Posted on 10/19/2009 6:09:48 AM PDT by rellimpank
If Harry Reid decides to use the Senate's "reconciliation" process to ram health care legislation through his chamber and crush a filibuster, then he'll have to reconcile something else: his astounding hypocrisy.
The majority leader from Nevada is working behind closed doors to merge health care bills passed by the Senate's health and finance committees. He desperately wants to come up with something that can get 60 votes -- the number needed to halt any attempt by minority Republicans to block a final vote on the massive expansion of federal authority.
Although Reid has 60 votes in his caucus, it might be an impossible task. Moderate Democrats oppose a "public option" that allows the government to sell health insurance and undercut private-sector providers, and far-left Democrats are insisting that any bill include the first step toward nationalized health care.
So Reid has let it be known that wrangling over the public option might compel him to go with the "nuclear option": ending a filibuster without 60 votes.
To do that, Reid would have to use a parliamentary maneuver called "budget reconciliation." Votes on the federal budget are exempt from filibusters. If he takes this route, Reid would have to pretend the legislation is a simple matter of fiscal housekeeping -- a routine issue that needs just 51 votes to pass.
Given the complexity and controversy surrounding new health insurance mandates and regulations, such an end-around would be unprecedented.
(Excerpt) Read more at lvrj.com ...
Don’t they understand that all of this subterfuge is silly. This will be overturned in 2010. I, personally, will not vote for anyone who doesn’t promise to do so.
bttt
You are invoking thought process in your decision. Most won't.
And the chances it is forgotten in 2010? 50/50.
With Democrats, it has ever been thus.
I will actively support anyone who campaigns against anyone who votes for this unneccessary cr@p sandwich. That means dollars, time, outreach, etc.
This is from Ed over at hotair about reconciliation (Bold is mine): Under the rules of reconciliation, no cloture vote is needed, as the chamber has a Constitutional duty to produce a budget. Some Democrats have threatened this for months, notably Chuck Schumer, but the plan has a couple of big flaws. First, the Democrats have to convince the Senate parliamentarian, ostensibly non-partisan, to agree that the bill is primarily budgetary. No one in their right mind could honestly make that judgment about massive regulation of 15% of the American economy. They’re likely to get denied before they even get started.
However, if they do manage to get past that obstacle, the Republicans can shut down the Senate for the next year. Those unfamiliar with the parliamentary procedure may not realize that a great many steps get skipped by unanimous consent. Bill-reading is just one example. One Senator can force each and every bill to be read aloud at every appearance it makes on the Senate floor, including when they are sent to committee. For ObamaCare and cap-and-trade, one bill reading could take a week, keeping the Senate floor locked off from any other business.
Traditionally, Senators give each other the courtesy of unanimous consent to allow business to proceed at a normal pace. If the Democrats try to force ObamaCare through reconciliation, that unanimous consent will dissipate faster than an Obama expiration date. It won’t take the entire Republican caucus to gum up the works, either; it only takes a single objection to end unanimous consent, and the GOP has more than a couple of conservative firebrands who will gladly toss sand in the gears to stop Harry Reid from steamrolling them.
Democrats might think that this will gain them sympathy with the public, but not if they’re breaking rules to pass an increasingly unpopular and intrusive piece of legislation. It will create a firestorm of anger even worse than what we’ve seen in the townhalls thus far. They would be signing their way to minority status, especially in the House. They can kiss the rest of their agenda goodbye for the rest of this session, too, including cap-and-trade. Even budgeting will prove very difficult
Sorry no bold my mistake
Reid!!! His Great Uncle was Hung as a Horse Thief I guess the scumbag Gene runs in the family.
Reid is not likely to re-elected, so he is dangerous in this regard. A man with nothing to lose doesn’t need to negotiate with anyone.
I think they are having trouble coming up with something to even get 51 votes.
People OUT OF WORK or still in process of losing their homes will not forget .They will VOTE against the machine ! Hopefully the AARP seniors will have seen the light also .
Correct usage is hanged.
If a man is hung, it is not acceptable to discuss it on this forum.
Have a great day!
“Reid!!! His Great Uncle was Hung as a Horse Thief I guess the scumbag Gene runs in the family.”
Correct usage is hanged.
Thanks!
If a man is hung, it is not acceptable to discuss it on this forum.
[sidebar]When I was a programmer, our system would occasionally freeze up. One day it happened that some of us guys were in the office of a veddy veddy proper Englishman. One of the women programmers stuck her head in the door and asked, "Are you hung?" The Englishman sniffed and said, "Dear lady, I surely hope so." We went into hysterics. She turned BEET RED and departed.
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.