The Glade 4.0

Politico

The final passage of the Obamacare bill was by a vote of 219-212.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if Reid allows a vote in the Senate.


In addition, there are now 26 states suing based on the unconstitutionality of the individual mandate; Iowa, Ohio, Kansas, Wyoming, Wisconsin and Maine just petitioned to join.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

I think Reid's too dumb to make his colleagues vote against repealing (essentially, for the bill a second time) if he can at all avoid it. He wants them to keep their jobs more than two more years.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

I just want to know what happened to the conservatives complaining about checks and balances in regards to this. When Obama essentially tried to create a new Cabinet position without Congressional approval using various loopholes and shady tactics to get around oversight there was a huge stink about it and people complaining that executive power had no limits. But now Congress is going to essentially repeal a law without the President being able to veto the action - what happened to checks and balances there?

All they did was vote on it, and pass it. It's not a done deal.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Oh, I realize it's technically Constitutional, the same way Obama's actions were. They're still shady run-arounds of the whole process.

I don't get how. they voted on it and it has to go the senate and the president to be ultimately approved. As would any budget proposals not to fund it.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Congress doesn't need Obama's approval to not fund something, that's how they're going to "repeal" it.

The President has to sign budget bills just like any other bill, and where did you get this idea anyhow?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yes, he has to sign budget bills, but if Congress doesn't ever pass a budget bill with Obamacare funding in it then it's essentially "repealed," Obama cannot do anything about it.

I just realized I misspoke earlier. I meant to say "I don't think Reid's so dumb that he would make his..."

Obama can refuse to sign budget bills that do not include Obamacare. With the resolve of the current House, though, this would mean shutting down government, which I don't think he's prepared to do.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

...

First of all, that isn't the sort of bill at issue in the OP.

Second, Obama can also reject all those budget bills not funding Obamacare just as easily as Congress can pass them.

Third, Congress's, specifically the House of Representative's control of the budget is a major check on the power of the President. "Repealing" a law (and this is yet another case of you badly abusing a word, just like you did with censorship) by not funding it is exactly the way the Constitution is supposed to work, and part of why the House has such a rapid election cycle: Ill-advised laws passed when one party is in power can be rapidly defunded after the next election if they outrage the public enough to turn the House over to someone else.

So yes, checks and balances are in place here; specifically a check on the power of the executive. You're just looking for an excuse to call this hypocrisy when in reality it's just a matter of you not understanding how the checks and balances are supposed to work.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yes, he has to sign budget bills, but if Congress doesn't ever pass a budget bill with Obamacare funding in it then it's essentially "repealed," Obama cannot do anything about it.[/quote]
Then nothing gets funded unless someone blinks or a compromise is made.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Yes, it's technically not "repealed," I know that, but then Obama did not technically create a new Cabinet position in his abuse of power either.

Obama can reject all the budget bills he wants, but if the Republicans in power are willing to shut down government over the issue then Obamacare is repealed regardless of what Obama does. He cannot do anything. Sure, you could argue that it would be political suicide for the Republicans to do so and thus it wouldn't happen, but I could similarly argue it would be political suicide for Obama to arbitrarily reject every funding bill just to preserve Obamacare. The political will of each side isn't really relevant. Congress can get rid of the law if they want and Obama can't veto it.

Yes he can. (no pun intended) its just a matter of if he has the will to do so.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

You will now explain how a major aspect of Congress's power to check the President is in any way equivalent to the President making an end run around a similar check on his power.



And that's the way it's supposed to be. The Constitution is written that way for a reason. The only equivalency with Obama's cabinet position is your desire to ***** about it. Just because the check and balance works the opposite way from the way you'd prefer (or in a way that makes it convenient for you to *****) does not mean there's any abuse going on.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Wait, I'm confused -- states are suing over the Obamacare bill itself or the repeal of it?

The bill itself.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Hmm seems a bit pointless now, as it is (apparently) being repealed.

How was it unconstitutional again?

The bill's not going to get repealed, because the Senate won't repeal it. It may get defunded, but that still leaves the law, and the regulatory agencies it creates, on the books.

So it's not pointless.

It's unconstitutional because it's yet another example of trying to cram **** into the commerce clause. What's even more reprehensible this time, is that they're trying to mandate that citizens buy something whether they want to or not, and punish them if they don't.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

Ah I see, the bill to repeal the original bill is currently on the bill, by Sen. Bill Billson (R).

On one hand, it's nice to see the idea of social progress being attempted, even though that attempt was horribly executed. Scarp original, start from scratch, better luck next attempt.

Buuuut that's a can of worms I am not going to delve into at the moment . . .

The sad thing is, this repeal stunt is exactly that. A stunt. The bill can't be passed, because as has been stated earlier, this will never get out of committee in the Senate. It gives Republicans the opportunity to grandstand, and try to say that they did something about reining back ObamaCare and Big Government without actually doing anything meaningful. They won't have the balls, or the political capital to defund it, which is the real solution; so instead they pander to their base by making this big spectacle wasting time, energy, and tax dollars on something that has literally ZERO chance of being successful. This way they'll be able to say, "I voted to repeal ObamaCare" come election time, without having actually done anything to impair the power of the government they are running.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

I'd like to think people are smarter than that now. That for them to do well they actually need to go to step two: the defunding phase. I'm not sure who will blink first or if a compromise can be made. I think eventually the senate is going to have to bring it up especially if those who have a senator up in 2012 harass him enough. Reid doesn't have the same kind of blocking power that Pelosi has iirc.

In summary. It's a step in the right direction but yes we need to see more for it be more than symbolic.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

People are just as dumb as we've always been. The defunding phase will nessecarilly include shutting down government, and the Republicans don't have the political will or capital to do it. They made the exact same sorts of stink over repealing social security, and medicaid when those were enacted. How did that work out do you think?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Those in the house who voted for repeal should be the exact people who defund the beast. Everything originates in the house, so spending sent to the Senate should never have a single Obamacare dollar in them. This can easily be done without "shutting down the Government".

I personally feel that these repeals should be done in the full view of the public, and the Republicans should walk across the lawn in front of the activists ala Pelosi, and watch the insults fly at them. All being recorded in HD of course. Win the damn PR war for once.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Best. Possible. Outcome.

If he shut down the fed for any extended length of time, that could actually make Obama the best president in recent history. (Inadvertantly, of course. No funding for anything at all for several months > no funding for Obamacare.)

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █