Should there be $100 million in the Iraq Afghanistan spending bill for 2008 conventions?

Question

Just watched an ammendment (Coburn - R-OK) defeated in the senate which would have REMOVED $100 million of US taxpayer's dollars for the 2008 democrat and republican conventions from the Iraq/Afghanistan spending bill. 51 to 45. To give credit, Obama was for said ammendment, Schumer against. How do you feel on this, and why? My personal opinion is NEITHER party deserves ONE CENT of taxpayer money to put on their conventions. All they need is their party members to get out and vote, and there are 51 senators who need to be voted out of office. As if anyone pays attention or remembers by then.

Answer 1

That is THE outstanding question. And when Bush veto's the bill, I hope he's articulate enough to explain that as one of the many reasons why.

Answer 2

You do have the option on your tax form if you want your taxes to go toward political parties or not.

In this world it is more than just getting people out to vote, it is convinving them to vote and there are a lot of methods to do some. Most of which are expensive!

Answer 3

don't forget the other 200 million for other pet projects. we the tax payers should never and i mean never have to pay for any political party's party. they already ask for personal contribution on tax filing forms so it is rediculous that they tried to put this in a bill that is supposed to just be for our military men and women fighting and dying for us, very crass. it doesn't matter who was or wasn't for this add-on only that the american people should be outraged that our politicians can't even do one bill without it being a payback to some rich backers.

Answer 4

I dont get what your complaint. You mad cuz the conventions didnt get the money?

Answer 5

Corruption.