U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued the following statement today after introducing legislation to repeal the Democrats’ government takeover of health care:
“It’s no secret, President Obama and Democrat leaders have ignored the will of the people and have chosen to ram through their trillion-dollar health care bill despite the American people’s overwhelming objection to it.
“It’s future generations, our children and grandchildren who will pay the price for our government’s arrogance and recklessness, and the American people won’t ever forget the irresponsible actions of this Administration and Democratic Majority. After all, government answers to the people, not the other way around. I’m asking my colleagues to join me in repealing this monstrosity of a bill.”
Last night, Democrats passed ObamaCare by a vote of 219-to-212. The most bi-partisan aspect of the bill was the opposition to it. Republicans voted unanimously against it and they were joined by 34 Democrats. This bill raises taxes by more than $500 billion. It imposes new taxes on investments and new fines on businesses. It imposes unconstitutional mandates on Americans and funds abortion. And the Democrats own it entirely. This is what happens when liberals get power.
In a weekend of outrageous statements, the worst was to hear Obama and Pelosi describing their takeover of nearly 20% of our economy in the language of liberty. They cloaked one of the biggest expansions of government and retractions of liberty in our nation’s history in conservative rhetoric. For example, Nancy Pelosi hailed the vote as “great act of patriotism.”
After the House vote, President Obama said, “We proved that this government — a government of the people and by the people — still works for the people.” But the American people didn’t want this bill. The latest Rasmussen poll found that likely voters opposed it 41%-to-54%. In fact, there is not a single poll the president or congressional Democrats can point to in the past 60 days that shows public support for the legislation that passed last night.
Republicans did everything in their power to stop socialized medicine. The reconciliation process that Democrats used to circumvent Republican efforts is proof of that. And while Democrats are celebrating today, they have damaged our democratic republic in the process. The bill was written behind closed doors. Committee hearings were a charade. It passed the Senate not because of the legislation’s merits, but because of special deals and kickbacks. Until the national uproar, Democrats had planned on passing it without even voting on it.
When a Republican doesn’t vote consistently for conservative principles, we call him a RINO – a Republican In Name Only. I don’t know what you call a Democrat who betrays his core principles, but this bill should be called the “Stupak Abortion Subsidy Act.”
Rep. Bart Stupak has been elected to Congress as a Democrat since 1992 in a relatively conservative district. But he was always pro-life. Yesterday, Stupak sold out his pro-life values for an executive order from the most pro-abortion president in history. An executive order cannot override legislation. That’s why the Hyde Amendment was so important and has been reaffirmed by every Congress for more than 30 years. The Senate bill funds abortion, which is why Stupak consistently said he was a “No” vote until the very end.
My friends, there’s no way to sugar coat this. Last night’s vote was a major set back – just one of many negative consequences of recent elections. Obama said recently that he was going to wear us down. The Democrats aren’t done. Immigration “reform” is next. This is gut check time for conservatives.
What is the solution? There is only one: We must win elections. But please do not email me asking about impeachment. Impeachment is a political process conducted by Congress, and liberal Democrats – Obama’s allies – dominate Congress. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are not going impeach Barack Obama.
If you don’t like the policies coming out of Washington today, the solution is to change the politicians making them. That means contributing to conservative groups and supporting conservative candidates, staying united against the Left, outworking the liberals and outvoting them on Election Day.
Now if your reaction is to throw your hands up in despair, give up and walk away, then Obama has worn you down. But if your reaction is to recommit to the values we cherish and fight even harder in the political arena, then it’s not too late to take back our country and make America the “shining city upon a hill” our Founding Fathers envisioned. I’m not giving up and I pray you will continue to stand with me!
Well, they finally did it. Despite more than a year of steadily rising public opposition, manifested in opinion polls and in protest rallies across the country, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finally rammed through Obamacare late Sunday when House Democrats gave the bill their imprimatur.
The House vote isn’t the end of the national debate on this issue, however, as the Senate still must accept the House changes in the Senate Obamacare bill. Senate Republicans argue that the House reconciliation bill that makes significant changes in the Senate bill violates the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, maintaining that it should be ruled out of order by the Senate parliamentarian for consideration in the upper chamber. That in turn would mean the only bill the president could legally sign would be the original Senate bill, with its massive funding of abortion and the infamous deals used to buy senators’ votes, including the Cornhusker Kickback. At that point, a constitutional crisis of historic magnitude seems inevitable.
Here’s why: Never before in American history has a measure of such importance been imposed on the country by the majority party over the unanimous opposition of the minority. Democrats have continually sought to create a halo effect for Obamacare by associating it with Social Security and Medicare. But the reality is that both of those landmark programs were approved with strong bipartisan support in both the Senate and House. The Senate vote on Social Security in 1935 was 77-6, with 64 Democrats being joined by 14 Republicans. In the House, the 373 votes for Social Security included 77 Republicans. When Medicare passed in 1965, the 68-21 Senate vote included 13 Republicans, while 65 Republicans were among the 313 affirmative House votes. Such bipartisan consensus was what the Founders sought with the Constitution. But Democrats made a mockery of bipartisanship by shoving Obamacare down the throats of Republican lawmakers and snubbing the popular majority that opposed it. The Democrats have undercut the credibility of the law they created.
A fast-track challenge to Obamacare’s constitutionality will likely reach the Supreme Court in coming months. The justices will have multiple issues to consider, including the unprecedented federal mandate that all individuals buy approved health insurance, the undeniable inequity of the many corrupt bargains used to buy votes for the measure, and the banana republic parliamentary tactics used by the Democratic congressional leadership. Whatever the high court’s decision, it won’t be nearly as unpleasant as the verdict many Democrats will hear from their constituents in November.
Some House Democrats are apparently selling their vote on healthcare reform for jobs at places like NASA — but they’re receiving a stern warning from one conservative senator about the ramifications of such behavior.
Human Events reports that retiring Congressman Bart Gordon (D-Tennessee) has been promised the job of NASA administrator in exchange for his vote — and that Representative John Tanner, another retiring Democrat, has been promised an appointment as a U.S. ambassador to NATO in exchange for his vote.
When at the White House recently, Congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas (D-Florida) also reportedly was seeking a special NASA deal in exchange for a “yes” vote on healthcare.
On Thursday, Senator Tom Coburn (R- Oklahoma) told House Democrats who voted against the legislation the first time that they had better “be prepared” to defend selling their vote in the House.
“If you voted no and you vote yes, and you lose your election, and you think [your] nomination to a federal position isn’t going to be held in the Senate, I’ve got news for you — it’s going to be held,” Coburn vowed.
“Number two is, if you get a deal, a parochial deal for you or your district, I’ve already instructed my staff and the staff of seven other senators that we will look at every appropriations bill at every level, at every instance, and we will outline it by district — and we will associate that with the buying of your vote.
“So if you think you can cut a deal now and it not come out until after the election,” he concluded, “I want to tell you that isn’t going to happen — and be prepared to defend selling your vote in the House.”
Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) has asked the House to remove a provision from the health bill allowing the state-owned Bank of North Dakota to continue receiving federal student loan subsidies, even though the program would be eliminated for other banks. Conrad asked for the special deal to be dumped after Republicans called the provision the “Bismarck Bank Job.”
While America is distracted by Democrats’ attempts to unconstitutionally ram government-run healthcare down the throats of the American people, the Obama administration began preparing to resume funding to President Obama’s favorite community organizing group.
The fiscal floodgates are opening for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the president’s former employer and legal client, despite a congressional ban on funding the activist group that has long been a practitioner of election fraud.
In a March 16 memo Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director Peter Orszag quietly ordered federal agencies to resume funding the group whose employees were caught on hidden camera videos last year condoning a variety of crimes including child prostitution and tax evasion.
The memo came a week after renegade federal judge Nina Gershon of the Eastern District of New York made permanent her temporary injunction prohibiting Congress from cutting off funding for ACORN.
The memo also came despite the fact that the Department of Justice is planning to appeal Gershon’s ruling and seek a stay pending appeal.
It’s unclear why the Obama administration isn’t doing the responsible thing and waiting for the case to work its way through the judicial system.
Could the OMB be moving at lightning speed to restore funding for ACORN, which is under indictment in Nevada for election fraud, because ACORN is in dire financial straits? Perhaps it’s a reward for ACORN’s loyal support in the ObamaCare battle.
Rep. Paul Ryan (R, Wisconsin) offers his opening comments in the Reconciliation Markup House Budget Committee on March 15, 2010. He exposes the mockery that the Democrats are making of our legislative process in order to ram a government takeover of health care through Congress.
TAKE ACTION: A vote on this health care bill is expected to occur on Sunday. Call your Representative NOW and tell them to vote “NO” on this sham of a bill.
Mark R. Levin, president of Landmark Legal Foundation, today issued a warning to the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives about the possible use of the so-called “deem and pass,” “self-executing,” or “Slaughter Rule” to enact H.R. 3590, the legislative version of President Obama’s healthcare proposal that has been previously approved by the Senate. If this tactic is employed, Landmark will immediately sue the President, Attorney General Eric Holder and other relevant cabinet members to prevent them from instituting this unconstitutional contrivance. A copy of the complaint can be found here: Landmark’s Draft “Slaughter Rule” Complaint.
By a vote of 222 to 203, House Democrats voted today to uphold the usage of the “self-executing rule,” also known as the Slaughter Solution. This further validates that Obama, Pelosi and the Democrats will to anything to pass this health care bill, even if it is unconstitutional and just plain shady. The undocumented President Obama has made it clear time and again that he doesn’t care about the process – he just wants it passed, no matter the consequences. And there will be consequences.
The Slaughter Solution “deems” the Senate bill passed without the House ever having cast a vote, while they vote separately on a reconciliation measure. Pelosi wants this done so the American people wont’ be able to see who actually voted for the bill – she wants to shield her Congressional allies from their constituents who are mad as hell about their representatives not listening to the people.
Even one of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s floor whips, U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch, says a proposed parliamentary move to pass health-care reform would be “disingenuous” and harm the credibility of Congress.
In a sign of how tough it’s been for Pelosi to round up votes for the massive bill, Lynch – a South Boston Democrat who supported a House reform package last year – said he’ll probably vote against a key Senate version of the legislation, unless unexpected major changes are made soon.
Lynch, who serves as one of Pelosi’s key vote counters, said he also can’t support a proposed “deem and pass” procedure that would allow Democrats to vote to strip out controversial portions of the Senate bill and then “deem” that the entire package has passed without a second, direct vote.
“It’s disingenuous,” said Lynch, who considers unfair a Senate provision to tack a surcharge on higher-end health plans. “It would really call into question the credibility of the House.”
WE UNDERSTAND the administration’s sense of urgency on health-care reform. But what is intended as a final sprint threatens to turn into something unseemly and, more important, contrary to Democrats’ promises of transparency and time for deliberation.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Monday that she is leaning toward a parliamentary maneuver under which the House would vote on a package of changes to the Senate-approved reform bill, and the underlying Senate bill would then be “deemed” to have passed, even though the House had never voted on it. That may help some House members dodge a politically difficult decision, but it strikes us as a dodgy way to reform the health-care system. Democrats who vote for the package will be tagged with supporting the Senate bill in any event. Why not be straightforward about it?
More worrying is that Congress and the country have yet to see the changes, for which Democrats hope to win quick House approval and which they then hope to speed through the Senate under a procedure that would bar filibusters. These changes — the so-called reconciliation bill — are not all minor “fixes”; some could have far-reaching consequences. Such changes deserve to be fully understood and debated before they are voted on. The speaker’s office says the week-long “conversation” that Nancy Pelosi promised to have with members is taking place and that they are waiting for the final word from the Congressional Budget Office before releasing the package; in any event, they say, lawmakers and the public will have 72 hours to consider the changes. But why be so secretive about it? Any number of measures — including versions of the health-care bill itself — have been unveiled without CBO scores.
The health-care debate has been going on longer than a year, and House members want to get it over with. They don’t want it hanging over them during the Easter recess. President Obama wants progress to have been made before he leaves for Indonesia on Sunday. These are understandable desires, but they don’t outweigh the need for a reasonable process on a matter of such importance.
By Brian York: If you have any doubt that the Democratic leadership of the House views passing the current health care reform bill as the beginning, not the end, of the process of creating a national government health care system, just note what Speaker Nancy Pelosi told a group of bloggers on Monday. “My biggest fight has been between those who wanted to do something incremental and those who wanted to do something comprehensive,” Pelosi said, according to an account by Washington Post reform advocate Ezra Klein. “We won that fight, and once we kick through this door, there’ll be more legislation to follow.”
But since the current bill is unpopular, and Pelosi at the moment does not have enough Democratic, much less Republican, votes to pass it, the door she will be kicking through is the back door. Pelosi told the bloggers she favors using the “self-executing rule” strategy in which the House would pass the Senate health care bill without going on the record as specifically voting for it. “I like it,” Pelosi said of the scheme, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.” The strategy of passing the Senate bill while avoiding a direct vote, writes Klein, “is all about plausible deniability for House members who don’t want to vote for the Senate bill.”
In a particularly Alice-in-Wonderland moment, Pelosi argued that the debate over health care reform can begin after the bill is passed. “Pelosi said passing the bill would allow Dems to undertake a ‘debate’ with Republicans over ‘what is the balanced role that government should have,’” writes another pro-reform blogger at the Post, Greg Sargent. According to Sargent, Pelosi explained, “We have to take it to the American people, to say, this is the choice that you have. This is the vision that they have for your health and well being, and this is the vision that we have.” Again, in Pelosi’s scenario, that debate would occur after the bill is passed.
Finally, Pelosi downplayed statements from her own team that she does not yet have the votes to pass the national health care measure. On “Meet the Press” Sunday, Democratic Whip Rep. James Clyburn said, “No, we don’t have them as of this morning.” Meeting with the bloggers, Pelosi said, “The reason [Clyburn] said that is we don’t have a bill yet.” In the end, the Speaker declared, “I have no intention of not passing this bill.”
Would House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her fellow House Democratic leaders try to cram the Senate version of Obamacare through the House without actually having a recorded vote on the bill?
Not only is the answer yes, they would, they have figured out a way to do it, according to National Journal’s Congress Daily:
“House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.
“Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.
“Slaughter has not taken the plan to Speaker Pelosi as Democrats await CBO scores on the corrections bill. ‘Once the CBO gives us the score, we’ll spring right on it,’ she said.”
Each bill that comes before the House for a vote on final passage must be given a rule that determines things like whether the minority would be able to offer amendments to it from the floor.
In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House “deems” the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself.
Would that rationale fly with the public? Is it logical? Of course not. But remember, these folks have persuaded themselves that a majority of the American people really want Obamacare. A blog post on House Minority Leader John Boehner’s blog described the approach as a “twisted scheme.”
How much fun will it be for Democrats representing congressional districts carried by John McCain in 2008 to be constantly reminded about the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, the Slaughter Solution, the death panels, $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, individual mandates, etc.
UPDATE: Turner on Nancy’s new rules
Grace-Marie Turner of the Galen Institute offers another insight into the Democrats’ desperate search for some way to pass a proposal that is clearly opposed by a majority of their constituents.
There’s an old saying that if you’re arguing process, you’ve lost the debate. In this age of Twitter and 30-second sound bites, it is generally true, and I try not to delve too deeply into the weeds of process and procedure in this daily report. But you need to know what’s going on in Congress right now.
Last week President Obama insisted that healthcare reform was so important that it deserved an up or down vote by any means necessary. Obama demanded Democrats get it done before the end of March, before members of Congress have to face their constituents back home. He also ordered Democrats to go “nuclear” by resorting to complicated and controversial budget reconciliation rules, which he and other Democrats once vehemently opposed.
For days, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have struggled to figure how they can “reform” 20% of our economy under strict rules only intended to guarantee the passage of a budget. Reconciliation rules require that the House pass the Senate’s healthcare bill first, then pass a “bill of fixes” or a separate reconciliation bill, which then has to be approved by the Senate.
The problem for House Democrats is that the Senate bill includes several provisions considered onerous to many House members for a variety of reasons – from abortion funding to immigration issues, kickbacks and tax hikes. Many House Democrats do not want to vote for the Senate bill, which is reportedly “dead on arrival.” But Speaker Pelosi and other House leaders thought they had a way around it.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi reportedly cancelled all House committee hearings today so she could corral members of her caucus and present details of their “end game.” One plan under consideration would invoke another parliamentary maneuver referred to as the “Slaughter rule,” after Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), chairwoman of the House Rules Committee. The Slaughter rule allows the House to vote on only the reconciliation “bill of fixes,” and in doing so consider the Senate bill as passed by the House without an actual up or down vote on the Senate’s bill.
I realize this is a lot of “inside baseball,” but it is important. Nothing could more clearly demonstrate the consequences of elections and why it is so critical that we take back Congress in 236 days. The fact that Democrats are going through such contortions to pass a bill the public opposes is an insult to the central principle of our republic: The Consent of the Governed.
The author of the reconciliation process, Sen. Robert Bryd (D-WV,) understood this. Here’s a stirring video of Byrd explaining why he refused to allow Bill Clinton to pass HillaryCare through reconciliation. All those arguments are valid today. The difference is that there’s a new gang in town, and it plays by whatever rules it must in order to win.
But there is good news breaking now! According to Roll Call, “The Senate parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress’ original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package.” In other words, the House must pass the Senate bill, with all its objectionable provisions, before the reconciliation bill can proceed. This is a major blow to ObamaCare because, as I noted, there is little support for the Senate bill in the House today. Stay tuned!
U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued the following statement today after introducing legislation to repeal the Democrats’ government takeover of health care:
Last night, Democrats passed ObamaCare by a vote of 219-to-212. The most bi-partisan aspect of the bill was the opposition to it. Republicans voted unanimously against it and they were joined by 34 Democrats. This bill raises taxes by more than $500 billion. It imposes new taxes on investments and new fines on businesses. It imposes unconstitutional mandates on Americans and funds abortion. And the Democrats own it entirely. This is what happens when liberals get power.
Well, they finally did it. Despite more than a year of steadily rising public opposition, manifested in opinion polls and in protest rallies across the country, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finally rammed through Obamacare late Sunday when House Democrats gave the bill their imprimatur.
Some House Democrats are apparently selling their vote on healthcare reform for jobs at places like NASA — but they’re receiving a stern warning from one conservative senator about the ramifications of such behavior.
“If you voted no and you vote yes, and you lose your election, and you think [your] nomination to a federal position isn’t going to be held in the Senate, I’ve got news for you — it’s going to be held,” Coburn vowed.
While America is distracted by Democrats’ attempts to unconstitutionally ram government-run healthcare down the throats of the American people, the Obama administration began preparing to resume funding to President Obama’s favorite community organizing group.
Mark R. Levin, president of Landmark Legal Foundation, today issued a warning to the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives about the possible use of the so-called “deem and pass,” “self-executing,” or “Slaughter Rule” to enact H.R. 3590, the legislative version of President Obama’s healthcare proposal that has been previously approved by the Senate. If this tactic is employed, Landmark will immediately sue the President, Attorney General Eric Holder and other relevant cabinet members to prevent them from instituting this unconstitutional contrivance. A copy of the complaint can be found here: 
E
WE UNDERSTAND the administration’s 
By Brian York: If you have any doubt that the Democratic leadership of the House views passing the current health care reform bill as the beginning, not the end, of the process of creating a national government health care system, just note what Speaker Nancy Pelosi told a group of bloggers on Monday. “My biggest fight has been between those who wanted to do something incremental and those who wanted to do something comprehensive,” Pelosi said, according to an 
Would House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her fellow House Democratic leaders try to cram the Senate version of Obamacare through the House without actually having a recorded vote on the bill?
Entries (RSS)