In they Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln promised a government "of they people, by the people, and for the people." "Of the people" broke down decades ago - officials on both sides of the aisle are too far removed from you and me to ever consider themselves one of the people. And now, if the leaders in the House of Representatives have their way, you can kiss "by the people" goodbye as well.
This is not about the health care reform bill. We already know that
more Americans are against the bill than supporting it, and opposition continues to grow. No, this post is about how the House Democrats plan to
pass the health care reform bill. I introduce to you The Slaughter Rule.
The Slaughter Rule is so named for House Rules Committee Chairperson
Louise Slaughter, though in an ironic twist it could have earned that name just as easily for what its doing to the Constitution or
your voice in
your government.
Here's how it works: a rule is proposed by the House. The rule can be a simple modification or amendment to another bill. If the rule is written in a certain way so as to include the rest of the original bill, when the House votes to approve the first bill it is also "deeming" the original bill approved without actually voting on the original bill. It can then be sent to the President to sign into law.
Here's how it's being employed with health care: Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitution required that both Houses of Congress pass the same bill before sending it to the President. It also states that the votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays. In this case, a) both Houses are not voting on the same bill, and b) forget about the same bill, the House of Representatives aren't even
voting on the bill. Why? Simply because the Representatives would be able to pass the bill without having their name attached to an actual vote on the bill. They're able to tow the party line even though they know the bill is so unpopular with the public that they want plausible deniablity later on.
Confused? Yeah, it's ridiculous. But it shows how our government works.
The best explanation I could found is from Director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School and former-federal judge Michael McConnell courtesy of
Heritage.org. Bottom line is that the rule essentially bypasses your voice (via your elected representatives) by skirting the Constitution.
This rule has been around since the 1930s and used with increasing frequency, with people from parties questioning the legality of it. But never has it been used to pass legislation as significant as this. If put into force, this will certainly be challenged in court and, if you read the Constitution, will almost certainly be defeated.
Despite the near certain judicial defeat, the House of Representative's Democrats are considering using this underhanded tactic, showing the incredible disregard they have for you and for the Constitution. Its actions such as these that are feeding the Conservative movement rising in America. I don't consider myself a Conservative - there are far too many positions I disagree with. But what I
do agree with Conservatives on is the need to uphold the Constitution.
In 1994's
With Honors, Joe Pesci made an impassioned speech in defense of the constitution. He says
The beauty of the Constitution is that it can always be changed. The beauty of the Constitution is that it makes no set law other than faith in the wisdom of ordinary people to govern themselves... Our "founding parents" were pompous, white, middle-aged farmers, but they were also great men. Because they knew one thing that all great men should know: that they didn't know everything. Sure, they'd make mistakes, but they made sure to leave a way to correct them. The president is not an "elected king," no matter how many bombs he can drop. Because the "crude" Constitution doesn't trust him. He's just a bum, okay Mr. Pitkannan? He's just a bum.
The United States Constitution is widely regarded as the most important piece of governmental literature ever written for exactly that reason - it allows for change. But it also stipulates in great detail the
process by which it should be changed. In my opinion, deliberately circumventing this process when 17% of our national economy and and saddling future generations is at stake should be considered treason.
Before you step into the voting booth this November, please come back and re-read this post. I don't care if you support the health care reform or not - just read this and think about whether or not your representatives are actually representing you. You have a voice.
Use it!
And by the way, in case you think that this is a bunch of right-wing conspiracy theory, the title of this post is a direct quote from
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.