Feeds - RSS Feeds

As the Arkansas Senate race heats up, Sen. Blanche Lincoln wants to set the record straight on her view of settling health care reform with a simple majority vote.

Calling all Tea Party activists: Make sure to make your voices heard in Cleveland, Ohio, on Monday when President Obama comes to town.

They’re piggy-backing Democrat fundraisers onto the Demcare salvation road show — just as they did in St. Louis, Missouri.

Will Dems flee from the Reverse Midas White House touch like they did yesterday?

At least one Democrat is taking the risk: Ohio Dem. Gov. Ted Strickland:

…in Ohio, Gov. Ted Strickland is making sure his schedule is cleared for next week’s visit by the president. Strickland, who is facing a tough challenge in his re-election bid from Republican John Kasich, will join Obama in northeast Ohio on Monday to promote his health care plan, a Strickland aide said.

The first-term Democrat, saddled with a difficult economy and a state jobless rate nearing 11 percent, led Kasich by five points in a mid-February poll by Quinnipiac University.

Strickland will get some political help from the administration on the same day as the president’s visit. Vice President Biden is headlining a fundraiser for the governor on Monday night in Cleveland.

With a tip of the hat to Doc Zero, who cracked on Twitter that “Democrats love Obama campaign visits like the citizens of Tokyo rush to have their pictures taken with Godzilla,” run for your lives!

As you may know, I do a cartoon on Big Hollywood every Sunday with Batton Lash called Obama Nation. It gives us the opportunity to lampoon the WPE* since few others seemed willing to do it when we started. But Big Journalism offers the opportunity to mock the “mainstream media” which constantly fails to report the facts or deal with reality. So I called up another friend, comics veteran and fellow libertarian, Val Mayerik to enter the fray and have a few laughs.

The strip we’re doing is called “Useful Idiots.” A term coined by the Soviets as the pet name they had for Western Lefties who believed any lie they were fed. It will feature a cast of familiar characters you may have seen on TV while changing channels. For the sake of storytelling we’ve put them all at the same network which we call BSN. And we focus on showing how the so called infotainment world provides neither. Info nor entertainment. Just a lot of partisan noise dressed up as “news” or “commentary”.

We show the behind the scenes editorial meetings where the “news” is “crafted” and the resulting “product” that issues forth. Why do they tell such blatant falsehoods? Stay tuned, kids. We’ll show you.

It’s no surprise that journalists are viewed with the same disdain child molesters and politicians are. I know it seems unfair to the child molesters, but the MSM has mostly become a press release house for any Democrat or radical who issues a decree. The press is supposed to be a watchdog, instead they’re a lapdog for a select group of masters. Instead of taking on the establishment, they’re the propaganda arm of the establishment. It’s a joke. So I decided to make it one. The inspiration is endless.

Rather than be angry, I always think the best way to criticize something is to show how stupid it is. And comics are a great medium for communicating ideas. It’s a “Show, Don’t Tell” medium if you use it correctly. And besides, who doesn’t want to laugh at the things that annoy you? I know I do.

As you may or may not know, I’ve worked in the comics field since the mid-’80s. I had a TV show made from one of my books, been nominated for awards. I’m even an Eisner Judge this year, which is the comics’ industry’s Oscar. Val Mayerik has been doing comics since the ’70s. He was the artist on Howard the Duck and did the Savage Sword of Conan among many others for Marvel and DC. He’s since become an amazing painter and commercial illustrator. Val decided to use a “Mort Drucker” style on the strip. Drucker was one of the main artists of the classic Mad Magazine parodies.

Look for the first ‘toon tomorrow. We plan on doing it weekly from then on out.

* WPE – Worst President Ever

....The necessity of a senate is not less indicated by the propensity of all single and numerous assemblies to yield to the impulse of sudden and violent passions, and to be seduced by factious leaders into intemperate and pernicious resolutions. Examples on this subject might be cited without number; and from proceedings within the United States, as well as from the history of other nations. But a position that will not be contradicted, need not be proved. All that need be remarked is, that a body which is to correct this infirmity ought itself to be free from it, and consequently ought to be less numerous. It ought, moreover, to possess great firmness, and consequently ought to hold its authority by a tenure of considerable duration. Alexander Hamilton-Federalist #62
As designed by our founders, the Senate is supposed to be a slow-moving body to protect the country from forced subjugation at the hands of the impulse of sudden and violent passions of a single Leader or movement.  The body's creation was the founders way of saying "Oh Really? Think about that for a while"

For months now Americans have been hearing the footsteps of the impending attempted passage of the Obamacare bill through reconciliation, which is nothing more than the progressives' attempt to subvert the constitutional purpose of the Senate.

