 |
| Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse Wants To Abuse and Limit Your Free Speech |
Yesterday the House voted (244-185) in support of H.R. 6079 to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010." All Republican Representatives and five democrats voted for repeal. The Democrats voting with the American people to repeal one of the biggest tax hikes in history were Mike Ross of Arkansas, Jim Matheson of Utah, Larry Kissell and Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, and Dan Boren of Oklahoma.
Today, the House today continued its debate on H.R. 4402 - The National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act. Working through the lunch hour today, the House passed the bill by a vote of 256 - 160. This bill would take steps toward streamlining the excessive regulations on domestic mining activities and providing our manufacturing community with valuable materials it needs. With the recent news that US manufacturing is in steep decline, it's essential that we make moves to roll back red tape. And this legislation would reduce our dependence on China. The House as a whole is not conducting anymore business today.
This afternoon, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 2237, Democrats’ small business bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has filled the amendment tree, thus blocking all amendments, and filed cloture to cut off debate on the bill. The Senate is scheduled to vote at 2 PM on a motion to table the text of a House bill dealing with the same subject, cloture on the Landrieu substitute amendment, and then cloture on the underlying bill, S. 2237.
The Hill reported yesterday, “Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) [progressive junior senator] and eight other Senate Democrats proposed new legislation on Tuesday that seeks to counteract the 2010 Citizens United case in which the Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot limit political spending by corporations, unions or other groups.”
And according to National Journal today, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is packing the summer schedule with symbolic, campaign trail-themed votes. . . . Democrats also plan next week to force a vote on a new version of the DISCLOSE Act, a bill to require disclosure of campaign spending by corporations and other groups.”
Of course in his speech to AEI last month, Senator Mitch McConnell explained what Democrats’ partisan DISCLOSE Act is really all about: “This is the Democrats’ legislative response to Citizens United, in which the Supreme Court correctly ruled that Congress may not ban political speech based on the identity of the speaker. The DISCLOSE Act aims to get around this ruling by compelling certain targeted groups to disclose the names of their donors, while excluding others, such as unions, from doing the same. . . . What this bill calls for is government-compelled disclosure of contributions to all grassroots groups, which is far more dangerous than its proponents are willing to admit.
"Because if disclosure is forced upon some but not all, it’s not an act of good government, it’s a political weapon. And that’s precisely what those who are pushing this legislation have in mind. This is nothing less than an effort by the government itself to exposes its critics to harassment and intimidation, either by government authorities or through third-party allies. And that should concern every one of us. Those pushing the DISCLOSE Act have a simple view: if the Supreme Court is no longer willing to limit the speech of those who oppose their agenda, they’ll find other ways to do it.”
Indeed, in its Citizens United opinion, the Court explained, “Premised on mistrust of governmental power, the First Amendment stands against attempts to disfavor certain subjects or viewpoints. … the government may commit a constitutional wrong when by law it identifies certain preferred speakers. … The First Amendment protects speech and speaker, and the ideas that flow from each. … We find no basis for the proposition that, in the context of political speech, the Government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers.”
One wonders how or why, except for purely political reasons, Democrats can again advance a bill to limit rights to privacy and free speech of the American people while being unwilling to ask its own candidate for President of the United States to disclose issues such 1) after four years - his academic records upon which he touted his qualifications for being president and which now seem to be lacking based on his ineptness to date , 2) after four years - records and an explanation on why and how he could have traveled on foreign passports and also attended college under funds only available to foreign students, 3) and the latest example - his justification for the use of Executive Privilege on records never issued or communicated by the White House in order prevent and or protect AG Eric Holder from properly turning over DOJ records to Oversight Congressional Committee with regard to Fast and Furious. While other incidents and situations could be detailed, these three alone show the repeated hypocrisy by liberals in the U.S. Senate. They are very good at obfuscation and covering the "backsides" of both their liberal leaders and themselves.
Make one almost willing to support those advancing Constitutional amendment proposals to limit the time Senators and Representatives may serve in office or even removing their ability to set their own pay and benefits which are statistically obscene in comparison to their constituents.
Tags: US Senate, Disclose Act, free speech, US House, repeal of ObamaCare, minerals productions To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
0 comments:
Post a Comment