Democrats plan on passing their massive health bill without voting through the use of a parliamentary trick known as the "self-executing rule". Since Congress is unable to obtain votes to pass their $2,000,000,000,000.00 healthcare monstrosity, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have figured out a way to pass it without a vote.
The "self-executing rule" has been "used to adopt concurrent resolutions correcting the enrollment of measures or to make other technical changes to legislation," according to the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress. It's "a two-for-one procedure," as the CRS describes it, because the House of Representatives always must pass a rule, written by the House Rules Committee (where Democrats currently hold a 9-to-4 majority), setting the terms of debate on a particular piece of legislation. In this case, it's been rigged so that if the rule passes, the legislation passes too.
Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research, is among a number of legal scholars who believe this Slaughter Solution, named after House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., "would stand a very good chance of being tossed out by the U.S. Supreme Court."
In the 1998 Clinton v. City of New York ruling on the line-item veto, liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for a 6-to-3 majority, "laid a likely road map for how the court might rule on a challenge to the constitutionality of the Slaughter Solution," according to Ridenour.
Stevens made note of "three procedural steps" that must be taken before a bill becomes law: The "exact text" must be "approved by a majority of the members of the House of Representatives"; the Senate must approve "precisely the same text"; and the same text must be "signed into law by the president. The Constitution explicitly requires that each of those three steps be taken before a bill may become a law."
Why do ANY Americans favor ObamaCare? It's a larger question that deserves attention.
A record number of the 142 million tax returns filed in 2008 resulted in no taxes owed, according to the Tax Foundation's analysis of the latest IRS data. About 51.6 million returns, or 36.3%, were filed by those whose deductions, exemptions and tax credits wiped out any federal income-tax obligation.
These aren't people who have overpaid their taxes or had so much withheld from their paychecks that they'll get refunds. Those people owe taxes and merely provided the government with a zero interest loan until accounts are settled. These are people who pay no taxes at all.
There's been a 59% increase in the number of nonpayers since 2000, growing from 32.6 million in 2000 to 51.6 million in 2008. In the same period, the total tax filers grew by only 10%.
So for those of you who don't pay taxes, getting "free healthcare" on the backs of those who do pay taxes must seem like a good deal. I get it. Nearly 40% of all Americans don't pay taxes.
According to the Tax Foundation, "The major elements of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 boosted the maximum income for nonpayers to more than $56,700" — the highest ever.
Maybe it's time to consider a flat tax, no deductions, no exemptions, a reduction of the impossibly complex tax code to a very simple formula where everyone pays a flat percentage of personal income. If that was the case and you had the choice of paying a flat 60% of your income with ObamaCare and National Socialism or 15% of your income without it, which option would sound better to you? National Socialism or the Constitutional System this country has been founded on?
Oh, and Happy St. Patrick's Day