If passing Obamacare through reconciliation was easy, it would have been done already. Truth is,  there are many different steps the congress has to take before this procedural anomaly is used. Yesterday, Congressmen Cantor and Senator Kyl issued a guide to the process and gave reasons why it may not pass:

If all goes according to the Democrats’ plan, the House will pass the Senate’s health care overhaul and it will be signed into law, with its “kickbacks,” “back-room deals,” and the Senate version of the “Cadillac” tax increase. House Democrats then hope to “fix” some—but not all—of the problems with a fast-track reconciliation bill. The Senate would take up the House-passed reconciliation bill, pass it, and send it to the president for his signature. Finally, a series of fixes outside of reconciliation might move through both the House and Senate later.The reason the "fixes" wont be added first is then the full bill will have to be passed through both houses .

If this sounds messy and a bit like a high-wire act, it should. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said:
“If we go the reconciliation route, we will be testing some reconciliation rules and provisions that have never been tested before.” (Politico, 3/3/10)But let’s be clear: House Democrats must pass the Senate’s health care overhaul before the Senate will even consider “fixing” it. And, while it seems like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid intends to take up the reconciliation package, it is far from certain that he can get it through the Senate without any changes whatsoever.

That could put nervous House Democrats in a position of being “BTU’ed,” which is Washington-speak for a scenario where House members vote on an unpopular issue that the Senate refuses to take up, resulting in a significant loss of House seats in the following election.

House Democrat leaders have confirmed they are nervous about the Senate’s lack of certainty:
“Members want some assurance that those items they have problems with are, in fact, modified before they vote for the Senate bill. I don't know that it's impossible, but it's difficult.” (House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Politico, 3/2/10)

“House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said last month that the House did not trust the Senate’s ability to act.” (The Hill, 2/28/10)BEFORE HOUSE DEMOCRATS VOTE ON THE SENATE’S UNPOPULAR HEALTH CARE OVERHAUL, HERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:

1) House Democrats Must First Approve The Controversial Senate Bill

House Democrats may find comfort in focusing on a reconciliation bill that amends a small number of provisions in the Senate’s health care bill, but that ignores two important points. First, the base bill, which will not change in reconciliation, is highly unpopular with the American people. Second, House Democrats must vote to approve the entire Senate bill, warts and all, before some of the objectionable provisions can be removed by the reconciliation bill. Here’s what House Democrats will be voting for if they vote for the Senate bill:
Increased health spending (according to CMS, bends cost curve up, not down) Nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts Over $500 billion in tax increases Health insurance premium hikes $1 trillion bill that relies on double counting and gimmicks Cornhusker Kickback Louisiana Purchase Carve-outs for Florida seniors only Tax on health care plans (JCT says will lead to increased health care costs for consumers) Targeted tax on small construction firms suffering from record employment losses2) The Senate Provides No Certainty

It is not uncommon for the House to vote for a bill, only to see the legislation languish in the Senate. That concern is magnified when such legislation is so unpopular with the American public. Recently, House Democrats voted for a controversial scheme called Cap and Trade. To this date, the Senate has not taken up the House’s Cap and Trade proposal. In fact, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) has declared it all but dead.

House Democrats must trust the Senate to complete the reconciliation two-step. Many don’t:
"So they're going to say, 'Okay, vote for this bill, because it would do X,' but under reconciliation, X may not make it past the parliamentarian's gate... We're not sure what's in it [and] we don't know whether it'll pass the Senate anyway." (Congressman Brian Baird (D-WA), Salon, 3/3/10)Let’s break down the problems Democrats will face with reconciliation:

A. Reconciliation Cannot Be Used to Make Policy Changes:

Provisions included in reconciliation must deal directly and primarily with spending and revenue. Provisions that have no budgetary impact or that have a budgetary impact that is merely incidental to the policy goal of the provisions (a determination which is made by the Senate Parliamentarian -- see below for further discussion) are subject to the “Byrd Rule” and, as such, a point of order. Overcoming the Byrd Rule point of order requires 60 votes.

