Your question (answered often btw)
“If a repeal bill could get thru the Senate a year ago, what can’t it now?”
Answer: A year ago the Dems didn’t bother with a filibuster because they knew Obama would not sign it.
Now you can sneer at that, or you can accept it as fact. They had no need to go to the administrative effort to filibuster when it would not be signed. Now that there is a risk of signature, they would filibuster.
We don’t have 60 votes. In 2009, they did.
Lol, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed through reconciliation; Senate does not need 60 which is why those who are paying attention understand this is all a farce and a continued commitment to unrestrained fiscal (Insanity) oppressive governance.
No, they can simply put it in reconciliation, which is immune to filibuster, and if the Democrat parliamentarian rules any of it impermissible for that—Pence can take the gavel and overrule.
The whole 60-vote excuse is a lie.
But the filibuster can be broken by Senate rule 19 which limits speeches to 2 per senator per subject.
Bring back a clean repeal bill, delayed 4 months or so to give them time to pass single issue bills that will address immediate problems, then make the dems do a real filibuster, and hold the senate floor.
What are there, 48 dems? Many of whom couldn’t hold a thought, let alone the floor, for more than 15 minutes. They each get to speak twice for as long as they can hold out, then the filibuster is over and the bill only needs 51 votes to pass.
It may take a month, but if they had started they’d be halfway through by now.
Love,
O2
Now you can sneer at that, or you can accept it as fact. They had no need to go to the administrative effort to filibuster when it would not be signed. Now that there is a risk of signature, they would filibuster.
We don’t have 60 votes. In 2009, they did.
The Senate doesn't need sixty votes to repeal the ACA. Since the USSC ruled that the ACA is a tax bill, reconciliation could be used to pass repeal just as reconciliation was used to pass it in the first place. Fifty plus Pence and the ACA dies.
If the Republicans wanted to repeal the ACA they could do so today and President Trump would sign the repeal killing this unconstitutional overreach. The fact they haven't shows they don't really want repeal. The simple facts are that the PLP has had a minimum of two years to craft a replacement for the ACA and they don't have one. This further illustrates that they never really meant their promises to repeal the ACA. Two cheeks of the same ass indeed.
James R. McClure Jr.
Jeffersonian Anti-Federalist Democrat