How is it that the so-called "Super Committee" is Constitutional? - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: How is it that the so-called "Super Committee" is Constitutional?

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by JimMullinsWVCDL View Post
    I may be either a little tired or a little dense, but either way I do not understand which "other part of the Constitution" you believe is violated in the first question and find the second question completely incoherent.
    How about the one that I cited that says how Revenue is raised? And how about the one that says how the President is elected?

    "Article. II.

    Section. 1.

    The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

    Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

    The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.

    The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

    No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."


    Just pick one and see if the House or Senate can make a rule that violates it.
    Charlie

  2.   
  3. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieK View Post
    How about the one that I cited that says how Revenue is raised? And how about the one that says how the President is elected?

    [full quotation of Art. I, 1]

    Just pick one and see if the House or Senate can make a rule that violates it.
    The Art. I, 7 Revenue Bill Clause issue is easy: the House of Representatives will vote on the bill before the Senate, thus making it a bill that originates in the House.

    However, I still don't know what in the world this off-the-wall suggestion that somehow Congress can, without a constitutional amendment, change the manner of electing the President, has anything to do with this thread.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Attorney, The Law Offices of James M. Mullins, Jr., PLLC
    Founder and Past President, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

  4. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by JimMullinsWVCDL View Post
    The Art. I, 7 Revenue Bill Clause issue is easy: the House of Representatives will vote on the bill before the Senate, thus making it a bill that originates in the House.

    However, I still don't know what in the world this off-the-wall suggestion that somehow Congress can, without a constitutional amendment, change the manner of electing the President, has anything to do with this thread.
    It is directly related to your statement that Congress can make rules on how it operates, which, in this case, includes how it raises funds. The so-called "Super Committe" is tasked with the responsibility of raising funds as well as cutting spending. Or did you not read your own post?

    You sound like the "lawyers" on the Supreme Court case a few years ago that ruled that "[i]....for Government USE"[/] means the same as "...for Government BENEFIT."
    Charlie

  5. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieK View Post
    It is directly related to your statement that Congress can make rules on how it operates, which, in this case, includes how it raises funds. The so-called "Super Committe" is tasked with the responsibility of raising funds as well as cutting spending. Or did you not read your own post?
    All that "super committee" will do is propose a bill. That bill will then be voted upon by the House of Representatives without an opportunity for any amendments or dilatory procedural tactics. If it passes the House, it would then go to the Senate for a vote without an opportunity for amendments, limited debate (no filibuster), and no dilatory procedural tactics. If it passes both houses of Congress (if it passes, it will have passed both houses in the same form since both houses have adopted rules requiring this bill to be voted up-or-down without any amendments), it will go the President for his signature.

    As far as the Revenue Bill Clause is concerned, all it means is that bills for raising revenue must originate in the House of Represenatives, not the Senate.

    While I think the whole "super committee" concept was an act of political cowardice and, if it does produce a bill, that bill will be wholly unpalatable to me, nothing in the Constitution prohibits Congress from using this procedure. Eugene Volokh agrees.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Attorney, The Law Offices of James M. Mullins, Jr., PLLC
    Founder and Past President, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

  6. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by JimMullinsWVCDL View Post
    ....While I think the whole "super committee" concept was an act of political cowardice and, if it does produce a bill, that bill will be wholly unpalatable to me, nothing in the Constitution prohibits Congress from using this procedure. Eugene Volokh agrees.
    Yes, nothing but integrity would prevent Congress from using that procedure, but sadly, that's utterly lacking.
    Charlie

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast