Arkansas Canoe Club Forums

Then you clearly remember what Madison said about the role of the House of Representatives. And the role given to it in the Constitution. And you know that the President is not supposed to make law by decree. And you have looked closely at the SCOTUS decision on NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS v. SEBELIUS and the issues they addressed and how they addressed them. As well as which issues were not addressed.

I have a quote for you as well. “But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”

And now we hear "We Have to Implement Obamacare Before We Make Any Changes To It."
This week, when asked whether she has read the 10,535 pages of Obamacare regulations published in the Federal Register, she wouldn't answer.

And to date, no Democrat is willing to state that they have read the law as published in the CFR.

Asked If He's Read 10,535 Pages of Obamacare Regs, Sen. Warner Walks Away.

Senator Max Baucus, one author of Obamacare and one of its biggest proponents, admitted in 2010 that he never read the bill. He said that reading the bill would be a waste of his time.

When asked by CNSNews.com whether he has read all 10,535 pages of final Obamacare regulations published so far in the Federal Register, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would not answer. - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-s ... MEHlP.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is a maxim of law that ignorance is no excuse. We the citizens are held accountable for reading and understanding the law. Yet those we trust to write, pass and discuss laws have not even read it.

And to answer your question, no I do not know you from Adam's off ox just as you do not know me. But if understanding the functions of government is your profession, it should be easy for you to understand the position of the House.

Canoe Codger, I solute you . But were a dying breed, the numbers are stacked against us, and it's off to Rome we go. By the way, if anyone wants to hike the Osage Gorge, your certainly welcome. Just look me up, and I'll show you the way.

The role of the House is to initiate and pass legislation that also must be approved by the Senate. It has exclusive powers in that all spending bills are initiated by it; it has the power to impeach the president; and it serves as the tie-breaker in the event of a deadlock in the electoral college.

The ACA bill passed in both the Senate and House (and yes I'm familiar with all the political machinations that went on) and not by a decree by Obama. If that were the case, SCOTUS would not have found it constitutional. And you can bet that the House would have started impeachment proceedings against the president had attempted to "pass it by decree."

I'm out of this now.

can those of you that have read the 10,000 pages of the ACA point out where/how it is linked to shutting down the govt?

also, anyone else heard the rumor that as soon as this is over liberal democrats will shut the govt back down over assault weapons?

For what it is worth.

Back when ACA was just a bill in the House, it was available for down load by the general public.

I did the down load.

It was massive number of pages.

I am not a lawyer by any means. But been a business person with bunches of contracts over the years and am a big time reader.

Got my yellow pad out and started reading.

The most difficult to follow document I have seen. If memory correct there seemed to be three major parts. The first few pages were for sure legal words which did not make much sense to me. Then the reference started. It goes back and forth with references to other pages which are full of references to other pages.

I made my living off computers and spent a lot of time programming them back in the day we used "machine language" which is difficult to analyze. So I felt I could chart out this bill.

Spent several hours and lots of notes before I realized I could not figure out what the document was saying in plain language for the first page or so. No way I could understand the full document. I gave up!

To Canoe Codger's post: I do not think any one who voted on this bill had any idea what the effect would be. I do not think more than a handful of Congress Members even attempted to read it and zero understood what the bill would do. They voted on the title of the bill and what they hoped it would accomplish.

I for one am a big fan of our Medical System. The system September 14, 2012 took my broken up unconscious body on a Friday evening and put me back together. Nothing wrong with our medical system as far as results. The only problem I can think of is cost and the Affordable Health Care title on this bill was what every one keyed on. It is the title I think that got the bill passed not the contents.

It passed and is still being modified by the bureaucrats to turn the actual Congressional Law into rules the country has to follow. This adds another level of smoke and mirrors to what was already smoke and mirrors.

Bottom line here is the title of this law is something every one wants to see happen. The actual implementation tho may well be so complicated that it tears apart the very system it is supposed to make affordable.



PS: To Prophet's point. My guess is no direct tie to shutting down the government. But a bunch of indirect ties to the shut down. Plus there is no explanation in "Plain Language" for this law. Or at least I have not seen it if it exists.

Please read the SCOTUS decision. Whether or not the law itself was constitutional was never a question put before them. The case was argued very narrowly on a couple of points and the court ruled only on those narrow arguements, not the constitutionality of the law itself. In fact, it was in their decision that they redefined the portion of the law, the "Fine", Fee" etc. to be a tax in spite of the government argueing from day one that it was not. That had to be done in order to make it comply with the constitution. In effect, they made law from the bench. Likewise, it was unconstitutional to force citizens to engage in commerce. So they stood that on it's head and said that it was ok to exclude people from the "tax" who did engage in the mandated commerce. Again, changing the law to make it compy with the constitution. If you would like, I can post a synopsis of those decisions and reasons for them from the case as published.

And again, the law has been changed many times (17? 19?) since the House and Senate voted on it and it was signed by the POTUS. None of those changes were returned to the house for consideration/approval as law requires.

prophet wrote:can those of you that have read the 10,000 pages of the ACA point out where/how it is linked to shutting down the govt?

also, anyone else heard the rumor that as soon as this is over liberal democrats will shut the govt back down over assault weapons?

