Reid Bill Says Future Congresses Cannot Repeal Parts of Reid Bill

**dpetty121263** · December-22nd-2009, 11:31 AM

If this is true and is upheld in the courts then it is all over, with a stroke of a pen the Constitution is pretty much null and void. The only way to overturn this would be with a Super Majority vote of 67 Senators and that is unlikley to happen.

Here is the link to the section of the bill that says that in Reid's Manager admendment.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblog...20language.pdf

Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) pointed out some rather astounding language in the Senate health care bill during floor remarks tonight. First, he noted that there are a number of changes to Senate rules in the bill--and it's supposed to take a 2/3 vote to change the rules. And then he pointed out that the Reid bill declares on page 1020 that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board cannot be repealed by future Congresses:

there's one provision that i found particularly troubling and it's under section c, titled "limitations on changes to this subsection."

and i quote -- "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 not legislation. it's not law. this is a rule change. it's a pretty big deal. we will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law.

i'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. i don't see why the majority party wouldn't put this in every bill. if you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates.

i mean, we want to bind future congresses. this goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future co congresses.

According to page 1001 of the Reid bill, the purpose of the Independent Medical Advisory Board is to "reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending." For any fearmongers out there tempted to call an unelected body that recommends Medicare cuts a "Death Panel," let me be clear. According to page 1004, IMAB proposals "shall not include any recommendation to ration health care"--you know, just like the bill says there's no funding for abortion.

Paging Sarah Palin: the death panel is unkillable

**mattfivefour** · December-22nd-2009, 01:47 PM

Well the full wording is: "(B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLATION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report (other than pursuant to this section) that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the Board if that change would fail to satisfy the requirements of sub paragraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2)." Note its context here as given in the heading. So what it is doing is ensuring that under the proposed legislation the goal of the legislation will not be changed by changes to parts of the legislation or by changes to other legislation. As I read it, it does not prevent repealing the legislation itself—only chnges to the legislation that are aimed at repealing of a decision by the IMAB.

**dpetty121263** · December-22nd-2009, 02:05 PM

On one of the top Progessive forums that will go unnamed went into detail on this came about and from accounts no other than Mr. Burris (Obama's replacement from IL) wrote much of this as as a safety incase the Dems get wiped out in 2010 and the next CONgress tries to change it. Here is a bit of the transcript of Sen. Demint and the acting Presiding Office of the Senate.

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 redefine them. Thank you. and I do yield back.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER: the senate stands adjourned until 7:00 a.m. tomorrow.

**Sean Osborne** · December-23rd-2009, 11:51 AM

There's one Republican Senator who really, really "gets it" when it comes to this Health Care beast. Senator James (Jim) E. Risch of Idaho. Here's the truth of the matter from the man the Republican's should have as the tip of their spear to kill this beast.

**mattfivefour** · December-23rd-2009, 12:10 PM

Awesome! Senator Risch indeed has it absolutely right. Wish I were an Idahoan so I could vote for him. He strikes me as not only a very smart man but one with integrity.

**micah719** · December-23rd-2009, 12:15 PM

Banana republic? Third world? No wonder Chavez von Venezuela is getting antsy, he's jealous he's about to lose his standing as Tin Pot Dictator #14.
2000 pages+, wow, that must have taken a while to cobble together, and it's being put out now....what's the rush? Mr Risch seems articulate and passionate, who is leading the charge if it isn't him?

**Sean Osborne** · December-23rd-2009, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by micah719

Mr Risch seems articulate and passionate, who is leading the charge if it isn't him?

In the Senate it's Mitch McConnell from Kentucky. In the House it's John Boehner from Ohio. Both of these congressional leaders have so far been only moderately effective. If this beast becomes law then they will have failed. No one in America can afford such a failure.

**citrixadmin** · December-23rd-2009, 12:48 PM

I think this all will wind up in the Courts.

**micah719** · December-23rd-2009, 12:51 PM

"No one in America can afford such a failure."

With socialism, seeing as how you're spending other people's money, anything is possible. Unfortunately, once you've killed the golden goose, you have to start hunting "enemies of the people", and with modern technology that lenin, stalin, hitler and mao could only have dreamed of, the persecution can only be that much worse. Praying for you folks over there.

**MikeD** · December-23rd-2009, 03:55 PM

What really gets me about all this is the very simple statement by the ruler of China just recently. Didn't this leader make the statement, the world can no longer buy America's debt. If that's true and no country comes up to purchase the debt needed to finance this bill, how will they be able to pay for it??? Would it be wrong for me to say, we just might be looking at another tax revolt comin' to our land?

**micah719** · December-23rd-2009, 03:58 PM

fema me up scotty, there's no more money......

**justme** · December-23rd-2009, 05:07 PM

What a horrible mess!

**micah719** · December-23rd-2009, 05:25 PM

John 16:33
I have told you these things, so that in Me you may have [perfect] peace and confidence. In the world you have tribulation and trials and distress and frustration; but be of good cheer [take courage; be confident, certain, undaunted]! For I have overcome the world. [I have deprived it of power to harm you and have conquered it for you.]

It's a mystery to me how the heathen make it through these days....looking back, I can't even understand how I survived more peaceful times than this...

**Sean Osborne** · December-24th-2009, 10:50 AM

Ah-Ha!!! Can't repeal this monstrosity? No problem. Come November 2010:

1. Throw ALL of the bums out of the Senate and the House who voted for and created this monster.

2. Elect in their place true fiscal Christian conservatives who know that they work for us, and who will pledge to DEFUND all of the unecessary programs and earmarks within it.

Without funding the monster will simply die as the lifeless, dried-up paper it really is.

How simple is that?

**micah719** · December-24th-2009, 11:04 AM

Sounds great. Wonder what they've cooked up to try and prevent something like that happening.

**Faith** · December-24th-2009, 10:18 PM

There is away out of this mess!
Ah-Ha!!! Can't repeal this monstrosity? No problem. Come November 2010:

1. Throw ALL of the bums out of the Senate and the House who voted for and created this monster.

2. Elect in their place true fiscal Christian conservatives who know that they work for us, and who will pledge to DEFUND all of the unecessary programs and earmarks within it.

Without funding the monster will simply die as the lifeless, dried-up paper it really is.

How simple is that?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amen & Amen Sean.......

I hope it's as easy at this....

My middle son, who just lost his job, was at my house today.

He got a call from a friend, where my son used to work, saying he got a $3.00 raise per hour.

The company 'drop' his company insurance,and he thinks the government will provide him his healthcare.

Now he was sooooo excited....

Now this is a man in his 50's....

Americans still DON'T GET IT,and those who do, why do they want to put the BURDEN on those who have saved to work hard all of their lives?

States trying to get out of paying their share ...

Sean, I just pray you are right,and this bill can be change...

**Sean Osborne** · December-25th-2009, 02:13 AM

I know that this idea is very highly favored by the core of the Christian conservative leadership. Expect to hear more about this in the days, weeks and months to come.