Tag: rules

Justin Amash

Lt Gov @briancalley stood w/ me from day one when I decided to run for Congress. He's a great friend & ally, and I'm honored to support him.

11:47 AM - 26 Aug 2013

How do you like them apples, Wes Nakagiri?  TEA folk?  Yessirree, 'ol constitutional Justin just face-wedgied all those opposing Snyder's Obamacare Medicaid Expansion by palling around with the deciding vote.

"The emergency manager has met with the White House and members of the state's congressional delegation, and these meetings focused on how the federal government can assist in Detroit's restructuring," said Orr's spokesperson Bill Nowling in an email message. "At each of those meetings it was made clear that a federal bailout is not a possibility."

Let that sink in.

Nobody is interested in bailing out LBJ's "model city" Detroit.  N-O-B-O-D-Y.  Sure, the Congressional Black Caucus has gone whining to race-baiter-in-chief, president Odowngrade², with JoAnn's "bring home some bacon" meme, but that narrative is as common as the sun rising in the East.  Besides, preezy Soetoro's agenda is already booked with making this entire nation look like Detoilet, so, how in the Hell can he bail out Detoilet?  Barry can't.  All of D.C. knows that bailing out Detoilet is opening Pandora's box.  Think Killadelphia isn't just around the corner on going teats up?  Think again.  It is poison for the Democratic Socialist Party in 2014 as much as implementing Obummercare is, and completely lethal for Hillary PUMA's in 2016.  Don't even go there about BJ and Mrs. Secretary Benghazi - they know damn well they've got damage control issues on their hands.

Working w/ my good friend @briancalley to welcome new Rs to @MIGOP who care about limited government, economic freedom & individual liberty.

Really, Justin?  Working with those trying to implement Obamacare entanglements in Michigan, isn't exactly what I would describe as a Republican value.

What a lying Progressive slovenly attired Hillary pantsuit-esque uniform wearing Corporatist slime-ball.  There is no such thing as "free" monies.  Rewarding bad governmental behavior will only decimate every state dumb enough not to see the Feds are offloading their debt onto them.

One provision of the law [ObamaCare], the bulk of which goes into effect next year, expands state Medicaid coverage to individuals earning less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level. In exchange, the federal government will provide 100 percent reimbursement for the expandedcoverage for three years, phasing down to 90 percent in 2020.

"The fastest thing that's going to go when we're cutting spending in Washington is a 100 or 90 percent match rate for Medicaid. There's no way. It doesn't matter if Republicans are running Congress or Democrats are running Congress. There's no way we're going to keep those match rates like that," said Ryan, who added that he has spread the warning to Republican governors and the National Conference of State Legislatures.

"You have already consumed your daily caloric intake of 2500.  Please report to the nearest State Dept of Excess for purging."

What?  You didn't expect that your health choices would matter any longer?

By golly those house Dems and Republicans sure your bad choices don't get worse under the free for all expansion of health care I guess. Body Mass Indexing is a believable end result of 'state provided' health insurance. By golly maybe my concerns have been answered? Jack McHugh notes the new "creepy" rules:

"Under the bill, enrollees would pay more unless they "demonstrate improved health outcomes or maintain healthy behaviors as identified in a risk assessment by their primary care practitioner." Dr. Edison characterizes as "creepy" the requirement that doctors must track and report to the state whether their patients have met that standard."

OR .. Engage in other risky behavior; do drugs, drink, engage full promiscuity, same sex ..stuff, stare at the sun, hang glide, etc..

Precious.

Two years ago, your Wizard opined on the choice Republicans faced between potential Supreme Court nominees Mary Beth Kelly and Jane Markey.  Judge Kelly, of course, is now Justice Kelly, and Judge Markey is trying again, this time squaring off against Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Colleen O'Brien.  

The Democrats have not liked the EFM law since it had its new dentures installed under the Republican legislature, and Governor Rick Snyder.  Once the realization that bloated contracts might actually be dissolved to preserve solvency for some governments, activists in labor and the donkey party got to work on placing a ballot measure before the voters.  The underlying hope of course, would be to inundate the airwaves with imagery of the starving kids of municipal workers and their uncertain futures.  Riding the guilt train all the way to the election where likely another 7 other ballot initiatives will reside.

But once again, someone forgot to dot an 'I'.

Or at least forgot to check the validity of the petitions used with the canvassing board BEFORE collecting 226,000 signatures.  Perhaps if they had done so, they might be a little more satisfied with the result.  Norm Shinkle, one of the board members, weighed in:

"Outside the meeting room, Shinkle said it was clear that Stand Up for Democracy's petitions did not comply with state law and that the group should have had the documents' format approved by the board before it started collecting signatures.

"None of this would have occurred today if they had their petition approved like almost everyone else does," he said. "The petition was defective." "

Defective.  Big 'D' .. 'efective'.

Its easy it seems, for the Dems to cry foul.  Party lines!  Partisanship! Favoritism! Those rotten Republicans!!!

Yet when one looks at the vote, split as it was along party lines, one should also weigh in the rule of law. And in doing so, see the partisanship FOR BREAKING THE LAW. Or perhaps bending it.  To assume that the Republicans are unfair by rejecting it against the will of the 'other' partisans, is to ignore the fact that the 'other' partisans are asking for an acceptance of the petitions, even illegally.

A federal appeals court judge pretty much put the Obama justice department on notice when he demanded to know if they agreed to the rules.

"Smith, a Reagan appointee, went on to say that comments from the president and others in the Executive Branch indicate they believe judges don't have the power to review laws and strike those that are unconstitutional, specifically referencing Mr. Obama's comments yesterday about judges being an "unelected group of people."

The Rules pretty much reconfirmed in 1803 Marbury v. Madison that:

Yes. The Supreme Court has the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether they are unconstitutional and therefore void.

It is emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret the rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Court must decide on the operation of each. If courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.

The rules are the rules.