Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

catoismymotor (35.54)

Article 1, Section 7

Recs

7

March 19, 2010 – Comments (8)

The United States Constitution

Article 1, Section 7

Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

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.

 Even Associated Press Says “Beware” of Obama’s Health Care Overhaul; Retired Judge Calls Health Care Tactic Unconstitutional

 

 

Fellow Fools,

This is the portion of the Constitution that Obama, Pelosi and Reid are trying to violate in order to enact the healthcare bill. This alone is grounds for impeachment.

Cato

8 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On March 19, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Melaschasm (54.35) wrote:

Didn't we discard the constitution a decade or so ago?

Report this comment
#2) On March 19, 2010 at 4:49 PM, drgroup (69.08) wrote:

Thanks for the insight to the law. Let's pray others know what the constitution is

Report this comment
#3) On March 19, 2010 at 4:51 PM, ease1 (91.20) wrote:

Naw,  Melaschasm we're getting ready to, Sunday I believe.

Report this comment
#4) On March 19, 2010 at 4:59 PM, DJDynamicNC (32.42) wrote:

Which part of the health care process violates which clause in that section?

 The bill meets all requirements listed above. Federal courts have already decided this - and as you well know, the courts interpret the Constitution, as set forth in... the Constitution.

Report this comment
#5) On March 19, 2010 at 4:59 PM, dargus (80.70) wrote:

So we can impeach the Chief Executive because of a legislative procedural failure? Is Obama running Congress now?

Report this comment
#6) On March 19, 2010 at 6:29 PM, catoismymotor (35.54) wrote:

DJ,

I don't want to get into a prolonged debate. I'll put this as simply as I can so that all Fools can understand: The President, Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader want to break the law to pass the bill. The Presisent of the United States of America swore to uphold the Constitution when he took his oath of office. He has violated the oath. He needs to answer for it.

I have attached a good article I found in the Wallstreet Journal that explains why the healthcare bill is unconstitutional. If you have any further questions I advise you send them to Mr. Rivkin and Casey.

Cato

LINK

Report this comment
#7) On March 19, 2010 at 7:01 PM, rd80 (98.32) wrote:

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

This is the part that's being violated.  The House isn't voting on the Senate bill, it's voting on a reconciliation bill.  If the reconciliation bill passes, Obama will be presented with the Senate bill to sign, but the House will have never voted on that bill so there won't be a record of 'the Persons voting for and against.'  The stuff in the reconciliation bill won't be presented to the President until the Senate and House both approve it.

The fact that previous Congresses failed to follow the constitution doesn't change the fact that the process being used to pass this bill is unconstitutional.

 

Report this comment
#8) On March 19, 2010 at 7:44 PM, catoismymotor (35.54) wrote:

DJ, read rd80's comment.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement