. He helped sponsor the bill in 2006."
...are mixing up two different bills. The one you cited is not the postal funding bill.
"In addition to Coburn, Obama, and McCain, there were 43 other Senators who co-sponsored this bill: Lamar Alexander, George Allen, Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Jeff Bingaman, Barbara Boxer, Sam Brownback, Richard Burr, Maria Cantwell, Saxby Chambliss, Hillary Clinton, Norm Coleman, Susan Collins, John Cornyn, Larry Craig, Jim DeMint, Mike DeWine, Chris Dodd, Elizabeth Dole, Dick Durbin, Mike Enzi, Russ Feingold, Bill Frist, Chuck Grassley, Chuck Hagel, Johnny Isakson, John Kerry, Jon Kyl, Mary Landrieu, Joe Lieberman, Mitch McConnell, Bob Menendez, Bill Nelson, Harry Reid, Ken Salazar, Rick Santorum, Jeff Sessions, Olympia Snowe, John Sununu, Jim Talent, Craig Thomas, John Thune, David Vitter, and George Voinovich."
That's a reference to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law No: 109-282, signed in September 2006)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Funding_Accountability_and_Transparency_Act_of_2006
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:S.2590:
The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 is a separate law (Public Law No: 109-435, signed in December 2006)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN00662:
Obama was not among the 26 co-sponsors.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
155 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Obama admin silent as USPS lays off 35,000 workers...with more layoffs to come [View all]
brentspeak
Feb 2012
OP
Who do you include in your definition of bourgeoise? I still think the working class needs a wakeup
rhett o rick
Feb 2012
#118
Sorry, I am totally lost. And yes I am sober. At least for the next half hour. nm
rhett o rick
Feb 2012
#130
When you talked about oligarchs v. people you were definitely on the right track -
TBF
Feb 2012
#135
Thank you for the clarification. Withholding our labor isnt an option at this
rhett o rick
Feb 2012
#150
Collectively the American middle class still has a lot of capital. They want that capital.
rhett o rick
Feb 2012
#152
No, once again bipartisan neoliberalism supports short sighted vested interests and upward transfers
PufPuf23
Feb 2012
#44
It's a continuing downward spiral for many, but if the markets go up too many think this is
RKP5637
Feb 2012
#3
USPS will be gone in ten years, so what happens if they don't fund retiree benefits now?
FarCenter
Feb 2012
#26
Why would they be gone in 10 years, they can be competitive in similar things to
RKP5637
Feb 2012
#27
I had read at one time that another problem USPS has is having to deliver to every
RKP5637
Feb 2012
#29
This is what I thought was the real reason that UPS is going bankrupt.It happened before Pres..
The Wielding Truth
Feb 2012
#54
"Just because it's obsolete for you doesn't make it so for everyone else."
Tarheel_Dem
Feb 2012
#107
And you don't particularly strike me as someone who can be lumped in with "any" of "us".
Tarheel_Dem
Feb 2012
#144
Waxman and Davis are not the ones responsible for the prefunding requirement
brentspeak
Feb 2012
#16
Well, this should all be a nice boon the private sector. I bet UPS and Fedex is funding Darrel Issa.
JNathanK
Feb 2012
#13
Many, if not all, are tring to avoid closure through cost cutting and efficiency measures
bhikkhu
Feb 2012
#25
"2006 bill, if they did not have to do that, they'd be TURNING A PROFIT RIGHT NOW."
SunsetDreams
Feb 2012
#35
We do a lot of eBay and we ship just about everything USPS, except for some large and
RKP5637
Feb 2012
#37
No, the USPS is running at a major loss because of the prefunding requirement
brentspeak
Feb 2012
#146
Rural America and its many teabaggers do want to pay for maintaining this service level
high density
Feb 2012
#32
^Post of the Day^ Cutting through the lies about the situation with the USPS.
Major Hogwash
Feb 2012
#55
What other businesses are artificially burdened with a bankrupting prefunding requirement?
brentspeak
Feb 2012
#61
With the internet and their pension costs, their cashflow is in a world of hurt. Something needs to
RBInMaine
Feb 2012
#69
Are you insane??? I have not had hundreds of posts deleted and have not accused but maybe 2 people
Pisces
Feb 2012
#153
This quote calls the whole basis of the o.p. into doubt. I'm so glad you're here.
Tarheel_Dem
Feb 2012
#115
I hate that this has happened. But people don't use the USPS much anymore, do they?
Honeycombe8
Feb 2012
#82
It's the same old crowd that will rec anything (and I seriously mean ANYTHING)
Number23
Feb 2012
#154
If we mail all those "business reply mail" cards and envelopes, would the USPS earn more money?
FarCenter
Feb 2012
#113
So many lies, no need to bother with arguing, as there is no intent of being truthful.
boppers
Feb 2012
#124
Someone needs to file a lawsuit against the Republicans and the administration re: PO
New Yawker
Feb 2012
#125
You must have flunked civics--the President can't override laws that have been
geek tragedy
Feb 2012
#134