Like a toddler playing with a nuclear warhead, an increasingly senile Harry Reid is now threatening to invoke another “nuclear option” to deal with the toxic fallout from the previous one.
He has used this to pack the circuit courts in the D.C., First, Fifth, and Tenth Circuits with radical anti-gun, pro-same-sex-marriage judges. From here on out, the courts will do pretty much what Obama tells them to.
Neither the press nor Reid will describe exactly what the “nuclear option” is, and there’s a reason for this: In the “nuclear option,” senators vote that the Senate rules say something which is just the opposite of what they actually say. It is fraud incarnate. It is like voting that “white” is “black,” or that “up” is “down.”
It violates Article I, Section 5, of the Constitution. If the rules aren’t binding, they aren’t rules at all.
But by invoking it, Reid is saying that, with 51 votes, no one can do anything about his exercise of pure brute force. And, furthermore, the courts will not intervene in his fraud because the “political question doctrine” excludes them from internal Senate procedures.
Fast forward to January 5, 2015.
There’s a pretty good chance that the Republicans will have 51 votes. And the Senate will have no rules to protect the minority. As hard as I fought to keep both Republicans and Democrats from blowing up the institution, you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.
So I recommend that Republicans, without debate and by 51 votes, change the rules to allow adoption of a simple resolution (requiring 51 votes) which would deem that the Senate cast a unanimous vote for a measure or matter.
It’s done all the time. Political conventions routinely vote to cast a unanimous ballot for the winning candidate.
Thus, the repeal of ObamaCare could be passed on January 5, by 51 votes, and the veto be overriden by a unanimous Senate (or, rather, a resolution deeming that it was).
A violation of the budget act, you say? As a result of Harry Reid’s fraud scheme, that’s no longer worth the paper that it’s written on.
Unconstitutional, you say? Well, so was Harry Reid’s unilateral repeal of the Senate’s ability to make binding rules. How’d that work out?
If Republicans are genuinely counting on ObamaCare to deliver them the Senate, they have to make a compelling case that the situation with respect to ObamaCare would be different, depending on whether Republicans or Democrats controlled the Senate.
The “Vote for us. Nothing will change.” mantra is not going to ride them to victory. And, frankly, the GOP has been horrible about warning the public about insurance company bailouts (“risk corridors”) — or about alerting Hispanics and young people to the hundreds of dollars of fines which their friend Barack has waiting for them (right after the election).
So since Reid has turned the Senate into the Wild West, fine. Timorous Republicans are unlikely to try to stop him. But that doesn’t mean that, when his gun is empty in January, they can’t shoot back.