Three Democrat Subterfuges Used To Pass The ACA (ObamaCare)

Procedurally How The ACA Originated UN-Constitutionally In The Senate

(Above Screenshot Taken From: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3590:)

 I've been saying for some time that ObamaCare is an unconstitutional law because it originated in the Senate. My rationale until now: the Supreme Court ruled part of the law a tax, not a fine (for not signing up) and since, constitutionally, ALL revenue/tax legislation MUST originate in the House, not the Senate, that ruling alone (if not the ACA's actual content) should have made ObamaCare unconstitutional. It turns out that the Senate and House together committed three outrageous subterfuges that I hadn't heard about which completely circumvent various constitutional and procedural limitations.

The House began work on a health care bill titled the "Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962)" but it was clear to Democrats it would fall far short of the progressive vision for health care reform. Senate Democrats believed they had more 'flexibility' to structure a health care reform bill along the lines of Obama's/progressives' vision for the reform but constitutionally(!) tax/spending-related bills can't begin there. So with an act of outrageous subterfuge Democrats found a way to originate it in the Senate after all.

The House had sent H.R. 3590 to the Senate. That was a bill regarding home ownership tax breaks for service members which had nothing whatsoever to do with health care. It was a tax/spending-related bill and therefore had originated in the House according to the constitution's requirements. Calling what they were doing an "amendment" Senate Democrats took that bill, totally(!) gutted the language in it, replaced ALL of its contents with the text of ObamaCare and changed the title to "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act". The only thing the bill kept was the bill's number, "H.R. 3590" which designated it as a House-originated bill. It's ridiculous to call a modification of such scope an amendment! Bottom line: the Democrat-controlled Senate hijacked a House bill solely(!) to use its number designation, totally ignoring the intent of the separation of powers features in the constitution regarding taxation/spending legislation. H.R. 3590 received 100% of the House Republicans' votes as a veterans home ownership tax bill but when it came back as the ACA it received 0% of their votes.

A second Democrat subterfuge was using reconciliation to move the ACA legislation quickly through congress. Reconciliation is used mainly in the Senate to limit debate on a budget bill to 20 hours, thus eliminating effective use of debate or filibuster by the minority (ie, Republican) opposition. Of course the ACA is not your standard 'budget' bill but that didn't stop them from using reconciliation anyway. This was one of the largest and most impacting bills in our history. And it was enormously complex. Therefore, the responsible thing for congress to do was thoroughly debate it ... as long as necessary to fix things needing to be fixed before it was sent to the president. Is it any wonder that its implementation is causing so much confusion, implementation difficulties and 'unintended consequences'? And there can be little doubt the worst is yet to come.

The third subterfuge was relatively minor compared with the other two, especially the first one above. Even though they controlled the House, Democrats didn't have enough votes to pass the ACA as received from the Senate. So to garner sufficient Democrat support, they convinced President Obama to issue Executive Order 13535 which affirmed the Hyde Amendment's superiority over abortion funding language that might be specified in or construed from the language of the ACA. An executive order may be used to clarify a bill's language in order to facilitate its faithful implementation by the executive branch but may not be used to override a bill's language in this way. Of course that didn't stop them from doing it anyway. (Note: This is a fairly minor subterfuge. To the extent you think this criticism is minor or even irrelevant, it's a secondary issue to the huge one of originating tax/revenue legislation in the Senate which is sufficient to declare the ACA unconstitutional.)

To Democrats, the end justifies the means and they most certainly saw it that way regarding the ACA. Their actions represented irresponsibility in the extreme and was a gross violation of their oath of office. Violating the intent if not the letter of the constitution is no big deal to them when they want something badly enough. So much for integrity or for responsibility TO the constitution which they all swear to preserve, protect and uphold.

To verify what I've said, refer to Wikipedia's explanation of the ACA where I obtained most of this information.

Text of H.R. 3590 as originated in the House:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590pcs/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590pcs.pdf

Text of H.R. 3590 as amended into the ACA by the Senate and returned to the House:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590as/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590as.pdf

Global Warming Hysteria As 'Science' ... Really?

Okay, it's time for both(!) sides of the global warming debate to take a deep breath and apply common sense.

First, all this pollution going into our planet's atmosphere has to have consequences of some kind. That's just common sense. But if pumped-up hysteria keeps proving itself to be false, you lose credibility. And you lose support. Do we really want people tuning out? That's what irrational claims (claims that facts prove are way off) will do to the movement. Proven untrue hysteria makes it more difficult to make some basic and necessary progress.

Case in point. Al Gore predicted an ice-free Arctic as early as 2013. He claimed this at the U.N. as well as at numerous other venues within and outside the USA. He even received the Nobel Peace Prize for his global warming 'insights' and repeated that Arctic ice disappearance claim in his acceptance speech! It created considerable alarm around the world. Today's update: Both Arctic and Antarctic ice have increased ... dramatically in recent years! What does that tell us about the credibility of the Nobel Peace Prize committee, Al Gore and the more hysterical among these advocates?

Another case in point is the irony of ships going to the Antarctic to study the loss of ice getting stuck in ice that's increasing at near-record rates. The optics of that do great harm to the 'global warming' movement and hysterics over it.

Another case in point is that the average global temperature hasn't increased for 17 years. But that fact doesn't keep alarmists from claiming that temperatures are increasing.

As to the basics of this 'science', one cannot easily dismiss skepticism about all(!) 17 'highly respected' computer climate models being proved completely wrong about the disappearance of Arctic ice. Common sense suggests that since computer modelling can only predict tomorrow's(!) local weather with an accuracy of 50%, computer models of the entire planet's weather are pretty much guaranteed to be no more than a guess. Isn't global weather more complicated than figuring out what tomorrow's weather is going to be? Common sense most definitely yes. So, why is it such a surprise in some circles that all(!) 17 models were wrong?

Do facts matter? They do if we truly care about the effects of all this pollution. The 'Chicken Little' thing applies. Keep sounding alarms about the sky falling and after years of the prediction proving to be completely untrue people will stop listening much less caring. Do we care whether people start tuning out when the subject comes up? I presume you'd answer yes. Then I recommend the 'scientists' and global warming supporters start saying things that make sense and prove to be true.

Re-Writing Civil Rights History

I've posted civil rights history truth before. Fact is, Democrats have not been THE civil rights leaders the past 200 years as they claim on their website's history page. Not even close. They've been dragged, kicking and screaming to the Black and other civil rights tables all along. It's true that they've finally caught up with Republican support in the past couple of decades on Black civil rights but to think they've led the fight all along is nothing short of delusional assuming of course that historical facts are relevant.

Case in point: The roles of John and Bobby Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. Just because they finally, grudgingly signed civil rights legislation into law does not mean they or other Democrats were the primary leaders of those accomplishments. Here's a more honest explanation of what actually happened which even Bill O'Reilly treats incompletely if not wrongly.

The liberal re-write of their Black civil rights (lack of) support is interesting in the context of the narrative that a large majority of Americans have been led to believe. Truth is an illusive and inconvenient thing any more where powerful political agendas rule over reason and even common sense. Does truth matter? Can we have a truly "honest" ... much less fair and respectful ... conversation about race as the president insisted a couple of weeks back when the party most demanding honesty can't muster it themselves on this subject?

Update On Democrats' "Dodd-Frank" Wall Street Reform, The Only Action By Democrats They Promised Would Fix Wall Street Excesses. Bottom line: It's Not Working; In Fact Making Things Worse

What little of Dodd-Frank has been implemented is making things worse. The larger percentage that hasn't been implemented ... after three long years(!) ... is so problematic in principle that implementers cannot figure out how to create regulations that don't hurt far more than they help.

Here's The Heritage Foundation's report behind that bottom-line statement that it's turning out to be the mess that was predicted by fiscal conservatives since well before it was passed. What that means is the Wall Street problems everyone was screaming about after the last financial collapse have had very little done about them, regardless how loudly liberals proclaimed this legislation was THE needed fix. What little of that legislation that has been implemented has dramatically increased costs of financial services everyone uses. What do you think of government bureaucracy now?

To liberals, we fiscal/constitutional conservatives keep saying, can you hear us now? The fake 'financial fix' called Dodd-Frank. Detroit collapse. Detroit, Chicago and DC crime. ObamaCare. No net jobs created in the past five years (the math: the number of people who've given up approximately equals the number of people finding jobs*). In fact, the unemployment rate is around 12% if you factor back in those who wanted to work but have given up. At what point will liberals be willing to consider we're not so crazy after all and start working cooperatively with us to create real fixes to these problems? Hopefully before this house of cards they're building collapses entirely.

* Regarding the 'real' unemployment rate, even liberal media is beginning to get it such as The Huffington Post and many others as they've had no choice in the past year or so but to report more honestly about this. Perform an internet search on people no longer looking for work if you want to see just how bad this problem is.

Obama's Fact-Challenged Argument That Republicans Have Been Holding Up His Judicial Nominations

Facts and truth seems to be irrelevant or at least elusive for our president. His argument that Republicans have been standing in the way of his nominations are baseless. I couldn't say it better than The Heritage Foundation's article so I'll not elaborate beyond that.

Sad To See What's Happening To Detroit And Other Cities

Consider what's happening in Detroit. This once great city is self-destructing before our eyes. How sad!


60 years ago Detroit was one of the most successful and affluent cities in the US:

• Was the 4th largest city in the US.
• Had the highest per capita income in the entire country.
• Had a vibrant, successful middle class economically unmatched by most cities.

So, shouldn't we ask what happened or do we care whether it is restored and whether that will help us save other cities from the same implosive path? Here, if you can handle honest facts and truth, are key things that have happened.

Are the following three points of political significance? I'll let you decide but I have a strong suspicion if Republicans had been in charge, the left would be outraged they did this to one of our world-class cities.

1. Last Republican mayor was elected in 1957 ... at its prosperity peak.
2. One Republican councilman has been elected to the city council since 1970.
3. Since 1957 Detroit has lost 63% of it's population.

While obviously posting a political spin/challenge in much of the text, one blog includes a non-political (ie, just factual information) list of 25 current conditions in the once great city of Detroit. The blogger's political challenge seems not without merit if the 25 facts mean anything. It's an important challenge to consider because more large cities are headed toward bankruptcy. If we can't put aside political biases and discuss the political basis that appears to have influenced this city's failure then we condemn ourselves ... our world-class cities ... to the same fate. Critical questions are right in front of us. Do we run/hide from them or face them with courage and honesty?

Is holding onto biases and agendas so important that we'd sacrifice our cities' futures to avoid a very uncomfortable truth? Will we be able to face and admit the truth in front of us with honesty, courage and integrity? Just how important is it to us that we restore Detroit and avoid this in other cities on the brink? We're obviously about to find out what we're really made of and what's really(!) important to us beyond the politics.

Zimmerman Trial And Verdict - An Illogical Excuse To Trump Up White Guilt And Avoid The Bigger Issues

This is a tough subject. And it's very difficult to overcome one's biases and media distortions sufficiently to make a rational examination what the bigger problems are. Having a background in engineering, I have a penchant for data and I tend to look there first before making decisions/opinions about big issues.

There is much more data available, thanks to the internet than I could possibly check out as thoroughly as I'd like but I submit to you that the following information is not only factual but logically fundamental to an honest discussion about fixing the problems being discussed today.

First, let's address the argument about Florida law being the reason Zimmerman was found not guilty. Please check out this article which seems to prove there's no significant credibility to that argument. Emotionally, lots of people want it to be true. Because of the national attention on the trial they want it to represent the racism that persists in America. Any clear-thinking person understands that significant racism exists in America but it'll be very difficult to get people's attention on it, much less do anything about it on the basis of claims that have no basis in fact.

Don't get me wrong. I want an honest discussion of racism and black/white crime but arguments that lack credibility make it harder to accomplish that. Making things up (that may sound good but are factually misleading if not outright wrong) as an argument for change will do more harm than good. If you want support from people for fundamental change, it's hard to make that happen when your arguments don't hold water. In fact, doing too much of that will make people tune out ('crying wolf' too often) and listen to your message less, not more. When your arguments begin losing credibility you lose credibility. Your argument on this subject and on others become suspect. And it can create a hostile environment which is very counter-productive to positive change. The false/misleading claims being made today take us in the wrong direction and distract us from real change. You want real change? Then let's talk truth with each other. Let's begin with facts regarding root(!) issues that are pretty undeniable. That's the only way positive, constructive and effective change can begin.

