New Debt Deal “Super Congress” is Super Unconstitutional

As if trapped in one of those awful nightmares where we try to run from the bad guys and we find we can’t lift our feet, we continue to watch in terrific horror as our federal government fully morphs into a communist dictatorship, while we can do almost nothing to stop it. It is apparent that the communist Democrats of the Obama administration will not be checked. What unconstitutional moves will they not make? Who will restrain them? Is it possible that they could ever speak with anything other than lies? Sadly, the answers to all those questions are nothing, no one, and no.

So, now we have the so-called “debt deal” out of Congress. Those of us who truly watch, knew they would do it. We all knew the sham proceedings would only lead to the very thing we demanded not to happen. This was no victory for the Tea Party (what a load of bunk!). This was a victory for Big Government and a monumental loss for We the People.

Does anyone believe that there will be any real reduction in government spending, when all is said and done? Oh, I know that among the uninformed and misinformed, there are those who do. But, we’re seeing this already-monstrous debt ceiling being immediately raised, while these paltry, so-called “cuts” are strewn out over a decade, and that means they may not even happen, because no future Congress is obligated to honor them.

What’s the deal? In reality, when we look at the black and white of it, the citizens of America are getting one of the biggest shafts the government has ever shoved at us, and tacked on to that wicked shaft is a brand-new, powerful committee that is a dream-come-true for any Constitution-hating communist.

The truth of this wretched scheme was stated nicely on The Economic Collapse blog site in a column titled, “The Debt Ceiling Deal from Hell.” The opening paragraph declares,

“Is the debt ceiling deal supposed to be some sort of a cruel joke? Is this what the American people have been waiting months and months for? The ‘debt ceiling deal from hell’ is a complete and total fraud. Barack Obama will not need to worry about the debt ceiling again until after the 2012 election, and no ‘real’ spending cuts will happen until after the 2012 election. The way the political game in Washington D.C. is played today, if you don't get something right now, you probably will never end up getting it. The Republicans have traded a massive debt ceiling increase right now for the possibility of very skimpy budget cuts in the future. Meanwhile, this deal establishes a new ‘Super Congress’ that threatens to fundamentally alter our political system (and not in a good way). The funny thing is that everyone is running around proclaiming that the Tea Party won this battle. That is a complete and total lie.”

So, what about this new “Super Congress”? It is a bipartisan committee of 12 Democrats and Republicans from both Houses of Congress that is assigned the task of deciding on 1.5 trillion dollars in spending cuts, spread over a decade, by a Thanksgiving deadline. What’s wrong with that? Just a few very significant things are wrong with it. As reported last week by the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim,

“This ‘Super Congress,’ composed of members of both chambers and both parties, isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, but would be granted extraordinary new powers. Under a plan put forth by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), legislation to lift the debt ceiling would be accompanied by the creation of a 12-member panel made up of 12 lawmakers -- six from each chamber and six from each party.

Legislation approved by the Super Congress -- which some on Capitol Hill are calling the ‘super committee’ -- would then be fast-tracked through both chambers, where it couldn't be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who'd have the ability only to cast an up or down vote. With the weight of both leaderships behind it, a product originated by the Super Congress would have a strong chance of moving through the little Congress and quickly becoming law. A Super Congress would be less accountable than the system that exists today, and would find it easier to strip the public of popular benefits. Negotiators are currently considering cutting the mortgage deduction and tax credits for retirement savings, for instance, extremely popular policies that would be difficult to slice up using the traditional legislative process.”

Oh, yeah. Who needs that old “traditional legislative process”? Here again we see the power-mongering loons on Capitol Hill spitting on the Constitution. Any “recommendation” by this Super Congress would not be allowed to be amended or filibustered by the real Congress. This is a nightmare!

Appearing on Fox New with Shepard Smith, Judge Andrew Napolitano had these strong words concerning the new Super Congress. Smith asked him to explain how this new Super Congress may be unconstitutional, and he replied,

“Well, because members of the Senate and members of the House have the opportunity under the Constitution to debate items that are sent to them and to modify items that are sent to them. To force them to vote just ‘yes’ or ‘no’ with no debate, not to follow the rules of the House, which permits amendments, not to follow the rules of the Senate, which permits a filibuster, is such a substantial removal of the authority the Constitution gave them, that this legislation is treading in waters which might not be constitutional.

Stated differently, the legislation will so change the relationship of Congress to this group by creating a new group. It will take power from Congress and give it to this group, and the Congress can’t do that.”

Then, Smith asked whether or not it mattered that the group is made up of members of Congress, and Judge Napolitano said that it does not matter. He did point out that although Congress has delegated some of its authorities to governmental agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration and the Food and Drug Administration, the distinction here is taxation. As the Judge stated,

“This field, which is taxes—there’s another part of the Constitution that says only the Congress can decide what taxes are. Only Congress can spend money. There are members of Congress walking around as we speak, saying, ‘There’s a rumor that this group of 12 could raise or lower taxes.’

If members of Congress think that they are losing the power to decide what the tax rates should be, then they’re creating a monster, which the Constitution doesn’t authorize.”

Once this committee is formed, there are those who fear further unconstitutional power grabs. Among those fears are that the Super Congress could basically bypass Congress with Second Amendment attacks. The Gun Owners of America released an alarming statement just prior to final passage of the debt raw deal,

“Gun owner registration … bans on semi-automatic firearms … adoption of a UN gun control treaty -- all of these issues could very well be decided over the next 24 hours.

