Election year StupidityThanks to my new link comes this story that, among other things, would seem to disprove what I have said earlier concerning the theocracy threat. After all, a law that would limit damages in religious liberty suits does seem to be part of a larger plan to inch theocracy forward, doesn't it?
Except, of course, even if the law - part of a larger bill - passes the House (my guess is it will, but only on a voice vote, rather than a call for "yeas" and "nays"), it will die a slow death of indifference in the Senate. My guess is for two reasons. The legislative session before the elections is short, and there is a budget to pass, appropriations bills to pass, and other major overhauls to work on. The Senate, by rules and tradition, works much more slowly than the House.
The most important reason for the bill never reaching the President's desk is this - as a wedge issue, and a fringe wedge issue at that, it simply has no traction in this year od war, wrong directions for the country, high energy prices (notice how the price of gas is creeping down as we move closer to election day?), and general incompetence and malfeasance on the part of the Executive Branch and dereliction of cuty on the part of the Legislative Branch. Most people are much more concerned with the realities they face than the concoctions of the Republicans, and attempts to draw attention away from those realities seem only to draw the ire of the people rather than "rally the base", as it is designed to do.
Back in the 1980's Jessee Helms tried to remove religious liberty cases from the jurisdiction of the federal courts - perfectly acceptable Constitutionally. It died miserably and quite publicly, and Helms never tried such a move again. My guess is this little clause will meet the same fate. The sooner the better, of course.