Voting On Amendment To Non-Existing Healthcare Bill Unconstitutional
By James Fox on March 16, 2010, 8:09 amJust when the country thought the healthcare bill was going to be settled a new twist is in the air. Democratic leaders are suggesting a health-care reform by what is being called “The Slaughter Solution.” This is named for Rep. Louise Slaughter, a Democrat from New York. She is the chair of the House Rules Committee and she is the person who proposed the possible solution.
The Bill Will Pass Without A Vote
Slaughter’s proposal calls for Democrats to pass a rule that says the Senate healthcare bill passed the House. However, the House actually will not vote on the bill. Congress could then vote on legislation to ‘fix’ flaws in the Senate bill. This would all be done in order to prevent a Senate filibuster.
The Slaughter Solution Seems Contrary To Our Constitution
Our Constitution 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.” The Slaughter Bill seems to be a way to get around our Constitution. By doing this, Congressmen can say that they voted for a rule – not for the bill itself. Is this being ethical and above-board to the citizens? The Constitution has several Articles which seem to address this issue: Article 1, sect. 1; Article 1, sect. 5, and Article 1, sect. 7 to name a few.
Is The Slaughter Solution Ethical Or Is It A Way To Make This Legislation Happen
Rep. Slaughter’s powerful position as the chair of the House Rules Committee is a key ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi to pass the health-care legislation. It seems, if the Democrats do not have their votes they can overcome the problem by sailing it through the Senate without an actual vote by members of the House.
Related posts:
- America Outraged At White House & Congress Over Healthcare Bill
- Rep. Stupak And The Healthcare Reform Bill Baby Killer Syndrome
- Healthcare Bill Does Very Little To Hinder Health Insurance Companies
- Why Nancy Pelosi Is Negatively Impacting Health Care Reform
- Healthcare Doctor Fix Going On Jobs Bill
This “Slaughter Solution” is one more bit of evidence that the health care bill is so unpopular that House members don’t want anyone to know how they would vote. They are asking for consequences they don’t understand. This nation will not stand to be railroaded into something it’s citizenry doesn’t want. I fear more than just a political rebellion if this bill is passed or “deemed” passed.
It’s not unconstitutional – it’s been in use for a long time, and Congress has been passing laws like that for a while.
The house is afraid to vote, The public is against the bill. Yet it’s about to be inacted with a gimick? How can we stand by and allow this to happen?
It doesn’t just “seem” unconstitutional, it *is* unconstitutional.
The House has to vote on and *pass* the Senate bill, period. No such vote or the vote on doesn’t pass it, then there is no reconciliation, period.
Actual governing takes a huge back seat to “will I get re-elected” – the easiest way to solve the health care debacle of for profit health care is simple – but handing a success to the other party – isn’t how the political “game” is played.
Unfortunately our lives are caught in the cross fire of their STUPID GAME. And because of game playing we deregulated everything and created the global financial meltdown – ooppps – maybe proper management would have prevented that – but politics has never been about properly managing our resources – its about GETTING RE-ELECTED.
Healthcare is easy – here’s how –
“Use Senate reconciliation and expand Medicare via the Senate’s buy-in provisions. The CBO has already signed off on this as a means of saving money.
More importantly, if more Americans can do a buy-in with Medicare, it creates more cost control (because there’s a genuine competitor to for-profit healthcare).
It also helps to solve the problems of pre-existing conditions, because Medicare does not deny coverage on this basis.
Allowing a Medicare buy-in to Americans under 65 would give people a genuine alternative to private insurance and thereby render the pre-existing question moot.
It would also lower Medicare costs by expanding the risk pool of patients (the great bulk of medical expenses are accounted for by a small number of people, mostly the elderly, requiring very expensive treatment).
And it would substantially enhance the global competitiveness of American corporations. After all, in what other country in the world is health care a marginal cost of production for business?” – Roosevelt Institute Marshall Auerback
Now get out there tell your neighbors, your friends, pick up the phone and email your representatives – because whether you like it or not we are all in this together – and it’s us versus the politicians – not each other.
Paul Burke
Author Journey Home
Democracy For America
I came from a former Soviet block “democracy” I escaped hoping that in my lifetime I will NOT have to face “FREE healthcare” and Socialism again. If the Democrats force this bill to pass unconstitutionally, I suggest (WE THE PEOPLE, The silent majority) give our Gov. a jolt that will get their attention. We will do like the French people do. We will setup a date immed., get in ALL OUR DRIVING EQUIPMENT (cars, trucks, SUV’s, 18 wheelers, etc) and STOP all traffic on the Freeways’ and the Gov. Centers, until Mr. OBAMA and the Dem. strike down this Socialist take over. The mainstream media and the Dem. spin clowns are telling us that we will take it and like it. Lets see if our Gov. is ready to see 50% of the Country on the streets to STOP the takeover.
Ilie- BS. You are a liar and not from a former soviet country, because the terms you used were not used in those countries. So F off you lying t-bagger.
Fred- if you think deem and pass is unconstitutional then you will gladly demand repayment for all saved monies from the 2002 bush tax cuts which were passed using deem and pass. So either you are a moron ignorant of the law and history or the tax cuts were illegal and all monies need to be returned.
According to the polls, the majority of Americans want Helthcare reform. It’s a minority of Senators who keep it from coming to a vote.
I’d be a whole lot more upset about this if the Republicans would let these reforms come to a straight up down vote and stop playing politics with the reforms that the American public want.