The Tax Bill Passed by the Senate is Unconstitutional

Self | 12/15/2010 | Self

[Blood of Tyrants]

The Senate has committed a major blunder today. I mean besides the RINOs being stupid enough to go along with the Rats. They have passed a revenue bill that did not originate in the House.

Article 1, Section 7
All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;

Can it be any plainer? Is anyone planning on challenging the constitutionality of it?

[Blood of Tyrants]

I hope Mark Levine and the Landmark Legal Foundation are on this like stench on a liberal.

[WKUHilltopper]

There is no such thing as a Constitution...they make it up as they go along. It’s an old game played by ageless tyrants.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Sorry if this violated the Breaking News category. But it needs to get out. Also, could you fix the spelling in Unconstitutional? Thanks

[exit82]

Didn’t they pass the bill the House passed last week?

[gorush]

So? There is no controlling legal authority at present, which is why gun control is so popular among Federalists, er, I mean Democrats.

[muawiyah]

The Senate has been doing this for over 200 years. They are ALLOWED to amend a bill sent over from the House. They are also allowed to vote on a resolution that's tantamount to what they will accept ~ then when the bill comes over from the House, to the degree it is different they will amend it in whole or in part to match their own.

They then send their bill (with the stuff they'll go along with) back to the House and the House treats it as a new bill. It has to go through the house and back to the Senate, and soon.

From time to time they've used the reconciliation process to deal with this (where there are minor differences). Where there are large differences this business can go on for many iterations before both houses agree, but it has to ORIGINATE IN THE HOUSE, but it can be changed in the Senate.

The House is not required to be IGNANT of what the Senate will agree to.

[GatorGirl]

Consti-who-tion?

What’s that?

[Ben Mugged]

According to the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 7, clause 1), all bills relating to revenue, generally tax bills, must originate in the House of Representatives, consistent with the Westminster system requiring all money bills to originate in the lower house which is why the appropriations bills that are enacted begin with "H.R.", indicating a bill that originated in the House. The Constitution also states that the "Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills," so in practice, the Senate and House each drafts and considers its own bill. The Senate then "cuts-and-pastes", substituting the language of its bill of a particular appropriations bill for the language of House bill, then agrees to the bill as amended.

[Cobra64]

Sorry if this violated the Breaking News category. But it needs to get out. Also, could you fix the spelling in Unconstitutional? Thanks

Thanks for posting this important news. I had not seen it.

It sure beats jocks posting football scores and bicycle races in France in a news forum.

[Blood of Tyrants]

No.

[Indy Pendance]

The constitution? How 20th century of you.

[Evil Slayer]

Just goes to show congress as well as potus hasn’t been watching Glenn Beck’s series on the U.S. Constitution.

[patriot preacher]

The Senate has been doing this for over 200 years. They are ALLOWED to amend a bill sent over from the House. They are also allowed to vote on a resolution that’s tantamount to what they will accept ~ then when the bill comes over from the House, to the degree it is different they will amend it in whole or in part to match their own.
They then send their bill (with the stuff they’ll go along with) back to the House and the House treats it as a new bill. It has to go through the house and back to the Senate, and soon.

From time to time they’ve used the reconciliation process to deal with this (where there are minor differences). Where there are large differences this business can go on for many iterations before both houses agree, but it has to ORIGINATE IN THE HOUSE, but it can be changed in the Senate.

The House is not required to be IGNANT of what the Senate will agree to.

---

This Bill ORIGINATED in the Senate, did it not? I don’t think it BEGAN in the House. The Obama Regime took it to the Senate FIRST. That’s Unconstitutional. They are doing it backward.

Now, there may indeed BE “no controlling legal authority.” The Democrats may indeed not have to follow the Constitution in this case (God knows they ignore it, violate it and crap on it in many other cases). BUT, Conservative Constitutionalists shouldn’t let it go unchallenged. They should IMMEDIATELY seek an injunction for relief from the Supreme Court if it is passed/signed into law. Why? IT’S AN OBVIOUS VIOLATION of Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1!

Then, if the SCOTUS fails to uphold the Constitution, well, I have further suggestions for the next move....

[Terry Mross]

This would mean something if dems and rinos believed in the constitution.

I’ve been saying this for years. The budget is “written” by the president. That’s not the way it’s supposed to be either.

[EGPWS]

There is no such thing as a Constitution...they make it up as they go along.

Today it's inhaling, tomorrow it's exhaling.

It's progressive...

[paulycy]

[Evil Slayer]

The Tax Bill Passed by the Senate is Unconstitutional

That's only the tip of the iceberg. The election of Hussian Obama was unconstitutional.

[Skepolitic]

Are you serious? Are you serious?!?!

[LearsFool]

As someone once put it, “The Constitution presents no obstacle to our government.”

[Jet Jaguar]

Bump