Category Archives: Contact Your US Senators & Congresswoman

A Question on Reconciliation

I have been reading the Budget Reconciliation Rules and as far as I can see, there are absolutely no stipulations allowing this process to be used to implement new entitlement programs. However, on the contrary, there are specific rules that is to be used ONLY for current programs, which programs it may be used for and which ones it may not be used for. It also stipulates that all legislation MUST be deficit neutral. The rules also are very specific that this process is for budget purposes only.

So my questions to Senator Johnson & Congressman Herseth-Sandlin are, “by what authority do you have to pass a new entilement program through a budget process? Will you please show me, in these rules that you swore an oath to follow, where it states that this process may be used to pass a brand new ‘Mandated Orwellian Socialistic Health Redistribution Program’?”

 

house committee rules logo

THE BUDGET RECONCILIATION PROCESS

“The 1981 reconciliation bill, which encompassed legislative language from thirteen different committees in response to savings instructions mandated by the Senate, produced a legislative result that would have been impossible to achieve if each committee had reported an individual bill on subject matter solely within its own jurisdiction. By using a procedure that permitted packaging of the savings, Congress was able to consider President Reagan’s economic program as a whole, resistant to the type of special interest pressures that would have scuttled the savings if they had been proposed in piecemeal fashion.”
– Senator Howard H. Baker, Jr., then Senate Majority Leader (Winter, 1983) 

Created in a budget resolution in 1974 as part of the congressional budget process, the reconciliation process is utilized when Congress issues directives to legislate policy changes in mandatory spending (entitlements) or revenue programs (tax laws) to achieve the goals in spending and revenue contemplated by the budget resolution. First used in1980 this process was used at the end of a fiscal year to enact legislation to fine tune revenue and spending levels through legislation that could not be filibustered in the Senate. The policy changes brought about by this part of the budget process have served as constraints on the levels of mandatory spending and federal tax revenues which also has served since 1981 as a vehicle for deficit reduction. The reconciliation process is an optional procedure and not a required action by Congress every fiscal year as is passage of the concurrent budget resolution. However, during the eighteen year period from 1980 to 1998 thirteen reconciliation measures have been enacted into law and numerous others have been considered by Congress. Occasionally, reconciliation legislation has included certain such enforcement mechanisms as extensions of the discretionary spending limits and PAYGO requirements or even reforms to the budget process. Whether for tax reduction, tax increases, deficit reduction, mandatory spending increases or decreases or adjustments in the public debt limit, this process has been used to focus many agents on one goal. 
Reconciliation Instructions: The process begins with the inclusion of reconciliation instructions in the budget resolution. These instructions require authorizing committees with jurisdiction over mandatory spending and revenue policies (usually more than one) to make legislative changes in those programs to effect a specified level of budgetary savings provisions. The instructions typically cover the same fiscal years as the budget resolution, with separate dollar amounts specified for each of the years in the budget resolution. While the Budget Committees develop these instructions based on policy assumptions for changes in programs and laws (which are often printed in the committee reports on the budget resolution), the authorizing committees have complete discretion over the specific programs to be changed and the substance of those changes. An authorizing committee must only meet the specified spending and/or revenue directive given it. The budget resolution normally includes a timetable by which the authorizing committees must report legislation that meets these saving targets. These committees generally hold hearings and mark-up these legislative products which are sent to the Budget Committees. 
Budget Committees’ Role: Once the relevant authorizing committees have reported their legislation to the Budget Committees, it is the Budget Committees’ responsibility to combine those bills into an omnibus package (or packages) as specified by the budget resolution. The legislative products of the authorizing committees are packaged together with report language and the Congressional Budget Office’s and the Joint Committee on Taxation’s cost estimates. This function of the Budget Committees is largely administrative, since the Budget Act provides that the Budget Committees may not make substantive changes in the legislation. However, if one or more authorizing committees do not meet these targets, certain procedures are used to bring the legislation into compliance. In the House, these legislative “fixes” are usually incorporated into the reconciliation package via a special rule granted by the Rules Committee. In the Senate, these violations of the reconciliation instructions may be remedied through the adoption of an amendment on the Senate floor or the adoption of a motion to recommit the bill with instructions to report back forthwith with an amendment containing legislative language which satisfies the original instruction. 
House and Senate Floor Consideration: The Budget Act specifies that Congressional Action on reconciliation legislation should be completed by June 15. It provides specific expedited procedures and restrictions for floor consideration of reconciliation measures, to ensure timely completion. In the House, reconciliation legislation is normally brought from the Budget Committee to the Rules Committee, which grants a special rule governing floor consideration of the measure. Under the Budget Act and traditionally under these special rules no amendment is in order that would increase spending or decrease revenue levels relative to the base bill without equivalent decreases in spending or increases in revenues. In other words, amendments must be deficit neutral. Also, non-germane amendments may not be offered to the package absent a waiver from the Rules Committee.
 
In the Senate, total debate on a reconciliation bill is limited to 20 hours, although the actual time for consideration of the omnibus package often exceeds this time limit set in the Budget Act. Motions and amendments may be offered and considered without debate at the end of this time period. There are also restrictions on the content of a reconciliation package and on the amendments which may be offered to it. For example, any amendment to the bill that is not germane, would add extraneous material, would cause deficit levels to increase, or that contains recommendations with respect to the Social Security program, is not in order. The Budget Act also maintains that reconciliation provisions must be related to reconciling the budget. For example, section 313 of the Budget Act, more commonly known as the “Byrd Rule”, provides a point of order in the Senate against extraneous matter in reconciliation bills. Determining what is extraneous is often a procedural and political quagmire navigated in part by the Senate Parliamentarian. The Byrd Rule and other points of order in the Budget Act may only be waived in the Senate by a three-fifths vote. Furthermore, the Budget Act prevents reconciliation legislation from being filibustered on the Senate floor. 
Conference Process: Once a reconciliation bill is passed in the House and Senate, members of each body meet to work out their differences. A majority of the conferees on each panel must agree on a single version of the bill before it can be brought back to the full House and Senate for a vote on final passage. Approval of the conference agreement on the reconciliation legislation must be by a majority vote of both Houses. In the House, the conference report is usually given a special rule from the Rules Committee to govern floor consideration. In the Senate, the floor debate is governed by Senate rules and specific provisions of the Budget Act. In contrast to the concurrent budget resolution, a reconciliation bill is sent to the President for approval or disapproval.

 

ConstitutionallySpeaking Makes It Into World Net Daily Exclusive

Thank You WND for helping to keep the fight for our National Security and our Constitution ALIVE by reporting my plight to get constitutional questions answered from South Dakota’s elected officials in DC.

Click on the photo for the full exclusive

 WND reports my story in an exclusive article

As Goes the Postal Service, So Will Your Government Run Health Care

BUYER BEWARE! I just received this in my e-mail updates from ShipperNet/CarrierNet Group Financial:

 ObamaCare_rectal_pescription

Due to the delivery time changes we need everyone who sends their invoices in via the Postal system to send them to our P.O. box this includes express as well as priority and regular mail.

Our local post office has had to put the delivery of our mail back due to loss of employees and they are not going to be replacing them.

So going forward sent ALL invoices to

Carriernet Group Financial Inc.

P.O. Box 1130

Sioux Falls, SD  57104-1130

If you send your invoices by Fed-Ex or UPS you can send them to our regular address since they cannot send to a po box.  If you have any questions please give us a call.

Thank You

Chris

 

This is ‘NOT” going to build confidence for further government run programs/entitlements.

Is This Illegal? You Decide…UPDATED ALREADY: Newsbusters BUSTED!!!

Correction

The entry previously posted at this address incorrectly asserted that the Capitol Hill switchboard was being used to promote liberal health insurance legislation. It is not being used for that purpose.

The telephone number referenced in this post originally is owned by a liberal lobbying organization, not the U.S. Capitol switchboard. We regret the error.

 

Of course they deleted the original message:

 

This is the main phone line representing ALL of Congress.  I repeat, this is the phone number for ALL of Congress, not an activist’s number to sell Obama, Socialist Democrats and their policies.

While it lasts, try it yourself and you’ll see.  The number is 1-800-828-0498.


Here is the transcript of the message you’ll hear:
  

Thank you for calling your Representative and your Senators.

Please urge them to vote yes on health insurance reform. Because the American people can no longer wait for more choices, lower costs, and coverage we can count on.

Will ALL of the mainstream media report this? My bet is on ‘NOT’. Time to fire up those e-mails & phone lines tomorrow Patriots!

 More info on the origins of the recording:

FamiliesUSA

September 27, 2009 – 10:21 ET by P.J. Gladnick : The recording is by FamiliesUSA which makes it sound like you have called Capitol Hill by thanking the caller for calling their representative. Then it  automatically forwards the caller to Capitol Hill switchboard. Not sure how ethical that is but recording originates from FamiliesUSA, a pro-ObamaCare organization. No mention in the recorded message about FamiliesUSA at all.

Sounds like impersonation of a Capitol Hill switchboard.

And more from the Examiner:

The United States Capitol does not have a toll free number.  There is only one main number to the Capitol – 202-226-8000.  It can easily be found on their website.  My sources say that there is nothing the Capitol can do about this.  Apparently anyone can use a private number and forward it to wherever they like.  Organizations that are legitimate are posting this number on their sites as if the number is a true number held by the Capitol.  There are over 500,000 hits for that number in Google alone.

FamiliesUSA promotes this number:

Just A Quick Note UPDATED

Update in ‘striked out red’

I listened to Sen Thune speak on the Senate floor this morning and waited with baited breath for just two little words to come out of his mouth regarding the GOP’s plan for health care reform:

“NO MANDATES”

As usual..”NOPE, NA DA sorry sucker, ain’t going to stick my political neck out that far” is all I got. Just more political rhetoric, same ole speech that he regurgitated from an earlier floor speech.

Now, don’t take this wrong. I do think Sen Thune is trying, but he has yet to step completely into the “Conservative Ring” and whole heartedly promote limited government as it should be under the Constitution.

And that is why he still has not secured ny vote for 2010!

I’ll post link to the video of Sen Thunes floor speech later when it becomes available. Click here: Thune floor address begins at 1:26:10

Sure he brings up the aspect of government control and how it makes us uncomfortable, but it would have been more appropriate to call it what it is: “a fascist government take-over of the most personal aspect of our lives that is totally and unequivocally UNCONSTITUTIONAL“!

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then call it what it is…a ‘duck’! And with that I say: ‘Quit DUCKING the issue & speak the TRUTH”

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1 Peter 5: 1-3   ~   To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.

 

2 Peter 2: 2-3 ~ Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

 
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson (1743 – 1826)
 
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have … The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
Thomas Jefferson (1743 – 1826)
 
The worst thing you can do for those you love is the things they could and should do themselves.

Abraham Lincoln (1809 – 1865)

 

 

 

 

 

Obama: “I’ve pushed people on the idea of paying higher taxes in order to implement the system.”

H/T Gateway Pundit:

In a speech he gave in April 2007 Obama said that health care reform “would require tax hikes” and that “savings are just a theory.”

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.3457150&w=425&h=350&fv=]

 

“We Are Taking Our Country Back”

A 9~12 message from Glenn Beck

Patrick Henry’s Peaceful Dissent

Those who were once united by the “Spirit of ’76,” or the Revolutionary generation, were not necessarily united in supporting the Constitution in 1787-88. We need only look to the state ratification debates to see the diversity of opinions regarding the new plan of government among faithful and once-united patriots. Acceptance of the Constitution was anything but a foregone conclusion.

Virginia patriot Patrick Henry, famous for his “give me liberty or give me death” speech which prompted Virginia (and eventually her sister states) to join besieged Massachusetts in the cause of independence, was one such devout Anti-Federalists, or one who opposed the new Constitution. His voice was often heard (and feared by Federalists) during the Virginia ratification debates.

Patrick Henry’s objections were not unfounded. After fighting off a British superpower, he feared a large national government with no declaration of rights to limit its power. He warned that if Virginia ratified, “the Republic may be lost forever,” and subsequently demanded to know “what right had [the delegates at Philadelphia] to say, We, the People.”

As the Virginia convention drew near a final vote on ratification, Henry stood to deliver his most impassioned soliloquy against the Constitution. He condemned an affirmative vote by saying it would negatively impact not just the fledging United States, but countries and even generations yet unborn but nonetheless present in the convention hall with the delegates in ethereal form.

When I see beyond the horrison [sic.] that binds human eyes,” Henry began, “and look at the final consummation of all human things…I am led to believe that much of the account on one side or the other, will depend on what we now decide. Our own happiness alone is not affected by the event-All nations are interested in the determination. We have it in our power to secure the happiness of one half of the human race. Its adoption may involve the misery of the other hemispheres…”

Just as Henry finished his speech, a storm suddenly arose which combined with Henry’s rhetorical weaponry to have an eerie affect on his listeners. His final words were punctuated by thunder and lightning which “shook the whole building.”

Without calling for adjournment, the delegates—including such distinguished figures as George Washington, Governor Edmund Randolph, George Mason, James Monroe and James Madison—fled the convention hall. One listener explained why: “the spirits whom [Henry] had called, seemed to have come at his bidding.” Moreover, “[Henry] seemed to mix in the fight of his aetherial auxiliaries, and ‘rising on the wings of the tempest, to seize upon the artillery of Heaven, and direct its fiercest thunders against the heads of his adversaries.’”

Yet in spite of his vehement opposition, Patrick Henry demonstrated his commitment to the democratic process. Shortly after the Virginia Ratification Convention, he was approached by his Anti-Federalist colleagues to head a guerilla war against the ratified Constitution. Instead of continuing to oppose the Constitution outright, he declared “I will be a peaceable citizen.”

And he was. While Henry disagreed with some aspects of the new government, he also recognized that the Constitution left his head, hand, and heart free to advocate change “in a constitutional way.” He accepted the choice made by the American people and advocated for change within the system they had chosen. As a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, he ensured Virginia’s two U.S. Senators were Anti-Federalists, paving the way for the passage of the Bill of Rights.

ConSource logo

Government Funded “CHILD” Prostitution Via ACORN

This is absolutely appalling. ACORN gets busted in a sting that exposes their involvement in child prostitution. CALL YOUR REPS TODAY and DEMAND an immediate investigation and the immediate HALT of ALL tax payer dollars to ALL ACORN AFFILIATES!

REMEMBER:  ACORN now has been given direct involvement in the census, thus, this proves without a shadow of a doubt we will no longer have fair and free elections if the current administration and their cronies at ACORN are allowed to continue in their take over of the census. Obama cut his proverbial “community organizing baby teeth” through this corrupt crime syndicate and during the campaign, he promised them that they would have the inside track to the white house and a strong say in how government operates if they got him elected. They did not let him down and now he is paying back that debt.

Born in the U.S.A.? Rethinking Birthright Citizenship in the Wake of 9/11

This is the congressional testimony of how a Saudi terrorist (that was captured on the battlefield) was granted US citizenship. It is time to start swamping our elected officials in DC with letters asking them to take back their responsibility and close up this imaginary loop-hole for good.

This is a matter of national security and economic survival. We have no time to waste here folks, grab those pens, keyboards & phones and let’s get crackin’.

Eastman Law Review om Birthright citizenship

The PDF of the congressional hearing seems to have been scrubbed from the House of Reps, but thanks to American Patriots, it is never gone forever!

 born_in_the_usa_congressional_testimony_by_eastman

Also see Sen Johnson’s appeals during the U.S. Congressional Documents from the Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session

 

USPS: United States Physician Services

Priority Flat Rate: A Simpler Way to Provide Healthcare and Ship Packages

 

“America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009’’

A BILL

To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans, alien immigrants & illegal aliens and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes [Socialism].

The Death Book For Veterans

The Death Panels Video

Learn About Services

Services Locator

Need Help?

Division A – Affordable Health Care Choices
Title I – Protections and Standards for Qualified Health Benefit Plans
Subtitle C – Standards Guaranteeing Access to Essential Benefits

SEC. 121. COVERAGE OF ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE.

(a) IN GENERAL. – A qualified health benefits plan shall provide coverage that at least meets the benefit standards adopted under section 124 for the essential benefits package described in section 122 for the plan year involved.

SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED

(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED. – The items and services described in this subsection are the following:

(3) Professional services of physicians and other health professionals

DIVISION C—PUBLIC HEALTH AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
TITLE II—WORKFORCE
Subtitle C—Public Health Workforce

SEC. 2231. PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE CORPS

Part D of title III (42 U.S.C. 254b et seq.), as amended by section 2211, is amended by adding at the end the following:

Subpart XII—Public Health Workforce

SEC. 340L. PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE CORPS

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established, within the Service, the Public Health Workforce Corps (in this subpart referred to as the ‘Corps’), for the purpose of ensuring an adequate supply of public health professionals throughout the Nation. The Corps shall consist of—

(1) such officers of the Regular and Reserve Corps of the Service as the Secretary may designate;

and

(2) such civilian employees of the United States as the Secretary may appoint.