Washington Examiner  home delivery | classifieds | autos | jobs | real estate | home listings | advertise
   
Arts on Foot
View today's E-Dition

Sunday, September 5, 2010 | Last Update 11:28 EDT
click for forecast
Untitled Document
Home News Politics Local Opinion Economy Sports Lifestyle Classified Cars Homes Rentals Remodel
Nation World Beltway Confidential Yeas & Nays Opinion Zone Capital Land Mobile Site Contact
Nation World Science Education Video Technology
Beltway Confidential Yeas & Nays White House Congress Michael Barone Byron York Timothy P. Carney
Capital Land DC Virginia Maryland Local Opinion Zone Crime Transportation People Education Real Estate
Editorials Beltway Confidential OpinionZone Nate Beeler Columnists Mark Tapscott Dave Freddoso Mark Hemingway
Your Money Real Estate Technology K-Street
Cheers & Jeers Redskins/NFL Wizards/NBA Caps/NHL Nationals/MLB United/MLS Colleges Golf
Yeas & Nays Art Movies Television Health Food Music Scoop Theater Wheels Video Events Calendar
Jobs Buy Stuff Post Free Ad Personals Events
Automotive News New Used Certified Pre-Owned
Real Estate News Rent a Home Buy a Home Home Makeover

Opinion
[Print]  [Email]         Share    

Democrats to America: Drop dead


March 22, 2010

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., announces he will vote to pass the health care reform bill in the U.S. Capitol on Sunday after President Obama agreed to sign an executive order reaffirming the ban on the use of federal funds to provide abortions. (Alex Brandon/AP)

Well, they finally did it. Despite more than a year of steadily rising public opposition, manifested in opinion polls and in protest rallies across the country, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finally rammed through Obamacare late Sunday when House Democrats gave the bill their imprimatur.

The House vote isn’t the end of the national debate on this issue, however, as the Senate still must accept the House changes in the Senate Obamacare bill. Senate Republicans argue that the House reconciliation bill that makes significant changes in the Senate bill violates the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, maintaining that it should be ruled out of order by the Senate parliamentarian for consideration in the upper chamber. That in turn would mean the only bill the president could legally sign would be the original Senate bill, with its massive funding of abortion and the infamous deals used to buy senators’ votes, including the Cornhusker Kickback. At that point, a constitutional crisis of historic magnitude seems inevitable.

Here’s why: Never before in American history has a measure of such importance been imposed on the country by the majority party over the unanimous opposition of the minority. Democrats have continually sought to create a halo effect for Obamacare by associating it with Social Security and Medicare. But the reality is that both of those landmark programs were approved with strong bipartisan support in both the Senate and House. The Senate vote on Social Security in 1935 was 77-6, with 64 Democrats being joined by 14 Republicans. In the House, the 373 votes for Social Security included 77 Republicans. When Medicare passed in 1965, the 68-21 Senate vote included 13 Republicans, while 65 Republicans were among the 313 affirmative House votes. Such bipartisan consensus was what the Founders sought with the Constitution. But Democrats made a mockery of bipartisanship by shoving Obamacare down the throats of Republican lawmakers and snubbing the popular majority that opposed it. The Democrats have undercut the credibility of the law they created.

A fast-track challenge to Obamacare’s constitutionality will likely reach the Supreme Court in coming months. The justices will have multiple issues to consider, including the unprecedented federal mandate that all individuals buy approved health insurance, the undeniable inequity of the many corrupt bargains used to buy votes for the measure, and the banana republic parliamentary tactics used by the Democratic congressional leadership. Whatever the high court’s decision, it won’t be nearly as unpleasant as the verdict many Democrats will hear from their constituents in November.



beltway confidential
Tony Blair

Dipping into  Tony Blair’s just published A Journey leads me toward the conclusion that Matthew D’Ancona articulates with great clarity in the Sunday Telegraph. Blair is really...

—Michael Barone

Barney Frank’s response to my column

In my August 23 Examiner column I wrote, “The 2009 stimulus package is so unpopular that Democrats have banned the word from their campaign vocabulary. ‘I’m not supposed to call...

—Michael Barone

With unemployment at 9.6 percent, why is the White House obsessed with sex?

Christina Romer has left as Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA), and the White House is looking to fill the position. Can somebody please wake me when...

—Mark Hemingway

Weekend Examiner: Six ways to lose your election

Looking for a way to lose your election? Try lying to the voters. Or hire this guy as your spokesman. Or lie about your law enforcement background. Or get arrested for...

—David Freddoso

More Beltway Confidential posts...




Today’s Featured Writers
Bill O'Reilly
Fox News is not lying, the left is just failing
Diana West
Allen West would put American soldiers first
Diane Dimond
How do gangs and a drug trade flourish in prison?
Steve Chapman
Regulators use egg scare to yoke choices
Mona Charen
These peace talks are doomed
Michael Barone
Tony Blair
Meghan Cox Gurdon
British prime minister's paternity leave sets odd example


Examiner Opinion Zone
Regulating and intimidating free speech out of existence

Bill Clinton once told an audience in Philadelphia, "You know one of the things that's wrong with this country? Everybody gets a chance to have their fair say." It was...

—Rob Port

Notes on the race to replace Charlie Melancon in the La. 3rd congressional district

It’s unclear whether Jeff Landry’s win in the Republican primary for Louisiana’s 3rd Congressional District which Charlie Melancon (D-La) is now resigning...

—Laura Curtis

Could Democrats lose it all in November?

Indications from many sources continue to suggest that November could be a sledge-hammer-to-the-forehead election for Democrats. Political pundits have watched as poll...

—Lynn R. Mitchell

More Examiner Opinion Zone posts...

Most Popular Headlines
  1. Glenn Harlan Reynolds: Who is responsible for Warmabomber's violent agenda?
  2. With unemployment at 9.6 percent, why is the White House obsessed with sex?
  3. Fearing for image, First Lady's aides warned against Spain vacation
  4. Weekend Examiner: Six ways to lose your election
  5. Higher education bubble poised to burst
  6. New evidence undermines feds' case against Arizona
  7. Barney Frank’s response to my column
  8. Interior Designer-in-Chief
  9. Michelle Malkin: Obama spending Labor Day with real thugs
  10. Examiner Editorial: If Obama won't investigate ACORN, new Congress should





To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 200 words. Comments that advocate violence, racism, or libel as well as comments written in ALL CAPS are not permitted.


blog comments powered by Disqus

RSS | Twitter | Facebook | Intern | Video | Maps | Mobile | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Rack Locations | Advertise