• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Group sues to block budget law

lily

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Wed, Mar. 22, 2006
Group sues to block budget law that never passed House

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14157929.htm

WASHINGTON - For anyone who took fifth-grade social studies, how legislation turns to law always seemed pretty simple: The House passes a bill, the Senate passes the same bill, and the president signs it.

But last month, Washington threw all that old-fashioned civics stuff into a tizzy when President Bush signed into law a bill that never passed the House. The bill -- in this case, a major budget-cutting measure that will affect millions of Americans -- became a law because it was ``certified'' by the leaders of the House and Senate.

After stewing for weeks, Public Citizen, a legislative watchdog group, sued Tuesday to block a law that aims to cut $40 billion over five years, charging that Bush and Republican leaders of Congress flagrantly violated the Constitution when the president signed it into law knowing that the version that cleared the House was $2 billion different from the Senate's version.

The issue is bizarre, with even constitutional scholars saying they could not think of any precedent for the journey the budget bill took to becoming a law. Republicans are evoking an obscure Supreme Court ruling from the 1890s to suggest that a bill does not actually have to pass both chambers of Congress to become law.
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
lily said:
Wed, Mar. 22, 2006
Group sues to block budget law that never passed House

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14157929.htm

WASHINGTON - For anyone who took fifth-grade social studies, how legislation turns to law always seemed pretty simple: The House passes a bill, the Senate passes the same bill, and the president signs it.

But last month, Washington threw all that old-fashioned civics stuff into a tizzy when President Bush signed into law a bill that never passed the House. The bill -- in this case, a major budget-cutting measure that will affect millions of Americans -- became a law because it was ``certified'' by the leaders of the House and Senate.

After stewing for weeks, Public Citizen, a legislative watchdog group, sued Tuesday to block a law that aims to cut $40 billion over five years, charging that Bush and Republican leaders of Congress flagrantly violated the Constitution when the president signed it into law knowing that the version that cleared the House was $2 billion different from the Senate's version.

The issue is bizarre, with even constitutional scholars saying they could not think of any precedent for the journey the budget bill took to becoming a law. Republicans are evoking an obscure Supreme Court ruling from the 1890s to suggest that a bill does not actually have to pass both chambers of Congress to become law.
Yup. The budget bill is unconstitutional. The funny part is that, before Bush signed it, Dennis Hastert had contacted him and notified him that he had the wrong version. Bush didnt like the version that passed, though, so he signed the version that did not pass.
 

lily

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
He also changed a part of the Patriot Act, after all his "the sky is falling, if we don't get this signed" and changed part of the Mc Cain "torture bill".

Odd........we're figthing for democracy in Iraq and we're getting the dictator.
 

lily

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
:3oops: I'm sorry...........I didn't see there was a thread already started on this topic. Could this be deleted?

Thank you.
 
H

hipsterdufus

lily said:
Wed, Mar. 22, 2006
Group sues to block budget law that never passed House

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14157929.htm

WASHINGTON - For anyone who took fifth-grade social studies, how legislation turns to law always seemed pretty simple: The House passes a bill, the Senate passes the same bill, and the president signs it.

But last month, Washington threw all that old-fashioned civics stuff into a tizzy when President Bush signed into law a bill that never passed the House. The bill -- in this case, a major budget-cutting measure that will affect millions of Americans -- became a law because it was ``certified'' by the leaders of the House and Senate.

After stewing for weeks, Public Citizen, a legislative watchdog group, sued Tuesday to block a law that aims to cut $40 billion over five years, charging that Bush and Republican leaders of Congress flagrantly violated the Constitution when the president signed it into law knowing that the version that cleared the House was $2 billion different from the Senate's version.

The issue is bizarre, with even constitutional scholars saying they could not think of any precedent for the journey the budget bill took to becoming a law. Republicans are evoking an obscure Supreme Court ruling from the 1890s to suggest that a bill does not actually have to pass both chambers of Congress to become law.
Lily, you're under the false impression that the constitution matters in the Bush administration. ;)

Whether it's violating the UN and going to war in Iraq, lying to the American people about pre-war intelligence, producing propaganda news reports to influence legislation, illegally spying on American citizens, disregarding the Geneva convention with regards to torture and so forth,Bush can just do what he wants; unlimited, unchecked executive powers and the Republicans in Congress say "Thank you sir, may I have another?"
 
Top Bottom