Pelosi, Slaughter went to court against GOP in 2005 case that exposes Slaughter Solut

[Stephanie]

By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
03/16/10 7:54 AM EDT

She wasn't so keen on "deeming" bills passed when Republicans controlled Congress. (AP / Ceneta)
You've been hearing a lot this week about the Slaughter Solution, the rule devised by House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter of New York whereby the House would pass an Obamacare reconcilliation bill via a rule that "deems" the chamber to have voted for the Senate version of Obamacare even though no such recorded vote was actually taken.

It's been dubbed the "Slaughter Solution in the media. I prefer to call the Alice in Wonderland way of passing Obamacare.

But put aside the present for the moment and step into my time machine. Dial the date selector back to 2005 when the Republican majority in Congress approved a national debt limit increase. But there was a minor difference between the two chambers' versions resulting from a clerical error.

Guess who went to federal court to challenge the constitutionality of the bill, citing the difference between the two texts? The Ralph Nader-backed Public Citizen legal activists. Here's the argument they made:

"Article I of the United States Constitution requires that before proposed legislation may "become[] a Law," U.S. CONST. art. I, § 7, cl. 2, "(1) a bill containing its exact text [must be] approved by a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives; (2) the Senate [must] approve[] precisely the same text; and (3) that text [must be] signed into law by the President," Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 448, 118 S.Ct. 2091, 141 L.Ed.2d 393 (1998).



Read more at the Washington Examiner: Pelosi, Slaughter went to court against GOP in 2005 case that exposes Slaughter Solution flaw UPDATED: Heritage's Darling explains it all | Washington Examiner

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You know, back in the Frist/Delay/Bush era, moderates and libertarians tried to warn the GOP faithful that the shennanigans going on under the GOP leadership would come back to haunt them.

Lo and Behold, today is the day.

If you're surprised that Pelosi is suddenly a favor of the "deem and pass" option, then you're just naive. And come the GOP's turn at bat, I guarantee that they'll use "deem and pass" options too for stuff as important as healthcare. Once a new trick is in the playbook, its only reasonable to expect the other side will use it too.

 

[dilloduck]

You know, back in the Frist/Delay/Bush era, moderates and libertarians tried to warn the GOP faithful that the shennanigans going on under the GOP leadership would come back to haunt them.

Lo and Behold, today is the day.

If you're surprised that Pelosi is suddenly a favor of the "deem and pass" option, then you're just naive. And come the GOP's turn at bat, I guarantee that they'll use "deem and pass" options too for stuff as important as healthcare. Once a new trick is in the playbook, its only reasonable to expect the other side will use it too.

ah yes---criticize a tactic and then use it because the other side did.

It's just one more thing that makes me love politics.

 

[edthecynic]

By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
03/16/10 7:54 AM EDT

She wasn't so keen on "deeming" bills passed when Republicans controlled Congress. (AP / Ceneta)
You've been hearing a lot this week about the Slaughter Solution, the rule devised by House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter of New York whereby the House would pass an Obamacare reconcilliation bill via a rule that "deems" the chamber to have voted for the Senate version of Obamacare even though no such recorded vote was actually taken.

It's been dubbed the "Slaughter Solution in the media. I prefer to call the Alice in Wonderland way of passing Obamacare.

You mean re-dubbed from the "Gingrich Solution."

 

[del]

well, at least obama hasn't resorted to using signing statements in order to do an end run around the constitution like booooooooosh did.

oh, snap.
nevermind.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You know, back in the Frist/Delay/Bush era, moderates and libertarians tried to warn the GOP faithful that the shennanigans going on under the GOP leadership would come back to haunt them.

Lo and Behold, today is the day.

If you're surprised that Pelosi is suddenly a favor of the "deem and pass" option, then you're just naive. And come the GOP's turn at bat, I guarantee that they'll use "deem and pass" options too for stuff as important as healthcare. Once a new trick is in the playbook, its only reasonable to expect the other side will use it too.

ah yes---criticize a tactic and then use it because the other side did.

It's just one more thing that makes me love politics.

It pretty much is the rule when it comes to these things.

Once you hand a politician a shiny new way to make an end run around the mechanisms of government, they'll use it. It doesn't matter how much they hated it when the other guy had it. They'll talk about how "conflicted" they are, and how much deep debate went into using it....

But in the end, they'll use it.

That's why the expanded Executive Power under Bush and Cheney is never going to go away. No one willing to run for President is ever going to be willing to give up that power.

 

[dilloduck]

It's such a pisser when the other party comes up with an evil stroke of genius and gets away with it that the only true payback is to adopt it as one of your own.

 

[US Army Retired]

The GOP only used the Slaughter Solution on getting ammendments passed and not a full fledge bill like this. It's different. What Obama and the Dems are doing is totally in violation of the constitution.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So if you're claiming that the two situations are comparable, all you're really doing is supporting the idea that whoever claims this is unconstitutional is full of shit.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

The GOP only used the Slaughter Solution on getting ammendments passed and not a full fledge bill like this. It's different. What Obama and the Dems are doing is totally in violation of the constitution.

As I've read it, they're using this to basically pass ammendments to the bill that passed the Senate and the House. It is pretty much the same thing.

Doesn't make it right. Just makes it ironic that the GOP is complaining.