« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Constitution Be Damned – ObamaCare Vote Next Week

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has scheduled a vote next week on a House rule to get ObamaCare passed without one Representative having to vote on the bill.  This may be unconstitutional.  I have to be careful not to say that “Pelosi will schedule a vote on ObamaCare,”  because the plan right now is to pass the Senate version of ObamaCare without a vote in the House.  The procedure is purposefully confusing because liberals in Congress hope the American people don’t figure out this procedural fraud until it is too late.  So much for the Constitution that says that a bill does not become a law until the House and Senate pass identical bills, and then the President signs that legislation.  

According to the AP:

Under White House pressure to act swiftly, House and Senate Democratic leaders reached for agreement Friday on President Barack Obama’s health care bill, sweetened suddenly by fresh billions for student aid and a sense that breakthroughs are at hand.   “It won’t be long,” before lawmakers vote, predicted Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The Pelosi agreement is to allow the House to vote on a rule that will preclude a vote on ObamaCare.  First, the House will take up a rule that will “deem” the Senate passed version of ObamaCare to have passed after the House passes a reconciliation bill.  The reconciliation bill is a yet to be released budgetary bill to reconcile current law and it amends the Senate ObamaCare bill.  The left assumes that the American people are too dense to understand that they are going to pass an unpopular bill in the House, yet House members can run back to the district and claim they never voted for the bill.  Win-win for Members of Congress and lose-lose for the American people.

I posted this at The Foundry Blog:

Just to restate a shocking development in the Obamacare debate; Congressional leaders have found a way to ignore the Constitutional requirement that a law be signed by the President before it is considered a law. Outrage is not a strong enough word for the feelings many American’s have toward elites in Washington, D.C. who will do anything to pass Obamacare.

The Constitution says that:

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; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law.

The House will never pass the ObamaCare bill, because they will never vote on it.  This procedure is unconstitutional and the American people should be rightly outraged when they learn of this plan.  It seems that some liberals are willing to toss aside the explicit words in the Constitution to get ObamaCare signed into law by Easter.

COMMENTS

  • earlgrey

    it be overturned by the Supreme Court.

    If they have scheduled the vote than they have the votes. All the posturing otherwise was wishful thinking I guess.

    • Menlo

      Well, first of all, judges don’t exactly use the Constitution. Their definition of the Constitution is “what judges have said about the Constitution in past rulings.” And from that, they can pick and choose any sort of opinion to fit their desired outcome. And if they can’t find anything, they’ll either look at international law or get their clerks to conjure up some new ideas they pick up from their “law” professors.

      Second, look at the record of court rulings on constitutionality. They have come to totally and completely define nearly every aspect the two-party system today; and at this point, just about every judge is a Democrat.

      Third, thanks to a little thing called “certiorari,” the Supreme Court is a figurehead institution.

      • earlgrey

        By the way I don’t think they would find precedent for this kind of madness. RIght now the Supreme Court is pretty decent. I say if the dems pass this Obamacare through the way they plan, we fillibuster any nominee for the Supreme Court until we just have Roberts. THen maybe we woudl get somewhere.

      • writeblock

        Strict constructionists care very much about what the Constitution says.

        • Menlo

          I can’t think of anyone who does not at least use prior rulings to validate his or her arguments or think that they take precedence over the Constitution. All of judges I hear seek to abide by precedent.

          • writeblock

            But that doesn’t mean they don’t attend to what the Constitutions says. They are well aware that distortions occur as the law evolves. And so they return again and again to fundamentals–at least strict constructionists do. That’s what Roberts, and Scalia and Thomas and Alito and (probably) Kennedy are all about. Do you think they are not watching the present shenanigans and are unaware of the huge consequences of this law if it comes about–in terms of reversing the roles of the citizen vis a vis the state? Obama thought to intimidate them during his SOTU speech. Instead I think he sounded the alarm. I think they were fully awakened to the threat he poses to our way of life. I fully expect them to strike back.

          • Menlo

            If they use the Constitution, they shouldn’t need to care about any prior court ruling. John Roberts thinks prior decisions should be followed even if he “disagrees” with them. All of them (except possibly Thomas) think that way. The practice is not new, but the huge array of opinions now available from which to choose makes it no different from citing international law or making something up.

            Whatever the case, I don’t know who will bring a case or on what grounds or when. The only thing I know is that whenever anyone does, it will have to start a lower court and be up to the court’s clerks in the cert pool to decide if it is among their one in one billion certworthy cases.

            Regardless, I’m having trouble seeing what in the bill one could challenge.

          • writeblock

            There is no absolute obligation to adhere to prior decisions–and Roberts never indicated he always would. He only owes respect to precedence, not blind adherence. Regarding the health care bill, the Dems are resting their argument regarding mandates on the supposed right of the federal government to regulate interstate commerce. They thus claim federal law supercedes any state laws to the contrary. There is some precedence for this view. But there have also been cases in which the Court has ruled just the other way around, in favor of the states. So the situation is murky and argues strongly in favor of revisiting the original Constitution in order to perceive the law in terms of the framers’ understanding regarding the rights and limitations of each entity.

          • writeblock

            There is not always the need to go through the lower courts. Sometimes a direct appeal may be made to the Supreme Court. In the case of a constitutional crisis there would be an expedited process certainly. If Congressional members themselves sought redress from some constitutional illegality that would impact the lives of millions, the process would be speedy.

          • bobojake

            I think they are just as guilty as Madhoff, Rezco and Enron officals in breaking the law of the Constitution of the United States of America and just as important the TRUST of the citizens/taxpayers/voters. They should all testify under oath about their part in the manipulation in this illegal process and if they find their seat beside Madhoff, Rezco and Enron officals, so be it.
            These elected officials supposely lawmakers are really good examples for the criminals filling our prison cells today.

