How is it that the so-called "Super Committee" is Constitutional?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

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

  1. #1

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

    Artical 1.
    Section. 7.
    All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

    Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

    Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
    Charlie

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Off of I-80 between Des Moines and Cheyenne
    Posts
    1,207
    Blog Entries
    1
    It isn't. I'm still pissed at the so called "leadership" that agreed to it. We should let the administration swim in the cess pool they are creating rather than throwing out temporary floatation devices that will do nothing in the long run.
    1)"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty." -Thomas Jefferson.
    2)"Imagine how gun control might be stomped if GOA or SAF had the (compromising) NRA's 4 million members!" -Me. http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/nraletter.htm

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Creswell, Oregon
    Posts
    3,865
    You mean the United States of American has a Constitution? Don't tell me, could that be the document that all our elected officials take an oath to uphold and protect. Nah, that couldn't be.
    "You can get a lot accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit" - Ronald Reagan

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    houston, texas
    Posts
    16
    They have to learn how to read it before they can uphold it.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Soverign State of Poverty Knob near Tennessee
    Posts
    200

    Angry

    It seems that the Dictator-in-Chief (DIC for short... add a K) has found a way around the Constitution of the United States of America and NONE of the elected officials in the Congress of the United States have the balls to oppose him and his tyranical "leadership" of our nation. We, The People, have got to get off our ASS and start a mail campaign to our Congressmen/women to uphold their oath of office, and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. (Emphisis added.)

    We have progressed from a Democratic Republic to an Elected Dictatorship!

    Since 2000, I have said, and I reiterate on this forum... REELECT NO ONE (Gary Nelson 2000)
    Let's hear it for Gun Free Zones... Public places where the criminal has a monopoly
    on self defense. - Gary Nelson 2012

  7. #6
    To answer the original question, Article I, 5, cl. 2 of the Constitution provides that "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings[.]"

    When Congress created the "super committee," a term I do not like and a committee whose creation I did not support, it invoked its power to create its own rules of its proceedings--in this case by authorizing a joint committee of both houses to propose a bill that both houses would be required to vote upon without amendments and limited debate.

    Although rare, the "super committee" process is not unprecedented. For example, Congress has in the past created similar processes through the Base Closure and Realignment Commission, which proposes lists of military bases for closure or realignment, which Congress then votes to approve or reject without amendments and no opportunity for filibusters or other dilatory tactics to prevent a final Yea or Nay vote.

    Since both houses of Congress must vote on the final product of the "super committee" and that final product cannot become law unless it passes both houses of Congress, the process is constitutional.
    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.

  8. #7
    Nice job of it, Jim!

    GG
    Fanatics of any sort are dangerous! -GG-
    Which part of "... shall NOT be infringed..." confuses you?
    Well now, aren't WE a pair, Raggedy Man? (Thunderdome)

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    TN, the patron state of shootin stuff
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by WB9IIE View Post
    NONE of the elected officials in the Congress of the United States have the balls to oppose him and his tyranical "leadership" of our nation.
    There is one. His name is Ron Paul!
    Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress;
    but I repeat myself.
    Mark Twain

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by JimMullinsWVCDL View Post
    To answer the original question, Article I, 5, cl. 2 of the Constitution provides that "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings[.]"

    When Congress created the "super committee," a term I do not like and a committee whose creation I did not support, it invoked its power to create its own rules of its proceedings--in this case by authorizing a joint committee of both houses to propose a bill that both houses would be required to vote upon without amendments and limited debate.

    Although rare, the "super committee" process is not unprecedented. For example, Congress has in the past created similar processes through the Base Closure and Realignment Commission, which proposes lists of military bases for closure or realignment, which Congress then votes to approve or reject without amendments and no opportunity for filibusters or other dilatory tactics to prevent a final Yea or Nay vote.

    Since both houses of Congress must vote on the final product of the "super committee" and that final product cannot become law unless it passes both houses of Congress, the process is constitutional.
    How can either house of Congress create a rule that violates some other part of the Constitution?

    If they can do that, then what keeps the House from creating a rule so that the House Members themselves can elect the President thereby bypassing the people entirely?
    Charlie

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieK View Post
    How can either house of Congress create a rule that violates some other part of the Constitution?

    If they can do that, then what keeps the House from creating a rule so that the House Members themselves can elect the President thereby bypassing the people entirely?
    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.
    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.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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