Posted on 03/14/2010 1:31:24 PM PDT by callisto
fiat [ˈfaɪət -æt], n., a legally binding command or decision; an arbitrary order or decree
A very dangerous act is being attempted by the Left to secure their rule over the American people and transform the legislative process from a Constitutional Republic to a government by fiat. Today on Fox News Sunday, Democratic leader Rep. Chris Van Hollen admitted Democrats intend to use the unconstitutional “Slaughter Rule” as a solution to ram nationalized health care through Congress without majority vote and in defiance to the will of the American people.
The Slaughter rule would declare that the House of Representatives “deems” the Senate health care bill “passed” by the House. House members would have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but would then be able to claim they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself. In other words, Democrats will avoid a direct vote on the health care bill while allowing it to become law! They will take over one-sixth of the US economy without voting on it in direct violation to the legislative process defined by the U.S Constitution. Article I, Section VII, Clause II specifically states,
"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;... But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsrealblog.com ...
Well, I guess if it really came down to it, “they” would have to put me (and hundreds of thousands of others) in jail. I would then sue the Federal Gov., probably as party to a class action.
There is much more going on than what people see. The undercurrent going on in the states is like the eruption of a volcano. Pressure is building up until this thing will blow:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=937746
Folks,
Republicans can easily destroy the “health care reform” bill right now; if they will but repeatedly and emphatically declare:
IT WILL KILL OUR STRUGGLING ECONOMY.
If every prominent Republican who attends a presser or gives an interview emphasizes that one crystallized point; the political pressure and citizenry push-back against wavering Democrats in the House will be enormous and irresistible.
ECONOMY KILLER equals JOBS KILLER. And the case can easily and succinctly be made that this new, massively unfunded entitlement will require massive new taxes while hobbling the medical industry. That’s obviously an economy killer. As unpopular as this piece of crap bill is, it can immediately be made much more so with simple clarion emphasis regarding its destructiveness to the American economy.
The American people already hate what the bill stands for (the substance of the bill) as well as they hate the corrupt process that has produced it. Now it needs to be branded into the national psyche that the bill will obviously cause long-term, personal financial pain for everyone. - If Republicans would simply apply massive pressure to this one point (using the new CBO numbers on the “reconciliation / fix it” bill as a new cause for alarm) that would be the ball game. There is no way Pelosi can secure wavering votes in the house if the Republicans concentrate exclusively on driving the message that this bill is toxic to our ailing economy.
“If the Health Care Takeover Bill becomes law, it will make a bad recession much worse.”
IMO, that's the key right there. People forget this "healthcare bill" is actually written as a tax bill that implements health insurance for tax purposes. But what is not commonly understood is that tax law is mostly implemented through "jursidictional presumption" and all the judicial trickery that protects this presumption from challenge in court.
That's relevent because, in essence, the "Slaughter solution" is nothing more than the House declaring a presumption about the passing of a tax bill - i.e. an aspect of law that is already mostly implemented through presumption.
Thus there is actually a legal argument that such presumption can be used for the passing of a tax law that is going to be implemented mostly through presumption, because in either case, striking it down is merely "rebutting the presumption" - not exposing wrongdoing. So for the Dems - like for the IRS - imposing law illegally is a no-fault exercise. If it works, they get away with it. If it doesn't, it's simply a rebutted presumption they can still disagree with "in principle."
Tax law used to be unique - the Rats are merely making it's "uniqueness" common.
If any in the House or Senate do not want to do their job, they are welcome to leave NOW.
yeah... it is genuinely depressing, when one looks at the various possible outcomes, say, 5 or 10 years from now.
Yeah, I was trying to be charitable to Oblahblah.
The problem for Oblahblah is that he must always stop short of a Soviet-style Reign of Terror, and his more streamlined
21st Century methods of imposing soft tyranny aren’t working so well. As ‘leader’,
he’s not dealing with newly ‘liberated’ Russian serfs who just exchanged one despot for another; he’s not dealing with chronically unemployed peons in a banana republic either. He’s just working to turn us INTO those kinds of populations and he’s in a race against us to do it, before we can get out from under him.
This is one race he will lose.
What one can do BEFORE that happens, is to create a few very bluntly written paragraphs that makes it clear just why millions of us (and it will have to be MILLIONS, MANY MILLIONS of us) are planning a serious response to this demagoguery, serious in the form of major demonstrations at every town hall, state capital, and in DC ,the likes of which has never been seen before, and was only vaguely hinted at in the past two DC events. It has to be clear that we won’t move until they all leave. Nothing less will do, in my view.
Yes, see #4 below.
ar·bi·trar·y (ärb-trr)adj.
1. Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle
2. Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference
3. Established by a court or judge rather than by a specific law or statute: an arbitrary penalty.
4. Not limited by law; despotic: the arbitrary rule of a dictator.
That ‘Government by Fiat’ made me think twice too!
To meet with Rahm in the shower room.
BEST answer I could find:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/03/explaining_deem_and_pass.html
“According to the CRS report linked above, the House has used this procedure at least six times between 1989 and 2005 with both parties in charge.”
;’) “The Obama Years: Fiat Performance on a Lamborghini Budget” (book title idea)
I would be much more concerned about their “Plan B”. Plan A is always out in the open, obvious, distracting. Plan B is always so much more direct and powerful, but always based on a magician’s misdirection. It will result in misplaced blame, misdirected attack and consequent misdirected and thus wasted energy. Watch for Plan B - sudden, powerful, truly devastating and evil, and demonically devious.
“Watch for Plan B - sudden, powerful, truly devastating and evil, and demonically devious.”
Most people are and thats what will start a civil war.
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.