Posted on 12/22/2009 8:56:56 AM PST by cornelis
Sen. Jim DeMint (R., S.C.) has thumbed through Harry Reid's manager's amendment and discovered some "particularly troubling" rule-change provisions, especially with regards to the proposed Independent Medicare Advisory Board, which he finds could be unrepealable:
“The bill on its face is unconstitutional regardless of the content since Article 1 Section 8 does not specifically grant Congress the power to regulate health care.”
I suspect it hurts us to take absurd positions like this. The bill may be unconstitutional; but if so, it is not because “Article 1 Section 8 does not specifically grant Congress the power to regulate health care.” There are likely equal protection problems (the Nelson payoff, among others), and some of the bill likely stretches the interstate commerce clause farther than a moderate Supreme Court can accept.
If all the businesses in your area decided they would not do business with Christians, I doubt you would be saying that “Article 1 Section 8 does not specifically grant Congress the power to regulate” discrimination based on religious principles (which it does not, of course).
By the way, I am convinced that the framers would say that Congress was never intended to have the power to enact Obamacare (or Social Security, for that matter). But, arguing for a Jeffersonian “strict interpretation” today is about as absurd as arguing that the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment should not ban ear cropping or branding.
The point is if this bill contains a rules change it would require a two/thirds vote to pass it. They don’t have a two thirds majority.
I like Jim, He’s a Conservative guy
This whole thing is such a disaster.
But 0bama, as a “Constitutional” lawyer, is rewriting the script. Will anyone challenge these nincompoops? Anyone?
There is only one recourse to tyrants
A bit confusing...but if 67 votes are necessary and this stands up as constitutional (What say you Mr. Kennedy?) Then when will the Repubs have 67 votes? The word never comes to mind. To many entitlement $hores along with their supporters in the Schools brain washing every generation.
How can a Senate rule be included in legislation? Does a President then ahave veto power over the rule? Does the House get to re-negotiate the rule in Congress? Can the House refuse to accept the rule?
What a friggin’ mess these Democrats are.
What’s good for the GOP is that the independent middle is particularly sensitive to procedural chicanery and hate it. The Dems’ steadfast opposition to transparency is going to be worth a pocketful of Congressional seats all by itself, even without the massive debt and other issues.
Democrats would trample their own mothers, spouses and children to get what they want.
Yes, they will DO what they accused Chuck Colson of thinking.
Understood. But the way the bill is written, it will take a two-thrids majority to repeal it. They will pass it calling it a procedural change (60 votes to invoke cloture) and when anyone tries to repeal it, they will call it a rule change requiring two thirds vote.
i would guess you can just go ahead and do it anyway, cut off funding for the disputed part, and let whoever wants to go to court.
I just sent him my $ www.jimdemint.com
Remind me again what you are speaking of, thanks.
It seems that Mr. -21 in the polls may actually wanting such a blatant thing to take place. It would cause a revolution which would give him rights to force a police state and take full control of the country and become a tyrant forever.
If, in fact, this clause makes permanent all or part of this bill, and if, in fact, it is unconstitutional, and since it is sure to pass, the best thing the Repubs can do is let it pass quickly. Court challenges could then tie it up for years. It is inconceivable to me that the Constitution grants authority to one Congress to forever ban the next Congress from overriding ANY LAW.
Simple fix. Just have the republican’s take over the senate. Then use nuclear option (saying it’s a budget issue) and then overturn the thing.
Take the heat from it...expose our gov’t as a sham that doesn’t follow the rules and constitution anyway.
the EVIL DUMS are going back to the old play book when they tried to rig the Congress to keep slavery legal in the South.
The Dumocrats are PURE EVIL.
To wit "this law can never be modified or repealed"?!? enacted as such with little more than "we do this all the time, now shut up"?
Resembling the buildup to this. Expect a police-action crisis soon.
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.