Did Pelosi truly Break Congressional law you decide

1. 60

   dutchman1951posted 13 years ago

   If this below is really true, and it is from the Library of Congress on Congressional By-laws and operations. Than how did any bill proposed that affects the Public generaly. sucH as Cap and Trade, Health reform, get to be declared Private.
   
   Did Pelosi break her own Congressional law?  I think so..?
   
   Your comments or thoughts please, if you care to.
   
   
   
   
   From the Library of Congress;
   
   
   Bills
   A bill is the form used for most legislation, whether permanent or temporary, general or special, public or private.
   
   The form of a House bill is as follows:
   
   A BILL
   
   For the establishment, etc. [as the title may be].
   
   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, etc.
   
   The enacting clause was prescribed by law in 1871 and is identical in all bills, whether they originate in the House of Representatives or in the Senate.
   
   Bills may originate in either the House of Representatives or the Senate with one notable exception. Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution provides that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives but that the Senate may propose, or concur with, amendments. By tradition, general appropriation bills also originate in the House of Representatives.
   
   There are two types of bills-public and private. A public bill is one that affects the public generally. A bill that affects a specified individual or a private entity rather than the population at large is called a private bill. A typical private bill is used for relief in matters such as immigration and naturalization and claims against the United States.
   
   A bill originating in the House of Representatives is designated by ''H.R.'' followed by a number that it retains throughout all its parliamentary stages. The letters signify ''House of Representatives'' and not, as is sometimes incorrectly assumed, ''House resolution.'' A Senate bill is designated by ''S.'' followed by its number. The term ''companion bill'' is used to describe a bill introduced in one House of Congress that is similar or identical to a bill introduced in the other House of Congress.
   
   A bill that has been agreed to in identical form by both bodies becomes the law of the land only after-
   
   Presidential approval; or
   failure by the President to return it with objections to the House in which it originated within 10 days (Sundays excepted) while Congress is in session; or
   the overriding of a presidential veto by a two-thirds vote in each House.
   
   Such a bill does not become law without the President's signature if Congress by their final adjournment prevent its return with objections. This is known as a ''pocket veto.'' For a discussion of presidential action on legislation, see Part XVIII.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It would help if you let us in on what 'private' bill you are talking about...

      replyreport
      1. 60

         dutchman1951posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         any bill labeled private, like the Health care bill for example, or the Cap and Trade Bill, they are in and went through closed door committees- those type of bills, which we are told we cannot know about them, until passed? 
         
         Why? If they affect the public and they do, then why?
         according to above that's not allowed?.
         
         I stated which two bills, as an example in the first part of the post, I thought.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Closed-door committees are not new or unique to either party - or absent from any administration.  What major legislation has not seen closed-door committees? It's not unusual for negotiation to be done off-camera - the final vote is public.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               dutchman1951posted 13 years agoin reply to this

               the vote, yes, but the details in the bill, exactly what is in there, that is not.
               and thats what I think is wrong, and possibly breaking their own laws and rules of operation.

               replyreport
2. 73

   Jeff Berndtposted 13 years ago

   Er, according to the quote from the Library of Congress that you put in the Original Post, there is no functional difference between the way a public bill and a private bill are passed.
   
   "There are two types of bills-public and private. A public bill is one that affects the public generally. A bill that affects a specified individual or a private entity rather than the population at large is called a private bill. A typical private bill is used for relief in matters such as immigration and naturalization and claims against the United States."
   
   The difference is in what they are used for, but both must go through the same process.
   
   Is there another clause in the rule set that describes some process by which a "private bill" becomes law that is different from the process by which a "public bill" becomes law? If not, then there's no issue.
   
   If so, then there may be an issue, if the proper processes have not been followed, and/or the bill in question has been mis-classified.

   replyreport
3. 60

   dutchman1951posted 13 years ago

   I see the point Jeff, I am wrong then to say she did.
   I see it.

   replyreport
4. 59

   TNotar7posted 13 years ago

   Makes sense to me. Thanks for the explanation, learned a lot on this one.

   replyreport
5. 61

   BillyDRitchieposted 13 years ago

   The woman was asked about the Constitutionality of the health care bill. Her response "Are you serious?"
   
   If she is that unconcerned about the Constitution, then I highly doubt she's any more concerned about the law of the land

   replyreport