CBO Score Rumored to be Over $1 Trillion

As Allahpundit says, this is too good to check.  Rep. Joe Barton is making news on Facebook:

health care issue is still up in the air.....the Congressional budget office score has come in at over 1 trillion $..yes .....1 trillion......if the bill is not posted by 6 pm today< we cant vote on it saturday...stay tuned

The actual score should be out soon  but if it is over a trillion Pelosi is going to have a rough time getting more votes if the whip count is close as it appears to be right now.

Meanwhile ( via Memeorandum), the folks at the CBO have had enough of 100+ hours work weeks:

CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told House Appropriations Legislative subcommittee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) that his staff has been working “100-hour weeks” and cannot keep up with the budgetary and economic impact queries lawmakers have about health care.

“Analysis of competing health care proposals absorbed a huge share of the agency’s resources, and CBO analysts in that area have worked flat out for more than a year,” Elmendorf said today. “…Considerable congressional interest in analysis of health care issues is likely to persist and …the almost round-the-clock schedule maintained this past year by CBO’s current staff cannot be maintained much longer.”

Mark Levin has a lawsuit ready to go if ObamaCare passes by the Slaughter Solution.  I am still praying it doesn't come to that.  Megan Kelly interviews Prof. Michael McConnell on the constitutionality of Slaughter's rule:

Jason Altmire Opposes Slaughter Rule

Jason Altmire (D PA) is, by all counts, a vote Democrats have been courting and could be key to passing the health care bill. Altmire has been leaning in recent days towards voting yes for the bill but today announces he opposes the legislative tricks being used to pass the bill. Who does he credit for his sudden concern for process, his constituents of course. Keep calling, it's working.

Trickery is Still Trickery

Pat Austin mentioned this interview over at Potluck. House Majority Whip claims in an interview with Fox there is no trickery with the methods meant to pass health care legislation in the House this week. When asked about the Slaughter rule Clyburn says,"that is one of the ways that's being discussed. And that's a way that's been used at least a hundred times since I've been here in Congress and I've only been here 18 years." No it hasn't certainly not for any bill of this size.

It has been used back in 2005 for a vote to raise the debt limit. This was not an entire bill mind you, it was a text change. As Ed Morrissey points out, in the link above, a lawsuit was filed by a private citizen by the name of Ralph Nader. The suit was joined by another couple of famous people namely, Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman and Louise Slaughter of the Slaughter Solution fame. Here is the rub and bad news for us, the Court ruled against them. Ed has the text of the ruling so I won't copy that here but he summarizes as follows:

In other words, the signatures of the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate are considered authoritative on the question of process. The court refused to interfere on a political question in 1892 and has maintained that precedent since. Unless this Supreme Court intends on overturning Marshall Field — an action that would create a constitutional crisis — Pelosi’s signature will be considered “unimpeachable,” at least in terms of process. The courts will undoubtedly have more to say on the constitutionality of the actual law, but probably not on the Slaughter Rule.

Here is the ruling on Field v Clark.   While this does appear to be some bad news for those hoping that this might be overturned on those grounds, if it passes, this doesn't have any bearing on the absolute fact that the House is operating in unknown territory here.  No bill has ever been passed this way.  Moreover, the hypocrisy of the Democrats, who filed a lawsuit on this issue for a text change yet seek to pass a bill that affects 1/6th of the economy, is stunning even for them.  No bill has been abandoned conference midstream and attempted passage by another legislative strategy.   Regardless of the constitutionality of the process, Democrats are absolutely lying when they claim this happens all the time.  It has never happened.

The Shell Game Shuffle - Let the Games Begin

The House released the reconciliation bill tonight with little fanfare. Before you rush off to read the 2300 page tome be forewarned the bill is not likely to be the actual reconciliation bill.  It is merely a shell.  Ezra Klein, chief cheerleader for all things ObamaCare at The Washington Post explains, this is just like an artist painting over an old canvas.  It all sounds so perfectly charming and harmless that way doesn't it?  Here is the nitty gritty:

Ryan said that he expects Democrats to begin the complex process on Monday, under which they would have the Budget Committee approve a phantom bill by midnight, which they will then send over to the Rules Committee. At that point, the Rules Committee will strip out all of the language in the phantom bill, and insert the changes to the Senate bill that Democrats have negotiated.

"They don't have the votes right now, but they're creating the vehicle so that they can airdrop in whatever changes they want," Ryan said.

 What was released, therefore, is the phantom bill that will have the language stripped to be replaced with whatever the heck the Democrats feel like putting in there.  They could also leave a few things in there like the public option that causes a fevah in the left at mere mention of the words.  The Democrats have added a little bonus though, the plan to nationalize the student loan industry, despite the inevitable job losses that would follow, to make voting for ObamaCare a bit more palatable for those who might choke on their vote.

Paul Ryan issued a detailed evaluation of the numerous hurdles facing Democrats in choosing to go the reconciliation route.  He also wrote a great op-ed for The Washington Post outlining what legitimate reform should and could look like if Democrats were not so hell-bent on passing their fiscal disaster on a strictly partisan basis. In addition to the procedural hurdles, there is great risk of constitutional challenges that appear to be well founded.  Michael McConnell, professor and director of Stamford's Constitutional Law Center writes:

The Slaughter solution attempts to allow the House to pass the Senate bill, plus a bill amending it, with a single vote. The senators would then vote only on the amendatory bill. But this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form. As the Supreme Court wrote in Clinton v. City of New York (1998), a bill containing the "exact text" must be approved by one house; the other house must approve "precisely the same text."

These constitutional rules set forth in Article I are not mere exercises in formalism. They ensure the democratic accountability of our representatives. Under Section 7, no bill can become law unless it is put up for public vote by both houses of Congress, and under Section 5 "the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question . . . shall be entered on the Journal." These requirements enable the people to evaluate whether their representatives are promoting their interests and the public good. Democratic leaders have not announced whether they will pursue the Slaughter solution. But the very purpose of it is to enable members of the House to vote for something without appearing to do so. The Constitution was drafted to prevent that.

While we may take some comfort that there are reasonable grounds on which to challenge this blatant power grab by the Democrats, it would be far better if this never makes its way into law.  While the Democratic leadership attempts to hold their persuadable members in Washington so they will not have an opportunity to hear from their constituents, they can't stop the constituents from coming to Washington.

Join the People's Surge Against ObamaCare in Washington on Tuesday March 16, 2010

Bring a pitchfork, well maybe not.  In all honesty, I think it is possible this will be the law of the land by this time next week unless we act.   There is still time time to make our voices heard.

For More please read: Another Black Conservative, The Other McCain, Doug Ross, RedState and Riehl World View,  Maggie's Notebook and Michelle Malkin
Follow the growing thread at Memeorandum