I’m baaaack! Did you miss me?
1) Louise Slaughter slaughters the Constitution: House Democrats looking at 'Slaughter Solution' to pass Obamacare without a vote on Senate bill
Would House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her fellow House Democratic leaders try to cram the Senate version of Obamacare through the House without actually having a recorded vote on the bill?
Not only is the answer yes, they would, they have figured out a way to do it, according to National Journal's Congress Daily:
"House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.
"Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.
"Slaughter has not taken the plan to Speaker Pelosi as Democrats await CBO scores on the corrections bill. 'Once the CBO gives us the score, we'll spring right on it,' she said."
Each bill that comes before the House for a vote on final passage must be given a rule that determines things like whether the minority would be able to offer amendments to it from the floor.
In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House "deems" the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself (emphasis mine).
As Michele Bachmann said on the Don Wade and Roma radio show today, this is the post-modern approach to law-making.
Would that rationale fly with the public? Is it logical? Of course not. But remember, these folks have persuaded themselves that a majority of the American people really want Obamacare. A blog post on House Minority Leader John Boehner's blog described the approach as a "twisted scheme."
See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/House-Democrats-looking-at-Slaughter-Solution-to-pass-Obamacare-without-a-vote-on-Senate-bill-87267402.html#ixzz0hsaEHIUI
1a) Ruling Kills an Option for Moving Health Bill
The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress’ original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package, senior GOP sources said Thursday.
The Senate Parliamentarian’s Office was responding to questions posed by the Republican leadership. The answers were provided verbally, sources said.
House Democratic leaders have been searching for a way to ensure that any move they make to approve the Senate-passed $871 billion health care reform bill is followed by Senate action on a reconciliation package of adjustments to the original bill. One idea is to have the House and Senate act on reconciliation prior to House action on the Senate’s original health care bill.
Information Republicans say they have received from the Senate Parliamentarian’s Office eliminates that option. House Democratic leaders last week began looking at crafting a legislative rule that would allow the House to approve the Senate health care bill, but not forward it to Obama for his signature until the Senate clears the reconciliation package.
See: http://cdn.rollcall.com/media/44110-1.html
1b) It's official now: ObamaCare will fund abortions if it passes
House Democrats have given up on fixing the Senate ObamaCare bill's abortion problem, the Associated Press reports:
Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman said Thursday that the leadership will try to secure the necessary 216 votes to pass the bill without reworking the divisive abortion provision.
The Senate version of health care reform would loosen current rules about federal money going to pay for abortions. The House version did not, and as a result a number of pro-life Democrats supported it. Because abortion cannot be fixed through an accompanying reconciliation bill, it looks like pro-life Democrats are out of luck with three bad options. They will either kill ObamaCare with their "no" votes, go back on their word and disappoint constituents by voting "yes," or else watch it become law without their support.
See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/ObamaCare-abortion-language-wont-be-changed-87383302.html
1c) Dems look to health vote without abortion foes
WASHINGTON – House Democratic leaders Thursday abandoned a long struggle to strike a compromise on abortion in their ranks, gambling that they can secure the support for President Barack Obama's sweeping health care legislation with showdown votes looming as early as next week.
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100312/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul
1d) Va OKs 1st bill banning mandated health coverage
RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia's General Assembly became the first in the nation Wednesday to approve legislation that bucks any attempt by President Barack Obama and Congress to implement a national health care overhaul in individual states.
The Republican-ruled House of Delegates, with wide Democratic support, voted 80-17 without debate for the largely symbolic step aimed at the Democratic-backed reforms pushed by Obama and stalled in Congress. The vote sends the measure to Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell who intends to sign it.
Thirty-four other state legislatures have either filed or proposed similar measures — statutes or constitutional amendments — rejecting health insurance mandates, according to the American Legislative Exchange Council.
See: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9OEnA3WRa_MXGFO83ta6RE9CQUgD9EC1HKG0
2) GOP loses bid for ethics probe of Dem leaders
WASHINGTON – House Democrats on Thursday stopped a Republican bid to force an investigation of Democratic leaders aimed at determining whether they covered up sexual harassment allegations against ex-Rep. Eric Massa.
Even in failure, Republicans planted questions about when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi learned about allegations from Massa's employees that he sexually harassed male staff members. The freshman New York Democrat resigned Monday amid a slew of conflicting statements in which he confirmed and denied that he groped staff members and argued that none of the contact was sexual.
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100312/ap_on_go_co/us_massa_republicans
2a) Morning Must Reads -- Massa investigation a ticklish situation for Pelosi
It seemed at first that House Democrats had acted swiftly to deal with the charges against tickle-fight fan Rep. Eric Massa, avoiding one the central problems that dogged the GOP in the 2006 election year: trying to protect Rep. Mark Foley who was pawing at the boy pages.
But now the House leadership is caught in a bit of a bind – on the day that the Ethics Committee dropped the investigation into Massa’s alleged sexual harassment of his male aides (the Foley probe went on for weeks after he left Congress and produced a damning report about him and his protectors) it is also revealed that the House speaker’s office knew about Massa’s unusual sense of congressional decorum last fall, but took no action.
It lends some credence to the theory that Massa’s antics only became an issue once Democrats were rounding up votes for the final health care vote. Massa voted n on the grounds that the bill was insufficiently liberal and was a prime target for leaders looking for switchers.
See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Morning-Must-Reads----Massa-investigation-a-ticklish-situation-for-Pelosi--87335887.html
3) Activist judge rules ACORN has a right to your money
Back in December, U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon in New York issued a temporary injunction preventing Congress from cutting off funding to ACORN. She has now ruled that injunction will be permanent. So no matter how grossly illegal the activities an organization is engaged in, they apparently have a constitutional right to your money if an unelected federal judge says so. Matthew Vadum runs down the consequences of the ruling:
If Gershon's absurd ruling remains undisturbed it will mean every parasitic leftist group in the country will have due process rights in the appropriations process. At worst, Congress will not be able to cut off any group for any reason. At best, Congress will have to jump through hoops in order to de-fund any group. The rights of tax eaters will become paramount to the rights of taxpayers.
…The ruling also appears to mean that ACORN and other leftist activist groups are eligible for up to $3.99 billion in federal funding included in President Obama's $3.83 trillion fiscal 2011 budget blueprint.
The $3.99 billion comes from a congressional slush fund known as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) $48.5 billion fiscal 2011 budget. CDBG grants, which are awarded to states and localities, flow indirectly to ACORN and similar groups that compete at the state and local level for grants.
Get ready for more federal ACORN dollars to start flowing -- just in time for the 2012 elections.
See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Activist-judge-rules-ACORN-has-a-right-to-your-money-87348892.html
3a) Obama Justice Dept. shut down FBI's ACORN investigation
Judicial Watch has unearthed some explosive new ACORN documents that, according to a press release, show the Obama Justice Department quashed an FBI investigation of ACORN. It started when the Republican Registrars of Voters of Stamford and Bridgeport, Connecticut -- Lucy Corelli and Joseph Borges -- filed a complaint with the FBI during the 2008 election season:
According to Corelli, on August 1, 2008, her office received 1,200 ACORN voter registration cards from the Secretary of State’s office. Over 300 of these cards were rejected because of “duplicates, underage, illegible and invalid addresses,” which “put a tremendous strain on our office staff and caused endless work hours at taxpayers’ expense.” Corelli claimed the total cost of the extra work caused by ACORN corruption was $20,000. Likewise, Borges contended that: “The organization ACORN during the summer of 2008 conducted a registration drive which has produced over 100 rejections due to incomplete forms and individuals who are not citizens…” Among the examples cited by Borges was a seven-year old child who was registered to vote by ACORN through the use of a forged signature and a fake birth certificate claiming she was 27-years old.
The FBI and Department of Justice opened an investigation into the the charges. But according to documents Judical Watch obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, the Obama Justice Department "while noting that ACORN had engaged in 'questionable hiring and training practices,' closed down the investigation in March 2009, claiming ACORN broke no laws." Of course, as Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made a point of telling me on the phone, it is illegal to knowingly submit false voter registrations so the Justice Department's claim that ACORN didn't violate any laws is highly dubious.
…Between all of these documents -- which Judical Watch is making public -- we have a shot at piecing together a comprehensive, systemic look at ACORN corruption. If it looks as bad as it appears and can be substantiated by documentation, the fact that ACORN has not been seriously investigated by the feds will be a damning indictment of the White House.
See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-Justice-Dept-shut-down-ACORN-investigation-87360097.html
4) This year's Obama budget spends more in each of the next ten years than the last one
President Obama promised a turn toward fiscal discipline in his State of the Union Address. But his new budget doesn't just plan on more deficit spending for a year, followed by austerity. Rather, it actually increases deficits in each of the next ten years over what he'd planned for in last year's budget.
When he released his new budget proposal on February 1, President Barack Obama asserted that the government "simply cannot continue to spend as if deficits don't have consequences; as if waste doesn't matter; as if the hard-earned tax dollars of the American people can be treated like Monopoly money; as if we can ignore this challenge for another generation."
Yet the President's new budget does exactly that-- raising taxes by $3 trillion and federal spending by $1.6 trillion over the next ten years.
See: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/This-years-Obama-budget-spends-more-in-each-of-the-next-ten-years-than-the-last-one-87335642.html
5) N.J. Gov. Chris Christie plans privatization of as many as 2,000 state jobs
TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie Thursday will create a commission to privatize as many as 2,000 state jobs beginning next January, officials said tonight.
As he grapples with an $11 billion deficit in the budget he will present on Tuesday, Christie is also considering invoking the Disaster Control Act to suspend Civil Service rules to make it easier for him to lay off higher paid workers, according to two administration officials.
See: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/nj_gov_chris_christie_to_annou.html
6) Another state to feds: Take your gun regs and stuff 'em
Local governments in massive revolt against rules ordered by Washington
Utah has become the third state to adopt a law exempting guns and ammunition made, sold and used in the state from massive federal regulations under the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and supporters say about 30 more states have some sort of plan for their own exemptions in the works.
Officials in Utah say they expect a lawsuit over their direct challenge to Washington if the federal government succeeds in its current case against Montana's law.
Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, who has spearheaded the Montana law, now describes himself as a sort of "godfather" to the national campaign. He confirmed Montana, Tennessee and Utah have enacted such laws.
See: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=127490
7) Fed. appeals court upholds 'under God' in pledge
SAN FRANCISCO – A federal appeals court upheld the use of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency, rejecting arguments Thursday that the phrases violate the separation of church and state.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel rejected two legal challenges by Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow, who said the references to God are unconstitutional and infringe on his religious beliefs.
…Judge Carlos Bea, who was appointed by Bush in 2003, wrote for the majority in Thursday's 2-1 ruling.
"The Pledge of Allegiance serves to unite our vast nation through the proud recitation of some of the ideals upon which our Republic was founded," he said.
Bea noted that schools do not require students to recite the pledge, which was amended to include the words "under God" by a 1954 federal law. Members of Congress at the time said they wanted to set the United States apart from "godless communists."
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100312/ap_on_re_us/us_god_and_government
8) Victoria Jackson: "There's A Communist Living in the White House!!"
See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWi182CMJY8
No comments:
Post a Comment