New steamer from the WSJ: Congress must cite constitutional authorization for bills they introduce

[Erose999]

A big pile of crap from our old friend Rupert.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703384504576055632235572362.html?mod=wsj_share_facebook

< Rupert Murdoch, inc. >

If the new Congress to be sworn in on Wednesday is the tea party's cardinal achievement so far, its most symbolic achievement will come on Thursday, when the first order of business in the House will be a reading, aloud, of the Constitution. That event alone will not bring us any closer to limited government. But it will help get a debate going that for too long has been dormant.

Already, House Democrats are lining up to ridicule a closely related rule that the Republican majority has said it will adopt, requiring members to cite the specific constitutional authority for any bill they introduce. "It's an air kiss they're blowing to the tea party," says Barney Frank, outgoing chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Henry Waxman, outgoing chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, all but dismissed any role for Congress in assessing the constitutionality of its actions: "Whether it is constitutional or not is going to be whether the Supreme Court says it is." < / Rupert Murdoch, inc. >

How exactly are these assholes planning on instituting that rule? The GOOP goes against the constitution more than the Dems do what with their wars, DOMA, DADT, and all that mess. They LOVE taking peoples "personal freedoms" away. I think the author of that piece, and congressman Scott Garrett are both full of shit.

http://garrett.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=217020

Anyway, discuss :)

[arcane1]

1. I wonder if they will really read it ALL, unaltered

with nothing omitted. Somehow I suspect they'll gloss over something at some point.

[NYC Liberal]

2. The Republicans are overcompensating for their disregard of the Constitution.

Just follow the Constitution without grandstanding about it.

[SpiralHawk]

3. The Republicons want to replace government of the people, with corporate profit-making

for their elite fatcat RepubliCronies.

Make no mistake. The TeaBaggers are just RepubliCorp's SuckerPuppets.

Ptooooey. A Plague on all their grossly overvalued McMansions (R).

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. "Guide us home!"

Such a transformative election. /S

[Warren DeMontague]

5. I want to find the part of the Constitution that says the government can arrest people for smoking a

plant in the privacy of their own home.

I'll wait.

[gratuitous]

6. This is positively earth-shaking

Unless, of course, as David Waldman pointed out at Daily Kos, you're familiar with existing House Rule XIII (d)(1):

(d) Each report of a committee on a public bill or public joint resolution shall contain the following:

(1) A statement citing the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution.

{Waldman comments:}The statement of constitutional authority is being moved from the committee report, which is written after a bill is refined and amended in committee, to a slip of paper that accompanies the bill as it's introduced, before all the changes are made.

That should be pretty awesome right there! (Hey, I wonder what they would have put on that slip of paper for the 1996 line-item veto legislation they passed, and that was later struck down by the Supreme Court. I'm sure they can totally show the Court the piece of paper next time. That'll learn 'em, the sociamalists!) {End Waldman}

So, Murdoch's Wall Street Urinal is basically conceding that they don't know current House rules and procedures, as this qualifies as a "symbolic achievement." Uh no, it's not. But why should the WSJ concern itself with such niggling items as facts and stuff? There's an ideology to sell!

[ljm2002]

7. Okay, I have a question for the Constitutional purists in Congress...

...if we're "at war" in Iraq and Afghanistan, how come Congress has never declared war on either of those two countries? And since they haven't declared war on either country, aren't we obliged to leave?