President Signs Kerry Cruise Ships Safety Bill Into Law

Cruise companies usually flag their ships in other countries in order to avoid the much higher US taxes.

First of all this is a bill about security. Secondly, that is inaccurate, the U.S. has no control over ships that do not operate in U.S. waters, but they do have control over ships that enter U.S. ports.

Here is the PDF

2) DETAILS REQUIRED.—The information recorded under
paragraph (1) shall include, at a minimum—
(A) the vessel operator;
(B) the name of the cruise line;
(C) the flag under which the vessel was operating at the
time the reported incident occurred;
(D) the age and gender of the victim

<...>

(c) CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.—Beginning 2 years after the
standards are established under subsection (b), no vessel to which
this section applies may enter a United States port on a voyage (or
voyage segment) on which a United States citizen is a passenger unless
there is at least 1 crewmember onboard who is certified as having
successfully completed training in the prevention, detection, evidence
preservation, and reporting of criminal activities in the international
maritime environment on passenger vessels under subsection
(a).
(d) INTERIM TRAINING REQUIREMENT.—No vessel to which this
section applies may enter a United States port on a voyage (or voyage
segment) on which a United States citizen is a passenger unless
there is at least 1 crewmember onboard who has been properly
trained in the prevention detection, evidence preservation and the
reporting requirements of criminal activities in the international
maritime environment. The owner of a such a vessel shall maintain
certification or other documentation, as prescribed by the Secretary,
verifying the training of such individual and provide such documentation
upon request for inspection in connection with enforcement
of the provisions of this section. This subsection shall take effect
1 year after the date of enactment of the Cruise Vessel Safety
and Security Act of 2009 and shall remain in effect until superseded
by the requirements of subsection (c).

Has nothing to do with the flag of the ship.

:rofl:

How easy it is to get disinformation out there!

:hide:

the person mentioned in the release, who lost his daughter, lives in MA, and that's near RI.

Does that count?

there was a half-mil hole in the tax base.

where Teresa owns a home and because she is married to John Kerry, the RW smear against him CLAIMED that he dodged a half-million in Mass taxes on the boat?

Shame on you - especially since you should know by now exactly how RW smear machine works and should know by now how Teresa's foundations do A LOT of work funding healthclinics for those who have no access, provides AIDS meds for those who fell through the cracks, PLUS the many environmental projects rehabbing and rebuilding neighborhoods, all of which saves the people of Mass tens of millions each year.

May I ask WHY you are so committed to spreading the smear of Kerry with this RW manufactured controversy? Seriously...why would you even be invested in believing the lie, let alone perpetuating it?

Neat trick.

the tune of MANY millions of dollars each year?

Not to mention the tens of millions she donates to fund similar projects in Pennsylvania. In New Jersey. In Africa. In many places around the world.

You really ARE invested in spreading RW smears against Kerry. Why?

It's the same line of specious reasoning.



eta: It doesn't bother me at all. Every dollar held in a massive fortune is a detriment to the needy. :think:

.

You're invested and now invested in defending WHY you spread RW smears.

My assertions in this thread:

6. Does it apply in Rhode Island? (snark)
8. Almost as much as the person who lost their home/job because there was a half-mil hole in the tax base.
20. Does it bother you that the rich create jobs? It's the same line of specious reasoning.
25. I'm not. He's a thoroughly competent centrist.

Please address the question since you've accused me of lying and RW talking points.

THAT is the base of your recent spin campaign. When the base is a lie.....

action to shut down the RW and their enablers.

Teresa is a resident of Pennsylvania, the trust is in Pennsylvania, it does not belong to Senator Kerry.

Are you saying that a Pennsylvania resident/company should have to pay taxes in Mass?

:think:

It it illegal? No. Is it hinky? Well, is it?



eta: And we're not talking DC an MA. We're talking DC, MA, PA and RI.

She also had a home and Foundation offices in DC. Kerry had apartments in MA and DC - because he was and is a MA Senator. They bought a home in Boston together - with Teresa keeping all of her homes, which will go to the Heinz sons. There is certainly nothing "hinky" there.

The statement put out makes sense. The Heinz organization registered the boat where it made the most sense - out of the premiere east coast yachting port - out of which it will be maintained and chartered. It is not Kerry's boat, though obviously he and Teresa will be among those who charter it.

