With all the talk of the House & Senate using procedural shenanigans like reconciliation & the "Slaughter rule" to ram socialized medicine through the Congress so they could present it to the Socialist -in-Chief in the White House for signing; I think the time has come to analyze what the constitutional requirements are when it comes to how a proposed bill becomes a law.
Baldman is going to provide some very dry, extremely technical analysis of Article I Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution. Here goes:
According to the U.S. Constitution, both the HOUSE & the SENATE have to pass the SAME EXACT SHIT and present it to the PRESIDENT for signing.
Now I know the meaning of the sentence above may be unclear to some. The same words may mean different things to different people.
So let's try to clarify:
What does the Constitution mean by "the exact same shit"?
It means the bill passed by both the House & the Senate has to be the same. Exactly the same. "Almost the same" won't do. "Substantially similar" doesn't cut it. "So close, its like Tiki & Ronde Barber; you can't tell them apart"-NO GOOD.
What does the Constitution mean by "passed"?
Now I know in the Senate, when they use the word "passed", it's usually in a sentence like "Ted Kennedy passed out during happy hour again." Or "Robert Byrd passed out the white sheets from his old days in the KKK".
But when the Constitution says "passed" it means something else.
It means the ENTIRE bill has to be voted on. Yea or Nay. And those votes must be recorded. And when they count up the recorded votes, if the YEAS have more votes than the NAYS, then the bill can be presented to the Socialist-In-Chief for signing.
And if they don't PASS THE SAME SHIT or don't VOTE ON THE ENTIRE BILL & still have the BALLS to present it to the "beyond obsessed with health care" Socialist President for signing- it will set off a shit storm of protest.
And a whole bunch of people will be running to the nearest courthouse.