      • Common_Cents
    • JHancock

      to the Supreme court–they don’t usually just deem an action to be unconstitutional unless a case is brought before them. This may take some time as it has to work its way up the court system. By then the Obamacare system will be ingrained and have several legitimate bills following it, so likely the Dems are hoping that even the Supreme court couldn’t completely dismantle Obamacare.

      • writeblock

        If a constitutional crisis occurs as a result of an illegal Congressional action. A majority party may try to bend some rules–but it can’t ignore them altogether. The Constitution still has got to be obeyed.

    • writeblock

      Then this unconstitutional fast-one is a blessing in disguise. It’ll go straight to the Supreme Court.

      You can’t amend bills that aren’t laws yet without going through the normal conference process. To claim to be able to do so is actually an attempt to change a bill that isn’t a law yet, without subjecting that bill to normal process. It is to treat a bill AS IF IT WERE established law. But any change in the Senate bill accomplished in this way would change the nature of that bill and subject it to established process. It must be returned to the Senate as a changed bill and a new vote scheduled–thus opening it up to a filibuster. There’s no way around this it seems to me. To attempt this is crazy.

      • earlgrey

        what they are saying above is that it woudl not make it to the Supreme Court before we are locked into Obamacare. I don’t see how an insurance company can’t immediately file suit based on the mandatory coverage of young adults or something.

        • writeblock

          …take it to the Court immediately? I know the Court likes to stay out of the other Branches’ business. But this has to do with a LAW that would directly affect 300million of us.

          And before any insurance company would file suit, it is far more likely that some of the States would do so–claiming a violation of the tenth amendment.

        • stigmo

          When a case is time sensitive, they expedite.

      • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

        I hope it doesn’t come to this, and will do eveything I can to stop the bill from going through in the first place, but I think this would hurt the Dems. They still have a few months to push this though and only need to swing a few House members (or 1 Senate Republican), and they’ll get their bill.

        Unlike in other SCOTUS rulings where only part of a bill is thrown-out, I think this would gut the entire bill. By the time SCOTUS makes a ruling, the Dems window of opportunity is gone. They get nothing, not even a drastically revised bill.

  • smitch61

    But I am just all fought out….. They are going to sign that BS bill into law, amnesty is next, which should set them up quite nicely to rule the world… I feel defeated, tomorrow is another day.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      Jump back in on Monday.

      • earlgrey

        thomas jefferson was no conservative and he favored the actions being taken in the French Revolution? If so, where did you read this stuff. This is really interesting to me.

        I appreciate your thoughts towards debbie downer. I am one of those too. I can’t seem to get my mind to let go of the the things that Mark Steyn says. Basically that there is no way back once this bill passes..

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          I’m a bit tired tonight but I’ll give you a few pointers.

          He never at any point denounced the French Revolution, even after it g ot as bad as the Reign of Terror. I can’t prove that, as it’s tough to prove a negative, though.

          But he wrote this in 1787: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”

          That’s a good snapshot into his mind.

          I also urge you to look up his opposition to the Alien and Sedition acts, as well as the mild and common sense nature of those bills.

          Consider just why he wanted to import lots of fresh immigrants, naturalize them, and get them inciting trouble in America. Then re-read the tree of liberty quote again.

          TJ was a very dangerous person whose ideas were not remotely conservative.

      • Beasley Beesmeal

        They want you to burn out!!

        I know, been there….everyone needs to take a break

        Go to Hugh Hewitts webpage you can get a letter sent to all important parties http://www.capitolconnect.com/freeourhealthcarenow/

        then take it Easy……come back strong on Monday

        • Beasley Beesmeal

          you won’t believe the crap they’ll have on the old tubes…

          Don’t watch it

    • redtillimdead

      I think its almost time to move on from “Kill the Bill” to “Repeal the Bill”

      • Beasley Beesmeal

        so you better stop…

        or just bring your sad quitting act over the weekend, when I have my Comp turned off

      • writeblock

        The last thing we need right now is discouragement. We need ANGER and OUTRAGE and the will to FIGHT. I’ve been saying for a long time this would head to the Supreme Court–and I’m more convinced than ever it will die there. But this doesn’t end with that. We need to destroy the left politically–and we will.

    • writeblock

      The fight’s only just begun. We’ve fooled around with these people for fifty years and all the while they’ve been undermining our institutions and declaring war on our values. Now the fight is out in the open. Up till now they’ve pretended to be who they weren’t in order to get elected. They won’t be able to run for dogcatcher anywhere but in NY and CA after this. The American public can see the truth finally–and the result will be a revolution–not only against this abomination, but against all the rest the left is pushing on us besides, the political correctness, the environmental craziness, the aggressive unionizing, etc. The full fury of the American public hasn’t been felt yet by the Left. But it’s coming.

      As for the SC–I’m sure it’s been watching all this closely. It knows which side the people are on. My guess is there are five justices who can’t wait to weight in on the Constitutional questions that are opening up.

      • Achance

        and the majority Party. I don’t know federal rules very well but I think at least on some things states could go straight to the USSC and on questions involving the US Government, any other party with standing would have to go through the DC Circuit and then appeal to the USSC. I don’t think you’d have to work through the District Court on a case involving the US Government.

        Maybe some of the lawyers can clarify, been awhile since I took that class!

  • smitch61

    If it is unconstitutional, no need to wait for the supreme court. He must be removed… immediately… at 6 o’clock in the morning while the kids are still asleep. This whole thing is crazy already.. Perhaps while is visiting his boy hood home next week, he can find a place to stay.

    • rbdwiggins
      • smitch61

        You literally made my day!!!!!! thanks for that…….. It’s not Monday yet…. terrific.. I will take your word for it and take the weekend off and jump back in on Monday…LOL

  • rsjt

    If they can pass laws without voting on them why do we even need representatives in Washington? We then have a dictatorship.

    Of course this will not fool Americans. And any house member that does not stand up and defend the Constitution will be held to account by the voters. Including Princess Pelosi.

  • rbdwiggins

    Charles Krauthammer:

    And there is only a single exit here. And that is if the vice president overrules the parliamentarian, which he can.

    But if he does that, that’s not a nuclear option. That’s a thermonuclear option. That’s Krakatoa. That’s 100 megatons.

    That will be a catastrophe if it is seen that the bill is pushed through by overruling a ruling of the neutral parliamentarian and passing what would otherwise be illegal.

    Don’t know what to add to that other than: Corruption runs deep within the Democrat Party.

    • earlgrey

      the Parliamentarian. THe house will just be passing the bill with all the other reconciliation and student loan stuff together. The Senate bill is then passed, and the rest goes to the Senate for reconciliation.

      It gives cover (albeit very weak cover) to wavering dems. It still seems like it should be ruled unconstitutional and I don’t see why we can’t overthrow the law because of that.

      • popdaddy

        Right? Any changes to the Senate bill has to go back for debate by the full Senate. There is no reconcillartion option if the House makes any change to the original Senate bill. Right?

        Good grief! Socialist democrat idiots gone wild, who is going to protect America!

        • earlgrey

          bill, will deem the SEnate bill passed unchanged. So the Senate bill will be passed without a vote, and then the reconciliation package will go to the Senate.

          • writeblock

            How do you amend a bill without changing it? You don’t. If you amend it, you change it. If you change it, you must send it back to the Senate for a re-vote and subject it to a filibuster.

            The only way you can amend the Senate bill without going through this normal procedure would be to vote first for the Senate bill unchanged, then send it to the President for his signature unchanged, and THEN–after it has become law–amend it to change it. By then it has become a law and subject to amendments.

            The attempt to go around this is insane and will not pass muster constitutionally. It violates every known precedent for passing bills in the Congress. What makes this even more shocking is that it’s being done with no bipartisan support and in defiance of every known poll regarding the opinion of the people. It smacks of real tyranny–far beyond what we fought a revolution over.

      • rbdwiggins

        that doesn’t require sixty votes to proceed.

        The House must pass the existing Senate bill, and the President must sign it into law before the Senate can proceed to reconcile current law.

        Krauthammer’s scenario plays out here, should they attempt to omit steps 1&2. Because it won’t be current law, it will be treated as a different bill if the Parliamentarian is queried.

        But before that can happen, President Obama is going to bribe or intimidate as many House members as it takes to pass the existing Senate bill, sign the bill into law, claim victory, quash anymore debate on healthcare, resume his apology tour and further alienate our friends and allies.

        All while the number of unemployed continues to mount.

  • makemyday

    Washington DC is a “no carry” zone. So wear an arm band and if you are stopped declare yourself to be a prisoner of war and you demand to be treated under the accords of the Geneva Convention.

    See you in the Mall

  • drbob1988

    they really have no idea of what they are going to responsible for if they jam this through….
    It isn’t over by a longshot…don’t give in…we will come out on the right side of this because we are standing for the principles of freedom and freedom always wins….

  • obladioblada

    You want to believe that there are members who are aghast at what their party has become, people who wonder how this state of affairs could ever come to pass. Is no one willing to slap Reid/Pelosi upside the head and force them to take a long hard look at themselves? Is no one willing to make a public statement about the horror the Democrats want to inflict on our Constitution? Everyone who goes along, who maintains silence about this deserves to be kicked out. All. Without exception.

    What an opportunity for a real leader to emerge among the Dems.

    When I pass word of this travesty on to friends and family I have to head it “not satire” or “not a joke,” because it’s unbelievable that the entire Democrat party is willing to throw away the rule of law at the whim of a faux messiah and petty party bosses who won’t be in a position to help or hurt them after November.

  • dio55

    The tea partiers are marching on washingtin on tuesday . I am no tea partier ,but LETS JOIN THEM . start whipping this thing to fever pitch and lets UNITE TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY . I will be in washington on tuesday if only TO TELL MY KIDS THAT I TRIED TO STOP THIS MADNESS. I have never marched for anything in my life and really cannot financially afford this right now but I will this time I WILL and I do not care if I am the only one there . if need be I will march alone

    • Jonas Parker

      You have exactly the attitude that is needed now. I hope you are not alone. How far do you have to travel to get to D.C. ?

      • ehud

        who scheduled this DC march and when? If it was a couple days ago that is not much time.

        How come none of the tea parties were planning a DC rally a couple months ago when it was clear the dems were going to do reconciliation?

  • skorrent1

    The House can make up its own rules. It is now pondering a rule that would have the effect of attaching the entire Senate bill as a rider to a House bill that proposes changes to that same Senate bill. Under that rule, one roll-call vote would serve to pass the Senate bill to the President for signature to become law, and to send the proposed modifications to the Senate for its consideration. I don’t see any way that a Representative could reasonably claim that he voted “only for the modifications, but not the Senate bill”.

    If the rule were to be made conditional “The House will deem the Senate bill to have been passed by the House if, and only if, the Senate passes this entire slate of modifications without exception and without change”, then I can see much parliamentary confusion and a high likelihood that the whole house of cards collapses, much to the benefit of the country.

  • Jonas Parker

    Oh man. This just goes to show that folks have no clue about what is going on here. Your life, and the life of your children will never be the same after this. The constitution is being thrown overboard, and we are entering a dictatorship, and folks are ‘fought out’ ?

