Random bits of jetsom and flotsam from the wreckage of the Good Ship HB 1053:
- Jason Tolbert has video of a post-failure David Meeks discussing what happened. Between the obvious dry mouth and the stammering, one almost loses the message, which is … umm … oh, yeah, that Meeks — unlike the “Democrats” he speaks ill of at the beginning of the video — will “continue to reach across the aisle” and would even consider proposing this same bill again.
- First runner-up in the GOP primary for AR04, Glenn Gallas, chimed in, claiming that “mandatory HC is in violation of the 9th Amendment.” That would be, I assume, the same Ninth Amendment that conservative judge Robert Bork has compared to an inkblot or about which Justice Scalia has stated, “the [Ninth Amendment’s] refusal to ‘deny or disparage’ other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them.” Seriously, any argument against the mandate based on the Ninth Amendment is a losing argument. Somehow, coming from Glenn, this doesn’t shock me.
- [Quick aside: The one argument that I’ve yet to see a Tea Partier (or anyone, really) make against the mandate is a claim that it violates the individual powers provision of the Tenth Amendment. There’s actually a decent argument to be made there. Of course, to make it, a conservative would basically have to eviscerate his position on abortion, which pretty much explains why you haven’t heard them make it.]
- The ARGOP chimed in on the vote, too. Question for Chase Duggar, though: if you think the mandate is unconstitutional, why is this bill even needed? (Follow-up: You realize that there’s no answer to that last question that would actually make sense, right?)
/enjoying Meeks’ failure
//moving on
Other stuff from around the intertubez:
The Arkansas House made a couple moves on two tax-related bills and kept twelve other tax bills on the deferred list, including the proof-he’s-as-sharp-as-a-tennis-ball capital gains bill proposed by Friend of BHR Ed Garner.
Loy Mauch is insane. Jeannie Burlsworth is insane. When they join forces, the result is nothing short of breathtaking.
House bills 1007 and 1014, both of which were supported by BHR, passed unanimously today. Congrats to Justin Harris, Jon Woods, and John Edwards.
GreenAR details the Denny Altes-proposed bills that it will be keeping an eye on. (If you want to have about five minutes of fun, find the day that Altes proposed about 10 bills, read through them, and then picture him taking notes on everything anyone mentioned to him while on the campaign trail. Bonus laugh: reading some of them while remembering that Altes considers himself a conservative.)
Ed Kilgore thinks that Barack Obama might be laying a trap for the Republicans with tonight’s State of the Union. It’s a well-reasoned piece, and I really want to believe Ed, but when I keep seeing stuff that makes me coin the term “Obamanomics” (and use it derisively), I am hesitant to hold my breath on this.
Paul Krugman tackles the competition myth. Money quote:
The financial crisis of 2008 was a teachable moment, an object lesson in what can go wrong if you trust a market economy to regulate itself. Nor should we forget that highly regulated economies, like Germany, did a much better job than we did at sustaining employment after the crisis hit. For whatever reason, however, the teachable moment came and went with nothing learned.
In case you were wondering, Robert Reich is on the same page as Krugman on the whole “competitiveness” thing.
Oh, if you are keeping a list of “People Who Think We Should Look At Cutting Defense Spending,” go ahead and add Colin Powell to that list.
Finally, returning from whence we came, it seems that David Meeks is not only a noted legal scholar, but also the consummate statesman. How else do you describe someone who Tweets asking people if they “need a reason NOT to watch SOTU tonight?” (And can you imagine the ARGOP response to something like that if the parties involved were reversed?)