I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
"The government has the power to" does not imply that the government "has an obligation to"
I'll go one further: Right now there is a bill before Congress (the House), H.R. 819: Government Shutdown Fairness Act, which would prohibit Congress and the President from getting paid if Congress doesn't pass a budget within 24-hours of it's required deadline to do so (April 16 or end of fiscal year, as necessary; I think those were the dates quoted recently by Congressmen Woodall from Georgia on CSPAN recently. I'd have to look them up to be sure) or pass a CR. Woodall also agreed that it IS unconstitutional for Congress not to pass a budget and effectively shutdown the government. So, I ask who's right? The Congressman or those with a decenting opinion?
I mean, really...
If WE don't know what those we elect to govern us are expected to do in adherring to our nation's highest law, how then can we expect to hold these people to task and call them out when they (presumably) violate the supreme law?
Last edited by Objective Voice; 04-01-11 at 10:41 AM.
Likewise, I'm telling you that you have the power to go into a theatre and scream "FIRE" - but I'm not telling you that you should or that you must. Just that you are able.
Last edited by Objective Voice; 04-01-11 at 03:53 PM.
Of course the House can, under the Constitution, deny the government the operating funds needed to function. I should have voted that it was constitutional but the relevant question these days is is there any advantage (Is shutting down the federal government an advantage?) in doing so?
“Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001
It better not shutdown, otherwise we're screwed.
Eat me, drink me, love me;
Laura make much of me
If it were we would have heard about the last time is was shut down.
But I for one will be very pissed and the stinking Liberals in the Senate who going to cause this so they can blame it on the Tea Party.
Thing is they want to do that because they are going to do what ever they can to discredit the Tea Party because they know they are growing in strength as they are going down for the count with Obama leading the race to the bottom.
I'm retired so a shut down will do me and plenty of others no good what ever the results would be.
The Constitution grants Congress the authority to:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
And THAT IS ALL.
The Tenth Amendment forbids an unlimited unrestricted Congress. Period.
Congress can only write laws the Constitution allows it to.
If the Congress fails to write a budget or the President refuses to sign it, then the budget doesn't exist and the government does not have the authority to spend money.
It's that simple, and it's what the Constitution requires. So, if the Democrats don't desire a government shut down (they want one, and they want it BAD), they have to stop being such complete idiots and start recognizing that they don't control the House, that the House is where the spending bills originate, and that the country can't afford their bull**** unconstitutional programs anymore.
No.Therefore, if that approve of a law - and consent of said approval is derived from Congress passing a bill, thereby making it law - does not Congress have a responsibility to fund those portions of the law that require funding (appropriations) so that the law is fully carried out?
Mayor Snorkum notes the wonderful cutting edge discoveries from the Super Conducting Super Collider never materialized.
You really, REALLY REALLY must read the Constitution some day. It can be found on line if you're curious about it. Here's what the Constitution says about HR 819:I'll go one further: Right now there is a bill before Congress (the House), H.R. 819: Government Shutdown Fairness Act, which would prohibit Congress and the President from getting paid if Congress doesn't pass a budget within 24-hours of it's required deadline to do so (April 16 or end of fiscal year, as necessary; I think those were the dates quoted recently by Congressmen Woodall from Georgia on CSPAN recently. I'd have to look them up to be sure) or pass a CR. Woodall also agreed that it IS unconstitutional for Congress not to pass a budget and effectively shutdown the government. So, I ask who's right? The Congressman or those with a decenting opinion?
They get paid what they get paid. Period. Certainly Madison meant it to mean that the sitting Congress can't vote themselves a pay raise. It also means their pay cannot be reduced in-term.Amendment 27 - Limiting Changes to Congressional Pay. Ratified 5/7/1992. History
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Certainly doesn't look that way. So the nation should stop funding all those unconstitutional programs, which comprise something like three quarters of the budget.So, you're saying it's okay to ignore the supreme law of the land?
No. Mayor Snorkum means really, really start obeying the Constitution. You mean, ignore those inconvenient things like the Constitution that forbids the laws and programs you desire.I mean, really...
Mayor Snorkum knows what the Mayor expects those elected to REPRESENT him are supposed to do. You shouldn't use the pronoun "we" when your uncertainty isn't shared. Those people are held to task by writing them when they err and not voting for them when they really mess up. There's always someone else out there who can read the Constitution.If WE don't know what those we elect to govern us are expected to do in adherring to our nation's highest law, how then can we expect to hold these people to task and call them out when they (presumably) violate the supreme law?