Posted on 12/22/2009 8:56:01 AM PST by Amerisrael
Dems trying to make Health Care bill "irreversible":
The language of Section 3403 seems rather explicit: SUBSECTION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection. Ed Morrissey's take is that Congress lacks the Constitutional authority to bind the decisions future Congresses can make, which would including passing new laws, amending existing laws, or repealing laws. Reid is demanding not just power over the current Congress, but any future Congress as well.
(Excerpt) Read more at mypetjawa.mu.nu ...
.....
*speechless*
These guys are just plain evil!
We should all send a copy of this to that A$$clown Reid . I am .
SCOTUS won’t buy it.
The bill on its face is unconstitutional regardless of the content since Article 1 Section 8 does not specifically grant Congress the power to regulate health care.
WAIT! GOD YES!
Let them pass this turd WITH that language! We could get the ENTIRE bill shot down as unconstitutional!
They won’t be using the term “dictatorship” but we all see where this is going. It’s just wishful thinking that 2010 can bring a change.
Actually this could be good - if passed, the whole law can be overturned as unconstitutional by the SOCTUS.
Naturally it would take years or decades to even get there, like the current "incorporation" cases for 2A. What will SCOTUS look like then?
As long as they didn't include a severability clause.
Don’t let them Dems and libtards tell you that FreeRepublic is not on their reading list cause be assured, they read here cause most of us have long been talking about repealing this piece of supreme unconstitutional garbage for quite awhile. Seems Reid saw such, saw the validity in doing such, and attempted to preempt it. =.=
Right...just like “Campaign Finance Reform” was unconstitutional.
We are doomed unless we are willing to do the things that cannot be mentioned here.
I agree with you, but I anticipate that Congress will have no trouble in torturing the twisted-beyond-redemption Commerce Clause to grant some semblance of legal justification to this bill. They've fig-leafed harder bills than this in the past.
Rotsa ruck getting THAT through the gauntlet.
The next Congress can simply rewrite it. But there is no way this would pass Supreme Court scrutiny. Pray for the health of the conservative justices.
‘zackly. No sitting congress can bind a future congress.
It will once Obama gets to appoint a new Justice or two...which he will in the next couple of years.
Textbooks used to call this tyranny.
Oh really ... kind of like letting the compassionate conservative bush signing Mcloser/Feindirt, signing campiagn finance (elect an incumbent democrat)reform. Everybody said he did it to let the supreme court take care of it.
How’s that working out for you
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.