    Guess that’s what they said at Normandy and Iwo Jima, huh ? Sorry, sarge, I’m ‘fought out’. Oh crap, I guess my friend with whom I’ve been arguing for years, is right. He says that Americans are too far gone, and we will loose our freedom because we don’t have the guts to fight. We are too comfortable and don’t have the fortitude to wage a struggle that could impact our comfort (though allowing this to pass will destroy our comfort anyway). I have been telling him that he is selling the American people short. But now I am beginning to think I’ve been overly optimistic, and that the reality is that they will get away with this because nobody cares enough to really fight it.

    Franklin said ‘Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ‘

    Think about that. There are many possibilities for resisting this, but I’m not seeing many people willing to act on them.

    • earlgrey

      People are saying they are fought out, because nothing seems to have an impact.

      Personally, I can’t afford this fight anymore. 3 times this week I have given to the League of American voters, on top of that the senate conservatives fund. I think I have probably given a total of nearly 2,000 bucks to various candidates/causes since the healthcare thing started and I am running out of cash! I need one of those money printing machine’s Bernanke has.

      I went to march 9/12. I have gone to local tea parties and spoken at them. I have called Senators/Congressmen. I have written letters to them. I have helped my parents and sister put together letters for their reps out of state.

      Now you are saying we have to keep fighting because there is so much at stake, but that in itself is defeating, because we have done so much and now we are comjing to the wire and it seems we are losing!! It is bad to lose, but especially when the other guy is cheating even though he started out with a better hand(media).

      What else wouidl have us do?

      • Beasley Beesmeal

        then….turn it off for 48 hours…starting right Now….

      • writeblock

        What can you do? Stop wringing your hands to begin with. The one thing everybody can do is not admit defeat! Never! And avoid DEFEATISM which tends to discourage others and leads to acquiescence and permanent serfdom. It’s not over by a long shot, even if it passes. We can vote the bums out. We can make sure we put some starch in the GOP by bringing in new blood. We can take back our schools. We can take over the party and then the Government. We can reverse this in the exact same way they instituted it. –if the Supreme Court doesn’t knock it down first. Hopefully it won’t get to this–but there’s a lot ahead of us we can achieve.

      • Jonas Parker

        I have sympathy for the weariness, because I have it too. And I don’t ascribe negatives to people who express this feeling, except that this is something that neither history, nor our children, will forgive us for allowing to happen.

        This is not something you or I, nor the people talking about weariness can do alone. You, and I’m sure they, have done everything that an individual can do (and I have done the same, attended the Tea Parties, given more than I can afford to, etc).

        This is something that a LOT of people, millions hopefully, must do. There needs to be a spontaneous reaction to the travesty playing out in D.C. Absent that, I would have to agree with you that opportunities for resistance are limited. It is a critical failure that neither the leaders of our movements nor the individuals involved have recognized that while some scheduled events are very important, they do not replace a public that persistently and passionately thrusts itself into the workings of the system, at every opportunity.

        Most here are not young? I am surely not. We have responsibilities, jobs, kids, grandkids, parents in need of care, etc. It isn?t as easy as when some of us were radical 40 years ago when we had nothing to loose.

        I am frustrated because there is no activity planned by my local Rep or Tea Party organizations. Though I have tried to influence that, it hasn?t met with much success. So I’m being restricted to individual activity. But that’s not going to cut it.

        So what would I have us do ? (if I had the power) I would have us show up at our local federal buildings. I would have those of us that are close enough or can afford it show up in D.C. Power comes from numbers, and it must be visible. Think about what the left has accomplished in the last 40 years. Most of it was accomplished by demonstrations… by bodies in the street. That is not a comfort zone for conservatives, but it is the fulcrum of politics. Consider… politicians and our society has been changed by the threat of demonstrations by the left. Our government and our whole society has for a long time now done things a certain way just to avoid the confrontation with the leftist demonstrators that everyone knows will follow if things are not done to their satisfaction.

        If conservatives cannot reverse this and take the momentum to our side, with a similar show of force, then we will never turn back the 100 years of movement toward a collectivist society, which I can assure you, as a historian, is a huge mistake that will result in the same human misery that it always has. And, after all, we are the majority. The left is only 20% of the population, but they rule the country and are delivering us into a Marxist state. ???? go figure? lack of astuteness on our part.

        The solution requires that not just you and I, but the people that purport to lead the organizations that we belong to and donate to (Rep party, Tea party, whatever) understand also how the ?game? is played an how to win it. So far despite the incredible turnout and enthusiasm we saw last year, we are falling short of the ?needful?. (That is an expression I get from the Indian folks I work with? ?do the needful?)

        Sorry for being long winded? bottom line is if we can?t generate a mass spontaneous reaction to this, we are probably cooked, and I?m just glad I lived most of my life before this, and I?m sorry for my children. I am trying. By blogging here I am still trying. I would like to help light a fire that gets people moving. When there is enough concern, people will start moving. But we are fast approaching a point where it will be too late. The founders gave us the tools, but we don?t recognize the need to use them. We seem to have lost our convictions and our clarity about what is unique about this country and what it is important to preserve? and it is not really ?this country?? it is really about people? the human condition. We are squandering a ?gift? of intellectual inheritance and geography that has occurred, substantially, only once in the entire history of the human race.

      • Jonas Parker

        Part 2:

        (these need concerted action by many people)

        1. Stay legal

        2. Realize and internalize that you are the MAJORITY. And, you are RIGHT.

        3. You have kept this society functioning… you have paid the bills. You, Da&^ it, deserve to have your say and to determine our course of action. We wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for YOU. Believe it !! because it is true and they can’t do anything without your compliance.