The other claim being made that begs clarity is that Travon Martin's death represents proof that "it's now open season on blacks by white Americans". That presumes that statistics will back up that claim ... which they don't by the way. [Approximately 90% of the crimes against blacks are committed by other blacks according to FBI statistics per table 5 on page 5.] While, to blacks it may feel like open season on them in the general pervasive racism sense, to claim that white Americans are looking for blacks to kill or purposely harm in some way is far over the top and completely lacking in proof. It's an emotional argument run amok from a reasonable argument that racism still exists and from the pain and frustration of that. You want to fix racism in America? Then let's start with a list of fundamental causes that are provable based on facts/statistics and go from there.

The biggest root cause of minorities' obviously(!) disadvantaged condition is arguably lack of education. In an increasingly technological world education has without a doubt become much more important to finding one's way into the middle class and beyond. With half of blacks not finishing high school, isn't it logical that poverty is more likely in their future than not? I don't buy the argument that poor teaching is the root cause of this. If you have a textbook you have all you need to learn something if you're motivated to achieve an education. I had some absolutely terrible teachers in the mining community where I grew up but I excelled in their classes. Why? Because, for example, I made it my mission to solve every(!) problem in my geometry book, not just the ones assigned by the teacher. I sat in the front row to avoid distractions and doing my homework was my top priority every day. When you make it your mission to become educated, bad teachers/schools will not(!) be a significant impediment.

Our country is full of examples how poor/minority students overcame both poverty and poor teaching to become successes. One of my personal favorite examples is Doctor Benjamin Carson who overcame fatherlessness, poverty, peer influence, black urban school education weaknesses, racism, and a bad attitude toward education to become one of the best pediatric brain surgeons in America. Every poor/minority child  and parent should look up this man's story on the internet.

Becoming economically successful is available to everyone in this country and while blacks have some serious disadvantages, becoming educated is significantly a matter of choice, discipline (self- or parent-imposed) and commitment. Totally(!) because I began thinking of myself as victimized in geometry by a bad teacher I got an "F" mid-term grade. When I began doing the things I described two paragraphs above I began getting straight "A's"! The teacher wasn't the difference; my attitude was. Take personal responsibility for your education (or most anything else in life) and you can go very far in this country in spite of and far beyond whatever circumstances you choose to use as an excuse for not succeeding.

What's interesting to me is that a high school education is completely free! THE most key thing one can do to escape poverty and to some extent escape the effects of racism is to at least finish high school. Poverty is highest by a long way among people without a high school education and the fix for that is something that is 100% free whose necessary AND sufficient requirement is that you take personal responsibility for achieving it.

People talk about statistics in other areas like divorce, poverty, racism, and crime as 'the' problems among blacks and other minorities but one of the key reasons behind those problems is a lack of education and, therefore (cause and effect!), being trapped in poverty. What do you think would happen to the statistics in those problem areas if the high school graduation rate among blacks went from the current 50% to near 100%? The sad thing is, what they need most is completely free yet they won't take advantage of it by their own (poor) choice. The only requirement: personal commitment to become educated. Only you can fix your lack of education problem and to the high school level it is free. It's your choice. Commit to reading your textbooks and doing all the homework and extra homework. Do more than is asked of you in school and in life. Until/unless you do that, you are holding you back more than are other people and/or circumstances.

No one can put an education in your brain but it's key to a decent life now. No amount of federal intervention, welfare, change in laws, or even total elimination of racism can get you an education if you don't take personal responsibility for it. The path out of so many of these problems is totally up to you but you must stop making excuses (like Dr. Carson did).

Blaming white Americans (who clearly do still have a racism problem to some extent) won't get blacks any closer to a solution to their problems. If we somehow magically made all white American un-racist overnight but blacks' high school graduation rate stayed at 50% and out-of-wedlock births stayed around 75% would crime, divorce, poverty, etc change much? We're not tackling the one thing that can actually go far toward fixing the problems everyone's talking about and is absolutely free! But no one wants to hold our kids and in many cases their parents responsible for the choice(!) of becoming educated. The one thing in all of this chaos in blacks' lives that's FREE ... AND will go far toward fixing these problems ... gets nowhere near the attention it needs. Why?

While racism is clearly still an issue that we need to talk about and do better on, Travon Martin is not a legitimate poster child for the problems facing minorities, an uneducated child is.