Categorized | News

GOP forces vote on constitutionality of health bill

What a move by the Republicans!

So, do we have freedom of choice or not? Democrats believe strongly in the Constitutional “right” for a woman to chose to have an abortion, but the mandatory requirement that everyone purchase health care really does not give us much of a choice about our health, now does it?

Would passage of this bill outlaw abortion? Seems that they can’t have it both ways. Listening to the Democrats blather about how this lack of choice is not like “pro” choice.

Should be cool!

From The Washington Examiner:

The House on Wednesday will have to take an unplanned vote on whether the Democratic health care proposal is constitutional.

Sens. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and John Ensign, R-Nev., on Tuesday raised a point of order against the legislation on behalf of a caucus of conservative senators.

Ensign said the bill violates individual freedom of choice by requiring people to purchase health insurance or be subjected to fines and penalties.

“Forcing every American to purchase a product is absolutely inconsistent with our Constitution and the freedoms our Founding Fathers hoped to protect,‚Äù Senator DeMint said. “This is not at all like car insurance, you can choose not to drive but Americans will have no choice whether to buy government-approved insurance.”

About Tom White

Tom is a US Navy Veteran, owns an Insurance Agency and is currently an IT Manager for a Virginia Distributor. He has been published in American Thinker, currently writes for the Richmond Examiner as well as Virginia Right! Blog.Tom lives in Hanover County, Va and is involved in politics at every level and is a Recovering Republican who has finally had enough of the War on Conservatives in progress with the Leadership of the GOP on a National Level.

2 Responses to “GOP forces vote on constitutionality of health bill”

  1. At the start of each new Congress, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate are sworn into office. This oath taking dates back to 1789, to the first Congress. However, the current oath was fashioned in the 1860s, by Civil War-era members of Congress. The Constitution stipulates no specific details for the oath of office for members of Congress other than what is stated in Article 6 under Debts, Supremacy, and Oaths. Article 6 states: “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

    There are two particulars herein that should be observed. First, the swearing is an oath. By definition an oath is an affirmation of a specific duty, which is sworn in the presence of witnesses to a supreme power. In this case, that power originally was defined as the God of the Scriptures. The definition of the term “oath” is as follows: OATH: an oath is: a. A solemn, formal declaration or promise to fulfill a pledge, often calling on God, a god, or a sacred object as witness. b. The words or formula of such a declaration or promise. c. Something declared or promised.

    The first Congress developed this requirement into a simple, 14-word oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” The current oath was enacted in 1884 which reads: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

    Each particular member of Congress swears, under God, and the penalty of His frowning chastisement, to uphold the Constitution. According to the Constitution’s original intent all tyranny, oppression, and in particular socialism, which is oppression by theft through the re-distribution of private property, and wealth, is forbidden. And yet, many of our congressional and senatorial “leaders”, have consistently supported the socialistic legislation of this executive administration whenever the opportunity arose. This is evident in the latest vote in favor of socialized medicine, commonly called “publicly funded health care”.

    The first system of socialized medicine, based on compulsory insurance with state subsidy was created by Otto von Bismarck, (“The Iron Chancellor” and predecessor of Adolph Hitler), after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. Socialized health care was implemented by the Soviet Union in the 1920s, in New Zealand in 1939, in England in the 1940s, in China in the 50s, and in Cuba, under the dictatorship of Fidel Castro in the 1960s.
    In a desperate attempt to be like other socialistic nations, here in the U.S., Universal health care and national health insurance were first proposed by President Theodore Roosevelt, who repudiated the Constitution by his statement that he had about as much use for the Constitution as a “Tomcat has for pajamas”. His cousin, President Franklin D. Roosevelt later championed socialized medicine, as did Harry S. Truman. As part of his Fair Deal, Truman announced before describing his proposal that: “This is not socialized medicine”. And yet, by definition it was, and still is. At that time government involvement in health care was ardently opposed by the AMA which distributed posters to doctors with slogans such as “Socialized medicine … will undermine the democratic form of government.” What is fearfully interesting is that not only will it undermine the democratic form of government; it will enslave the American people to the state in a way unlike American’s have ever experienced.

