Posted on 02/21/2010 8:07:35 AM PST by CaroleL
As the Democrats attempt to ram their hugely unpopular idea of health care reform through the legislative process, there is increased interest in how that process works. There's been plenty of talk lately about reconciliation and how the Obama machine will most likely attempt to mis-use this part of the budget process and that brings us to another little known moment in US Senate history known as the Byrd Rule.
(Excerpt) Read more at talkingsides.com ...
If Obama and Biden want to play hardball Chicago Thug politics, Biden has the ability to preside over the Senate and ignore any rulings from the Senate Parliamentarian about what is legal or illegal according to the Byrd Rule.
Biden could just tell the Parliamentarian to stay at home, and he can gavel through the Public Option easily with just 50 votes.
Don’t worry, the Dems won’t get the 51 votes they need from democrat senators to pass ObamaCare via reconciliation. Too many Dems are in stiff re-election bid races at home that won’t survive to serve another term if they vote for ObamaCare.
IMHO There should not be a need to invoke the use of the Byrd rule or to have to consult the Senate Parliamentarian.
Presuming that Byrd would ever say a word against the negro.
Not going to happen.
my bet is Byrd cannot even speak.....
Also presuming that Byrd will even be aware of his surroundings when all of this goes down.
Here are the Dems up for reelection this year. How many do you count as possible "Nay" votes for reconciliation ...
Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas
Barbara Boxer of California
Michael Bennet of Colorado
Daniel Inouye of Hawaii
Barbara Mikulski of Maryland
Harry Reid of Nevada
Kirsten Gillibrand of New York
Chuck Schumer of New York
Ron Wyden of Oregon
Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania
Patrick Leahy of Vermont
Patty Murray of Washington
Russ Feingold of Wisconsin
With the exception of possibly Lincoln, I believe none of these criminals will have a problem using either Budget Reconciliation or the so-called "nuclear option", if it should come to that.
As for the ones who aren't up this year, I think Bayh, because he won't be standing for reelection again, is much less likely to oppose the bill. Nelson might not, but if he's been bought before, he can be bought again - the same for Landrieu. I can't think of any other Dem Senators who wouldn't happily cram this down the throat of America.
I think that our hopes don't lie with Senate, but with the House - where they only had a two-vote margin the first time this came up, and that was before the exit by Wexler, the death of Murtha and the promise by Stupak (a guy who doesn't joke about abortion) to NOT vote for any bill containing the Senate abortion language, same goes for Cao. It seems to me that Nancy is at least two votes short, perhaps more considering ALL the Dems, especially the "Blue Dogs" are up for reelection this year.
Byrd is the word?
Honestly.
I think you are correct.
Technically it’s: Will the Byrd Rule be the determining factor for whether or not President Obama and Congressional Democrats can push their hugely unpopular idea of health care reform through the Senate via the budgetary process of reconciliation?
But that wouldn’t make a very catchy title for my article. ;)
Hussein’s health care fraud gives the radical left a unique opportunity to enslave the American people. Don’t think for a moment that “rules” will get in their way.
The Byrd rule? Is that like the Bird Exemption in the NBA?
I agree with your analysis of the Senators who are up for re-election. I somehow feel that some Democrats who are not even up for re-election may grow a backbone and a conscience for the Nation’s welfare and vote against ObamaCare.
With regard to the House: Because the House already passed their version of the bill and the Senate will substitute the text of its own bill for the House text when it sends the bill back to the House, no NEW vote in the House will take place.
There are alot of potential delay tactics all over the place that the Repubs can employ, however, unless they delay until after the midterm election, Obamacare is likely to pass.
Here’s a GREAT article on the reconciliation process:
“Uh Oh—What If Reconciliation Isn’t Quick?”
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-treatment/uh-oh-what-if-reconciliation-isnt-quick
No, no. That's not the way it works. It's a little complicated, so this is going to take a second...
Right now, both Houses have their own Bill. Those repsective Bills are in Conference Committee. If anything comes out of that committee (known as a Conference Report - CR), then they'll (both House and Senate) have to hold a simple up or down vote on that Conference Report. The rules in both the House and Senate don't allow for amendments to be offered on CR, although a CR may be filibustered. That's option number 1.
Option number 2, is that the House adopt in it's entirety the Senate bill. That would mean that the Senate wouldn't have to "re-vote" on any legislation, but that the House would have to hold a majority vote, on the floor, for a motion to adopt the Senate Bill. Again, simple majority rules here.
Finally, and this is the part that's likely, the House and the Senate would pass what's called a Reconciliation Bill. This may be passed before the House adopts the original Senate bill, so long as the President doesn't sign it (the Reconciliation Bill) first. With me so far?
That Reconciliation Bill would presumably change everything in the original Senate health care bill that the House doesn't like, like adding a public option, as an example. So, you'd have two pieces of legislation, the original Senate health care bill and the Budget Reconciliation bill that would be signed, but not necessarily passed, in that order.
While this method does eliminate that possibility of a filibuster, because of the Budget Reconciliation process, it also means that the House would have to take two floor votes. There's also no guarantee that the Senate Parliamentarian would allow the provisions the Dems want to actually pass in the Budget Reconciliation Bill.
I’d pay a bucket full to see Byrd show up on the Senate floor wearing in HIS full KKK regalia denouncing the ,”magic Nigro”.
Lovely! Just as they scr*wed themselves with rule changes in MA to try to hurt the republicans and ended up hurting themselves once again a rule they put in to hurt republicans comes right back to bit them on their collective @$$e$! They just do not understand the rules of unintended consequences.
The Senate version has to be voted on.
That is the problem that the House Democrats are facing.
The House Bill passed, but this is a new Bill, which has to be voted on.
Now, the fact is that Reconcilation only deals with the money issues, not the actual health 'care' issues.
Obama is desperate to get the money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.