According to the former Senate Parliamentarian:

“Part of the Byrd Rule is that if something is in there, not for its budgetary effect, but for its policy effect, that invokes something called the incidental test and it can be thrown out.” (Former Senate Parliamentarian Robert Dove, MSNBC, 3/1/10)

This means that Democrats probably cannot use the reconciliation bill to make changes to abortion and immigration provisions, or to include the President’s new insurance regulation proposal. At face value, these would appear to violate the Byrd Rule.

It also means that provisions that were added to the original House bill to gain the support of certain lawmakers cannot be included in reconciliation. For example, Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA) publicly stated that he voted for the House bill only after adding a provision authorizing a new program to benefit medical centers in his district. That provision, which is not in the Senate bill, would appear to be subject to the Byrd Rule point of order.

Even the president’s proposal to hold the Social Security trust fund harmless from the impact of his proposed changes may run afoul of the requirement that reconciliation cannot make any changes to the Social Security program.

B. Reconciliation Contains Several Complicated Deficit Tests:

The reconciliation bill must reduce the deficit over the next five years, and it must not increase the deficit over ten years (2010 to 2019) or increase the deficit by more than $5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods (2020-2029, 2030-2039, 2040-2049, or 2050-2059).

Why is this important? The president has proposed increased spending, scaling back the “Cadillac” tax, and imposing higher Medicare taxes to cover the difference. But because revenue from the “Cadillac” tax was projected to grow much more quickly than revenue from the Medicare tax will grow1, additional taxes may be needed—even beyond what is being suggested in the press. How can the American economy, and small businesses in particular, begin to create jobs if even more taxes are imposed?

C. Chances Are Good That The House Will Have To Vote On The Reconciliation Bill Twice: While many are speculating as to what provisions the Senate Parliamentarian will determine violate the Byrd Rule, it is only speculation. In the past, the Senate Parliamentarian has refrained from giving a definitive ruling on items that may violate the Byrd Rule until the bill is on the Senate floor. If the point of order is sustained and not waived by 60 senators, then the provision is stripped from the bill and the remainder of the bill is sent back to the House. The House passed a conference report on the bill that it believed would survive all Byrd Rule points of order. The Senate ultimately sustained three points of order (one relating to cost sharing for emergency room care). The House then had to revote on the bill minus the three provisions.

3) Less Senate Support Puts House Democrats in Difficult Position and Could Mean Senators Will Support Amendments to the Reconciliation Bill
A. With 59 Senate Democrats and Independents, up to nine Democratic Senators can vote against the bill on passage or on any given amendment (with Vice President Biden breaking any ties). But at one time or another, as many as twelve Senate Democrats have expressed concerns about using reconciliation to facilitate enacting a health care overhaul.Those twelve Senate Democrats represent nine states. At a minimum, the Senators who vote NO on final passage of reconciliation will be putting House Democrats from their states who may have already voted YES in a difficult position, given how extremely unpopular the health care overhaul is with the American public. These House Democrats could be particularly affected by that dynamic:Congressman Marion Berry (AR)
Congressman Rick Boucher (VA)
Congressman Russ Carnahan (MO)
Congressman Gerry Connolly (VA)
Congressman Joe Donnelly (IN)
Congressman Brad Ellsworth (IN)
Congressman Baron Hill (IN)
Congressman Steve Kagen (WI)
Congressman Charlie Melancon (LA)
Congressman Alan Mollohan (WV)
Congressman Glenn Nye (VA)
Congressman Tom Perriello (VA)
Congressman Nick Rahall (WV)
Congressman Mike Ross (AR)
Congressman Ike Skelton (MO)
Congressman Vic Snyder (AR)B. In the Senate, it may take just 51 votes to pass reconciliation, but it also only takes 51 votes to adopt germane amendments.

• The germaneness test for amendments to a reconciliation bill in the Senate could be fairly broad (possibly as broad as the jurisdiction of the Finance and HELP committees); meaning popular amendments might garner 51 votes. 
• Also, the amending process in the Senate can be fairly chaotic. Once debate time has concluded the amending process continues with votes being held in rapid succession (so-called “vote-a-rama” or “vote-a-thon”). This is the time when discipline could break down and amendments could be adopted, which would send the bill back to the House.

4) A Second “Clean-up” Bill Is Highly Unlikely
There is some speculation that the provisions of the Senate bill that could not be fixed using reconciliation might be fixed in a separate bill that would not have reconciliation protection. This is highly unlikely for two reasons:

• Most major bills in the Senate have to meet a 60 vote threshold for passage. If the Majority had 60 votes to fix the Senate-passed bill, then there would be no need for them to try to use reconciliation. There has been some public discussion about a third bill (not reconciliation) to address the abortion issue. It should be noted that when language similar to the “Stupak language” was offered by Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE), the amendment only received 45 votes. 
• Controversial bills cannot be done quickly in the Senate. Even routine bills can take several days because the Senate generally allows for amendment. After spending all of December and a week or two on a reconciliation bill, does anyone believe that Senator Reid would be willing to spend time on a third health care bill?

5) So What Will Happen?

In the world of legislating, nothing is certain. But, what is clear is that House Democrats cannot count on the Senate being able to pass a reconciliation bill that makes all the fixes to the Senate health care bill currently being sought.

House Democrats who vote for the Senate health care overhaul can be certain of one thing if it passes—it will become law over the objections of the American people. And they will spend the rest of the year explaining that vote, whether or not the Senate passes a reconciliation bill to “fix” it.

With that in mind, we believe House passage of the Senate’s health care bill will ultimately be decided by the 37 remaining House Democrats who voted NO to a government take-over last November, and the following 21 House Democrats who originally voted YES, but may now be on the fence:
Congressman Michael Arcuri (NY)
Congressman Marion Berry (AR)
Congressman Tim Bishop (NY)
Congressman Dennis Cardoza (CA)
Congressman Chris Carney (PA)
Congressman Jim Costa (CA)
Congressman Joe Donnelly (IN)
Congressman Steve Driehaus (OH)
Congressman Brad Ellsworth (IN)
Congressman Gabrielle Giffords (AZ)
Congressman Baron Hill (IN)
Congressman Paul Hodes (NH)
Congressman Dan Maffei (NY)
Congressman Harry Mitchell (AZ)
Congressman Bill Owens (NY)
Congressman Earl Pomeroy (ND)
Congressman Mark Schauer (MI)
Congressman Kurt Schrader (OR)
Congressman Zach Space (OH)
Congressman Dina Titus (NV)
Congressman Charlie Wilson (OH)Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list. Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com

Leonard Pitts, Seattle Times
Fear again.Not hope, nor patriotism, nor progress, nor any of the nobler emotions and impulses by which human beings are driven. Nope. None of those.Instead, fear. Again.We've seen this movie many times. So there is little that is surprising about the Republican National Committee fundraising document recently reported by Politico, the one that offers strategies to get donors to part with their money. Donors can, it says, be persuaded to give by appealing to their egos, by offering them tchotchkes, or by promising them access. And some, the small donors, the five- and 10-dollar Janes and...

Deficit reduction? My a**!! See Table 3 - the expenditures when fully phased in. More discussion coming. The Great Fallacy. Table 3 states that "Excise tax on High Insurance Premiums" will bring in its first money - $13B - in 2014. It will grow to over $30B a year after that. Do these folks not understand the free market? The industry will change product offerings. Between insurance companies and employers, this revenue will drop to noise level. That adjustment itself will make this bill an increase to the deficit. "CBO has just released an estimate of the budgetary effects of the health bill, H.R. 3590, that passed the Senate on December 24. Today’s estimate differs from the estimate for a slightly earlier version of the legislation that we released on December 19 in that it encompasses all of the amendments that were adopted by the Senate, reflects a revised assumption about its enactment date, and incorporates some technical revisions. We and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) prepared this updated estimate in preparation for further consideration of health care legislation. However, the changes we have made do not result in an estimate that differs substantially from the earlier one." CBO Reid Letter HR3590

Michael Barone, Wall Street Journal
Are there enough votes in the House to pass the Senate's health-care bill? As of today, it's clear there aren't. House Democratic leaders have brushed aside White House calls to bring the bill forward by March 18, when President Barack Obama heads to Asia. Nevertheless, analysts close to the Democratic leadership tell me they're confident the leadership will find some way to squeeze out the 216 votes needed for a majority. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has indeed shown mastery at amassing majorities. But it's hard to see how she'll do so on this one. The arithmetic as I...