    This aggressive move to socialize medicine by the socialistic congress, senatorial and executive branch of Obama’s Government (with all its Czars stealthily in place for an American coup de gras) is the last great leap into a full-fledged socialized system of Government. Ronald Regan rightly observed: “One of the traditional methods of imposing statism, or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine” even though he was indeed guilty of unbiblical spending and the increase of government expansion.
    Trifling with an oath is consistently condemned throughout Scripture. A Godly man’s communication must be “yea and yea” and “nay and nay”. Swearing falsely is also forbidden in the United States legal code, let alone the Holy Scriptures. A Godly man will take his oath seriously, even if it is to the U.S. imperfect constitution, and not try to impose upon the people a system of tyranny through political gyrations, twisting and bending what is clearly a violation of his oath. A vast multitude of congressional, senatorial and the chief executive officer of these united States, has violated their oath of office by not protecting Americans from the plundering enemy of socialism, which inevitably must give rise to fascism. As a result of the corrupt nature of these politicians coupled with the apostasy of the Christian church and the pathetic silence of the Christian people, the United States has been plunged into the great darkness of God’s judgment.

    The second particular resides in the fact that socialism is indeed a religious, messianic ideology. While there may not be a religious test for Constitutional officers perhaps there should be a political ideological test, since Socialism postures itself as the “Great Physician of souls” by promising cradle to grave totalitarianism by way of an egalitarian system of wealth distribution. Not only is this fascism, it is also blasphemy, and in actuality a religious belief system. According to Dr. Stephan Perks of the Kuyper Institute, Edinburgh Scotland, “Socialism is a world-view – a religion – that is diametrically opposed to the Christian religion in its view of God, its code of ethics and its teaching on social and political order. Christians must see the socialist agenda for what it is, revolution against God’s will for man’s life. The Church is called to speak the prophetic word of God to society and call the people back to obedience to God’s law. If she is to do this faithfully she must resolutely stand against socialism in all its forms.”

    On November 7th, 2009, congressional leaders voted in support of the tyrannical un-Constitutional, and un-Biblical health-care program in violation of their Constitutional oath and their ministerial responsibly before God as per Romans 13. Just recently the senatorial leaders voted likewise. The political career of these godless men and women must end. It is clear that they are only capable of more ungodly acts of corruption and evil.

    One final observation: It is significant that in some European countries still adhering to a Christian legal system, a violation of a promissory oath is treated as perjury. Thus, accordingly members of both the house and senate have not only perjured themselves, but have consistently perjured themselves. Sadly, and even more frightening, these politicians cannot distinguish between what protects the American people and what plunder them. Pressure from the Christian community must increase to critical mass. Biblical solutions from God’s Law must be proposed on all fronts through the writing of position papers and the implementation of those solutions to the real world. Then the system, if God wills, will recalibrate. The magistrates of this nation must be held to the strictest accountability. Americans, and especially Christian Americans, must identify and resist all notions and implementations of Socialism wherever it exists, locally, state-wide and nationally.


    There was a time when I wouldn’t believe that members of congress would be so out of touch with the American people that they would have to resort to underhanded tactics to thwart the will of the people.

    Well, Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, is thinking of doing just that. Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) came up with what is now known as the “Slaughter Solution” or “Deem and Pass” that will let the House of Representatives deem the Senate Health Bill as passed in the House without any representative voting on it. Once they use this outrageous procedure, the house leadership can then have additional language inserted into the bill that will satisfy those House Democrats who oppose the bill in its original form.

    Meanwhile, in order for Senate Democrats to be able to use the Reconciliation procedure – a procedure that circumvents the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster – the House must pass the Senate Bill ‘as is’, with the exact same wording, before changes can be made. However, the Democratic leadership in the House doesn’t have enough votes to do that and one of the biggest reasons is that the Senate Bill has a provision that allows for taxpayer funded abortions.

    I believe that the Slaughter Solution is not only dishonest and smacks of dirty tricks, but I also believe that it is unconstitutional as is most of the legislation that congress has passed in recent years. Article I, Section VII, Clause II of the U.S. Constitution clearly states: “…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…” This newly invented “Slaughter Solution” clearly does not allow this type of procedure.

    The Democratic leadership in the Senate has tried to assure the Democratic leadership in the House that if the House simply passes the bill as it is, the Senate will make changes amenable to the House after the fact. Pro-life House members, led by Bart Stupak (D-MI) are balking at this assurance and pointed to the hundreds of House bills that are currently still wallowing in the Senate. He also wants to see the changes in writing as he doesn’t trust his own party’s leaders.

