Posted on 06/29/2012 9:40:23 PM PDT by Revel
According to Ben, then if Obamacare is a tax as per the USSC, then the bill had to originate in the house. He claims that it did not. Watch the Video. Can anyone with great understanding validate if what he says is true. Did the final bill not originate in the house? Someone at youtube suggests that the senate used a gutted bill from the house. True or False?
It was a House bill.
My understanding...Reid knew he needed a vehicle from the House, so he pulled the cheap trick of using a bill that came over and simply replaced what was written on those pages with what he wanted it to say.
It was all a technicality. The content was not a House bill.
Nevertheless that’s what he did and he got away with it. How often such things are done there, I don’t know.
If it’s a tax they overturn it with a simple majority, filibuster-proof, via reconciliation
Here's the House vote on that bill before it was gutted by amendment in the Senate: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll768.xml
Notice the bill history
They used every trick in the book to overcome opposition.
It was a House bill but, interestingly enough, it was not the House healthcare bill. That one never got taken up by the Senate.
Take it up with the Supreme Court. Yeah, that's the ticket. They are sure to void the law based on that technicality. /s
Thanks for checking it out. I guess Ben got it wrong and his claim was too good to be true.
Moderator- Please remove from front page news.
” How often such things are done there, I don’t know.”
And IMO you really don’t WANT to know. Same thing with exactly how sausages are made (not to mention chicken nuggets;)
“According to Ben, then if Obamacare is a tax as per the USSC, then the bill had to originate in the house.”
All of these articles decrying the legality of ObamaCare, or attacking it on procedural grounds, assume that Obama gives a rat’s *ss about the customary rules and regulations of the American legislative process - or even the constitution.
Clearly, he does not.
And all of the opinions rendered about how the Republicans are going to nullify it later ignore the twin facts that: 1. RomneyCare preceded ObamaCare by several years, and it is therefore highly unlikely that Romney - assuming he’s elected - will do anything at all about this new law; and, 2. The Republicans are a fighting bunch - they’re most certainly not; they’re all out to pasture baaaing while the democrats shear them or simply asleep and serving time while they collect enormous salaries, gigantic benefits, and generous pensions for doing absolutely nothing but posturing for cameras and writing fictional letters home, mailed with their franking privileges, telling everyone what a big job they’re doing.
Hate to rain on anyone’s parade, but when Roberts blew it, it was thereupon destined to stay blown.
“Hate to rain on anyone’s parade...”
Not really.
Howzzat again?
Read the decision. The pertinent legalese is between pages 39-44. It's a logical abortion worthy of Alice in Wonderland.
Bookmark. Great post, thanks!
Romney might have a difficult time ignoring a Republican-dominated Congress in 2013. If this scenario pans out, there will be a mandate that Obamacare be repealed and since Romney’s not black he’ll be held accountable for inaction. The repeal would have to take place if the Repubs sweep Congress.. No two ways about it. It’s the ‘replace’ part that’ll get ugly because we’ll end up with government intrusion of health care no matter what, to appease the news media. MUST answer to the news media, right?
You've got it exactly backwards. The Republican-dominated Congress is going to have a hard time saying no to Romney, who will be the leader of their party.
They're going to give him what he wants, and the Dems will go along with it, because Romney will continue to forward their agenda. Just like he did in Massachusetts.
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.