Posted on 03/16/2010 11:36:03 AM PDT by truthandlife
The GOP rules chief should RESIGN IMMEDIATLY.
Well he damn well BETTER talk to some of them! Otherwise HE should resign and let someone with some initiative and balls take over.
The Slaughter Solution Will Probably Pass Constitutional Muster
—DrewM.
Gabe laid out the procedures involved in the Slaughter Solution and former Judge Michael McConnell’s argument for it’s unconstitutionality. While I, and I think most sane people, agree with McConnell, sanity is a relative term when it comes to the law.
Shannen Coffin makes the case for why it’s going to be very hard, if not impossible, to get a court to overturn the bill based on a challenge to the Slaughter Solution.
The short version is, courts don’t do legislative sausage making. If the Speaker of the House, the President Pro-tempore of the Senate and the President say it was passed and signed properly, the courts generally take their word for it.
The Supreme Court, since an 1892 decision in Marshall Field & Co. v. Clark, has refused to look behind the signature of the speaker of the house and president of the Senate (or president pro tempore) on an enrolled bill to challenge the process by which that bill was enrolled and a claim that the bill was not properly enacted. There was a bit of daylight opened in a more recent decision in which the Court examined whether a properly enrolled bill was nevertheless enacted in violation of the Origination Clause (which requires that bills that raise revenue originate in the House), but lower courts (such as the D.C. Circuit in the recent challenge to the Deficit Reduction Act linked by Andy) have reasoned that the enrolled bill rule itself wasn’t affected by that later decision.
Look at what the Constitution actually says about the passage of bills
Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States;
Article I, Section 7 goes on about vetoes and overrides but that’s the heart of the matter. Notice it doesn’t say what ‘passed’ means. We all assume it means a vote where the majority of members vote yes but that’s not actually stated. What it takes to pass a bill is left up the rules of each house and courts aren’t likely to get involved in that.
There are a lot of things we take for granted, as being understood and inviolable rules but the reality is democracy requires a respect for institutions, customs and shared understandings. There’s no force of nature that ensures democratic norms are followed. The checks and balances of our system help but ultimately it comes down to the willingness of individuals to be bound by them. Get enough people in power agreeing to push past those boundaries and bad things can happen.
The Democrats know this Slaughter Solution won’t shield members from the wrath of the electorate, it’s likely to increase the anger. This isn’t some legislative trick played in the middle of the night on a bill no one has ever heard of. Voters are going to want to know how their representatives voted on ‘health care reform’, not the ‘rule under which the Senate sidecar reconciliation bill’ passed. This is not a vote anyone can hide from, it’s a bottom line deal...did you vote to screw things up or not? That’s what will matter.
By this maneuver the Democrats are showing that they hold the customs of consensual democracy in contempt. While the institutions of government may not be enough to constrain these bastards, there is still one final court of appeal and that’s the voters.
Hardcore liberals in the Democratic leadership just don’t care about the consequences or what people want or don’t want. This is their Holy Grail and they know once they shove it down our throats it’s not going to be undone.
There’s something fundamentally very ugly and dangerous when elected representatives don’t respect the voters or at the least fear them.
Related: House Republicans are going to try and force Democrats to hold an up or down vote on the Senate bill or at least go on record as saying they won’t.
Nancy gets a Yes vote to stay Yes.
Added... A few years ago, Nancy went to go to court to stop Republicans from doing something similar, though on a much smaller scale. Good news, we’ve got her on hypocrisy. Bad news, she lost the court challenge.
Posted by DrewM. at 11:56 AM New Comments Thingy
For the same reason that it is illegal to drive a car on the sidewalk. It can be done, someone may try to change the rules to allow it, but it does not change the law.
I could care less about what McCarthy has to say.
And there have been articles from Constitutional lawyers as well as press conferences and interviews that say it is clearly unconstitutional.
You want to defend this ignoramus? How do you defend a Member of Congress from saying they don’t know the Constitution? There are members backed by experts ready to take it to court. Why is Dreier not talking to them? And if he is, why is he acting like a weak inept pushover before the press?
Why, because David Dreier is an idiot? I've got news for you, David Dreier is not the Republican party.
Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), the ranking Republican on the House Rules Committee, indicated yesterday that he was resigned to letting congressional Democrats make the Senate health-care bill the law of the land
Right, Dave. Don't FIGHT, or anything.
Yeah. Right. He'll end up giving amnesty to 30 million democrat Mexicans.
If this POSIC resigns, we get plugs.
Bingo your #86 !
If Drier passed the bar by virtue of attending law school we can presume he has a working knowledge of the Constitution.
Drier sits on a very important committee. A basic understanding the clear language of the Constitution ought to be a prerequisite to serving on that committee. And, the language pertinent to the Slaughter device is not difficult to read or understand.
It would be pathetic if he thinks not being an Constitutional expert gives him an out.
A responsible official in such a fix who thought himself unqualified would immediately reach out for assistance and otherwise prepare himself for performance of his duties.
Keep the goal in mind.
I'm wondering if obama knows he can't get it passed and is using this dumb bass move to "pass" it and then have it ruled unconstitutional. He can turn around and say the USSC has made another ruling against the people. Then he would proceed trying to pack the court with more Marxists.
They better be praying there isn't a blood bath in the streets.
Dreir would be more effective if he could come out and say:
"What the Democrats are proposing is unconstitutional. That's not just my opinion -- I sat down with a number of constitutional expects and they told me that this is a travesty. Our constitution is being trampled right before our eyes by the Democrats. I'm chairman of the Rules Committee, but I am powerless to stop this, because Democrats outnumber Republicans 9-4 on my committee. This is going to happen. And it may very well destroy the system of government we've had for over 200 years."
But his statement is a little wimpier than that.
So what?
It’s the people behind Sor0bama that run things anyway.
Figures.
You gotta wonder how many sex tapes Rahm Emmanuel has of this bozo.
Dreier.. the top House Republican responsible for making sure that Congress follows legitimate rules of procedure, told reporters yesterday that he is not a constitutional expert and that he had not spoken personally to any constitutional experts about the issue.
-
Bang-Up Job, Dreier.
1. He was Arnold Schwarzenegger's California campaign co-chairman.
2. There are many rumors that he is secretly gay.
Is he afraid that his support of Schwarzenegger tags him as more liberal than conservative? Is he afraid that he might be "outed" if he opposes the Democrats?
-PJ
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.