Government "shutdown" is nothing new. Excepting the Bush administration, it has been a feature of almost every administration. I am recounting no less than 17 in my memory. What does seem to be unique is that this administration and Senate refuses to even consider negotiations to break the impass. I know it is vogue to blame the Republicans in the house for the impass, but time and again they have come back and submitted funding bills to no avail. The Senate refuses to even allow them to be considered and the POTUS "pre-vetos" them seemingly while they are still walking them from the House to the Senate.

Linkage? Pretty apparent by some statements from the Senate majority leader and the Executive. Leaving out all of the insulting, pyrheic rhetoric, they want to keep people blaming Republicans for the "shutdown" (actually a slimdown - approx 15% employees furloughed with backpay for vacation time) and state that if they ease up the "pain" being felt by the citizens, they will be less likey to get their way with the infamous "clean CR". Note that in the case of NPS closings, never in our history, certainly not during a budget impass. have most of these parks and memorials been closed to the public, armed guards and barracades placed at a cost exceeding that of keeping them open.

so the Senate and Executive got the repubs to link the ACA with the slimdown so they could blame the R's for the slimdown?
tricky!

Nope. It isn't like this budget deadline came as a surprise to any of them. The end of the budget extention has been well known to all parties since the last extention. As has the roll out date for the ACA mandates (except for those who have received absolution from the mandates as political favors). No one, except perhaps citizens who have not been paying attention, are being blindsided by the shutdown. Just how the administration has chosen to selectively administer the shutdown is surprising to many. Like the families of the KIA who are claiming the bodies of soldiers killed overseas. Like the foriegn tourists held in hotel rooms by armed NPS police and veterans who traveled all the way to France to visit Normandy one last time. All of those are direct decisions made by the administration in order to apply political pressure to their opponents.

well if the Slimdown and the ACA aren't linked in the 10000 pages and the Executive didn't trick the repubs into linking them together, then that only leaves the R's into linking them, but I know they aren't that dumb.
It was probably the elk, when do the elk hunting permits get issued?

The Republicans in the House have attempted repeatedly to break the "link" by passing individual bills authorizing spending CRs for departments and so far, few have been signed and passed, the military spending bill is one. Otherwise, it is the Senate leadership and the White House which refuse to unlink them. Think about it. Yes, I understand that it is vogue to blame the House Republicans for the Senate and Executive's refusal to unlink ACA from the rest of government funding.

Viewing news programs this morning: FOX did a live report from the WWII Memorial. Folks were tearing down the barricades and stacking them in piles. A park ranger actually shook hands with several of the vets and was applauding them for their actions. He will probably lose his job.

NBC's Meet The Depressed, CBS's Disgrace the Nation, and ABC's This Week w/ George Snuffleupagus did not even mention this "protest". I believe the mainstream media's role in this is to downplay the citizens' TRUE feelings about this "make It hurt" policy as much as possible.

Ted Cruz and the other Tea Party Republicans were only doing what their constituents elected them to do. And that is to shut down Obamacare. I wish my US Senators were that conscientious.

Terry P.

as a retired Chief Information Officer for a major retail company and project leader of many fairly complex projects over the years, (admittedly none as complex as the Affordable Health Care Information Technology Project) I can feel their Pain!!

If the Wall St Journal reports there are problems with a Obama major project, must be worse than one would expect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/us/po ... h_20131013" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again, from experience with on line computer systems, it is not the problem hooking up the terminals and data bases that worries me, it is the fact that all these minimally checked out navigator types will have access to the most private information we as citizens have. IRS, Medical, you name it from the questions that have been raised by those able to get past the system logon. If Private Manning can bust the military grade computer security from his little terminal, my bet is the navigators will soon be making big money on the identity thief market.

AHC is the law, no doubt of that. Useless I think for the Repubs to waste what little media standing they have on defunding, better off to let it continue and see if it works or craters of it's own complexity. Meanwhile, lets get the borrowing more money on the Federal Credit card get going so we can as a nation enjoy a bit more fun time till the bubble really does burst. I am not much of an economist either, the President said the credit limit bucket does not increase the national debt. Maybe technically that is true, but funny that no matter how much the limit is increased that bucket of money is not enough.

The Elk watching, river running and National Park features are calling us all!!

This thread has hopelessly spiraled into the black hole that is message-board-partisan-arguing.

No one ever wins online. You just feed the trolls.

mgood wrote:This thread has hopelessly spiraled into the black hole that is message-board-partisan-arguing.

No one ever wins online. You just feed the trolls.

Actually, I was just about to thank my friends here, all who have posted their opinions and knowledge in this thread, for their civility and willingness to discuss the topic(s) without resorting to perjoratives which tends to shut down reasoned debate. Plus, it has done a fair job of keeping these topics from spiling over to other areas of the forum. Thanks ladies and gents.

Michael