T Nation

The Slaughter Solution

Who needs a representative Republic where elected representatives actually vote for a bill and pass it?

What an obstacle that is, when a large majority of the American people are opposed to the bill and many Congressmen are therefore afraid to vote for it.

The Slaughter Solution: Simply deem the bill to have passed! Without a vote.

This is being seriously considered as a way to “pass” the Senate bill, without the problems of having to actually get a majority of House members to vote for it: 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

Much better to just have the House Leadership deem a bill to have passed the House when in their wisdom the bill needs to be passed but the pesky citizens are mostly against it and as a result a majority of Representatives cannot be found to pass it.

I heard about this last week and just shook my head. When are people going to realize that the marxists they’re electing are Americans in name only with no regard or respect for our constitution whatsoever?

Seems the mask is starting to slip off.

She should be censored - at the very least.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I heard about this last week and just shook my head. When are people going to realize that the marxists they’re electing are Americans in name only with no regard or respect for our constitution whatsoever?[/quote]

Some of us like us do, many just don’t care. call it lack of education, lack of effort or whatever. But on the good side, the smart ones tend to be motivated.

House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it
By Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, March 16, 2010; A01

After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic – known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” – has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

“It’s more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know,” the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. “But I like it,” she said, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.”


Full story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/15/AR2010031503742_pf.html

I would say that for those who are against the Senate bill and have a Congressman who is a potential “no” vote on health care that the thing to do would be to get in touch with their office and make clear that a yes vote on an “improvements” bill that will be used to deem the Senate bill as having passed will be counted by you as voting for the health care bill, and you will blah, blah, blah.

I can see where they love the idea of cover of saying “I never voted for it, I voted for improvements on it but I was against the bill itself.”

They need to be informed that that lie won’t work.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Part of me wants it to happen. The repercussions could be so overwhelming that it might be worth it. With the Congress back in the firm control of the GOP as of next year, Hopie, Changie & Co. would be put out of business.[/quote]

The risk is that once deemed to have “passed” the House, after Obama signs it the bill cannot be repealed without 60 votes in the Senate in favor of repeal, in addition of course to 50%-plus-one in the House, and the President.

It is very, very far from a sure thing that the Democrats will soon if ever drop to no more than 40 seats in the Senate.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Part of me wants it to happen. The repercussions could be so overwhelming that it might be worth it.[/quote]

that’s where I’m at.

There are plenty of national polls showing a majority – not vastly above 50%, but a majority – of likely voters nationwide to be opposed to the health-care bill.

I have NOT seen a poll that breaks it down by state.

I question whether the runaway-Obama-voting states have a majority opposed to the bill. If they did, then the margin nationwide would be much wider than it is.

And consider that effects will not be immediate. It will be like the frog in the slowly heating water.

So far as outrage over the Democrats ramming it through, I think it is expecting too much of most voters to think that they will still be outraged by this aggressiveness in 2012. The energy seen for example recently in Massachusetts will, as personal opinion, have long since dissipated by then.

Hoping that the bill will pass out of confidence that the Democrats will drop to 40 seats seems to me like believing in the lottery. But of course personal opinions will vary, and that is a matter of opinion.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Apparently all these lawyers missed this part. Or more accurately just don’t care.

http://gregnmary.gotdns.com:8080/index.php/topic,181.new.html#new

I guess so much for they have the votes.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it
By Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, March 16, 2010; A01

After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic – known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” – has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

“It’s more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know,” the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. “But I like it,” she said, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.”


Full story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/15/AR2010031503742_pf.html

I would say that for those who are against the Senate bill and have a Congressman who is a potential “no” vote on health care that the thing to do would be to get in touch with their office and make clear that a yes vote on an “improvements” bill that will be used to deem the Senate bill as having passed will be counted by you as voting for the health care bill, and you will blah, blah, blah.

I can see where they love the idea of cover of saying “I never voted for it, I voted for improvements on it but I was against the bill itself.”

They need to be informed that that lie won’t work.[/quote]

Bill,

The Republicans used a similar tactic similar tactic in 2006, which, typically/hypocritically, pelosi challenged in court. The U.S. District Court upheld it.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzFjYTQxODU3MGUyZDUyNjY2N2U2NmVmMWExYTU4NjE=

However, it’s never been used for anything like this. Nor should it. I have a feeling this would be fast tracked to the SCOTUS.

Besides this tactic being obviously unconstitutional, does anyone else think that obama’s State of the Union speech could end up hurting him?

Would anyone else love to watch the Harvard Law Professor/rigid ideologue-in-chief claim victory in his massive, government health care takeover, only to have those he shamed pull it out from under his feet?

JeffR

This is all I have to say. Fucking ignorant bitch. Civic tests to qualify to fucking vote. From now on.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Part of me wants it to happen. The repercussions could be so overwhelming that it might be worth it. With the Congress back in the firm control of the GOP as of next year, Hopie, Changie & Co. would be put out of business.[/quote]

Depends how appealable this POS bill is.

Meanwhile, the Hopie Changie Express has been pretty busy. See chart that Beck had on his show here: http://americansforprosperity.org/obamachart.php

Obama and crew have taken the mentality of Jihad. They learned how to fly a plane from take-off, but didn’t bother to learn how to land it. They have no regard for their political future, they are now flying the plane, headed toward crashing it, killing all on board. This is what I see with their approach of “pass the bill no matter what.”

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
<<< This is what I see with their approach of “pass the bill no matter what.”[/quote]
Which is what Pelosi literally said. “We will do whatever it takes to pass this bill”

The face of U.S. healthcare…