TexasCHLforum.com

Skeptics unite, I suspect we have been vindicated! Those who wanted to see at least a small bit of Constitutional debate related to each bill will be disappointed. The Tea Party/Republican conservatives failed in their first test (a minor one at that).

http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/05/early ... z1AD6jxrj3

An early push by New Jersey Republican Rep. Scott Garrett to add some “teeth” to the GOP’s new Constitution rule requiring every bill cite its specific constitutional authority failed in a Republican conference meeting Tuesday.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/05/early ... z1ADnO5vD3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In an attempt to bring Constitutional rule back into the Federal government, this rule is an invaluable step in the correct direction (if properly applied), and would mean at most 20 minutes of extra debate, and still not derail any legislation. This extra debate means far more to improving the actual legislative process than the show of reading the Constitution on the floor.

However, the amendment would have prevented meeting the requirement by using "overly broad" language, i.e., "boilerplate text" that would be essentially meaningless. Thus, there now will be little to actually debate, and the rule itself will be practically useless.

Edited: For improved explanation.

This is what gets people at every election. Promise whatever one needs to in order to get elected, only to fail at delivering because the promises were so far out of touch with the political realities that exist.

I don't know why anybody is blaming the "tea party".

The new congress has what, half a dozen or so reps endorsed or related to "tea party" orgs?

Vast majority is same ole demipublicans, all serving the great almighty goverment they love, instead of the people.

Bullwhip wrote:I don't know why anybody is blaming the "tea party".

The new congress has what, half a dozen or so reps endorsed or related to "tea party" orgs?

Vast majority is same ole demipublicans, all serving the great almighty goverment they love, instead of the people.

Actually, the Congress is made up of a lot of Elites, who are on both sides of the isle and believe that they are Philosopher Kings whose mission it is to control the masses.

I never had the illusion that the new Congress was going to solve the ills of the government that have been created for almost a century. That they even tried to take a step forward toward tying legislation to the Constitution is a good first step. If we are doing our job as voters, the switchboard for everyone of those who voted against this attempt ought to light up. Even that won't fix the problem but it will be a good second step. It it better that we take steps in the right path rather than walk in the other direction like we have been doing.

At the current time the Republicans winning the House majority
are like the dog that chases cars - now that he's caught one,
what's he going to do with it?? :-)

SIA

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:At the current time the Republicans winning the House majority
are like the dog that chases cars - now that he's caught one,
what's he going to do with it?? :-)

SIA

Something like this??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1xndiXQJsc

I would not call this a failure. The Republicans have amended the House rules such that every proposed bill must cite its Constitutional authority. That is a huge step forward. What Rep. Garrett was trying to do was to require bills to contain more specific language than the "general welfare" clause or the "necessary and proper clause" as the only Constitutional support for the bill. The fact remains that for the first time in Congressional history every House bill must contain its Constitutional justification in the bill. If you don't think that's a huge victory, then I suggest that you are looking at this from an all or nothing position. In politics, that is unrealistic.

I completely disagree with your analysis that the change will be "completely useless". It will prompt debate both in Congress and among the citizenry and force Congress to articulate exactly what powers it thinks the Constitution has granted it. In the present atmosphere, that can only be a good thing.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

baldeagle wrote:I would not call this a failure. The Republicans have amended the House rules such that every proposed bill must cite its Constitutional authority. That is a huge step forward. What Rep. Garrett was trying to do was to require bills to contain more specific language than the "general welfare" clause or the "necessary and proper clause" as the only Constitutional support for the bill. The fact remains that for the first time in Congressional history every House bill must contain its Constitutional justification in the bill. If you don't think that's a huge victory, then I suggest that you are looking at this from an all or nothing position. In politics, that is unrealistic.

I completely disagree with your analysis that the change will be "completely useless". It will prompt debate both in Congress and among the citizenry and force Congress to articulate exactly what powers it thinks the Constitution has granted it. In the present atmosphere, that can only be a good thing.

This is not how legislative activity works, unfortunately. To avoid discussion, all bills will contain nearly identical language. Much of every bill already includes standard language that has been previously deemed to be required, and is now essentially serving the purpose of sawdust in hamburger. This is only a show of constitutional support, just as is their reading the Constitution in the chamber.

chasfm11 wrote:

Bullwhip wrote:I don't know why anybody is blaming the "tea party".

The new congress has what, half a dozen or so reps endorsed or related to "tea party" orgs?

Vast majority is same ole demipublicans, all serving the great almighty goverment they love, instead of the people.

Actually, the Congress is made up of a lot of Elites, who are on both sides of the isle and believe that they are Philosopher Kings whose mission it is to control the masses.

I never had the illusion that the new Congress was going to solve the ills of the government that have been created for almost a century. That they even tried to take a step forward toward tying legislation to the Constitution is a good first step. If we are doing our job as voters, the switchboard for everyone of those who voted against this attempt ought to light up. Even that won't fix the problem but it will be a good second step. It it better that we take steps in the right path rather than walk in the other direction like we have been doing.

It's more a matter of predictable disappointment. Their first opportunity to make a difference, and it becomes business as usual. The Tea Party-flavored Republican Party is already auditioning for a part in Animal Farm.
Edit: Can't believe I mistyped the name of one of my favorite stories!

I think most bills already claim some bogus authority. The GFSZA got shot down, they added some weasel words and passed it again, it's still standing (still wrong and unconstitutional).