        4. Storm your congressman’s office if he/she is a yes vote. Stay there. Don’t ever stop until they are defeated.

        5. Defeat RINOs and get into office representatives that reflect constitutional values and are dedicated to government with the consent of the governed and to carrying out the will of the majority of the people in a constitutional manner. We need to break the back of the entire beltway gang from both parties. Our lives depend on it.

        6. After the elections this year, force the impeachment and removal from office of Barack Obama, for violation of his oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution. You think this is impossible ? Only because underdog status has been ingrained in you. You can do ANYTHING, if only you have the will. You do have the numbers. You just need to learn how to use the numbers.

        If you think this is extreme, just consider what is going on in D.C. right now. We are in a fight for the existence of our democracy.

        • tjgmba

          Agree completely. But we’re a republic, not a democracy.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    Use the Constitution and the 10th Amendment. VA passed a bill stating that VA wouldn’t be subject to mandates. Rush discussed it yesterday. If you’re in a Red state fight this at the state level. If enough states opt out it WILL collapse.

    See the 10th Amendment Center and read my diary

    http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

    http://www.redstate.com/derkrieger/2009/12/28/federalism-is-freedom/

    • Menlo
      • writeblock

        …it affirms principles embedded in the tenth amendment. Individuals would just be ignored. The states won’t be–and it’ll end up in the Supreme Court.

        • Menlo

          As written, the Senate bill bars the federal government from acting against individuals who do not pay their non-insurance “penalty.”

          • writeblock

            In other words, the government still claims to be our master–though a benign one who will forbear issuing deserving punishments. Sorry, that won’t wash. It’s a legal document, prescribing mandates–with or without further action by government. The principle is wrong–and tyrannous. It will begin benignly and end up with unfettered right to rule every aspect of our lives–once its structure is in place. It needs to be shot down–and will be.

    • tjgmba

      …in Missouri. The Missouri Sovereignty Project is having a massive impact on our elected officials across our state.

      Go here: www.mosov.org

  • kchand

    Look at this process. Look how it’s being distorted and corrupted. Look at this legislative pile of b.s. that this ‘Congress’ has created. And this is JUST attempting to CREATE the law. For God’s sake, THAT is not even defined yet.

    Can ANYONE fathom how they will implement and execute this nightmare? God help us.

    And I’m not giving up. Too many have given so much more than any of us have over 234+ years for us, the truly fortunate in the world, to give up. Not a friggin’ chance!

  • Swamp_Yankee

    Everyone knows this fake optimism routine that Pelosi plays. But Blue Dogs and Pro-Lifers are slowly joining the ‘NO’ ranks.

    Also, Pelosi has spent so much energy on the Blue Dogs that it looks like other rifts have not been addressed. She is herding cats and some that she thought she had locked up are now on the loose.

    The best news I’ve heard is that Luis Guttierez is a firm ‘no’ now. The crack on the hispanic front is for real. Also, I’ve been following Capuano, a solid Mass Dem, and he is leaning no now. Oddly, the liberal bas is receptive to his wavering. This vote is too important. Im trying to rally Republicans and Indpendents to his corner.

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/capuano-suggests-hes-leaning-no-on-health-care.php

    Also, Heath Shuler came out a strong no today.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/12/democrats.against.health.care/

    • Mary Beth

      For instance, what if we organized people to call all the Representatives on Monday and get them on record as either supporting the Slaughter Rule or not and then report it through Hannity or Mark Levin or some such thing? Send it over to Breitbart?

      If each office gets calls asking them to go on the record in support or opposition, doesn’t that blow their idea to do this in the cover of darkness out of the water?

      BTW…. I’ve been giving more thought to Pelosi’s “4 shy” comment a lot today. I figured it was just posturing and presenting a sense of momentum and inevitability…but what if it’s also to provide cover for this maneuver? I mean why be surprised that a “vote on Obamacare” passes if she’s already *this* close?

      And another thing. I read elsewhere…I think it was NRO…someone was suggesting that Obama had planned to “delay” his trip all along…and that this was just a move on his part to create a false sense of urgency and inevitability. I wouldn’t be surprised if that were true, would you?

      PS. Awesome news on Shuler and Guttierez. I had figured that the latter was just a political move to get concessions elsewhere…or perhaps he sees this ship as sinking and he wants to make a show of supporting his pet topic…

    • hickorystick

      I clicked on your link and read his letter. I liked what he had to say. The thing that struck me the most, was it wasn’t ideological, but keyed directly to issues within your state, particularly what the will of MA people expressed in the their own version of health-care. He spelled out how the National Bill is in conflict with the will of MA voters as expressed. He also brought it down to numbers, and how it would hurt funding for existing care. He did point out Obama spiking MA provisions after SB’s election.
      I really think this is the direction for the future, for each Rep and Senator to speak for the interests of their own state, and relate how each bill effects the existing structures already set up in the state. Out here in Washington, we do things differently. We have used co-ops for many supply and distrubution needs. The Dairy Farmers received far more for their goods this way. Group Health is very successful network of Clinics and hospital. When Conrad brought up this idea of using Co-op’s as a Public Option, only Maria Cantwell stood up and said good idea; because she has seen it work well. For Oregon, they set up their own single payer system. They voted on it by initiative, and approved it, because thats what they want. Fine.
      I think much of peoples anger is Party officials cramming a national agenda down Reps throats, when it clearly doesn’t work well for that state. A republic, with each state soveriegn, and their delegation defending it, would benefit Republicans limited government stated philosophy. It would set them up for victories. Since 9-11, all attention has been national; Enough I say,of the constant crises mentality.

    • cookcountyconservative

      Believe me he will be a “yes” in the end – Dah Mayor will straighten him out.

