Posted on 09/25/2009 1:16:15 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
Acorn CEO: Block on Federal Money ‘Unconstitutional, Wrong’
Nomaan Merchant reports on politics.
Acorn CEO Bertha Lewis made it clear she’s not happy with an amendment to a stop-gap funding bill that blocks any money from going to the community organizing group.
“To include language in legislation that targets a single organization is unconstitutional and wrong,” Lewis said in a statement. But she saw a silver lining of sorts: “One unintended - and positive - consequence of the witch hunt against ACORN is that it could help rein in the likes of Halliburton and Blackwater and even Wall St. If the standard is that organizations that have broken the law shouldn’t get federal money, then let’s set that standard consistently.”
The bill avoids a government shutdown while Congress completes work on fiscal 2010 appropriations. The measure passed the House, and now must clear the Senate before Oct. 1, the start of the new fiscal year.
Democratic lawmakers included the language blocking any money to Acorn – the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now – to distance themselves from the community group.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
Sweetie... they get contracts to work for the government. You get freebies. There is a difference!
Halliburton and Blackwater are now 501c’s
WOOHOO we can donate to our favorite charities
blah, blah, blah, gimme mai monnie!! blah, blah, blah.
Anyone hear anything differnt?
Maybe they should have specifically blocked any funds going to ACORN AND the NAZI party.
And what they have done with OUR money IS constitutional!? Squirm Acorn, squirm!!!
Translation: "ACORN is a protected entity and can break the law with impunity".
It’s called a Bill of Attainder, and it’s unconstitutional.
I heard a lib on tv recently spout the same nonsense, said it was ex post facto. Ann Coulter pointed out to him that it was unconstitutional to give them money to begin with.
ACORN claims to be non-partisan?
“To include language in legislation that targets a single organization is unconstitutional and wrong,” Lewis said in a statement.
O.K., then let’s include SEIU, Apollo and TIDES too!!!
“Unconstitutional and wrong”?
SEE: Health Care Reform Bill
Actually, it’s unconstitutional for the govt. to give money to a partisan organization that exists for the sole purpose of fraud and election riggings, so it’s a wash...
I am the farthest thing from a law person, but was it constitutional to give them money in the 1st place?
Failing to renew ongoing contracts as a result of untrustworthy performance is not the same thing.
Nice try.
Cheers!
see if she floats. if not, burn her.
Stealing money from taxpayers to support things we oppose seems pretty unconstitutional to me.
She's referring to a Bill of Attainder, which is in fact Unconstitutional.
However, the mere fact that legislation references a particular person or organization by name does not make it a Bill of Attainder. To be such, it must be a law that punishes without trial (e.g., by imposing a fine, confiscating property, imprisonment, or otherwise denying a person his rightful liberty; or it must suspend civil liberties.) Denying some named person or organization a gift from the public purse does not satisfy the definition.
Guess it's unconstitutional to continue refuse fund rampant widespread corruption??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.