Comments on: Reid’s Secret Amendment to Change the Constitution: Section 3403

By: 2010 in review « Chicagobluesgirl’s Blog

2010 in review « Chicagobluesgirl’s Blog — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 01:52:04 +0000

[...] The busiest day of the year was January 5th with 264 views. The most popular post that day was Reid’s Secret Amendment to Change the Constitution: Section 3403. [...]

By: chicagobluesgirl

chicagobluesgirl — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:38:13 +0000

By removing the government regulations on insurance and slowly reducing Medicare and replacing it with health savings accounts and/or tax breaks to purchase insurance. There are many solutions beyond what will be passed tomorrow as health care but what really will be controlling 1/6 of our economy while NOT insuring millions.

By: rdquinn

rdquinn — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 20:46:54 +0000

You are taking this out of context. The section also lays out the process for the Congress to approve each recommendation and how to abolish the Board.

Http://www.quinnscommentary.com

I am strongly opposed to this legislation, but how do you propose to control the escalating cost of Medicare?

By: chicagobluesgirl

chicagobluesgirl — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:36:51 +0000

That I do not know. Let me know if you have anything on this. Thanks

(Not sure I totally trust Snopes either.)

By: BJ Novice

BJ Novice — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:33:58 +0000

Does Snopes confirm that the bill cannot be repealed, if passed, b using Sec. 3403?

By: chicagobluesgirl

chicagobluesgirl — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 01:28:39 +0000

Conservative – Specifically a “fusionist” conservative of the National Review – Heritage Foundation mold. Someone who believes in traditional morality and capitalism, and the need for a limited government to allow both to flourish.
Neoconservative – A “neocon” is more inclined than other conservatives toward vigorous government in the service of the goals of traditional morality and pro-business policies. Tends to favor a very strong foreign policy of America as well.

I’d call myself a conservative, not a neocon, but whatever. You’re more of an uneducated liberal. If you knew anything about the “frickin’ ” health care bill–for instance that it will leave 23 million uninsured–you wouldn’t be “for” it.

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:54:05 +0000

I’m all for the health care bill and you frickin’ neocons are frickin’ insane.

By: chicagobluesgirl

chicagobluesgirl — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 14:43:20 +0000

God bless you for your service to our country. Thanks for this informative post. The states are fighting the unconstitutionality of this bill. Please see: http://chicagobluesgirl.com/2009/12/31/states-prepare-to-fight-obamacare/ Also, we can fight this bill, believe it or not, by helping to elect Scott Brown in MA. He's the senator who can take over Ted Kennedy's seat. The Dems will have their forces out in full to win this seat for their side which means we have to fight extra hard to combat the fraud that will occur so they do not lose their 60 seat majority in the senate (which this win for conservatives will end). Tell everyone you know to contribute if they can to: http://scottbrown.com/splash.html

By: J. E. Walton

J. E. Walton — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 07:13:06 +0000

I am a fifty-nine year old Republican Veteran of Viet Nam from Oklahoma.

How can Section 3403 possibibly be Constitutional? I show my ignorance by saying that it seems any Senator or Representative could put anything, either legal or illegal, in a Bill and try to pass it. Is there no safety devise in Congress or our Constitution to keep this type of thing from happening? I can’t believe that Harry Reid is the first Senator who has tried to slip something illegal into a Bill. And, if there is something in a Bill that is unconstitutional, doesn’t that void the entire Bill?

Our Constitution was designed to keep things like this from happening. Once an Amendment is signed into Law, there are four ways to dispose of it.

The Health Insurance Bill is not a Constitutional Amendment, it is only a Bill the U. S. Senate is seeking to enact, and unless the President of the United States signs that Bill into Law, it will take 67 Senators voting to over-ride a Presidential Veto. Most Bills contain a statement near the end of their Bill which states; If any part of this Bill is ruked unconstitutional, the remaining portion of the Bill remains the law as enacted.

The Following protion of the U. S. Constitution would make the Nebraska Compromise in the Senate Bill unconstitutional, as you can understand, when you read the following.

You will find in Article I, Section 8, Sub-paragraph (1).

Section 8. The Congress shall have power:
(1) To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense, and GENERAL WELFARE of the United States, but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

That section of the U. S.Constitution also empowers the U. S. Congress to provide for the Common Defense and General Welfare of the United States, and since the U. S. Constitution doesn’t specify what the General Welfare consist of, the members of the U. S. Congress are enabled to define what the General Welfare and the what the Common Defense of the United States is, doesn’t it?

By: chicagobluesgirl

chicagobluesgirl — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:32:28 +0000

Michael,
Thank you so much for your service to our country. My post was a reprint (URL is included in post if you want to write directly to Eric). I’m with you totally on the unconstitutionality of what this Congress is doing. We can support candidates running against the Democrats in November (10 months from now). I’ve already contributed to Scott Brown of Massachusetts and I contributed to Doug Hoffman in New York. I’m fighting to change the demographics in our legislature. Once changed, we can work to declare much of what has happened unconstitutional but Obama still has veto power. A universal voter registration is also planned and will pass I am quite sure. This means felons, homeless, etc. will all be registered to vote–anything to keep or gain Democrat seats. I just keep saying that Washington did not give up at Valley Forge; how can we?