      • Common_Cents

        He never gave a firm answer and said it depends. They gonna throw amnesty in there too? along with the takeover of student loans.

        No DEM wants to be the sole deciding vote for no. If they get close there will be tons of pressure to cave. There needs to be a strong small group of them to hold out and lead on the issue against this bill.

  • cdrapcho

    This is OUTRAGEOUS!!!!! This is not a simple political maneuver or tactic. This is unconstitutional and is tyranny plain and simple. The House wants to vote on a suppplemental reconciliation bill and claim that that vote “implies” that the Senate Bill passed the House. Mark Levin stated tonite that he could not find precedent of this ever happening in the House on such a large piece of legislation. He also stated that the American people should NOT feel confident that the Supreme Court would overturn this law. He also assumes that it will pass the House and is suggesting ways that the Senate could fight the legislation, but even if they (Senate) fight this, it is still the law of the land.

    Now is the time to get involved. I too have contributed money ($1,000s), call reps/senators and talked to friends, but now I will “go”. Go to my local senator’s office, then go to Washington. If I and you don’t, you won’t recognize the America you are living in.

  • JimmyGee

    I now understand why Obama used the State of the Union Address to ridicule the Supreme Court of the United States. He is trying to use Alinsky tactics to marginalize the Supreme Court of the United States; Obama knows full well that this unconstitutional power-grab will not stand and that they will be deciding on numerous parts of it this year. This will make the Gore/Bush election debacle look like a girl scout meeting!
    As a nurse, I fear that once this becomes law, Obama, will soon after HCR is passed, will federalize all health care workers and put them under the SEIU. We will be forced to pay union dues to the SEIU.
    Something else I fear. Someone is going to be killed in this mess. Some Senator, or Congressman will be shot at a town-hall, or even while out for pizza with their family. I fear something akin to the riots of the 1960′s.
    But what I fear most, is that if the democrats get this bill through, and successfully pass it, they can, and will, do anything else they want to do.
    But what they don’t understand is this; they see this as a means to continuous political power for how ever the United States exists. We, the people, see this as the death of the Constitution and the death of the United States.
    Never corner a caged animal…you have not idea the fight in them!
    This will end badly…

    • Beasley Beesmeal

      chill out

      • Jonas Parker

        the gist of this comment is right on the money… you just chill while the Marxists take over ? weird

        • Beasley Beesmeal

          listen, nothing will happen on this issue until Monday am…

          Chill out…..this premise of yours, that nobody is fired up is BS

          your not going to find a protest to march in by hanging out badgering the Redstate nightshift

          there’s lots of protests being arranged right now…go look around…breath

          • discerningconservative
          • Jonas Parker

            Still breathing this morning :)

      • tjgmba

        …JimmyGee is more on target than you think. I run the Missouri Sovereignty Project (www.mosov.org) and the undercurrent in this state, and a few others surrounding us, mirrors JimmyGee’s observations. I can tell you as a fact, a power keg is lying right below the surface.

      • JimmyGee

        Sorry but I had to go to work so I could not give a rebuttal.
        Couple of things I know; 1) Once this nightmare passes, it will be INFINITELY harder to repeal. Do you know of ANY entitlement that has been terminated once it became law? 2) If this nightmare does pass and become law, Obama will have just over to years to fortify the law. Do you think for one minute Obama will just sit back and WAIT for the republicans to disembowel it? No, he is going to fortify it with every liberal, socialist groups tie-in to the law. He will make the SEIU the official “UNION” of all health-care workers. I believe we would even go so far as to use an executive order to force non-union medical worker into the SEIU. Why? Because what does he have to loose? He is going to make people angrier? Anger has not stopped him so far, in fact he seems to thrive on it.
        3) I don’t know constitutional law, but as a nurse I am very adept at human nature. I have to work with drunk, drugged-up, belligerent patients all the time. There are things I need to get done on their behalf and I need their cooperation to do those things like lab tests, and EKG, etc. Now I can just do what I will to get the job done, or I can work with the patient to get what I need done. And almost every time if I listen to them, and give them choices they comply with no need for security or restraint. Why? Because they felt heard, and that they have options.
        I bring out this point because we are the trashing patient that does not want this bill passed. And we are not being listened to, and we are not being given options. Nothing good can come from that. This may be the first time in the history fo the United States that such a condition exists. Americans are not used to this political environment where the stakes are so very high. I can see the escalation at work the past year; people are not getting though calling their senator and congressman, so they flood the town halls, they are being invalidated at the town-halls, so they march and have tea-parties, and we are still being marginalized.
        Ben Nelson was having dinner at a restaurant when he was booed into leaving the establishment. If this bill passes, Ben Nelson may have had something far worse than being booed out of a restaurant happen to him. That is my concern here. People who feel powerless use greater power to be heard. It is human nature. My concern also is that our elected senators and congressmen who vote for this bill, may well be out of a job after November, and they will have a very hard time finding a place small enough to hide in.
        4) I remember the over-thrown of the Shaw of Iran. The riots; hundreds of thousands of people on the nightly news. My dad said something very profound…”You know what you see there? People without jobs.” That is what we have here. Lots of angry people without jobs, with lots of time on their hands. Will there be riots? Maybe, maybe not. BUT THE CONDITION IS RIPE FOR RIOTS.
        And lastly, I would like to take issue with the phrase “chill out.” “Chill out” is a great phrase while on vacation, at a party, or BBQ. You never hear people in competitive sports use the phrase chill out much. I played football, and can say I never heard it spoken. Because when your loosing the game, and you are running out of time, chilling out is not an option.

