As we move to the climax on the Health Insurance Reform bill we see ever increasingly creative ways to move this puppy along. No longer are we talking about the "Louisiana Purchase" or the "Corn Husker Kickback".
The most creative is the proposed rule coming out of the House Rules Committee, the so called Slaughter Rule, that will allow the House to vote on amendments to the Senate Bill (passed already by the US Senate) and to then "deem" the underlying bill to have been passed—but without the yeas and nays (see the US Constitution, Article I, Section 7).
Here is a discussion at the Volokh Conspiracy.
Cited several times was Clinton v City of New York, which is about the Line Item Veto, passed as part of the "Contract with America" program of Congressman Newt Gingrich. The past is always with us.
Since I am not a lawyer I could be charged with practicing law without a license by offering my opinion, but what the heck, maybe the fact that I am in Pennsylvania will protect me. That said, I think the Slaughter Rule is terrible. On the other hand, "Campaign Carl" Cameron said on Fox News that both parties have done this before. Shame! Shame, I say. Shame on both parties if that is the case.
But, I am dubious about the US Supreme Court ruling this illegal. The US Supreme Court tends to avoid getting involved in activities internal to the US Congress.
I know that the Democrats in DC think of this as Caster Oil. They are doing this for our own good, even if we don't want it. The poll numbers are against this and being tricky is even worse.
If it happens we will see how this plays out in November.
Regards — Cliff
PS: Hat tip to Instapundit
9 comments:
This came up at work today. I don't think it matters - most people don't really care about the process.
By November, what will matter is what people think of the bill, not how it was passed. If they did this in October, it may be a different story.
It's worse for the Democrats if they don't get it passed. People who don't want the bill will be pissed at them for trying to pass it. People who do want the bill will be pissed at them for not being able to pass it.
Oooh I would be a little careful on saying the poll numbers are against reform, it appears to be about 45% in favor and 45% opposed (or are you referring to polls on how it is being handled?).
And is that the way you spell Caster?
I feel a little bit sorry for the congresscritters that rode the wave in '06 & the tsunami in '08. We have Dems perched in some precarious districts. Oh well.
I have a good feeling about HCR, so I'll just work a little harder to protect MA-5 & NH-2. The races will be tighter in the rust belt. Sucks for them, but they are lucky to be there in the first place.
Norm Ornstein: "Any veteran observer of Congress is used to the rampant hypocrisy over the use of parliamentary procedures that shifts totally from one side to the other as a majority moves to minority status, and vice versa. But I can't recall a level of feigned indignation nearly as great as what we are seeing now from congressional Republicans and their acolytes at the Wall Street Journal, and on blogs, talk radio, and cable news. It reached a ridiculous level of misinformation and disinformation over the use of reconciliation, and now threatens to top that level over the projected use of a self-executing rule by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi."
http://blog.american.com/?p=11467
Lance was going for my known soft spot, spelling. However, I am sticking with Castor. Wikipedia redirects to "Castor Oil" when you put in "Caster Oil".
I think that most folks believe we need health care reform, but there are questions about the best way to go about it. I am for more health care providers and better distributed, as opposed to changing health care insurance without shrinking the market or expanding the providers.
48/36 this evening on O'Rielly, quoting the WSJ. Who knows?
And then there is the debt...
Regards — Cliff
Slaughter is what this fecal legislation will do to what is left of the American middle class. By government fiat, those who can "afford" health insurance must purchase it......and there are only 4 plans that will be available through private insurers, the cheapest of which will cost a family $12,500 per year, but it is a 60/40 plan...ie....you will pay 40% of the "approved charge." If it isn't approved for whatever reason, and there will always be one, you get to pay 100%. Oh, and BTW, there is no annual or lifetime cap. So, if you get cancer, you pay 40% of whatever the cost will be.
Boy oh boy, is this a good deal.......for those who have no health insurance and will not or cannot pay premiums.....this is called income redistribution.
And those nasty, brutish, criminal health insurance companies, I would quote Shakespeare a little....to them I would say..."thou protestest too much." Ask yourself why medical insurance stocks are selling like hot cakes right now. Gee, 30 or 40 M new customers....and an absolute guarantee of clientele provided by the rest of the population.
True, the government will mandate what they have to give you, and will mandate that they have to take you...no matter what. BUT, there is no mandate or control on the COST to you. They can continue to raise their prices...except now.....at the very least, you pay 40%.
And finally, take a look at Big Pharma in all of this....and what they have provided Obamao.
Yeah...those R's are so bad.....uh huh.
Still missing 21 out of 20.
Regards — Cliff
If you use gov't run health care, raise your hand.
BTW, the HCR proposed is NOT gov't run health care. Just ask Dennis Kucinich.
Yup.....like most political slimeballs in DC, he was against it before he was for it as a result of an hour long bribe session on AF One...all at taxpayer expense.
Don't even go there on the promises made and repeatedly broken on military retiree medical care.....and I think we ALL agree...Medicare has been an unmitigated disaster for all the reasons that Obamaocare will exceed that dismal failure by a quantum leap.
Post a Comment