---------------
Today in Washington, D.C. - Nov. 15, 2011:
The Senate began consideration of 2 district judge nominees. At noon, the Senate will vote on the nominations. Following the votes, the Senate will recess until 2:15 PM for weekly policy lunches.
When the Senate returns, it will resume consideration of H.R. 2354, the Fiscal Year 2012 Energy-Water appropriations bill, which is expected to be the vehicle for the next minibus bill, combining the Energy-Water, Financial Services, and State-Foreign Operations appropriations bills.
US House to consider H.R. 2838, Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011 which reauthorized the US Coast Guard. It authorizes the service for fiscal years 2012 through 2014, and authorizes a service strength of 47,000 active duty personnel. The bill authorizes $8.49 billion for the Coast Guard for fiscal year 2012, $8.6 billion for fiscal year 2013, and $8.7 billion for fiscal year 2014.
The House is also expected to vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) this week.
As reported yesterday, the Supreme Court announced it would take cases challenging the constitutionality of President Obama’s unpopular health care law, setting up “what is believed to be a modern-day record” length oral argument next year. In addition to comments by individuals yesterday to this news, below are from he press.
According to The Hill, “The high court on Monday culled together pieces of the appeals filed by the Justice Department and by the NFIB and 26 states. The arguments, which could be split over multiple days, will break down as follows: two hours on the core question of whether the individual coverage mandate is constitutional; one hour on whether a separate tax law bars the court from reaching a decision on the constitutional question; one hour on whether the law’s Medicaid expansion is constitutional; and an hour-and-a-half on whether, if the mandate is unconstitutional, other parts of the healthcare law must also be struck down.”
In an editorial today,The Wall Street Journal writes, “In announcing yesterday that it will consider the law's constitutionality, the Supreme Court said it would give an historic five-and-a-half hours to oral arguments. . . . We . . . think this shows the Court recognizes the seriousness of the constitutional issues involved. It makes those who cavalierly dismissed the very idea of a challenge two years ago look, well, constitutionally challenged.”
And even The New York Times noted yesterday, “The law is increasingly unpopular with the public, including Democrats, according to recent surveys.”
In May, 44 Senate Republicans filed an amicus brief with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing the unconstitutionality of President Obama’s health care law. In a letter to his colleagues, Leader McConnell explained the brief: “First it asserts that the Individual Mandate in the [2010 health care law] is an unprecedented and unauthorized exercise by the Congress of its authority to ‘regulate Commerce… among the several States…’ For the first time, the Congress is not regulating an economic activity in which its citizens have chosen to engage, but rather is mandating that they engage in economic activity – that they purchase a particular product – to begin with; moreover, it would allow the federal government to punish those who make a different choice. Second, the brief argues that if the individual mandate is deemed constitutional, there will no longer be any meaningful limit on Congress’s power to regulate its citizens under the Commerce Clause. Congress’s specific power under that clause will be transformed into a general police power, all but eliminating the constitutional distinction between federal and state regulatory authority in our federal union.”
As the WSJ editors write, “The law is already speeding the ruin of U.S. health care, increasing costs and reducing competition. It is easily the most unpopular major reform in decades and the most unpopular entitlement expansion ever. More broadly, it is impossible to duck the matter of whether this law's powers would stop at health care, as its backers insist, or whether it will be merely the first wave of other such mandated enforcements, if the federal government is given the power to compel individuals to participate in commerce, rather than merely regulate it. These are issues involving the nation's core understanding of the citizenry's relationship to its government. Voters should have the chance to include the Court's verdict on the law when they go to the polls in 2012.”
Tags: INSERT TAGS 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