The good part is the breadth of his No - read on: Holden, D-17, voted against the health care reform bill last year. However, another vote will likely be held soon, as the House appears set to pass the Senate's version of the bill. Johnson and others believe Holden is likely having "his arm twisted" by Democratic leaders eager to turn his "no" vote to a "yes" vote the second time around. However, in a telephone interview Wednesday night, Holden said his position will not change. "I will not vote for the Senate bill," Holden said. "It makes significant cuts to Medicare and Medicaid ... and the restrictions on (federal funding for) abortion are not as strong."

Newsmax first reported that Organizing for America, the community organizing outfit under the auspices of the Democratic National Committee, has launched a plan to inundate talk radio shows with callers.  The action will occur when a particular radio show is discussing ObamaCare.

This is an extension of OFA’s and Health Care for America Now’s campaign to flood last summer’s town hall meetings with union members and left-wing activists supporting Obama’s government takeover of health care.

The intent then, just as it is now, was to drown out average taxpayers showing up  to voice their concerns or vent their frustrations.  The intent is also to run out the clock on real debate and take a vote on health reform with as little resistance as possible.

HCAN and ACORN were busing non-constituents, some from as far as 200 miles away, to fill the seats and skew the crowd.  It was to give the false impression that constituents really wanted ObamaCare.

But the result was even worse.  HCAN and union members, particularly SEIU, were filling the seats which would have otherwise been occupied by the average person just getting out of work.

So, the campaign now is geared toward achieving the same result: flood different talk radio shows with left-wing activists and ObamaCare apologists.  The OFA’s website has a talk radio du jour with a call-in number and “discussion points” – talking points for the latest version of the Democrats’ plan.

Be aware and be prepared, Talk Radio: The president’s got your number and his foot soldiers are coming for you.

Reader Monica e-mails about how my governor, Colorado Democrat Bill Ritter, is squeezing folks who make money online through the Amazon affiliates program. Politicians don’t want to make tough spending cuts, so they’re targeting Internet commerce. First, some background:

The enduring skirmish in Colorado between Amazon.com and lawmakers over collecting online sales taxes has become the new front in a larger national war with billions of potential tax dollars at stake.

For years, it has pitted the anti-tax online giants, armed with a favorable 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision, against public officials and brick- and-mortar retailers that say it is time for Amazon and others to pay their fair share.

Now, Colorado legislative leaders’ political scrap with Amazon is being watched across the country by lawmakers and online-industry experts who say it’s yet another example of how confusion still reigns nationally without strong intervention from Congress.

This week, Amazon fired thousands of affiliates in Colorado, saying it refused to be forced to collect taxes under a new state law. Those affiliates were online partners that routed sales to Amazon.

“Everyone should be playing by the same tax rules,” said Craig Shearman, government-affairs spokesman for the National Retail Foundation, who says economically devastated government budgets need a shot of revenue.

…Online retailers often cite a 1992 Supreme Court decision to bolster their case against taxation. It effectively barred states from requiring online merchants to collect sales tax on their behalf, except where they have a physical presence.

But the court also suggested that Congress could give that power to states if it wanted to.

Monica shares her story:

I think it is important to know what is going on.

I got the letter yesterday and had my affiliate account closed. While it wasn’t a lot of money, it was some income for my family.

I wrote to our state legislators and the Governor last night. Doesn’t make sense to me how cutting off money to the state in the form of people’s income is helping to stimulate the economy. And they are blaming Amazon, but they are just a business, doing what they need to do to stay in business. The legislators were warned this would happen and did it anyways. No cutting of spending, no balancing the budget…just trying to use those of us who work hard to do their work for them.

The Democrats are going after the little businesses now. Something to be aware of.

P.S. Below is the letter I sent to the Governor and a copy to my representative and my senator last night. I really doubt they care.

Dear Gov. Ritter,

Up until today, I have been an associate in Amazon.com’s affiliate program. Because of the recent actions of you and the state legislature, I no longer will receive any income from Amazon when visitors to my websites click on an Amazon link. I have lost this income. Therefore, I will not be paying state income tax on this income. I also will not have this income available to spend in the state. I fail to see how this is helping the state of Colorado or our economy. You can continue to blame Amazon.com for this; but, Governor, we are not stupid. We can see who is to blame for this. It is the decision of our legislators and you, who signed this bill. You were informed that this would occur and decided to sacrifice small business owners in the state in order to continue irresponsible spending and a lack of resolve in cutting the budget.

