Dems Shredding The Constitution

[Shady]

House Democrats appear set to pass Senate bill without voting on it

Republicans now expect Democrats to pass health care through the House with a trick only Capitol Hill could dream up: approving the Senate bill without voting on it.

Democrats will vote on a separate bill that includes language stating that the original Senate bill is “deemed passed.”

Link

Can you believe it??? Deemed passed??? They're not going to actually vote on the legislation, because they don't have the votes to pass it. So they're literally going to deem the bill passed, and move on. This from the same people who used to refer to President Bush as King George.

This is about as un-democratic, and un-constitutional as it gets! :angry:

[Alta4ever]

This is disgusting talk about a loss of democracy to the US, I wonder if heads will roll literally if they do this.

[Bonam]

From what I understand the "reconciliation" measure has been used many times by both parties to pass a variety of legislation. They aren't doing anything any more "unconstitutional" then what has been being done by both parties in the past.

[Smallc]

If it's unconstitutional, then it won't stand up to a court challenge, and it won't matter anyway. You and Hannity will just have to live with it.

[Shady]

From what I understand the "reconciliation" measure has been used many times by both parties to pass a variety of legislation. They aren't doing anything any more "unconstitutional" then what has been being done by both parties in the past.

This particular new rule proposed by the house isn't reconciliation. And no, it's never been done in the history of the United States of America. Luckily, the congressional parliamentarian is apparently having many doubts over this process.

[Shady]

The truth about what the Dems are doing.

[Sir Bandelot]

What about this then-

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced his party's legislative game plan in a letter today to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). "We will do so by revising individual elements of the bills both Houses of Congress passed last year, and we plan to use the regular budget reconciliation process that the Republican caucus has used many times," Sen. Reid wrote.

In budget reconciliation, lawmakers adjust spending and revenue lines in the annual federal budget. Both parties have relied on the technique to pass legislation when they controlled Congress. A Republican Congress, for example, enacted major tax cuts during the George W. Bush administration this way.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/718388?src=rss

[Shady]

What about this then-

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced his party's legislative game plan in a letter today to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). "We will do so by revising individual elements of the bills both Houses of Congress passed last year, and we plan to use the regular budget reconciliation process that the Republican caucus has used many times," Sen. Reid wrote.

In budget reconciliation, lawmakers adjust spending and revenue lines in the annual federal budget. Both parties have relied on the technique to pass legislation when they controlled Congress. A Republican Congress, for example, enacted major tax cuts during the George W. Bush administration this way.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/718388?src=rss

What about it? It has nothing to do with the new attempted house rule of "deem and pass." You deem a bill is passed without voting on it, and then pass changes to the newly deemed but not voted on bill.

People, if you're gonna take time to post on this subject, kindly have at least a bit of an idea of what the hell you're talking about. THIS ISN'T RECONCILIATION. It's something entirely different. Reconciliation involved two already passed pieces of legislation, and then reconiling them. It doesn't involve deeming a bill passed, without actually passing it. And then making changes.

[BubberMiley]

Because one can't effectively argue with Shady because he'll deny his basic premises when put to the fire, I'll just link to an article that explains how the regurgitated talking points he spews today are, as usual, lies.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/16/health-care-opponents-dem_n_501353.html

He could now debate the article, but he won't because he can't. All he has are the talking points.

[bush_cheney2004]

This is about as un-democratic, and un-constitutional as it gets! :angry:

Krikey....next Obama will prorogue Congress!

Edited March 17, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Alta4ever]

Funny how those that were so upset Harper perogied parliament will come to the defense of the democrats when they are trying to side step voting for a bill in the house of reps to reconcile a bill that will not have passed that house.

Disgusting

[BubberMiley]

Disgusting

No interest in reading how it's all just lies? I guess sometimes truth is just information you don't want to know.

[Shakeyhands]

Funny how those that were so upset Harper perogied parliament will come to the defense of the democrats when they are trying to side step voting for a bill in the house of reps to reconcile a bill that will not have passed that house.

Disgusting

Ummm... this works both ways there Alta...

[Sir Bandelot]

People, if you're gonna take time to post on this subject, kindly have at least a bit of an idea of what the hell you're talking about. THIS ISN'T RECONCILIATION. It's something entirely different. Reconciliation involved two already passed pieces of legislation, and then reconiling them. It doesn't involve deeming a bill passed, without actually passing it. And then making changes.

