jambalakadi1
Registered Users (C)
06/03/2006: House Hardliners Come Up With A Weapon to Block CIR Conference Committee
Report indicates that the House hardliners who opposed the Senate-passed S. 2611 have come up with a weapon to block the House-Senate Conference Committee and the S.2611. The weapon they have hammered out involves a constitutional issue as to whether the provision in S. 2611 that requires guest worker applicants to "pay the back taxes" as condition for the legal status constitutes a federal government's measure to raise the revenue. These hardliners argue that the U.S. Constitution mandates that any legislation to raise revenue for the government must originate in the House and S. 2611 violated the U.S. Constitution by originating such legislative bill in the Senate. When the Congress returns on Monday, there will be a see-saw fight between the S. 2611 proponents and opponents on this legal technicality issue. One wonders how the House hardliners would defend their prior violations in the past in another legislations that involved such legal technicality issues. Besides, there is no clear definition as to whether such back-tax payment requirement indeed constitutes a revenue raising measure. Please stay tuned to this website to watch how this fight in the political arena will unfold!
Report indicates that the House hardliners who opposed the Senate-passed S. 2611 have come up with a weapon to block the House-Senate Conference Committee and the S.2611. The weapon they have hammered out involves a constitutional issue as to whether the provision in S. 2611 that requires guest worker applicants to "pay the back taxes" as condition for the legal status constitutes a federal government's measure to raise the revenue. These hardliners argue that the U.S. Constitution mandates that any legislation to raise revenue for the government must originate in the House and S. 2611 violated the U.S. Constitution by originating such legislative bill in the Senate. When the Congress returns on Monday, there will be a see-saw fight between the S. 2611 proponents and opponents on this legal technicality issue. One wonders how the House hardliners would defend their prior violations in the past in another legislations that involved such legal technicality issues. Besides, there is no clear definition as to whether such back-tax payment requirement indeed constitutes a revenue raising measure. Please stay tuned to this website to watch how this fight in the political arena will unfold!