PDA

View Full Version : Harry Reid's Poison Pill



Franco
03-12-2010, 10:04 AM
They never stop, they will keep trying to shove this down our throats
until they get it through...pass this on to everyone...

The impudent tyranny of Sen. Harry Reid Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid of Nevada is proving once again the maxim that darkness hates the
light.

Buried in his massive amendment to the Senate version of Obamacare is
Reid's anti-democratic poison pill designed to prevent any future
Congress from repealing the central feature of this monstrous
legislation!

Beginning on page 1,000 of the measure, Section 3403 reads in part: ".
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."

In other words, if President Barack Obama signs this measure into law,
no future Senate or House will be able to change a single word of
Section 3403, regardless whether future Americans or their
representatives in Congress wish otherwise!!

Note that the subsection at issue here concerns the regulatory power
of the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to "reduce the per
capita rate of growth in Medicare spending."

That is precisely the kind of open-ended grant of regulatory power
that effectively establishes the IMAB as the ultimate arbiter of the
cost, quality and quantity of health care to be made available to the
American people. And Reid wants the decisions of this group of
unelected federal bureaucrats to be untouchable for all time.

No wonder the majority leader tossed aside assurances that senators
and the public would have at least 72 hours to study the text of the
final Senate version of Obamacare before the critical vote on cloture.
And no wonder Reid was so desperate to rush his amendment through the
Senate, even scheduling the key tally on it at 1 a.m., while America slept.

True to form, Reid wanted to keep his Section 3403 poison pill secret
for as long as possible, just as he negotiated his bribes for the
votes of Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska
and Bernie Sanders of Vermont behind closed doors.

The final Orwellian touch in this subversion of democratic procedure
is found in the ruling of the Reid-controlled Senate Parliamentarian
that the anti-repeal provision is not a change in Senate rules, but
rather of Senate "procedures." Why is that significant?

Because for 200 years, changes in the Senate's standing rules have
required approval by two-thirds of those voting, or 67 votes rather
than the 60 Reid's amendment received.
Reid has flouted two centuries of standing Senate rules to pass a
measure in the dead of night that no senator has read, and part of
which can never be changed. If this is not tyranny, then what is?

Henry V
03-12-2010, 10:14 AM
Nice cut and paste from a December opinion piece http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/The-impudent-tyranny-of-Harry-Reid-8665439-79935422.html

and from FactCheck.org
(http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/medicare-board-unrepealable/)


Q: Does the Senateís health bill contain a provision that canít be repealed?

A: No. It would create an Independent Medicare Advisory Board that could be repealed by a vote of three-fifths of the Senate.
Are you this far behind reading right wing blogs?

YardleyLabs
03-12-2010, 10:24 AM
Actually, the specific language used is typical of bills/laws that seek to control costs. Examples include social security, the "Pay-Go" law, etc. The section you reference established a committee to recommend ways of containing growth in health care costs and states that such recommendations should be accepted, be replaced with other savings to restrict cost comparably, or be rejected by a 60 vote majority. The idea is that Congress should not overturn administrative decisions that help control costs without coming up with comparable savings. The entire section may be repealed with 60 votes.

Franco
03-12-2010, 10:52 AM
Are you this far behind reading right wing blogs?



It was just emailed to me this morning. Afterall, we all know how desperate Harry Reid is.

Good to know that they can't do it!

Henry V
03-12-2010, 11:20 AM
Nothing but a desperate return to messages that were lies the first time around.
Maybe a "death panel" email will show up next.;)

Marvin S
03-12-2010, 11:27 AM
messages that were lies the first time around.


How's that Global Warming :( thing going these days :)?

Henry V
03-12-2010, 01:04 PM
Depends on your point of view. The fact remains that the earth's climate is warming, but then, posting numbers and facts and all really doesn't matter to you and many others.

You can post all the numbers you want, I don't see the improvement you talk about.
Since your interested, here is a good article. http://climateprogress.org/2010/03/11/gallup-poll-global-warming-partisan-deniers-winning/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+climateprogress%2FlCrX+%28Cli mate+Progress%29
I apologize for all the numbers. I keep waiting for more "daily" debunking of the theory but have not seen anything for weeks.

Marvin S
03-12-2010, 03:16 PM
Depends on your point of view. The fact remains that the earth's climate is warming, but then, posting numbers and facts and all really doesn't matter to you and many others.

Disingenious - but as long as you quoted something from another discussion, perhaps you would like to explain the relevance of the Dow, Nasdaq & S & P to whether Joe Six Pack has an income or not. If you can that would be more than your leftist heroes can do :confused:.

Henry V
03-12-2010, 05:41 PM
Marvin,
The quote from you that I used was in direct response to a bunch of numbers and facts presented by someone else on another topic. Does it really matter what topic? I doubt it. As you said, you believe what you see despite the numbers. Based on previous discussions on climate change, I expect you have the same attitude toward this topic, so why should I waste my time, particularly when you are the one that hijacked this thread off topic.
Have a great weekend.

ducknwork
03-12-2010, 08:52 PM
Disingenious - but as long as you quoted something from another discussion, perhaps you would like to explain the relevance of the Dow, Nasdaq & S & P to whether Joe Six Pack has an income or not. If you can that would be more than your leftist heroes can do :confused:.

You also noticed that point got totally blown off? Interesting, isn't it?

HuntsmanTollers
03-13-2010, 06:09 PM
Yesterday on the radio, a Senator from Utah mentioned that there is language in the bill to give it the appearance of being unchangeable. However, he also said that the language is only hyperbole, since NO CONGRESS can Limit what actions a FUTURE CONGRESS takes (without a constitutional amendment).

Marvin S
03-13-2010, 10:28 PM
The quote from you that I used was in direct response to a bunch of numbers and facts presented by someone else on another topic. Does it really matter what topic?

I believe the topic does matter - meaningless numbers = Male Cow Manure - which is what I was responding to.


As you said, you believe what you see despite the numbers.

Please see above - I do not believe I posted anything faintly resembling your statement. Do you not think you are scraping the bottom in disingenuity?


Based on previous discussions on climate change, I expect you have the same attitude toward this topic, so why should I waste my time, particularly when you are the one that hijacked this thread off topic.


Climate change is not a science, it is an opinion presented by many who stand to benefit from government regulation. I do know the difference :eek: . Had you even presented a feeble argument with merit I would have looked at it. As for hijacking, I would remind U that U presented the lying argument, I was just trying to measure your intent.

But if you would like to - start a thread - Global Warming vs The Stock Market - there are many similiarities. & I will participate in the discussion.

Until then, Man Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Henry V
03-14-2010, 09:40 PM
I believe the topic does matter - meaningless numbers = Male Cow Manure - which is what I was responding to.
Yes, I'll let your responses over at that other topic stand http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=37039&page=6 Jeff provided the numbers and you provided your perspective and opinion in response.


Please see above - I do not believe I posted anything faintly resembling your statement. Do you not think you are scraping the bottom in disingenuity?
I'll let my posts stand.


Climate change is nnotot a science, it is an opinion presented by many who stand to benefit from government regulation. I do know the difference :eek: . Had you even presented a feeble argument with merit I would have looked at it. As for hijacking, I would remind U that U presented the lying argument, I was just trying to measure your intent.
The theory of anthropogenic climate change is based on solid science. The theory that the climate is not changing or that humans are not part of the cause is not. Do you really want to have a discussion to compare who is to gain by taking actions to mitigate climate change versus who is going to lose if we do not take action?
I brought up lying because this thread was started by a lie. Perhaps you missed this fact?

But if you would like to - start a thread - Global Warming vs The Stock Market - there are many similiarities. & I will participate in the discussion.
Until then, Man Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'll let you start the thread. I see no comparison.

Marvin S
03-15-2010, 05:15 PM
The theory of anthropogenic climate change is based on solid science.

So solid that the promoters of the theory were/are unwilling to listen to both sides of the debate :confused: ?


I'll let you start the thread. I see no comparison.

:) :) :) :) :) After the statement above I can see why!