Posted on 03/03/2010 8:31:54 AM PST by Danae
POLITICO Breaking News to me
show details 8:20 AM (8 minutes ago)
POLITICO Breaking News: -----------------------------------------------------
Sen. Tom Harkin tells POLITICO that Senate Democratic leaders have decided to go the reconciliation route for health care reform. The House, he said, will first pass the Senate bill after Senate leaders demonstrate that they have the votes to pass reconciliation in the Senate.
Giffords (AZ 8) is my “blue dog”. She’d vote to raise Hitler from the dead if Pelosi told her to...that blue dog label is just cover for idiots.
The Massachusetts election left the Democrats with < 60 votes in the Senate, so they can't pass a modified bill there anymore. So the modifications the House wants to the Senate bill will be approved via reconciliation, which requires only 51 votes.
Shocking!
We should all pool what is left of our money together and buy an island somewhere. RINO’s need not apply.
I think they are betting that getting something passed and moving on to other things is their best bet. Lots of time between now and November—sad but true.
No they aren't
Ideology over party over self over country
They'll jump on this hand grenade in order to get control over 1/6 of the economy. It'll be incremental and will never be repealed.
I’m sharpening my pitchfork even as we speak. Got to make sure it’s nice and ‘pointy’.
I am open to suggestions.
Well, we can always hope for a good SCOTUS decision to help derail it. I do know that if they pass this in their sleazy way, lawsuits are already prepared to be launched.
I myself, do not buy they mantra that this just cannot be repealed. Nothing is ever impossible.
other than that....go after them
Seriously. This can’t just be talk. These bastards have to pay.
Eff November. By then its too late.
B U M P !!!
Here’s a hint.
The only good commie is a dead commie.
202-224-3121 - Ross (D - ARK)
Office says he will vote - “NO”!
The “nuclear option” was something else entirely. It refers to changing the Senate rules to remove the filibuster option completely. Reconciliation is a manuever used to modify or “reconcile” a bill that has already been passed by the House and Senate and only requires a simple majority vote because debate is limited by Senate rule to 20 hours. It’s used fairly often. (Maybe once every couple of years or so.) For example, the Bush tax cuts were passed using reconciliation.
The big debate about it’s use here is because of what’s called the “Byrd rule.” The Byrd rule, (named after Robert Byrd,) says basically that reconciliation can not be used for making changes to bills when the changes would increase the deficit. The problem is that the determination of whether the reconciliation bill violates the Byrd Rule is made by the Presiding Officer of the Senate, (Joe Biden,) and he can only be overruled by a 60 vote supermajority.
The process is:
The House must pass the Senate bill in it’s entirety as written. (This could already be a stumbling block for the Dems because the Blue Dogs in the House don’t like the Senate bill’s language re: abortion. To get around this, the Senate may pass it’s reconciliation bill before the House votes on the original Senate Bill.)
The House and Senate are going to have to pass another bill that includes the changes to the Senate bill that they wish to make. (This is the Reconciliation Bill. It will only require a simple majority in both houses. As I’ve said, the Senate may very well try to pass it’s reconciliation bill before the House votes on the original Senate bill.)
Last, the POTUS needs to sign both bills. Bills take effect in the order that they are signed by the President, not in the order they are passed by the Legislature. As long as the President signs the original Senate Bill 1 second before he signs the Reconciliation Bill to modify it, they will take effect as the Dems designed. Again, the Blue Dogs have to trust that the President will indeed sign the reconcilition bill. He could simply sign the original Senate Bill and veto the reconciliation bill to leave the original Senate Bill intact.
That’s the process in a nutshell.
Isn't that how we got into trouble with McCain-Feingold? How do you repeal a multi-thousand page bill that does so many things even those looking after the text of the USC at the Archives are going to take years to just to integrate all of the words where they are supposed to be?
Are we ready for that?
There's also the possibility that this will finally be the straw that breaks the camel's back. We then might be able to pass legislation to roll back this, Medicare Part D, etc.
Of course that's probably just wishful thinking on my part.
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.