THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Speaker to Animals]

Flipgina Akhbar!

[Speaker to Animals]

Democratic members of Congress want taxpayers to subsidize their housing, signing onto legislation that would allow them to deduct living expenses for members of the House of Representatives.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.) introduced a bill that would ban members of Congress from sleeping in their offices and would change the tax code to allow House members to deduct their spending on housing in D.C. up to $3,000. The deduction would not apply to senators.

Thompson has also proposed turning a vacant building near Capitol Hill into apartments for House members at the expensive of taxpayers, which critics have dubbed a "Congressional Animal House."

The taxpayer-watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste criticized Thompson's legislation and his proposed "taxpayer-funded dorms."

"On May 16, 2018, Rep. Thompson introduced H.R. 5845, the ‘No Couches for Congress Act,' which would ban members of Congress from sleeping in their offices," the group said. "He also proposed converting vacant residence halls near the Capitol into ‘affordable‘ housing for members of Congress, who make $174,000 per year. He claimed that it would be available for members who found housing costs to be ‘prohibitive.'"

http://freebeacon.com/issues/democrat-c ... ded-dorms/


That's how you make a blue wave happen, guys. Keep it up! Trump is almost finished this time!

[Ph64]

Democratic members of Congress want taxpayers to subsidize their housing, signing onto legislation that would allow them to deduct living expenses for members of the House of Representatives.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.) introduced a bill that would ban members of Congress from sleeping in their offices and would change the tax code to allow House members to deduct their spending on housing in D.C. up to $3,000. The deduction would not apply to senators.

Thompson has also proposed turning a vacant building near Capitol Hill into apartments for House members at the expensive of taxpayers, which critics have dubbed a "Congressional Animal House."

The taxpayer-watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste criticized Thompson's legislation and his proposed "taxpayer-funded dorms."

"On May 16, 2018, Rep. Thompson introduced H.R. 5845, the ‘No Couches for Congress Act,' which would ban members of Congress from sleeping in their offices," the group said. "He also proposed converting vacant residence halls near the Capitol into ‘affordable‘ housing for members of Congress, who make $174,000 per year. He claimed that it would be available for members who found housing costs to be ‘prohibitive.'"

http://freebeacon.com/issues/democrat-c ... ded-dorms/


That's how you make a blue wave happen, guys. Keep it up! Trump is almost finished this time!

Agreed. I think they need to add a stipend for coke and hookers to that budget too. And propose bumping their pay up to $250k/year while extending their summer recess by a month. The party of the "common working man" will prevail!

[Zlaxer]

[TheReal_ND]

Maxine waters btfo lol

[pineapplemike]

wake up punchy!

[Haumana]

[Okeefenokee]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/1 ... 1_j4el.pdf

No, actually it did.

The sentence directly preceding,

The State Court of Appeals’ brief discussion of this disparity of treatment does not answer Phillips’ concern that the State’s practice was to disfavor the religious basis of his objection.

SCOTUS ruled that the gov't was mean in their process, not that they were wrong.

SCOTUS rules on facts not emotions. The state was wrong on handling and ruling.

Go read any conservative commentary on the decision. Go read what Gorsuch wrote. Go read what Thomas wrote.

[The Conservative]

The sentence directly preceding,

SCOTUS rules on facts not emotions. The state was wrong on handling and ruling.

Go read any conservative commentary on the decision. Go read what Gorsuch wrote. Go read what Thomas wrote.

Today’s decision respects these principles. As the Court explains, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission failed to act neutrally toward Jack Phillips’s religious faith. Maybe most notably, the Commission allowed three other bakers to refuse a customer’s request that would have required them to violate their secular commitments. Yet it denied the same accommodation to Mr. Phillips when he refused a customer’s request that would have required him to violate his religious beliefs

And

I agree that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission (Commission) violated Jack Phillips’ right to freely exer­ cise his religion.

Seems they both agree with me that Colorado overstepped their boundaries.

[Okeefenokee]

There is no hope for you.