Both houses of Congress will be voting on a debt ceiling bill that establishes a legislative committee with TREMENDOUS powers. Fox News is calling this committee a SUPER CONGRESS, because its legislative proposals (which could include gun control provisions) CANNOT be filibustered or amended in the Senate or House.

To understand what a huge deal this is, consider that House Speaker John Boehner is able to keep a mountain of gun control bills from coming to the floor of the House. That’s the power of the Speaker.

And in the Senate, we have been able to kill much of the gun control agenda by filibustering legislation (that is, requiring the Majority Leader to get a supermajority or 60 votes in order to pass gun control).

The most recent example of this occurred earlier this year when we defeated a radical, anti-gun judicial nomination (Goodwin Liu) using the filibuster. The filibuster has been our saving grace in the Senate, but that could be tossed within the next 24 hours.

Regarding the debt ceiling compromise, here’s what one legislative analyst (inside a Republican office on Capitol Hill) had to say:

Right now, we have limited protection from the schemes of the left – even if they have some Republican support, we have a speaker who wouldn’t bring horrible bills to the floor, and we have the Senate filibuster.

Both of these are rendered moot by the Super committee. There is NO Senate filibuster on the product they report. The Speaker CANNOT stop a vote in the House….

[Hence], 22 liberal Republicans can join the Congressional Democrats and the President in: Closing the gun show ‘loophole,’ banning semi-automatic weapons, creating a national handgun registration, or ordering state gun laws moot.

A super highway for gun control legislation? This is incredibly unconstitutional! We don’t elect a Congress, which can then turn around and elect a SUPER committee. We need to make sure this never lands on the President’s desk.”

Well, we now know it’s a done deal. What the end result of this Super Congress will be remains to be seen. If enough Constitution-honoring lawmakers hear from America about this, perhaps they will take a second look at this extra-constitutional committee. Surely future action could undo this bad idea.

Meanwhile, in our American nightmare, we continue trying to flee the developing dictatorship in Washington while our legs are fixed to the spot like lead weights as the communists continue their inexorable march toward us.

I think the corallary should be “No representation without taxation.”

Wouldn't the 'usual suspects' howl at that!

Everyone needs some skin in the game: dump the current income tax, go to a retail sales tax which exempts primary housing, food, home-use energy, and medical care.

Then they can get a clue why we are griping.

"I’m asking, so don’t just all over me anyone, but how does this committee differ from, say, the military base closure committees in the past that gave a recommendation list which couldn’t be modified, only voted up or down?"

One or possibly two major differences. First, the failure to approve the supercommittee recommendations will trigger a broad based sequester of defense and non-defense funds, and second, some writers/analysts like the author at the top of this thread think the committee could originate and send to the House and Senate legislation that is unrelated to the original financial savings mission. That legislation would be subject to the same protections against amendment and the normal committee process and require an up or down vote by both bodies.

I don’t think it’s unconstitutional. All tax and spending bills will still have to be approved by Congress. And if Congress legislates to limit debate (and not allow a filibuster on) the proposal that comes out of the commission, then that’s fine and dandy, since each house gets to set its own rules and they each agreed to change them for this particular issue. This is similar to the base-closing commission, which was empowered by Congress to make recommendations, which were subject to approval by both houses on an up-or-down vote.

“the failure to approve the supercommittee recommendations will trigger a broad based sequester of defense and non-defense funds”

Those broad-based cuts were already approved by both houses of Congress in the bill that was signed into law this week. The commission merely will make a recommendation to Congress that will replace the apprved across-the-board cuts with other cuts, which will be subject to an up-or-down vote in both houses.

Let them howl. We should have been howling years ago when the Communists began their takeover of our schools and media. Nobody howled and those that did were ridiculed, think McCarthy, and we ignorantly carried on as if there were no threat. We find ourselves today with one of our parties completely in the hands of socialists, at best, or communists, and the other heavily infiltrated. We, the people, are being called terrorists because we want our country and its rules back. Please pray often for our country as we are in very perilous times and we will need God on our side to get through them.

RE: “All this law does is impose the trigger based on specific conditions.”....That is a good way of looking at it. “

In theory if in late 2012 this lame Duck House decides to debate the recommendations and add amendments to it and send that to the Senate (contrary to this bills requirements) the trigger cuts kicks in, but this trigger is just another delayed (conditional) budget law that was passed into law now. Nothing stops the House, Senate and POTUS to pass another law replacing the trigger at any time short political reality.

Of course, another problem with this committee is that if the committee even attempts to raise revenue/taxes then it will violate Article I Sec. 7 of the US Constitution which explicitly states that only the House has the right to initiate revenue bills. This power does not lie in a Joint Committee, it belongs solely to the House of Representatives. Of course, the House will pass the back along so they don't actually have to take the blame of raising taxes...they'll just blame the committee. Then the powers of the House will gradually be lost to the committee who will become real legislature. If the House won't even defend its own constitutional authority from usurpation, then our system of checks and balances isn't working as intended and the Constitution itself is in danger.

The points you raise about the Super-Committee being abused to circumvent the normal process of republican government in order to force unpopular legislation through Congress is a great threat to the Republic as well. This Super-Committee seems somewhat reminiscent of the old Politburo of the Central Committee of the Soviet Union.

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.