Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,102 Year: 5,359/9,624 Month: 384/323 Week: 24/204 Day: 0/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Scalia is a Scoundrel
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 966 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 98 of 108 (763099)
07-20-2015 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by JonF
07-20-2015 3:03 PM


Re: how can the Supreme Court make an unconstitutional decision?
H.R. means House of Representatives. Any bill labeled HR started in the House of Representatives.
I found this site which shows the version of HR3590 that was introduced in Sept, 2009. Yes, clearly it originated in the House. But, it's original version was a bill intended
quote:
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes.
with the short title of "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009."
The Bill was passed by the House and placed on the Senate calendar in Oct. 2009.
The Senate then appears to have "amended" the Bill and the amended version is found here (the 7 versions of the bill are available from a drop down menu on the right side of the page). This "amendment" bears no resemblance to the original bill and was intended as a substitution
quote:
Purpose: In the nature of a substitute.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES--111th Cong., 1st Sess.
H. R. 3590
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes.
November 19, 2009
Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed
Amendment in the nature of a substitute intended to be proposed by Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. DODD, and Mr. HARKIN)
Viz:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the ‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’.
(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
...
I had not heard this claim that the ACA had been initiated in the Senate before, and maybe I don't really understand the significance or legality (or constitutionality) of the issue, but it seems a bit shady to "amend" a Bill by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with something completely different. Also note that the Senate version was dated Nov. 2009 - only a month after it was put on the calendar. The text of the substitution must have been drafted before the bill was even placed on the Senate calendar (the rate government moves it would have taken at least a month just to cut-n-paste the text into the body of the bill). So it does appear that HR3590, as passed DID originate in the Senate, but was hidden or "substituted" for a bill that had originated in the House.
I had a similar complaint when the grey wolf was de-listed. The problem was that the rider to remove the wolf from the endangered species list was included (buried) in a budget bill - at a time where passage of the budget was extremely time sensitive, threatening government shut down. Even if there was objections to that rider, it was not going to be addressed because of the urgency of the budget bill. While it may be perfectly legal, it takes advantage of loopholes to push forward an agenda.
It seems to me that although it may be "constitutional" it seems rather unethical. Its a shell game.
What do you think?
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by JonF, posted 07-20-2015 3:03 PM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by jar, posted 07-20-2015 9:10 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 100 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-20-2015 9:17 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 101 by NoNukes, posted 07-20-2015 9:25 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024