Mark Levin Calls for the Explusion of Rep. Louise Slaughter

Comments Off on Mark Levin Calls for the Explusion of Rep. Louise Slaughter

This is the only person I’ve heard saying much about how unconstitutional this scheme of her’s is. Levine is calling for her expulsion from Congress for violating the Constitution.

Mark Levin Calls for the Expulsion of Rep. Louise Slaughter from Congress

Arguing that Slaughter is attempting an unprecedented violation of the constitution, Mark Levin argues that the House Republicans should initiate expulsion proceedings against her .

He concedes it may be a futile gesture, but I think there is merit in this. It will make it harder for those who vote for this wrap around cramdown bill to consider a fig leaf behind which they can pretend they didn’t vote for the odious Senate bill.

Levin also brilliantly expounds on the constitutional issue. First, the relevant portion from Article I, Section VII, Clause II of our founding document:

“…But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.


How Close Are the Liberal Democrats to Having the Votes for Health Care

Comments Off on How Close Are the Liberal Democrats to Having the Votes for Health Care

Well as the days go by, Nancy Pelosi shows what she’s best at, back room deals, arm twisting and I’m sure just down right threats in order to get the votes for another government takeover like GM or AIG. Seems like this administration loves government takeovers even if it’s a US citizens expense.

According to we are told that four Democrats are changing their votes from “NO” to “YES” on Obamacare:

  • Boccieri, OH – (202) 225-3876
  • Altmire, PA – (202) 225-2565
  • Gordon, TN – (202) 225-4231
  • Baird, WA- (202) 225-3536

On the other hand, the corner reports the Democrats are still about 10 votes of the 216 required to pass Obamacare, or execute the unconstitutional Slaughter gambit. It is also possible the Democrats could be losing votes.

Either way it wouldn’t be a bad idea to call the offices of the representatives listed above and let them know how you feel about the Democrats’ Obamacare bill.

Dreier: Democrats ‘About 10 Votes Off’ from Passage in House

In a press conference on Capitol Hill today, Rep. David Dreier (R., Calif.), ranking Republican on the House Rules Committee, said the word around the House is that Democrats are still about 10 votes away from securing the 216 they will need to pass changes to the health-care bill. Dreier added that that number might be moving in the wrong direction for Democrats.

“You are hearing that people are peeling off,” he said.

Dreier also repeated the warnings about the Senate that many Congressional Republicans have been issuing to the other side of the aisle. He said that, assuming House Democrats succeed in passing a reconciliation measure along to the Senate, even marginal changes made there would require the measure to return to the House yet again.

“I would not be terribly sanguine about the prospect of the Senate effectively dealing with this,” Dreier said, adding that only once in history has a reconciliation measure passed through the Senate without a single amendment.

The reconciliation measure would also have to be sent back to the House if any provisions contained therein were struck down by the Byrd Rule. A memo from Dreier’s office put it this way:

The one thing that history demonstrates is that the reconciliation process in the Senate is unpredictable. No matter how well you “scrub” the provisions in a bill for potential Byrd rule violations, something always gets through. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 had 3 provisions which were stricken on Byrd rule points of order despite a thorough review. The notion that the reconciliation bill will be immediately cleared by the Senate for the President is difficult to fathom.

Dreier said that Republicans won’t know until later this week whether the Democrats will pursue a form of what has come to be known as the “Slaughter Solution” to avoid a direct vote on the Senate bill.

But in the memo, Dreier’s office gives three “flavors” such a rule could take.

(1) It could simply self-enact the Senate bill and send it to the president to sign.

(2) It could deem the Senate bill passed upon passage of the reconciliation measure in the House. Or,

(3)  in the most unprecedented option, it could deem the Senate bill passed in the House only when the Senate passes the House reconciliation measure.

UPDATE: As several readers noted, the first draft of this post was unclear on whether the whip count was moving toward or away from passage. To clarify, Dreier suggested that the Democrats could be losing votes.


Rep. Paul Ryan on what real health reform should look like

Comments Off on Rep. Paul Ryan on what real health reform should look like

Well to those saying the Republicans don’t have any ideas on Health Care…..

Rep. Paul Ryan on what real health reform should look like

Today, the House Budget Committee is to mark up a “reconciliation” vehicle, initiating the greatest expansion in government and entitlement spending in a generation through a partisan process to push “health-care reform” across the finish line.

