Rand Paul Pushes for a constitutional amendment.

[The Serbian Empire]

Paul told the Daily Caller in September that the amendment would take specific aim at Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, whose swing vote upheld the constitutionality of much of the Affordable Care Act.

“If he likes Obamacare so much, I’m going to give him an amendment that gives Obamacare to Justice Roberts,” Paul told the publication.

Nice to see that Paul is totally committed to the welfare of the American people, and is in no way driven by petty politics and personal vendettas.

If the politicians and judges are protected under their special Cadillac plans that are tax protected specifically, then it's worth the image of the vendetta. I doubt politicians would support half of what they support if they had to live through the laws like everyone else.

[Silent Majority]

I really do not understand What ACA provision does he think Congress is exempt from ?

The death panels?

No, it's the part that requires you to get gay married. *nods*

[Maurepas]

I might not agree with everything the man does. I might not even agree with a lot of what he does. But every once and a while he comes out with something good, and this is one of those times.

This Amendment should've been in the damned Bill of Rights in the first place.

[Myrensis]

Of course the amusing bit is that under his amendment the Republican attempt to force Congress onto the exchanges would have been Unconstitutional, since no ordinary citizen is being ordered to throw away their employer provided healthcare and buy from the exchanges instead.

[Ifreann]

I might not agree with everything the man does. I might not even agree with a lot of what he does. But every once and a while he comes out with something good, and this is one of those times.

This Amendment should've been in the damned Bill of Rights in the first place.

Do you want Congress setting your pay, as they set their own? Perhaps you're more motivated by a desire to stand for re-election in order to keep your job, hmm?

[Maurepas]

I might not agree with everything the man does. I might not even agree with a lot of what he does. But every once and a while he comes out with something good, and this is one of those times.

This Amendment should've been in the damned Bill of Rights in the first place.

Do you want Congress setting your pay, as they set their own? Perhaps you're more motivated by a desire to stand for re-election in order to keep your job, hmm?

I don't think Congress should get paid at all.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Do you want Congress setting your pay, as they set their own? Perhaps you're more motivated by a desire to stand for re-election in order to keep your job, hmm?

I don't think Congress should get paid at all.

So you want to be represented by only those who are independently wealthy? People who would be more prone to corruption through graft and lobbying?

[Benuty]

So how long before they throw themselves off a cliff?

[Zavea]

out of about 10,000+ attempts to amend the US constitution, only 27 ever succeeded, or so i've read.

this is usually why i find news of anyone, elected rep or US citizen, trying to amend the constitution to be kinda boring since it's very nearly always so quixotic and overly ambitious.

but rand paul, being rand paul, still manages to raise the bar just by being his usual silly numbnuts self

keep on truckin', mr. paul

[Grizzleheim]

So how long before they throw themselves off a cliff?

Not until four o'clock tomorrow.

[Maurepas]

I don't think Congress should get paid at all.

So you want to be represented by only those who are independently wealthy? People who would be more prone to corruption through graft and lobbying?

So like the current system only without them being paid by my tax dollars to do it? Yes.

[The Emerald Dawn]

out of about 10,000+ attempts to amend the US constitution, only 27 ever succeeded, or so i've read.

this is usually why i find news of anyone, elected rep or US citizen, trying to amend the constitution to be kinda boring since it's very nearly always so quixotic and overly ambitious.

but rand paul, being rand paul, still manages to raise the bar just by being his usual silly numbnuts self

keep on truckin', mr. paul

Zahvay. That's how I'd pronounce it.

Also, I blame the "News Media" for this being a thing at all.

[Seitonjin]

What the bloody hell are they doing.

[The Emerald Dawn]

So you want to be represented by only those who are independently wealthy? People who would be more prone to corruption through graft and lobbying?

So like the current system only without them being paid by my tax dollars to do it? Yes.

That's rather silly. Instead of attempting to fix the problem, you'd simply embrace it and pretend exasperation?

[The Scientific States]

What the bloody hell are they doing.

No kidding.

[Ifreann]

Do you want Congress setting your pay, as they set their own? Perhaps you're more motivated by a desire to stand for re-election in order to keep your job, hmm?

I don't think Congress should get paid at all.

Do you place so little value on your own labour? I mean, if Congress is going to be treated like every other American, then no pay for their work means no pay for yours.

---

So how long before they throw themselves off a cliff?

Once Obama says publicly that he's in favour of fencing off dangerous cliff edges.

---

What the bloody hell are they doing.

Desperately trying to distract from that whole thing where they tried to destroy the country in order to save it from Obamacare.

[Maurepas]

So like the current system only without them being paid by my tax dollars to do it? Yes.

That's rather silly. Instead of attempting to fix the problem, you'd simply embrace it and pretend exasperation?

More like I don't think allowing them to set their own pay and continually give themselves raises every few years actually solves the problem you present.

But I'm crazy in that I think graft and lobbying should be illegal unto themselves, and that campaigns should have a specific set of money set aside in the budget that's for anyone wanting to run to draw from. Like a grant.

That way not only does it help stop corruption, but it actually opens up the field more, because you don't have to have lots of money to go campaigning to run, you just have to apply for the grant. And of course, how you spend it would be highly monitored to ensure no abusing the system, etc.

[Maurepas]

I don't think Congress should get paid at all.

Do you place so little value on your own labour? I mean, if Congress is going to be treated like every other American, then no pay for their work means no pay for yours.

Only if they actually pass a law stating Congressmen can't make money at all. Somehow I don't think they'd be up for that.

[Olthar]

This doesn't seem like such a bad idea, but such a sweeping, generalized law would undoubtedly have many negative ramifications. Something with more specific language would be better.

[Avenio]

Nice to see that Paul is totally committed to the welfare of the American people, and is in no way driven by petty politics and personal vendettas.

I don't understand how Roberts' isn't under "Obamacare"...like...he has insurance...I just...


...are they just making noise in the hopes that stupid people will go, "Hey, yeah...fuck that shit, man!"

Probably. With the added bonus of being able to punish people they don't like and who they blame for their failures. I would expect a lot more of GOP hardliners singling out opposition targets for very personal attacks in the coming months.

[Ifreann]

Do you place so little value on your own labour? I mean, if Congress is going to be treated like every other American, then no pay for their work means no pay for yours.

Only if they actually pass a law stating Congressmen can't make money at all. Somehow I don't think they'd be up for that.

I'm sure they wouldn't, but I am asking about how you value your labour. If you think that you and they should be treated the same in all respects, the spirit of this amendment, and you think that they should not be paid, then it follows that you think you should not be paid. Is that so?

---

This doesn't seem like such a bad idea, but such a sweeping, generalized law would undoubtedly have many negative ramifications. Something with more specific language would be better.

It would also be largely pointless.

[Cannot think of a name]

I don't understand how Roberts' isn't under "Obamacare"...like...he has insurance...I just...


...are they just making noise in the hopes that stupid people will go, "Hey, yeah...fuck that shit, man!"

Probably. With the added bonus of being able to punish people they don't like and who they blame for their failures. I would expect a lot more of GOP hardliners singling out opposition targets for very personal attacks in the coming months.

I just got this via stumble, and yet seems to be appropriate...

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

When I opened this thread I expected something that outlaws taxation or some shit. This bill seems very...reasonable.

Only if you don't actually understand the situation and background for it.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

I think the most important problem that faces america for 5 years is ...


DEBT its like a big ol' sledgehammer that beats down on uncle sam

Nah, there's nothing wrong with the federal debt at this point. If anything, it could probably stand to grow quite a bit.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

He and his ilk are destroying therepublican partyAmerica and humanity.

Fixed.