Many friends and acquaintances accuse me of being over-the-top when I insist on calling the Democrat Party the “Totalitarian Party.” They are certainly entitled to their opinion.
I wonder, however, what they make of this language of The Majority Leaders’ Amendment to current version of Obamacare?
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.”
This is how totalitarians rule. This is not how Americans govern themselves.
If this bill passes and is signed into law by The Messiah, he truly WILL live-up to his promise :
“So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future — and that is the issue of health care…. I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last.”
He will not have lived up to it by creating the best system America could create. He will have lived up to it by ramming down our throats legislation we do not want and are almost completely unable to alter.
THIS is TOTALITARIANSIM.
So – how does this work?
Normally a change to Senate Rules requires a 67-vote majority. This is a change to the rules, so logically means that the HC bill now requires 67 votes to pass the Senate, right?
Nope. Reid has decided that it is only a PROCEDURAL change, and so requires on 51 votes.
Here’s a bit of an exchange between Sen DeMint and the Senate Presiding Officer:
DEMINT: and so the language you see in this bill that specifically refers to a change in a rule is not a rule change, it’s a procedure change?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: that is correct.
DEMINT: then I guess our rules mean nothing, do they, if they can re define them. Thank you. And I do yield back.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: the senate stands adjourned until 7:00 a.m. tomorrow.
That’s right. When confronted with the facts, the Senate Democrats ran for cover. The Senate Democrats are ignoring the constitution, the law, and their own rules to pass Obamacare.
(Try to imagine for just an instant the response of the Democrats or the media had this been a Republican pushing legislation that disallowed modification by any future representative of We the People… You can’t imagine that? I can’t either…)
With a 67-vote supermajority required to do anything with regard to this portion of Obamacare, it truly will be untouchable, regardless of circumstances, regardless of the opinions of the citizens… I mean, of the subjects … regardless of anything at all, this bill will not be able to be touched by any future Congress.
Should the GOP take Congress in November? Too bad, done deal.
So – for those who think I am over the top? Your thoughts?
THIS is TYRANNY.
Note that the subsection at issue here, the untouchable portion of this bill, 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, unaccountable 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. He is flouting 900 years of the Rule of Law.
If this is not tyranny, then what is?
DON’T SIT BY AND LET THIS HAPPEN IN THE DARK!!! FORWARD TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!