    If the Democratic leaderhip in the Senate imposes the ‘Reconciliation Rule’ to pass this bill, unfortunately for them, that alone will not be enough to get the bill passed. The reconciliation procedure, also known as the ‘Byrd Rule’ named after Senator Robert Byrd, is already extremely controversial. Senator Byrd is on the record in Congress saying his rule was “Never intended” to pass this kind of legislation, so the House leadership appears ready to adopt the Slaughter Solution instead. If the Slaughter Solution is instituted, the House of Representatives will actually pass the almost $875 billion bill without the members of the House actually voting on it. This is outrageous and smacks of something we would expect from the Russian politburo or a marxist distatorship.

    Although the “Slaughter Solution” or the “deem and pass” rule has been used in the past, it has never been used to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Nancy Pelosi said she is considering for a House vote, but she added that she prefers this method because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure. What an outrageous statement, particulalrly in view of constitutional requirements of Article I, Section VII, Clause II previously mentioned in this article.

    There is also a 1998 Supreme Court ruling, CLINTON v. CITY OF NEW YORK (97-1374), that said each house of Congress must approve the exact same text of a bill before it can become law. A self-executing “deem and pass” rule would sidestep that requirement, former federal appellate judge Michael McConnell said in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed and it would be unconstitutional.

    The American people have overwhelmingly rejected this bill, but the President and the Democrat leaders in both houses of congress seem intent on using misinformation, lies, deceit, bribery and any other questionable and unconstitutional procedure to ram this socialist legislation down the throats of the American people without a public discussion of the merits. Why?

    We are fast approaching a point of no return in America. If our Marxist President and the Democratic-Socialist leadership in congress are successful in passing this Health Bill, they will be emboldened to pass other critical legislation on their agenda to bring a free America to its knees. If the Health Bill is passed, they will quickly move to pass an all-encompassing Amnesty Bill, followed by a massive Cap and Trade Bill, a National biometric ID Card Bill and then the takeover of America will be almost complete. All that will be left is for them to come for our guns.

    Let us remember that at critical points in human history, only a few generations have been given the honor and privlege of defending ‘Freedom’ in its maximum hour of danger.

    In 1776, our founders’ generation were given the honor and privlege of defending ‘Freedom’ in its maximum hour of danger, which resulted in the birth of this great nation that is still a beacon of hope to the freedom loving people of the world.

    The generations of World War I and World War II were also given the honor and privlege of defending ‘Freedom’ in its maximun house of danger.

    Today in America, we again find ourselves in a critical point in history, for ‘Freedom’ once again is in mortal danger, just as it was in 1776 and in WWI and WWII. Our generation is facing a different kind of mortal danger to our “Freedom’ because that danger is not coming from some foreign country, king, dictator or enemy combatants, but it is coming from our own federal government.

    Our Founders told us that “Governments get their just powers from the consent of the governed and whenever the government becomes destructive of these ends, it is not only the people’s Right, but it is their sacred Duty to change the government. “

    In 2010, we are now the generation that has been given the honor and privlege of defending ‘Freedom’ in its maximum hour of danger and this is our time to perform that sacred duty. We must stand up, speak up and be willing to actively resist the growing unconstitutional actions of the our federal government that puts the interests of government leaders and the oligarchy ahead of the interests of the people. By definition, this is tryanny.

    Let us act before it’s too late, not just for ourselves, but for our children and our children’s children. I pray to God that we will be successful, for the free people of the world are depending on us.


    John Wallace


    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    CommentLuv badge

    Tom White Says:

    Nothing is more conservative than a republican wanting to get their majority back. And nothing is more liberal than a republican WITH a majority.

    Check out NewsMax!

    Sign up for Virginia Right Once Daily Email Digest

    No Spam - ever! We send a daily email with the posts of the previous day. Unsubscribe at any time.
    * = required field

    Submit a Blog Post!

    Submit a Blog Post for our 'Boots on the Ground' feature

    Click Here for Instructions on How to Submit a Post

    Google Ad

    Google Ad

    Follow Us Anywhere!

    Google Ad


    Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com