        • Jonas Parker

          Keep blogging

          • Beasley Beesmeal

            you dudes are ‘blogging’….now I get it

            http://www.redstate.com/wwwjava/

            http://www.redstate.com/jimmygee/

    • writeblock

      How did we get to this point? It happened because of one-party dominance. What makes you think this can’t occur again–in reverse? After this, how viable will the Democrats be politically? They are in for a bloodbath. If we win both chambers–and it’s possible, though improbable (but given the rising anger of the public, it wouldn’t surprise me if it happened)–then anything is possible. It’s true Obama would veto any repeal–but vetoes can be overruled with enough votes if we take over with sufficient strength. And much can be done to sabotage the program in the interim till we take over fully in 2012. So why the pessimism? Personally, I’m thrilled we got to this point. That is to say, I never thought the Dems and Obama would be so quickly discredited, or that we could return as soon as this November to real power. After November he will be a lame duck. His administration will be subjected to REAL investigations by a truly concerned Congress. Obama might think he is a transformative figure–but the real transformation will be in 2012.

      • Jonas Parker

        sorry, but I continue to be astounded that people think this bill can pass, and whatever else they do this year, and there will be a country left in 2012.

        It’s all over at that point, friends. There will be no rolling this back. If you don’t have the guts to get in the streets now and do whatever is necessary to back the government off, you have lost forever.

        • writeblock

          It isn’t all over if it passes. That’s when the fight is just beginning. We go to the courts. We pass nullification laws. We refuse to comply. We kick the bums out. We take over the Congress. We investigate and sic special prosecutors on the President and his cohorts, we plot to overthrow this abomination. What we don’t do is get discouraged. It’s war, not politics as usual. On their side it was war all along. Now we realize this. We’re just beginning to mobilize our forces.

          • Jonas Parker

            later is too late

  • Bobcat51

    Oliver Cromwell when you need him?

    The King has torn up the Constitituion ; Not good ,very very bad.

    • http://andrightlyso.com/ civil_truth

      Not to mention the massive slaughter of English citizens in the Civil War. I’d wouldn’t advise appealing to that era as a historical model for today..

      • Bobcat51

        but did they really need to dig him up and treat his corpse very badly ?!

      • ceili_dancer

        n/t

        • hickorystick
  • archer52

    The key to the trust between authorities and civilians is that both sides understand there are rules you don’t break. The police have the right to arrest you, but only so you can have your day in court. The civilians submit to arrest assuming they’ll be treated fairly and will have their chance to defend themselves in front of a jury of their peers.

    But if the police start shooting people instead of arresting them, the people have a right and an obligation to resist. That is how a society works. Once one side quits playing by the rules, the other side MUST resist. If you submit you are going to be continuously assaulted by those who lose more and more respect for you as humans with free will. The assaults will continue until there is nothing left, no free will, no rights, no hope… no freedom. It is the way of humans. It has been the way of humans since the first man struck another with a fist or club and took what the fallen man possessed.

    Whether it is by a club, a fist, a stone, a spear, or from the barrel of a gun, the constant threat of abuse and violence always exists. This is why the founding fathers built this nation, to create securities, no more like barriers to those threats. They gave us ways to peacefully resolve differences. But they also warned us, repeatedly, that the threat is not only out there but can come in many different forms, including the velvet covered fist of good intentions by liberals and progressives.

    What is going to happen? I wrote about one possible future in my novel. (www.revoltthebook.com) You see, it is also the duty and responsibility of the people to protect their God given rights. This is what many felt around 1858 when an assault upon state and individual rights occurred.

    Today, most people don’t understand Obama wasn’t lying. Neither were the radical leftists from the sixties disguised as mature politicians we see before us now. They are on the path to pull the final plug on their drive to crush what was once the greatest and freest nation in the history of the world. How will we respond? How will you respond? Will you be content to talk about the Nov 2010 as the way to punish the Dems when Biden overrules the Senate parliamentarian? Even though it will be tantamount to being shot at by the police.

    I’ve said this many times before, the biggest problem within a revolution is one of perspective. You simply cannot get far enough away from the problem to see the enormity of the effort and assault. As we complain about healthcare, they are thinking of seizing more land out west (the premise of the book’s plot- written in 1997 mind you!), stopping fishing, FISHING!, seizing control of your kid’s higher education and pushing regulation upon you so you will never rise above your class without their approval.

    I wouldn’t worry so much, but the greatest generation is dying off. Their words of caution are no longer muttered from old men’s lips. Some say our financial meltdown was caused by the retirement of the cautious old men who knew better, who remember the last depression, and who were replaced by those young guns who screwed up our system in a drive to get rich quick on the backs of men and women like you and me. The same who now demand billions of our tax money and also demand they control our way of life because they are the educated elites. Talk about brass ones!

    No honor, no sacrifice, no respect and no accountability, no soul and no morals. Why are we standing by and letting them tell us how to live, how to raise our kids, and they are the ones who will tell us what rights they will give us. Why?

    You have to remember the 90/10 rule. 90% of the people are sheep, 10% run the world, the rest go around wondering what happened and who did it. It has always been that way until a crisis wakes up more of the 90%. Politicians and tyrants bank of the hope that they can keep most of us asleep. When that doesn’t work, they’ll resort to force.

    In 1776 it was a relatively small band of men and women who stood up and said enough. The vast majority of the people were either neutral or favored British citizenship. They stood on the sidelines, at least at first. In 1858, the South refused to accept the tariffs and other restrictions put upon them by the greedy North. Slavery was only one part of the equation. It was their way or no way, and the South chose to exercise its Constitutional right to secede. You don’t learn that in history classes because it doesn’t fit the progressive mantra. They don’t want you to learn you have a right to say no. That our founding fathers begged us not to submit to tyranny, because they knew it would mean all their sacrifices were for naught.

    Do not allow that to happen. Read the book. Understand we are a free people and there are options available. Always chose peaceful options first. Always. But like I said before, sooner or later, enough will be enough. The question is where is the line? I don’t know. But it seems the Obama administration and their cronies in Congress, business, and the media are dead set on finding it.

    • Jonas Parker

      I’ll leave that to your imagination, but I want to see a whole lot more of what you are saying on here. You get it. It’s time.

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    Whenever I think of Obama I think of Soros who is a convicted criminal and who has made his plans for this country quite clear. Nothing will be a surprise. A lot of money is behind these people including David Rockefeller and his so-called moderate republican group. I find it helpful to avoid all cable news channels. Perhaps someone is preparing paperwork right now to sue to stop this bill should it be enacted.

  • mavericktime

    I thought Obama had to actually sign the Senate bill before the House could vote on the fixes.

    • Swamp_Yankee

      House Dems have cleared the schedule and are preparing for two votes. The Parliamentarian ruling pretty much put an end to the slaughter Rule no vote. From what I understand, they are pursuing a back to back vote, passing the Senate bill and the reconcilition bill at the same time.

      • Mary Beth

        Wouldn’t their correction bill be subject to passing in the Senate?

        They’d be exactly where they were anyway…having to trust the Senate to keep their word and not leave them signing on to a bill they hate right?

  • snowshooze

    Couldn’t we tie up the entire bill and get it stuck in a quagmire, effectively killing it at birth? It would seem to me that the injunction would arrest the implementation of the bill untill all the legal challenges were cleared..which would be never…and the dems could spend the rest of their lives fighting over how to implement historys’ greatest tax grab and crying..

  • archer52

    The options are endless, but understand the problem. They aren’t paying attention to the rules. The States can refuse the healthcare law, but at their own peril. Feds could withhold fed money, file lawsuits, etc. We could sue, but many, MANY federal judges are in the bag. Years of getting “their” people on the bench will pay off now. That leaves disobedience. The left loves riots, unions love riots, WTO people are paid to riot, but we seem to want to protest peacefully. The radical leaders in America are more than content to put up with a few signs held by middle aged hard working men and women as long as it vents the frustration enough to allow the left to work in the dark. As we walk around or call or write, they are steady crushing the nation.

    How long they can get away with it is the issue and why they are trying to cram all they can in right now. They know the open door of opportunity is closing. I have a question for all of you. What if we have a good turn out in Nov. but the election supervisors controlled by the Democrats in the states (Washington and Minnesota being examples) refuse to allow your votes to count? Or allow fradulent votes to count?

    What will you do then?

    • Beasley Beesmeal

      chocolate eclairs at the donut shop tomorrow morning…

      but not to worry……Dems Love chocolate!

  • ehud

    The senate parliamentarian ruled that a reconciliation bill could only be used on the senate bill after it was signed by the president.

    Is the house exempt from this? Did the house parlimentarian rule differently? How can the house even begin to work on a reconciliation bill that modifies something that doesn’t exist?

  • avgjo

    Thank you for keeping the fighting spirit alive. Maybe it will become infectious and we’ll win.

    One reason, I believe, they don’t listen, is because they don’t face real consequences if/when they get voted out. Oh, sure, their ambitions for office maybe postponed or even ruined, but there’re all kinds of cushy lobbying jobs and the like.

    You know what might be a really good thing? Maybe we could start some collaborative project (a la wiki), a ‘where are they now?’ There’s gotta be enough of us with resources at our disposal to do this. We could use it as an intel source; with the info, we could cause bad p.r. for whoever associates with them. Make them pariahs. Make it clear that, just like elections, bad votes have consequences.

  • avgjo

    What do you think would happen if the GOP forced a vote on a resolution condemning the use of the slaughter solution?

    • writeblock

      Because it’s certainly unconstitutional. The SC would knock it down. I can’t believe they’d be so stupid.

  • Adjoran

    They are enemies of America, freedom, and constitutional governance.

    They don’t even seem to care about their own precious political careers – something they have put first since about 5 minutes after arriving in DC the first time. They are willing to sacrifice their seats to destroy America.

    We need rope, and lots of it. For after fair and impartial trials, of course – but it does pay to plan ahead . . .

  • tjgmba

    I’ve been reading RS for a long time; I’m just now starting to post. There are some great, knowledge people here that I have enjoyed for some time now. Exception constitutional thought. Sound logic. Patriotism, Conseervatism, etc.

    This whole disgusting violation of the constitution is not going to be cleansed on the federal level. I founded the Missouri Sovereignty Project, and I wish to God other people (like some of you, maybe) would start similar movements within in your states. The state level is precisely where our battle is going to begin and end.

    Please HELP!!!! Here we are: www.mosov.org

  • Bobcat51

    Obama Civilian Security

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

  • eburke

    that rules out of order any motion by the Senate to repeal HCR. Our constitutional republic is unraveling before our eyes.

    • avgjo

      Law is not that which public approbation hath not made so.

      Screw ‘em. We put as much pressure on our people to disregard this illegitimate ‘law’ as the communists did these people to disregard the Constitution.

  • avgjo

    to be everybit as ruthless and brutal as these people are. Until then, we will continue to watch our country rot.

    And I gotta tell ya, with all the hand-wringing and whining I see everywhere from people on our side, it is tempting to be pessimistic.

  • http://www.havearoach.com Lee Hempfling

    Unconstitutional acts by congress, in conjunction with the signing of an unconstitutional act by the President. Smells like rejecting the oath of office to me. Just another nail. Just another nail.

  • teresakoch

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=662R2awSwPQ

    Because we all need a little inspiration!