Despite claims of transparency and calls for a “simple up-or-down vote,” there is nothing simple about this process. This convoluted legislative charade demonstrates how far the Democratic majority has wandered from real health-care reform and cost control, employing any means to achieve political victory.

Through any analytical lens, the legislation will not address the central problem of skyrocketing health-care costs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that families’ premiums could rise 10 to 13 percent; private-sector actuarial estimates top these already high numbers. The higher costs are driven by federalizing the regulation of insurance, narrowing consumers’ options and reducing competition among providers. The health-care market would be dominated by government programs and the largest insurance companies, operating as de facto government utilities.

Rather than tackle the drivers of health inflation, the legislation chases the ever-increasing premiums with huge new subsidies. Already, Washington has no idea how to pay for the unfunded promises in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — and creating this new entitlement would accelerate our path to fiscal ruin. When you strip away the double-counting, expose the hidden costs that must be funded and look at the price tag when the legislation is fully implemented, the claims of deficit reduction are as hollow as claims of cost containment.

This legislation includes a range of job-killing tax hikes and controls on all Americans — to fund this new entitlement and to penalize employers and individuals who don’t play by Washington’s new rules. The CBO said last July that “requiring employers to offer health insurance, or pay a fee if they do not, is likely to reduce employment.” The mix of mandates and higher costs will drive Americans into government exchanges, with an ever-enlarging number reliant upon taxpayer subsidies for their care. The architecture is designed to give the government greater control over what kind of insurance is available, how much health care is enough and which treatments are worth paying for.

The debacle of the past year’s “debate” has been a missed opportunity for real reform. Democrats and Republicans alike have put forward proposals that address the drivers of health-care costs, yet they have been ignored in this sharply partisan crusade. House Republicans continue to offer common-sense solutions, with specific legislation. Last May, Sens. Tom Coburn and Richard Burr and Rep. Devin Nunes and I collaborated to address rising costs while securing access to quality, affordable health coverage for all Americans. The Patients’ Choice Act takes on the discriminatory and inflationary tax exclusion, delinking the tax benefit from employers and attaching it to individuals through universal tax credits.

This year I re-introduced my own proposals to tackle our entitlement crisis head-on. My plan, “A Roadmap for America’s Future,” fulfills the mission of health and retirement security, lifts our crushing burden of debt, and spurs economic growth and job creation. In stark contrast to the vision being pushed by the majority in Congress, my plan unapologetically seeks to apply our nation’s timeless principles — our Founders’ commitment to individual liberty, limited government and free enterprise — to today’s challenges. It does so in a way that honors our historic commitment to strengthening the social safety net for those who need it most.

If this debate had actually been about health care, we could have worked together to get a grip on costs, make quality care more accessible, address exclusions for preexisting conditions and realign the incentives of insurance companies with those of patients and doctors. Yet this process — including its embarrassing conclusion — demonstrates that the debate has never been about health-care policy but, instead, paternalistic ideology.

Should the Democrats’ health-care train wreck make it to the president’s desk, it will be a pyrrhic victory, and its devastating consequences will take their toll on our health-care system, our budget and our economy.


Lawrence O’Donnell: Reconciliation ‘Never, Never, Never’ Been Used Like This Before

Comments Off on Lawrence O’Donnell: Reconciliation ‘Never, Never, Never’ Been Used Like This Before

Well here we have Lawrence O’Donnell a MSNBC  political analyst (the most liberal network around) stating exactly what Kent Conrad and the Senate Parliamentarian  have been saying for the last two weeks. In the attached video below O’Donnell says in effect what are the Democrats thinking? Here we have the majority of citizens opposing (at least 53%) this legislation and yet they are saying “if we don’t pass this we won’t get elected in November”. What kind of mindset is this?

Lawrence O’Donnell: Reconciliation ‘Never, Never, Never’ Been Used Like This Before

So much for the MSM refrain about Republicans having previously used reconciliation just as Dems are proposing to do now on ObamaCare . . .

Larry O’Donnell has emphatically proclaimed that the way Dems intend to use reconciliation is “unprecedented” and has “never, never, never” been so used before. O’Donnell’s many off-his-meds rants notwithstanding [recent example here], he actually does understand the legislative process, having served as Dem Chief of Staff of the Senate Committee on Finance back in the HillaryCare day.