Well I was only asking a question. Since you started the thread and thus consider yourself an expert, I want to hear your answer to these democratic talking points. I think your answer seems to hold some truth, and I'm not surprised that the Dems are playing their own game of manipulation.

In this age of disinformation it's useful to look at both arguments and see who is really lying. More often than not it seems both are lying. Sorry, Thomas Jefferson.

[Pliny]

From what I understand the Senate passed their bill and the House passed their bill but the Democrats can't reconcile the two and get the bill they want passed. So they will just "deem" the senate bill as passed in the House. Apparently, this has been done in the past many times.

This bill is very important and thus it has come to light what it means to "deem" a bill passed. It seems on the surface to be rather unconstitutional but is apparently called the "Slaughter Rule" which was, according to Bubber's article, challenged in court as unconstitutional but "deemed" by the courts to be constitutional. I am not aware of the particulars of this and the article doesn't say how or why it was considered constitutional. Some research on this is necessary but let's take the author's word for it right now.

If the Democrats go ahead and deem the Senate bill as passed they are asking for trouble. There is major public opposition to the Senate bill as it stands and the Democrats are simply attempting to make themselves look like they didn't support some of the things in it but in deeming it passed they can make the claim they didn't vote for it thus washing their hands of any responsibility and being able to let public backlash just roll off their backs - at least until voting time. It's is a pretty transparently sly dodge of responsibility. Is this what Nancy Pelosi means by being transparent? Politicians no longer need to hide how slimy, partisan and irresponsible they are in order to get back room deals passed.

The American Constitution was a roadblock to government tyranny at it's inception but it has over it's 2 century plus history been eroded to the point now where it is merely an inconvenience and government will get what it wants "deeming" what is best for it's citizens. "Deem", another word for tyranny, perhaps?

I think Nancy Pelosi isn't above deeming this legislation passed to satisfy her legacy as the Godmother of American health care. I would warn Americans that if this passes it will be the last major change to health care they will ever be able to make. Once government mandates everyone have/buy health care all the following legislation will only be cosmetic and mostly to do with allocating ever-increasing resources and extending government tentacles in it's regulation.

If it does pass then momentum against it must be immediately demonstrated in the next election by the voting public and will be the only chance they have to ever repeal it.

Opposition after that will be hard to rally.

I would like to see an American solution to their health care problems not a government solution.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Pliny

[punked]

HAHAHAHAHA SHADY IS SUCH A LIAR!!! The Republicans used "this particular rule" as Shady calls it 35 times in 2005-2006 alone. WHERE WAS SHADY THE PROTECTER OF THE CONSTITUTION THAN? His head must have been up his butt or something then. Ouch truth hurts Republicans. I am reminded of the great Adlai Stevenson whenever Shady posts anything as it always blows up in his face. "I am willing too offer Republicans a deal, If the Republicans will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them.”

http://blog.american.com/?p=11467

[Alta4ever]

Ummm... this works both ways there Alta...

Really how, every issue that the opposition was concerned about they are able to address in parliament, proroguing set them back 22 days thats it.

Deeming a bill that was not voted on passed on a different piece of legislation, is sidestepping the US democratic process.

[BubberMiley]

Deeming a bill that was not voted on passed on a different piece of legislation, is sidestepping the US democratic process.

Clue: By "both ways" he was probably referring to the fact that the Republicans have "deemed bills" many, many, many times. The reason you just found out what "deeming bills" means is because the Democrats are doing it.

Edited March 19, 2010 by BubberMiley

[Alta4ever]

Clue: By "both ways" he was probably referring to the fact that the Republicans have "deemed bills" many, many, many times. The reason you just found out what "deeming bills" means is because the Democrats are doing it.

And yet this negates nothing.

[Smallc]

In reality, the bill is still being voted on. If you do not vote to deem it passed, then it doesn't pass.

[Alta4ever]

In reality, the bill is still being voted on. If you do not vote to deem it passed, then it doesn't pass.

But they aren't voting on the health care bill they are voting on an abstract to have the details filled in later.

I would have more faith in my dog not to eat a steak dropped on the floor then I would have in these morons.

[Smallc]

When talking about US legislators, I completely agree with that sentiment.

[BubberMiley]

I would have more faith in my dog not to eat a steak dropped on the floor then I would have in these morons.

But they're duly elected morons, so that's the system "we're" stuck with.

Edited March 19, 2010 by BubberMiley