Archive for the ‘Bill’ Category
Saturday, May 14th, 2011
BY TRACI DEVETTE GRIGGS
North Carolina lawmakers are considering a new law that would protect women who are considering abortions. This bill, titled Abortion: Woman’s Right to Know , would guarantee that abortion providers give women time, 24 hours, to think again before they make decisions they cannot reverse. It requires that abortion providers make available information that a woman and her family might need for making a truly informed decision.
The bill is practical. It requires abortion providers to ensure that women know:
The name of the physician who will perform the abortion.
Medical risks associated with the abortion, including psychological risks.
Probable gestational age of the unborn child.
Medical risks associated with carrying the child to term.
The opportunity to view an ultrasound and hear the heartbeat of her child, whether in the abortion facility or in another facility free of charge.
Whether the doctor has malpractice liability insurance.
The location of the hospital within 30 miles that offers obstetrical or gynecological care and where the doctor “has clinical privileges.” (more…)
Posted in Abortion, American History, Big Government, Bill, Healthcare, NC Politics, Politics, Progressive Movement, Social Issues, Women's Issues | No Comments »
Sunday, April 10th, 2011
THE FOLLOWING BILL IS BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA HOUSE:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA
SESSION 2011
H 1
HOUSE BILL 427
Short Title: Run and You’re Done. (Public)
Sponsors: Representatives Faircloth, Folwell, H. Warren, and Shepard (Primary Sponsors).
For a complete list of Sponsors, see Bill Information on the NCGA Web Site.
Referred to: Judiciary Subcommittee B.
March 23, 2011
*H427-v-1*
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 1
AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE SEIZURE, FORFEITURE, AND SALE OF MOTOR 2 VEHICLES USED BY DEFENDANTS IN FELONY CASES INVOLVING SPEEDING 3 TO ELUDE ARREST. 4
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 5
SECTION 1. G.S. 20-28.3 reads as rewritten: 6
Ҥ 20-28.3. Seizure, impoundment, forfeiture of motor vehicles for offenses involving 7 impaired driving while license revoked or without license and 8 insurance.insurance, and for felony speeding to elude arrest. 9
(a) Motor Vehicles Subject to Seizure.Seizure for Impaired Driving Offenses. – A 10 motor vehicle that is driven by a person who is charged with an offense involving impaired 11 driving is subject to seizure if: 12 (more…)
Posted in Bill, Corruption/Crime, Legal Issues, NC Politics, Politics | No Comments »
Friday, February 4th, 2011
|
|
Paul “Skip” Stam
Republican Leader
North Carolina House of Representatives |
House Passes Healthcare Freedom Act
Raleigh – The North Carolina House of Representatives today approved House Bill 2, the “NC Healthcare Protection Act”, by a vote of 66 to 50 on final passage. This legislation protects North Carolina citizens from the unconstitutional mandate to enroll in health insurance or to buy medical care under the federal healthcare legislation passed last year. Enactment of HB 2 would also make North Carolina a plaintiff with twenty-eight other states in federal lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”.
The House vote came two days day after U.S. District Court Judge Roger Vinson ruled the entire federal health care bill unconstitutional. Judge Vinson’s ruling agrees with the assertions of the majority of the NC House that Congress cannot mandate individual citizens to purchase health insurance. (more…) |
|
|
|
Posted in Big Government, Bill, Congress, Conservatism, GOP, Government Regulation, Healthcare, NC Politics, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Obamacare, Politics | No Comments »
Tuesday, February 1st, 2011
February 1, 2011
A federal judge ruled that Congress violated the Constitution by requiring Americans to buy insurance as part of the health overhaul passed last year, and said the entire law “must be declared void.”
With his ruling, U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson set up a clash over whether the Obama administration still has the authority to carry out the law designed to expand insurance to 32 million Americans.
A Florida federal judge on Monday ruled that a key plank of the health overhaul passed last March violates the Constitution, in a decision that could threaten the Obama administration’s ability to implement the law. Janet Adamy has details.
David Rivkin, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the ruling meant the 26 states challenging the law must halt implementation of pieces that apply to states and certain small businesses represented by plaintiffs.
But the Obama administration said it has no to plans to halt implementation of the law. Already, it has mailed rebate checks to seniors with high prescription drug costs, helped set up insurance pools for people with pre-existing medical conditions and required insurers to allow children to stay on their parents’ insurance policies until they reach age 26.
“We will continue to operate as we have previously,” a senior administration official said. (more…)
Posted in Big Government, Bill, Congress, Constitution, Entitlements, Government Regulation, Healthcare, Obama, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Obamacare | No Comments »
Wednesday, January 19th, 2011
REDSTATE
Posted by Brian Darling (Profile)
Tuesday, January 18th at 4:30PM EST
I just posted a piece on The Heritage Foundation blog, The Foundry, titled “How to Repeal ObamaCare in the Senate.” I tried to put into easy to understand terms the way for the Senate to repeal the unconstitutional ObamaCare. Although it is unlikely that the Senate will take up the House repeal measure H.R. 2 in the next few months, it is possible to bring it up later this year or some time next year if Republicans are smart.
If Senators don’t take any action when the bill is transmitted from the House to the Senate, then there is little to no chance to pass the House repeal measure. This will show that Senate Republicans are not serious about a full repeal of ObamaCare. It is possible for conservative Senators to force a vote on H.R. 2, when the time is right, if they follow two simple procedures in the Senate to protect their rights. (more…)
Posted in Big Government, Bill, Conservatism, Democrats, Entitlements, GOP, Healthcare, Heritage Foundation, Liberalism, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Obamacare, Politics, Senator | No Comments »
Tuesday, January 4th, 2011
The House Republican majority has said it will require members to cite the specific authority for any bill they introduce.
If the new Congress to be sworn in on Wednesday is the tea party’s cardinal achievement so far, its most symbolic achievement will come on Thursday, when the first order of business in the House will be a reading, aloud, of the Constitution. That event alone will not bring us any closer to limited government. But it will help get a debate going that for too long has been dormant.
Already, House Democrats are lining up to ridicule a closely related rule that the Republican majority has said it will adopt, requiring members to cite the specific constitutional authority for any bill they introduce. “It’s an air kiss they’re blowing to the tea party,” says Barney Frank, outgoing chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Henry Waxman, outgoing chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, all but dismissed any role for Congress in assessing the constitutionality of its actions: “Whether it is constitutional or not is going to be whether the Supreme Court says it is.”
As a legal matter, Mr. Waxman is right; at least since Marbury v. Madison in 1803, the Supreme Court has had the last word on what the Constitution authorizes Congress to do. But well before that, and long after, members of Congress took it upon themselves to have the first word, often citing their oath of office.
In 1794, for example, James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, rose on the House floor to object to a bill appropriating $15,000 for the relief of French refugees who had fled to Baltimore and Philadelphia from an insurrection in San Domingo. He could not, he said, “undertake to lay [his] finger on that article of the Federal Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” The bill failed. (more…)
Posted in American History, Big Government, Bill, Congress, Conservatism, Constitution, Election, GOP, Government Waste and Fraud, Legal Issues, Liberalism, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Politics, Progressive Movement, Spending, Supreme Court, Taxation, Taxes | No Comments »
Monday, December 27th, 2010
Congress’s Monstrous Legal Legacy
Put together like Frankenstein, ObamaCare risks coming apart at the seams.
-
The historians will long be fighting over the legislative legacy of the 111th Congress. As to its legal legacy, the only real question is whether this just-finished Democratic Congress was the most unserious in decades, or the most unserious in history.
That much is clear from the recent ObamaCare court proceedings. Federal Judge Henry Hudson, responding to a lawsuit by the state of Virginia, last week struck down the core of the law, the individual mandate. His decision came the same week that a coalition of 20 states presented oral arguments against the health law in front of Florida federal Judge Roger Vinson. In October, Judge Vinson ruled against the Obama Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the states’ lawsuit.
The law professors and think-tankers and media folk who initially ridiculed these lawsuits have now had to dream up sinister reasons for why they are succeeding. Judges Hudson and Vinson, we are told, were both appointed by Republicans and obviously can’t be trusted to fairly interpret the law. Some commentators have gone further, suggesting that we are witnessing a cabal of right-wing activists, lawyers and judges conspiring to kill not just ObamaCare, but the entire New Deal. If only.
What the observers seem not to have done is read the briefs, arguments or rulings. Had they done so, they’d see a far simpler explanation for what’s going on: Congress earlier this year punched through audacious yet unvetted health legislation, a slapdash political product that is now proving to be an historic embarrassment in its legal shoddiness. The Justice Department is in fact having to play games to defend it, which has only further provoked the courts.
And really, is that such a surprise? The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is one of the bigger, more complex pieces of legislation in U.S. history. Yet Democrats never gave it the respect it deserved.
(more…)
Posted in Big Government, Bill, Democrats, GOP, Healthcare, Judges, Legal Issues, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Obamacare, Progressive Movement, Supreme Court, Taxation, Taxes | No Comments »
Thursday, December 23rd, 2010
WHICH REPUBLICANS SOLD OUT?
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on
DickMorris.com on December 22, 2010
With the new Republican power in Washington, it is doubly important to keep a close eye on the doings of GOP Senators and Congressmen to spot those who are straying from orthodoxy, seduced by power and the insider clubiness that characterizes Washington.
In the Lame Duck session, we want to draw attention to six Republican U.S. Senators who voted with the Democrats on a key issue. We should all bear their apostasy in mind and, in particular, make them mindful of the possibility of primary challenges to their re-nomination.
|
Two Senators, in particular, deserve to have primary challengers take them on in 2012 — Tennessee’s Bob Corker and Mississippi’s Thad Cochran. Both men voted for the START treaty which conceded a permanent edge in nuclear weaponry to Russia. While the Treaty provided for equal and reduced stockpiles of strategic warheads, it did nothing to address the vast piles of tactical nuclear warheads held by the Russians. The Russians have 10,000 of these battlefield nuclear weapons piled up in the stockpile while we have only a few hundred.
In addition, START’s preamble blocks the U.S. from developing missile defenses, now especially important in light of North Korea’s and Iran’s expanding capacities. (more…) |
Posted in Bill, Election 2012, Foreign Policy, GOP, Missle Defense, National Defense, Nuclear Energy/Weapons, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Russia, Technology | No Comments »
Saturday, December 18th, 2010
NEW YORK TIMES
December 16, 2010
Can Congress Force You to Be
Healthy?
By JASON MAZZONE
HENRY E. HUDSON, the federal judge in Virginia who ruled this week that the individual mandate provision of the new health care law is unconstitutional, has become the object of widespread derision. Judge Hudson explained that whatever else Congress might be able to do, it cannot force people to engage in a commercial activity, in this case buying an insurance policy.
Critics contend that Judge Hudson has unduly restricted Congress’s authority to regulate interstate commerce, the principal basis on which the government defends the law. Some also claim that he ignored the “necessary and proper” clause of the Constitution, which allows Congress leeway to choose how to put in place national economic programs. Yet a closer reading shows that Judge Hudson’s analysis could prove irresistible to the Supreme Court and that there is a reasonable chance it will agree that the insurance mandate is invalid. (more…)
Posted in Big Government, Bill, Constitution, Healthcare, Legal Issues, Obamacare, Progressive Movement, Socialism, Supreme Court | No Comments »
Thursday, December 16th, 2010
Posted in Banking, Bankruptcy, Big Government, Bill, Democrats, Election, GOP, John Locke Foundation, Multiculturalism, NC Politics, Obama Administraiton and Policy, Obamacare, Pensions, Politics, Radical Islam, Uncategorized | No Comments »