On ObamaCare, a Life and Debt Struggle
If you tuned into C-SPAN this
week and mistook it for the Soap Opera Network, you're not alone. This
morning, the ObamaCare-budget drama took another twist, as House
conservatives accurately diagnosed one of the major problems facing
America: ObamaCare dollars in the federal funding stream.
With the help of two Democrats (Reps. Mike McIntyre and Jim
Matheson), 230 members kept their promise to play hardball on a health
care policy that could be the downfall of American society. After an
hour of debate, representatives moved to pass a $986.3 billion
short-term budget that keeps the lights on in Washington and fully funds
the government through December 15. What it won't do is devote a single
cent to ObamaCare -- ever.Under Rep. Steve Scalise's (R-La.) amendment, Congress would choke off the health care law before it can inflict more damage than it already has. Almost every day, workers across the country are waking up to the news that their employers (like Trader Joe's, Walgreen's, and Home Depot) are either dropping their health care coverage or dumping them onto the government's exchange. Together this mass exodus spells disaster for the health care industry, which is slowly being commandeered by the federal government. We applaud the House members who voted to defund ObamaCare. For now, the question isn't whether the House will fight, but how far that fight will go.
Senate Republicans like Ted Cruz
(R-Texas) will try to block the procedural motions on the House's CR in
the Senate, but it will take a united GOP front to keep Majority Leader
Harry Reid (D-Nev.) from striking the House's bill and replacing it
with a resolution that fully funds ObamaCare. In the meantime, Sen.
Chuck Schumer (D-Pa.) is just one of the Democrats who's banking on the
GOP's track record. "At the end of the day, they'll blink," he told
MSNBC's "Morning Joe." Like others who watched the "cut, cap, and
balance" debate unfold, he thinks the conservatives' courage is
short-lived.
While the GOP regroups for the Senate vote next week, Schumer
insisted the President's party wouldn't budge. "We will not... don't get
it into your heads that we will. We won't. Don't make it part of your
strategy that we'll cave. We're unified. We're together. You're not."
Sen. Reid went a step further. "In case there is any shred of doubt in
the minds of our House counterparts, I want to be absolutely crystal
clear," he threatened.
"Any bill that defunds ObamaCare is dead." Liberals may have the Senate
numbers to sink the bill, but they're still on the wrong side of public opinion.
And conservatives understand that if Democrats are left defending a
policy that no one likes, it can only boost the GOP's prospects.
While members sort out the
legislative chaos, it looks like the U.S. Supreme Court will be taking
its second crack at ObamaCare -- this time on the contraception-abortion
mandate. With the circuit courts issuing conflicting opinions on
conscience, the Justice Department is asking the Court to break the tie.
The case that seems destined for America's highest bench is a lawsuit
from Conestoga Wood Specialists, a Pennsylvania company owned by
Mennonites who "object as a matter of conscience to facilitating certain
contraceptives that they believe can destroy human life."
Ultimately, Alliance Defending Freedom's Matt Bowman points out,
"The question is whether the government can pick and choose what faith
is, who the faithful are, and when and where they can exercise their
faith." Let's hope the Court answers that question the same way the
Founders did -- with a resounding no!Labrador Hounds House on Marriage
Speaking
of treating people's views with tolerance, Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho)
has a new bill that aims to do exactly that. While the Left is busy
talking about the "injustices" of natural marriage, very few reporters
are telling the stories of Christians being hauled into court, before
human rights commissions, and even questioned by their own employers for subscribing to a view on marriage that the majority
of Americans share! With a country fiercely divided on marriage law,
wedding vendors from Washington State to New Jersey are trapped in the
middle, wondering why their rights are suddenly less important than
homosexuals'.
Under Labrador's "Marriage and Religious Freedom Act," the federal
government would be bound to respect the marriage views of everyone from
businessmen to ordinary citizens. Specifically, the bill ensures that
Americans' First Amendment rights are honored by federal agencies like
the IRS, which has been guilty of singling out social conservatives for
harassment. Under HR 3133,
a person's beliefs on natural marriage cannot be used as a basis for
exclusion from federal programs or benefits. Barely 24 hours after it
was introduced, Labrador's bill had 62 cosponsors.
Hopefully, the measure will help
bring the spotlight back to the fallout of the marriage debate -- and
not a moment too soon. Yesterday, the Department of Labor announced
its intent to trample the will of voters -- and the sovereignty of 37
states -- by ordering the federal government to start applying same-sex
benefits in all 50 states. (We'll have more on this latest outrage
Monday). In the meantime, urge your congressman
to sign on to Rep. Labrador's bill and take the first step in
protecting Americans against an administration bent on ignoring their
constitutional rights.
Sentence Punctuated by Congress, Media
The
liberal media may not give conservatives a fair shake, but they
certainly have a soft spot for Leo Johnson. After yesterday's hearing,
in which FRC shooter Floyd Corkins was sentenced to 25 years
in prison, reporters across the country were clamoring for time with
Leo the Hero. As he moved from interview to interview (including a stop
on yesterday's "Washington Watch" radio), our friends -- like CNSNews.com and Gov. Mike Huckabee -- continued their solid coverage of the shooting and its aftermath.
On the Hill, the support was
just as strong. In a powerful rebuke of Southern Poverty Law Center, the
organization which fueled Corkins's attack, four members of Congress
took to the House floor to decry their reckless labeling of Christian
organizations and harassment of conservatives. Reps. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), Tim Huelskamp (R-Kans.), Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) used yesterday's sentencing as an opportunity to call for an end to the SPLC's intolerance. As I said in a column for today's Washington Times, Corkins admitted to the FBI (Preview)
that he identified Family Research Council as a target through the
Southern Poverty Law Center's so-called "hate map." Prosecutors later
revealed in federal court this link between SPLC and this act of
domestic terrorism. In the greatest irony, the Southern Poverty Law
Center -- the supposed authority on all things "hateful" -- was linked
in court to Corkins' attack on the Family Research Council.
Despite the evidence, many in
the media refuse to admit what the Southern Poverty Law Center itself
says: SPLC is a liberal organization dedicated to tracking what it
considers to be "right-wing" extremism. It's time for the Southern
Poverty Law Center retract its inaccurate and malicious hate label,
which encouraged Corkins' hateful violence, and send another message:
Civil discourse is essential to a democratic republic.
** On Friday's edition of "Washington Watch,"
FRC's Vice President of Government Affairs David Christensen joins us
to talk about the latest action on the Hill. Rep. Vicky Hartzler will
stop by later to talk about her stance on the House floor speaking out
against groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center. Also, Congressman
Joe Pitts (R-Pa) will update us on the CR vote today and what it means
for the ObamaCare going forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment