Lieberman lies on his Website -claims he's against Bankrupcy Bill

[papau]

Lieberman of course voted for cloture, which was when opposition would have mattered. Does anyone get angry about transparent lies by Mr Ethics of the Senate - the fellow that damned Clinton over a private sex affair?

http://lieberman.senate.gov/

Lieberman Statement on Vote Against Bankruptcy Reform Bill

WASHINGTON - Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) today made the following statement on the passage of S. 256 the Bankruptcy Reform Bill by a vote of 74 to 25.

“I have always supported bankruptcy reform legislation in the Senate when it has reflected a bipartisan effort to enact a balanced bill for both debtors and creditors and I have opposed it when confronted with a bill that seemed one-sided. This is not a balanced bill. I voted against this bill because it failed to close troubling loopholes that protect wealthy debtors, and yet it deals harshly with average Americans facing unforeseen medical expenses or a sudden military deployment. The Senate simply rejected out of hand many worthwhile amendments that would have protected these and other working Americans who find themselves in dire financial straits through no fault of their own. As a result, I believe this is a seriously flawed bill and I am disappointed at its passage.”

[danalytical]

1. yes or no

He voted for the bill?

[papau]

2. He voted for cloture knowing that meant bill passed, then voted against

the bill.

A classic trying to have your cake and eat it too moment.

[genius]

11. He voted against it. We can call him on his cloture vote as hypocritical

but I don't think we can just out and out say he was for the bill - since he can show that he voted against it.

[JohnnyRingo]

3. Just another politician

It's probably his way of saying that he doesn't have a dog in this hunt.

Not sure, but I think the big insurance companies own Joe, and he may not want to discourage future "support" from the CC comps.

[Hokie]

4. Holy Joe, Holy Cow, Holy Sh!+,

Can you imagine how much pleasure Joe gives Karl Rove?

[saracat]

5. So concerned he is for all the poor debters he voted aginst every single

amendment that would have helped them. He is just making his position worse. He is an ass wipe!

[papau]

6. good point :-(

:-(

[applegrove]

7. What do we mean by poor. Isn't the cut off rate something like if

$60,000 a year? I don't consider that very poor. Please explain it to me because I do not know what this is about.

I do understand that there were a few gifts for some rich. But beyond that...

[papau]

8. State average wage is Bankruptcy means test start level - not $60,000

The centerpiece of the legislation is a provision that would limit access to Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code, which allows people to sharply reduce their debt payments and get a fresh start.

The bill would instead impose a means test that would prompt many people to file for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 13, which requires a repayment plan. The means test would not be applied to debtors who earn less than the median income in their state. Those who earn more than that and can pay at least $6,000 over five years would have to seek protection under Chapter 13.


So check the median income for individuals in your state and you will find where the new law kicks in.
For example: Vermont and the USA average
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/50000.html

Per capita money income, 1999 $20,625 $21,587

Median household income, 1999 Vermont $40,856 USA$41,994

Persons per household, 2000 2.44 2.59

So I suspect that most of those making more than $10 per hour are hit by this law.

[papau]

9. Here are highlights of Bill - and table H11 median income by size of

Household.

HIGHLIGHTS
• Spells out what is a reasonable amount to pay for food, clothing, transportation and housing, and requires the debtor to live within those guidelines unless there is a good reason not to;

• Makes it harder to shield assets by moving to Texas or Florida (or another state with a high homestead exemption) and buying an expensive house;

• Forces the debtor to pay the full cost of an auto loan or lose the vehicle to repossession, even if the vehicle isn't worth the outstanding balance on the loan;

• Requires debtors to complete courses in personal financial management before their debts are discharged in bankruptcy;

• Raises the priority of child-support and alimony payments;

• Places a $1 million cap on the amount in Roth and regular Individual Retirement Accounts that can be shielded from creditors;

• Protects money that has been put in education IRAs;

• Requires debtors to pay all charges made to credit cards in the three months before filing for bankruptcy;

• Makes it easier for landlords to evict bankrupt tenants who are behind on their rent;

• Lets creditors ask the court to dissolve the bankruptcy plan if a debtor is late in filing paperwork, such as copies of paycheck stubs and tax returns;

• Requires bank regulators to study whether credit card companies are offering credit indiscriminately, without regard to whether consumers can repay their debt, and whether the resulting debt is contributing to bankruptcies;

• Requires credit card issuers to disclose how long it will take to pay off a balance if you pay just the minimum every month, and prohibits the issuer from closing your account just because you pay off the balance every month and don't pay interest.

• Instructs the Federal Reserve to find out whether people are going bankrupt because of credit card debt amassed in college.

Under the proposed law, if you earn more than half of other families of the same size, and you declare bankruptcy, the court is required to assume that you are cheating. It's called a "presumption of abuse." If you can't prove that you're not abusing the bankruptcy system, you'll have to find a way to pay your debts. It's like being presumed guilty until proven innocent.

H.R. 2415 is "the highest median income of the applicable state for a family of the same number or fewer individuals last reported by the Bureau of the Census." No additional allowance is provided for families with more than four persons, and for one-person households, the standard is the median family income of the applicable state for one earner. Since the Bureau of the Census does not currently publish such data, we used other published data to estimate the applicable state medians. The median family income for each state (from Census Income Table D) was divided by the national average to obtain a state multiplier. (These ranged from a low of 0.7041 in West Virginia to a high of 1.2825 in Maryland.) For each state and family size, this figure was multiplied by the national median income for that family size (from Census Table H.11).

 Table H-11. Size of Household--Households (All Races)
by Median and Mean Income: 2001

(Households as of March of the following year. Income in
current and 2001 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars28/)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Median income Mean income Average
Size of --------------------------------------- house-
household Number Current 2001 Current 2001 hold
and year (thous.) dollars dollars dollars dollars size
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Households

2001 109,297 $42,228 $42,228 $58,208 $58,208 2.58

Households with One Person

2001 28,775 $21,761 $21,761 $31,724 $31,724 (X)
--------------
Households with Two People

2001 36,240 $45,245 $45,245 $60,689 $60,689 (X)
----------------------------------------------------------
Households with Three People

2001 17,742 $54,481 $54,481 $68,221 $68,221 (X)
----------------------------------------------------
Households with Four People

2001 15,794 $62,595 $62,595 $78,353 $78,353 (X)
-------------------------------------------------------
Households with Five People

2001 6,948 $59,898 $59,898 $75,709 $75,709 (X)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Households with Six People

2001 2,438 $57,548 $57,548 $73,315 $73,315 (X)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Households with Seven or More People

2001 1,360 $54,560 $54,560 $71,388 $71,388 (X)

[applegrove]

10. Oh that is grievous. I really hope people stop spending. It seems as

if the people in power cannot find enough ways to let folk hit rock bottom.

[Robert Oak]

12. well, he did vote against it

which is way better than those Senators who voted for it.

I'll let him slide on the other vote.

[American in Asia]

13. Not me...

He gets no pass from me... I might have forgiven his cloture vote given his eventual no for the bill itself -- but not his votes against the amendments to provide some relief for the poor, the sick, the elderly and the veterans. Heck maybe I even could have forgiven those if he'd given a good reason. But not on top of his other horrendous votes. He's a scumbag.

[Robert Oak]

14. to me

it's better to focus on those Republicans and completely corporate
sponsored democrats. We've got to get them out in 2006.

But, to me, he's always been a Republican, not a democrat anyway...

but I'd like to go after vulnerable "worse case" guys more..

For example, Gordon Smith is up for re-election 2006 in Oregon.

This guy is such a corporate sponsored dweeb plus he's in a "Blue state".

Defeating him seems possible if the OR/DNC starts working on it now.

[fujiyama]

15. It was clever parlimentary

political manuvering.

It's a great way to fool people that he was really against it. Hell it fooled me as well before I found out he voted for the cloture.

That said, I still think it was better voting against it than for it. I'm too disgusted with one of my own senators that voted for both.

[ElectricIron Sweeney]

16. Lieberman

would make a better republican than any kind of man