You do realize that most Senators' families live in their state - while the Senator lives a huge portion of the the year near DC.

Put RI in there.

Teresa does have a house in Idaho. Yes, I know that means she has 5 homes - 2 in MA, one in DC, one in PA and in Idaho. One of the MA homes is jointly owned with John Kerry.

Teresa is incredibly wealthy and an extraordinarily good person. Are you saying that Senator Kerry should not have married her - even though it is very clear that she is the love of his life because doing so may him seem too wealthy? The facts are the boat is owned by a Heinz Foundation related corporation.

shame on you for accepting this manufactured controversy and furthering it.

Small businesses are the biggest job creators. Many of them are not rich.

:rofl:

Burn! (I put an animated smilie up. That makes my point more powerful!)

The point still failed.

were Teresa's - and only Teresa's. They watched like hawks that Teresa not contribute more than the $2,300 that she - like every person - was limited to. Note there was no similar concern with McCain - where the money was all his wife's as well.

Kerry is a millionaire in his own right, but not one that could spend $7 million on it.

Some people assume that because the RW and media constantly attack certain Democrats, it's an opportunity for them to jump on the bandwagon with ridicule.

It reminds me of the 2006 elections, when they decided to try to take Kerry out at the last minute after his amazingly successful campaign for Democrats. Leading up to the 2008 election, some wrote him off based on the damage they think the media had inflicted, not realizing that none of it is real. As annoying as it is, it's surface crap that captures a few media cycles. Therefore, when Kerry went to campaign for Obama, they immediately thought it was a bad idea. He kicked butt across the country, and his success was evident in his speech at the DNC and Obama's win over John McCain. So, let the people who think this really matters enjoy it. Senator Kerry will go on doing what he needs to do to help move this country forward. He's been fighting the RW for four decades, long before he joined Congress.

He's alright, he's just not a hero.

:shrug:

People make whomever they want out to be heroes. Dorgan voted for the IWR and Bush's RW law protecting the unborn and he's a hero to some.

Gore has been right of Kerry for most of his life, and he's a hero to some. Kerry was the lead author on the clean money bill attributed to Wellstone and he voted against DOMA, something Wellstone didn't do, and he's a hero to some.

Just to prove how flawed it is to hype two votes to prove your claim, the Patriot Act includes provisions based on Kerry's moneylaundering legislation, which is the law of the land. I see people hyping it all the time.

If not for Kerry and his push to set a deadline in Iraq, there would never have been a push for it. The majority of Dems wanted to keep an open-ended commitment.

Why ARE you here? Oh, I know the answer. YUCK. Don't bother.

You know, the reason some people are miserable is they hang on to cynicism like a drug. Life is tough for a lot of people.

Constantly attacking those who try to help is about as productive as wishing a Democrat had won Scott Brown's seat.

Senator Kerry has done more for his state and this country than most of the useless politicians clogging up the system.

Second, skipping taxes has real world consequences
Third, here's Kerry politically:



Fourth, if this is helping I'd hate to see hurting
Fifth, it wasn't one person losing a home/job, it was an 100 people with $5K assistance, 500 people with $1K assistance
Sixth, see First
Seventh, relax

Thank for the insight into your perspective.

:rofl:

Kerry = Ben Nelson with a conscience

:rofl:

:D

and, in your world JK and THK are deliberately trying to avoid taxes in Mass so they can burden the poor.

Except YOU buying into the smear enables the RW spin machine to win what they REALLY want with this smear - to get the taxes REDUCED in Mass to 3% by making working folks feel that Kerry is getting breaks they are not because he can afford ways to avoid paying taxes.

Guess you missed THOSE stories the last few days, eh? The poor in Mass will be thrilled if the RW scheme works, eh?

variables chosen and the metrics used to define them. Here, consider "libertarian" and "authoritarian". First of all, they are not in all ways opposites - as this implies. I suspect that this access is better thought of as big government vs small government. To a libertarian, almost any law that forces them to do or not do anything or to pay taxes for all but a small number of things. Where a person is on this axis can come from very different sets of positions.

