The reality is that any House member who votes for this rule is knowingly undertaking the risk that ONLY the Senate bill will get signed into law (warts and all) and that the reconciliation bill intended to “fix” it will die in the Senate.
There’s any number of analogies one can draw, but it’s akin to playing Russian roulette (with the number of bullets in the gun determined by one’s assessment of the odds that the Senate won’t pass the reconciliation bill: no one can claim with a straight face that the chances of this are zero, so there has to be at least 1 bullet in the gun, but some might argue there are 4-5). If the gun fires and kills someone, no court is going to let the person holding the gun escape punishment on grounds that “I didn’t mean for this to happen: I was hoping/expecting there to be an empty chamber when I pulled the trigger.”
Or pretend you took your car to the mechanic to fix the brakes because every so often they fail completely, but when you picked it up he says “I didn’t have time to fix your brakes.” The next day you embark on a long trip during which you kill a pedestrian because your brakes failed. No court will exculpate you on grounds “Well I TOLD the mechanic to fix the brakes.”
Thus, whether they vote for the rule or for the Senate bill itself, no House member can evade responsibility for the risk they are taking. They therefore can and should be held accountable for being party to such risky business.
Thats interesting since I saw King Obama The First say in the Fox Interview tonight when the House VOTES they will be VOTING either for the Package or against the package, now pelosi says she likes this because they DONT have to vote.WHICH IS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11