TexasCHLforum.com

Anything to this? Sounds scary enough without any gun control implications.

http://gunowners.org/a08012011.htm

"Both houses of Congress will be voting on a debt ceiling bill that establishes a legislative committee with TREMENDOUS powers. Fox News is calling this committee a SUPER CONGRESS, because its legislative proposals (which could include gun control provisions) CANNOT be filibustered or amended in the Senate or House."

Regular congress passed the anti-constitutional NFA, the anti-constitutional GCA, the anti-constitutional homeland defense gun ban, etc. If regular congress can violate the constitution willy-nilly then who knows what Super Congress can do?

Remember. The opposite of Progress is Congress.

So the end result of this charade was that we go further into debt and the government attains even more power....

SQLGeek wrote:So the end result of this charade was that we go further into debt and the government attains even more power....

Obama promised change. People assumed he meant a positive change for the better.

GOP are messing with Dems. The debt is raised by 900 billions enough to be burned by next Spring, where the election is in full force. The super committee will fail to enact budget "savings" cause there would be tax increases proposed by reducing tax deductions, etc. Auto reduction would kick in next year and that then people would feel the heat and GOP would propose to save the boat by reforming the tax system and raise the retirement age to 75 by the 2020.
The spending is out of control and raising the tax on big rollers would drive investments outside the US.

This "super" congress is not going to hold water. It is a violation of the constitution in a bunch of way-- one of which is by constitutional law you have to be able to have debate on a topic and be able to amend a bill. All it takes is one disgruntled politician to sue (and there are plenty of lawyers in congress) and this "super congress" goes the way of the do-do bird.

...they've forgotten what happened the last time a bunch of dumb farmers had enough...

boba wrote:

SQLGeek wrote:So the end result of this charade was that we go further into debt and the government attains even more power....

Obama promised change. People assumed he meant a positive change for the better.

Another classic example of what happens when you assume anything.

mamabearCali wrote:This "super" congress is not going to hold water. It is a violation of the constitution in a bunch of way-- one of which is by constitutional law you have to be able to have debate on a topic and be able to amend a bill. All it takes is one disgruntled politician to sue (and there are plenty of lawyers in congress) and this "super congress" goes the way of the do-do bird.

More information today:

The agreement creates a 12-person House and Senate special committee to identify further spending cuts. The committee must complete its work by Thanksgiving - November 23 - and Congress must hold an up or down vote on the committee recommendations by December 23. The committee could overhaul the tax code or find savings in benefit programs like Medicaid, Medicare or Social Security. Congress could not modify the committee's recommendation.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

mamabearCali wrote:This "super" congress is not going to hold water. It is a violation of the constitution in a bunch of way-- one of which is by constitutional law you have to be able to have debate on a topic and be able to amend a bill. All it takes is one disgruntled politician to sue (and there are plenty of lawyers in congress) and this "super congress" goes the way of the do-do bird.

Ergo, 'deem and pass' as a Congressional procedure is nefarious.

The "super" congress better also vote theselves superman capes as they may need them if they think that people would put up with them.......

mamabearCali wrote:This "super" congress is not going to hold water. It is a violation of the constitution in a bunch of way-- one of which is by constitutional law you have to be able to have debate on a topic and be able to amend a bill.

Since when is the Constitution part of the discussion in DC?

I don't think that Obama is above trying to subvert the Constitution, but I also do think that GOA hyperventilates a lot. I tend to take what they say with a big grain of salt. So this speculation that the "super congress" would attempt to legislate gun control (which is entirely outside its mandate—which is to find a way through the budget crisis) is exactly that: speculation, and it is not based on the facts.

It is a fact that boneheads like Kerry would try if they thought they could, but this committee is merely that....a committee. It isn't really a super congress.

Salty1 wrote:The "super" congress better also vote theselves superman capes as they may need them if they think that people would put up with them.......

The subjects in the most populous states already put up with it.

mamabearCali wrote:This "super" congress is not going to hold water. It is a violation of the constitution in a bunch of way-- one of which is by constitutional law you have to be able to have debate on a topic and be able to amend a bill. All it takes is one disgruntled politician to sue (and there are plenty of lawyers in congress) and this "super congress" goes the way of the do-do bird.

Yeeeeup. This is the reason I couldn't support Boehner's bill or the bill that ultimately passed. When you essentially whittle congress down to 12 people, you've disenfranchised a huge number of citizens - even entire states! And we the people don't get to vote on who goes into the Debt Committee, nor is it representative of the overall makeup of Congress. It's 50/50 Dems/Republicans - there's no guarantee that we'll get a Tea Party rep in that committee, and they could easily pack it with RINO's. And as much as I want a Balanced Budget Amendment, for Congress to pass one law that forces a future (or even that same) Congress to vote on certain bills, amendments, etc. is a clear corruption of the process. That said, I don't think the Debt Committee will take up gun control or anything else but the budget. They'll be under alot of pressure to get something so watered-down and vague that it will pass. Including gun control in their "recommendation" would ensure its failure.