O’Donnell also criticized the MSM “group think” to the effect that Dems were obliged to pass some kind of health care legislation this year.  Larry’s uncharacteristically lucid observations came during his Morning Joe appearance today.

Here’s a transcript of part of what Lawrence O’Donnell says to Joe Scarbrough in this video above:

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Will Democrats get health care passed?

LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: I’m going to say what I’ve said all along in my humble approach to this subject.  I, having worked on this kind of legislation on the Senate floor, trying to get it passed, and in committee.  I do not see how they can do this.  Now, and part of that is because it’s never been done before. And they have moved into a legislative territory that has never previously existed.  The Republicans have not been very smart about trying to describe this. It’s difficult to describe.  But this is unprecedented, using reconciliation this way. Because what they’ve done, is that they’ve abandoned a bill in mid-conference. The Senate passed a bill, the House passed a bill. They were in mid-conference negotiating this bill, in conference, and they said it’s going to be impossible for us to pass it now because of Scott Brown, so we’re going to abandon conferencing this bill and move over to another legislative vehicle, called reconciliation.  To handle something you’ve already been legislating another way, now, that’s never occurred before.

SCARBOROUGH: That’s never happened?

O’DONNELL: Never, never, never.

A bit later, O’Donnell made another surprisingly candid comment about the MSM.

O’DONNELL: I have never seen, when people come on this show all year, everybody, the conventional wisdom on this show is the Democrats have to pass something because it will be terrible if they don’t because they’ll show they can’t govern. And the thing they have to pass is opposed by a majority of the public. Fifty-three percent, you know, somewhere in there, maybe more.  No one has given me the example of the party that passed the thing the public didn’t want in order to win an election. But every single pundit on this show–except for you as far as I can tell–for a year, Democrat and Republican, they all agree, that this has to be done.  The group-think in the media about the Democrats have to do this for their own good is virtually universal. And that group-think is joined at some point in the Congress and we’ll see if that’s the group-think that gets them through to do this.

How Does Your Congressman Stand on Health Care

1 Comment

Here’s a chart that gives as close as can be told how your Congressman/Congresswoman will vote on Nationalized health Care.

WHIP COUNT: House Democrats’ positions on the health care reform bill

The Hill’s survey/tracking of House Democrats’ positions on healthcare reform legislation.
UPDATED: 3/17/10 at 3:01 p.m.

RECENT UPDATES: Reps. Jerry Costello, James Oberstar, Jason Altmire, Bart Gordon, John Garamendi, Dennis Kucinich, Gabrielle Giffords, Raul Grijalva and Ann Kirkpatrick are not voting for the Health Care Bill.

The Hill’s survey/tracking of House Democrats’ positions on healthcare reform legislation.
UPDATED: 3/18/10 at 9:45 p.m.

RECENT UPDATES: Reps. Brad Ellsworth, David Wu, Lincoln Davis, Harry Mitchell, Tom Perriello, Gabrielle Giffords, Russ Carnahan, Bobby Rush, Betsy Markey, Adam Schiff, Travis Childers, Luis Gutierrez, Bart Gordon, Joe Baca, Raul Grijalva, Mark Schauer, Heath Shuler, Stephen Lynch, Betty Sutton, Bob Etheridge, Michael Arcuri and Baron Hill

The Hill’s survey/tracking of House Democrats’ positions on healthcare reform legislation.
UPDATED: 3/19/10 at 9:54 p.m.

RECENT UPDATES: Reps. Scott Murphy, Dennis Cardoza, Harry Mitchell, John Salazar, Tim Bishop, Bart Stupak, Bob Etheridge, Suzanne Kosmas, Jim Matheson, Brad Ellsworth, Jason Altmire, Joe Courtney, John Adler, Allen Boyd, Adam Smith, Dina Titus, Chris Murphy, Peter DeFazio, Lincoln Davis, John Boccieri and Charlie Wilson

House Democrats not on this list are expected to vote yes. However, some members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who are not mentioned below have threatened to vote no unless the Senate’s immigration-related provisions are changed.

All House Republicans are expected to vote no.

If every member votes and all GOP lawmakers vote no, the maximum number of Democratic defections to pass a bill is 37, which would result in a 216-215 tally.

See the most recent names at The