Every mainstream Democrat that I have seen on this particular graph are in nearly the same spot Kerry is. This to me suggests that the underlying metrics are such that the scoring evaluates things where all our politicians agree - and are not that far from the Republicans. Now, as I see a HUGE difference in the issues on the table with the Democrats in power vs when the Republicans are - this to me suggests that the graft does a very poor job in discriminating right at the area where you want to see the differences, Therefore, it does a very poor job.

There have been others that have done a better job, including one done by I think the National Journal that scored each on three dimensions - foreign policy, economics and social issues - on how liberal (conservative) they were. They gave the three individual scores and then a composite. In late 2007, this was interesting as you could see that Hillary, for example< was very liberal on social issues, more moderate on economic issues and one of the most conservative Democrats on foreign policy.

Others do not explain their rankings other than giving a list of good votes/bad votes. I tried to analyze one that gave little information when someone posted it to say Kerry was not progressive. Clicking into, I saw that Kerry's mediocre score was identical to Sherrod Brown's. It was for 2009. I was curious as to why - so I took all the votes for the first half of 2009 and listed wherever Kerry and Feingold, who was rated one of the most progressive, differed. I stopped at the middle of the year because the patterns were clear and it was cumbersome.

The differences:
- Kerry was for climate change legislation - Feingold voted that it could not be done under reconciliation
- Kerry voted for gun control (against guns in national parks and on buses), Feingold for it
- Kerry voted for the budget and other expenditures that Feingold voted against - Feingold voted for every anti - earmark bill

Now, Kerry and Feingold, have often been allies and both are liberals. I like both of them. You can also see that that scale likely is close to the axis that I first spoke of. In each of these cases, Feingold is voting for the smaller government, more libertarian position. Yet, I remember most of those votes from when they happened - and - by and large - DU agreed with Kerry's position. (here is a link referencing that score and the full list of votes - http://journals.democraticunderground.com/karynnj/33 )

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Not really helpful for the millions struggling to live day to day.

So the safety of anyone who can still afford to go on a vacation should be ignored?

Should Democrats have skipped the hate crimes bill since it doesn't address unemployment?

Especially as an election looms.

You did not get the point of my post. It is not just unemployment, it is about how pols pander to those with a bit of coin. They turn blind eyes to the legions who are struggling to survive. That is not limited to the unemployed. What a sad demonstration such an assumption is.

Is the rape of a woman less important and less illegal if it happened on a cruise ship?

Like there is some change going on.

Why is this such a big concern that you need to make it? Read the OP and determine the extent to which this law shifts policy.

Apparently so.

Frankly, I do not think The Most Powerful Man in the World needs so much defensive diversion.

Your contribution to this thread is comparing a measure to save people's lives to "scraps."

and B) how anything that gets a signature is trumpeted as some fine thing.

But thanks for dismissing my contributions. Some will take that as meaning I hit a mark.

It is something fine. In fact, it's significant. You may not agree, but you seem to think that your opinion is the only one that matters.

been sent from Kerry's office, as is done with every piece of legislation, would you even KNOW this law was signed and went into effect?

There are many without big $$ that take a cruise for some special event in their lives. This is certainly not something for the true upper crust who likely would not be caught dead (or alive) on these large cruises.

The fact is that Kerry has been working on the various jobs bills - including the extension of TANF, which helps some of the poorest people. His bill on this merged with Murray's on summer jobs was defeated when it was considered as an amendment to the last unemployment bill. Kerry was the sponsor of what became the affordable housing fund re-introducing it for 3 Congresses gradually building up support until he had 23 sponsors in 2008 when it was included in a banking bill. He did a lot more on poverty than the candidate you supported who did little or nothing as a US Senator on it.

It is rather silly to attack every bill that passes because it is not a jobs bill. The fact is - as this passed on a voice vote, it did not take up precious Senate floor time. If it saves a life, even if it is a middle class or even upper middle class girl (or boy or adult), wouldn't that have some merit?

Thanks

That was specifically providing jobs for low income people. It lost, but Kerry will likely get it attached to something else. Senate offices work on many bills simultaneously - this took no floor time worth speaking of because it was passed with a voice vote.

I posted this yesterday and it sank like a rock.

Yet everything unrelated to jobs attracts complaints about jobs.

road blocks - rather than things that amused them, you might get sufficient push back that would make them either pay a political price or vote for this.