When a reporter asked Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi if she will be “whipping” her fellow House members (on the health care vote), Ms Pelosi replied:

“..I never stop whipping..”

Pelosi added:

“..There is no beginning, there’s no middle and there’s no end..” (To the whipping.)

Ouch. Why did we give Ms Pelosi the whip..??

Photobucket

Photobucket

Democrats turned Dennis Kucinich (Ohio) and Dale Kildee (Michigan) into YES votes this week, however could they still be 9 votes short..??

The Health Care Bill, (yes, I refuse to call it “health reform” because it has no public option and nothing in the bill will lower the cost of what insurance companies can charge you, so where is the “reform”..??)

Photobucket

This Bill is beginning to remind me of one of those monster movies in which everyone thinks that the evil beast is dead. Everyone turns their backs on the beast, and the monster rises up to kill again.

Photobucket

Such is the way of the Health Bill.

One minute we are told that the House does NOT have enough votes to pass it. The next minute we are told that they have the votes.

However, they may not even NEED votes, (those silly little old fashion things.)

Speaker Pelosi has not ruled out a using a procedure called: “Self- Executing Rule.”

Photobucket

(Or, as republicans are calling it: “The Slaughter Rule.” NOTE- republicans only call it that when democrats use it.)

What this procedure entails is that because the Senate passed their version of health care- 60 yea, 40 nay; and the House passed a similar bill, the House can just “pretend” that they signed the Senate version (without actually voting on it) and hand the Senate version to the president to sign, with a few amendments.

What’s the BEEF..??

Democrats claim that this method is used all the time.

Republicans claim that this is unconstitutional.

As usual, both are wrong, and both are right. (They are just not telling you the whole truth.)

Republicans were the ones who actually created this method (Self- Executing Rule) way back in the 1930’s.

However, it has NEVER been used for something this BIG, which would affect every American, and force people to BUY a consumer product.

This procedure, which has been used by both parties, is probably unconstitutional.

(Why do I say “probably unconstitutional”..??)

OK, to simplify, (I am very good at “simple”) by LAW, congress MUST pass a federal budget. It is unconstitutional for congress to NOT pass a federal budget. So if that first republican congress (in 1933) used the “Self- Executing Rule” to raise the national debt limit to get a federal budget passed, then it would be constitutional. (Because they MUST pass a budget.)

Here is where it gets tricky; to say that this procedure is unconstitutional, you would have to know the “intent” of that congress, in using this procedure. Was congress just trying to pass a HUGE bill filled with pork projects? OR did the national debt limit need to be raised for the benefit and safety of all the states?

OK, I am NOT a constitutional scholar, so I am going to drop that debate.

However, I am not sure that you could argue that a Health Bill, WHICH (most aspects) WILL NOT TAKE EFFECT FOR 4 YEARS, would be considered “urgent.”

Photobucket

If all of the benefits of this Bill were to take effect immediately, and you could prove that Americans were dying if you did not act NOW, then you could say that it is urgent, and use this procedure. (Self- Executing Rule.) However, the simple fact that democrats took one year fighting over the details in this bill proves that it wasn’t “urgent.”

So, to recap: it is unconstitutional for the democrats to use this procedure to pass health care. The only time you should ever use this procedure is to get a federal budget passed, in the event that congress is in a deadlock over a budget.

Yes, the republicans have used the Self- Executing Rule in the wrong manner before, but never for something this big.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

Photobucket

So, the image I get from this story, (aside from the mental picture of Nancy Pelosi in S & M gear, whipping her boys into shape) is that congress no longer wants to take part in the “governing process.”

So why do we need the House of Representatives..??

I mean, if the House does not want to vote on something so important as health care, why should we have them?

Photobucket

We all have computers, why do we need to send someone to Washington in our behalf..??

Yes, I am making a point in a humorous fashion, however; if the House does not want to vote on the BIG issues, like health care; why do we need them anymore..??

We can easily set up a computer data base and we can represent ourselves. Whenever a Bill comes up for vote, we could give ourselves a week to read over the Bill, think about it, and then vote.

Gone would be all this crap with our representatives trying to GUESS what “we the people want?”

“…60 % of Americans polled do not care for this bill..” Oh yea, well “…75 % of Americans believe that something MUST be done..”

Just take a look at this latest poll result:

Photobucket

This is all crap.

Give us the Bill, we will vote on it.

Now, before you say: “..Hey AR, you are talking about changing our representative government into a pure democracy..”

Hold on a minute…

We would still leave the Senate in place. The president’s job would not change. The only change would be that “we” would become our representatives.

Think of the money that we would save:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi- $223,000 per year.

Rank-and-file members of the House receive about $70,000 per year. (It can vary.)

We have about 290 retired members of congress each receiving about $60,000 per year- FOREVER.

And we have about 123 retired congress people receiving $36,000 per year, until they die.

All members, past and present, have great benefits.

We could save millions, upon millions of dollars by getting rid of the House of Representatives, and our voices would be heard.

Photobucket

Of course I am joking here, but my joke is based on a belief that I have had for some time.

If I had to pick one area of our government that is screwed up the most, I would pick the House of Representatives.

The founding fathers had meant for the House to be made up of people like you and me. It was never intended to be filled with career politicians. The Senate was the place for career politicians.

Today, we have people who graduate from college after studying political science and public speaking; they take a job with one of the political parties for a few years. Then maybe they run for a local office and hold that for a few years. Their next target is the House of Representatives. They have NEVER held a “real” job. They do not understand the needs of our community.

Ultimately, it is our fault for putting these people in office. We just do not take the time to learn who these people are. Because of this, the House is manned by “carpetbaggers” who have never held a real job, (outside of politics), and they have no idea what we need.

So, if the House decides to use the Self- Executing Rule so that they do not have to vote on the issue of health care, then we should just get rid of the House. Why do we need them..??

But if the House realizes that the health bill is too big an issue to side-step the constitution, then I say give them another chance.

(Whips and S & M gear not included.)

Photobucket

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

Photobucket

Advertisements