As long as you continue to hurt those of us who work hard and do contribute to the state’s coffers, you and the legislators who voted for this will continue to face a budget crisis and will face an election crisis come next election.

I ask that you work to rescind this damaging legislation as quickly as possible to mitigate the damage to thousands of small business owners in Colorado.

Sincerely,
Monica Mayhak

***

The fallout, via Complete Colorado:

A move by Amazon to sever all ties with affiliates in Colorado already has some Fort Collins companies looking to move their businesses to other states.

Monday, Luke Knowles, CEO of Kinoli Inc., a Fort Collins-based interactive design and development Web site that has thousands of affiliates, received an e-mail from Amazon indicating it would no longer pay him advertising fees because of a new state law aimed at collecting sales tax on online purchases.

The loss of Amazon, one of his top grossing merchants, will hurt his bottom line as other affiliates who rely on Amazon also are cutting ties with his company, Knowles said.

The end result is that he is strongly considering moving the company to Montana because it does not have a general sales tax.

Heckuva job, Gov. Ritter!

And does the self-proclaimed defender of the working and middle classes actually know anything about them and how they live? My questions were prompted after a “letter from Michael Moore”...

View Original Post

Once again, Palin-haters reveal more about themselves than about the former Alaska governor.

The Virginia General Assembly has given final approval to a bill that would make it illegal for the government to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a measure intended to conflict with Democratic efforts to reform health care in Washington. Thirty-four other states are weighing similar legislation to block the individual mandate, which is an element of bills that have passed both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. But Virginia is the first state to complete legislative action on such a bill.

E.J. Dionne, Washington Post
There is a pathetic quality to our discussion of deficits and fiscal responsibility because we never face up to how much we need government to do. Our debates are also characterized by a politically convenient amnesia. Just a decade ago, we were running surpluses so big that Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Federal Reserve, worried about what would happen once our national debt was liquidated. We had this problem well in hand until we started waging wars and cutting taxes at the same time.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bluffing here when she says:

“Yes,” Pelosi said when asked if she believed the House would end up having the votes to approve healthcare.

“If we took it up today, yes,” the speaker quickly added.

The speaker still cautioned, though, that the timing and actual vote count on the bill couldn’t be entirely set in stone until the final legislative language was finalized and until the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) delivers its score of the bill’s impact.

There is no chance Pelosi has the votes to pass ObamaCare and she knows it. If she did have the votes, she would have already had the vote and wouldn’t need the “Slaughter Solution.”

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.

The Slaughter Solution has one very large obstacle–the Constitution Article I, Section 7–which states:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.  Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Clearly, this Congress is so desperate to pass ObamaCare, despite the American people’s utter hatred of the bill and everything it represents–including the path to socialism and government control of the people. However, if this Congress continues down this path of violating the Constitution, the “people” will have a viable case, class-action or otherwise, in the US courts because it is going to be extremely difficult for a judge to ignore that the 111th Democrat-Progressive led Congress violated Article I, Section 7 to the most obscene extent.

Jay Newton-Small, Time
As the Massa implosion fades, Capitol Hill returns today to health care reform with both chambers considering obscure parliamentary procedures in order to pass legislation before Easter recess, which officially starts March 28. The House is on a shorter leash, with the White House pushing them to get something done before President Obama leaves for a tour of Indonesia and Australia next Thursday (the CW being that massive legislation is more easily passed with the president physically in Washington). Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, though, noticeably left the door open for missing that...

Ron Hart, Orange County Register
Americans do not want this massive government takeover of our health care. Fearing that Cajun extraterrestrial James Carville is correct, Obama is intent on ramming it down our throats. This is not about what's right; it's about politicians perpetuating their power.

George Will, Washington Post
There are legislative miles to go before the government will be emancipated from its health care myopia, but it is not too soon for a summing up. Whether all or nothing of the legislation becomes law, Barack Obama has refuted critics who call him a radical. He has shown himself to be a timid progressive.His timidity was displayed when he flinched from fighting for the boldness the nation needs -- a transition from the irrationality of employer-provided health insurance. His progressivism is an attitude of genteel regret about the persistence of politics.

The Chicago "enforcer' earns his nickname