The Slaughter Strategy

National Review Online ^ | March 14, 2010 | Grace-Marie-Turner

[raptor22]

This week will be the last stand for Obamacare, and the trickery that Speaker Pelosi is concocting to get the 2,700-page Senate bill through the House almost defies belief. It’s aptly called the “Slaughter Strategy,” after Rep. Louise Slaughter (D., N.Y.), who chairs the House Rules Committee.

Under this scheme, House members would vote on a bill of amendments to the despised Senate bill, and the Senate bill would be “deemed” to have passed if this companion bill is approved. This is supposed to inoculate House members, who could say they never actually voted for the Senate bill.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich has the best line: Last year, the House was passing bills without reading them. This year, they’re passing bills without voting on them.

If you pull out your copy of the U.S. Constitution, you will find that in Article 1, Section 7, it clearly states that the House and Senate have to pass a bill before it is sent to the president to be signed into law.

[FlipWilson]

Quote: “Your question doesn;t make sense. The constitutidoesn;t grant line item authority. The whole bill is either signed, allowed to lapse or vetoed.”

My point was that congress passed a line item veto when Clinton was in office and the courts declared it unconstitutional. Someone had stated that the courts never get involved in the legislative process. I asked the question to point out that it is simply not true that the courts are not involved.

[April Lexington]

I don’t remember reading that case. Do you have the cite?

Thanks

[silverleaf]

you unfairly diss the “cute” tea parties, imho

Kudos to those who keep turning out all over the USA and to the hundreds of thousands who marched on DC last Fall

Congress creatures may be able to turn their “town halls” into teleconferences, as my liberal rats Sarbanes and Cardin have done

But let them try to run their campaigns next fall and from here forward without being able to face their constituents in public

at least, not without SEIU purple people beater thugs as body guards against all these newly inspired and politicized seniors, soccer moms, and other previously silent majorities

“If we are astroturf, why are they trying to mow us?”

Bring It. Let it be in my lifetime.

[April Lexington]

The court WILL NOT interfere with how Congress does its business. Period. They have no jurisdiction over Congress. Its a separate branch of the Federal joke of a government we tolerate. Only the voters can discipline Congress. THAT'S WHY ITS IMPORTANT TO ELECT PATRIOTIC REPRESENTATIVES...

[April Lexington]

Nice photo. Unfortunately, these patriotic folk didn't bother to burn the place down and tar and feather the pecker heads who allegedly work there...

[csense]

The court WILL NOT interfere with how Congress does its business.

If that were true, then the United States Supreme Court would be an idle mechanism. They may not interfere "while" Congress is performing it's function, but they can rule if the process is constitutional, should such a case be brought before them.

In other words, Congress can do whatever the hell it likes, but if, in so doing they create a law that by proposition or process is unconstitutional, and the case is brought before them, then the Court can do whatever the hell it likes...

[April Lexington]

Obama can round up the Supreme Court and ship them to the GULAG any time he likes. They have no guns, no army, no protection from the dictator... Just robes to scare people. Watch for court packing and walks through Fort Marcy Park...

[csense]

Obama will be lucky if he makes it to the end of his four year term...