Posted on 03/21/2010 3:56:40 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf reports: The House bill has not yet passed and already we are seeing the reconciliation fight start in the Senate.
Senate Republicans say they can get the whole package of reconciliation fixes – the fix-its that make the Senate plan palatable to House Democrats - thrown out with a trump card procedural motion. And they say Democrats are slow-walking a decision from the parliamentarian until the House passes the Senate bill.
That means the Senate bill, which everyone in the House seems to universally hate, will be the law of the land.
This afternoon Senate Republicans say Democrats won’t meet with them and the parliamentarian – a charge Democratic staffers call “absurd”. (The timing of the allegation also works as a last-minute, probably too-late message to wavering House Democrats). Bottom line: Don’t expect the health reform debate to end tonight even though the health reform bill will become law as soon as Obama signs the Senate bill.
Should the House pass the Senate bill and the package of reconciliation fix-its tonight, Senators will take over the reconciliation fix-its as soon as Tuesday.
That will set in motion a week or longer parliamentary floor battle with points of order, references to the budget act, the Byrd Rule and more.
For an appetizer, take a look at Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Judd Gregg’s statement tonight....
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
Campaign Finance Reform. The Code of Federal Regulation only grows.
If you have a bunch of states’ AGs filing a lawsuit then this one will get fast tracked to SCOTUS.
And you know the folks on the court will be happy to jam a thumb in Bambi’s eye too....
Because by letting them know they could be stuck with their yes vote with nothing to show gets them to consider, 'is it worth in'. IOW, Do you feel lucky sucker..? It might just get them to reconsider.
The difference is that the Republicans crafted the legislation and the Republican president signed it. There was no real effort to dismantle it. Same with Steyn’s argument that “no one ever got rid of the Department of Energy.” Nobody ever campaigned on that promise. This fall will be all about dismantling this POS and they damn well better follow through.
Yes, but I would have rather they got blindsided by the fact, provided the entire bill died. If the Senate bill would still pass then I the strategy makes more sense to me. This whole process is a little convoluted to me. The only thing I know is that, if this passes, the days of filibustering are passed. If you are in the minority party you may as well stay home.
The logic is that if the Senate Parlimentarian, the republicans can convene with the Democrats in the Senate, they can stop the Reconciliation Bill.
Now before you repeat that the Reconciliation Bill is just a sham (which is true), remind yourselves that the House Dems are using it for cover.
If the Reconciliation Bill is stopped BEFORE the House votes on teh Senate Bill, there is no cover for House dems, and they won’t vote for it until Reconciliation is back in play (which it won’t be).
So when they say they are doing a ‘slow walk’ to killing the Reconciliation Bill, that means they are hoping the House gets the time to vote on the Senate Bill and voila, they got what they want and reconciliation be damned.
reconciliation = cover
The House will not approve the Senate Bill if the Reconciliation Bill is dead.
So this is playing out the clock......exactly what it is.
The questions now are what can the Senate Repubs do to speed up the parlimentary action on reconciliation (kill it)? What can the House repubs do to slow down the vote on the Senate Bill?
If the House repubs can call for a Motion to Recommit (MTR) many times over, they can slow it down. Also they can call for a MTR for the Stupak dems to vote on the EO language to be put into the Senate Bill etc. Each MTR gets 20 minutes on the floor, it is a way for the House to filibuster.
I’m almost out of popcorn. But dead serious to follow this. In fact I would like to see the states take up their 10th amendment cases because I think they have strong cases and if they score victories, the tactic can be used on a host of socialism, IOW kill socialism in the United States.
In fact, the best outcome would be to kill the bill (but it is never really dead, it is just shelved), then follow through with state legislation to prohibit federal mandates to purchase health insurance.
We'll have to see just how many Constitutional or Congressional rules "get bent" by the time 0bambi signs this Republic-, jobs- and wealth-destroying travesty, but don't count out SCOTUS for a Florida Supreme-like smackdown, as nefarious items of similar moment may well be employed before the ink gets drawn.
Wer weiß?
HF
How would stopping the “fix” kill the whole bill? The way I understand it, the original Senate bill would now be law and they (the Senate) would just say, “Oh, well......”
Let's have at it, but we dern well better have candidates that will follow through!
HF
Sorry. I see CFR, and my mind goes immediately to Code of Federal Regs. Blame it on law school.
What's funny is I even mentioned Citizens United (the case that the Supremes used to strike McCain/Feingold) and it still didn't register.
I spent a week looking through HR 3590. There are several constitutional infirmities that I don't believe will survive judicial review, with the "personal mandate" the most likely to die in the judiciary - that is so long as Roberts has his four amigos (and part time originalist, Kennedy)
"If Republicans can get the parliamentarian to agree with them even once, whatever ultimately passes the Senate will have to go back to the House. And Democrats in the House quietly admit that its very likely they will have to vote again on the reconciliation fixes at some point down the road."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/03/senate-fight-starts-gop-says-senate-parliamentarian-will-kill-fixits-bill.html
If there's any hope it's that the whole thing is so convoluted, we're bound to see more options opening up to fight it. Personally I don't see how the Rec bill being used to deem and pass (if struck down) could still stand to qualify the 'deemed' Senate bill as validly passed. So if there is a chance to invalidate the Rec bill on the basis of that 301 point of order Senate thing, then who the heck knows.. Man this is bullshit. I hope I'm making sense.
Yawn.... the GOP. Snooze. Who the hell is the GOP?
When the Pubbies block the reconciliation bill in the Senate, the Dems and MSM will then say that the Pubbies are responsible for the abortion language, the Cornhusker Kickback, and the Louisiana Purchase, etc. staying in the HC legislation. Just watch the MSM let the Dems do this, and unfortunately, many people will believe it.
Not yet would be more accurate.
GOP senators also promised to block all of the pay offs. One of those payoffs was to the Hispanic racist caucus to vote for the bill in return for McAmnesty. We need to hold their feet to the fire on that one.
I think it’s time we quit talking about and worrying about what the rats will think or the media will say or any of it. It’s time to take the bull by the horns, go forward with all barrels blazing and do what needs to be done. Let it all fly, and keep it flying. Lawsuits, state revolts, media campaign, letters, rallies, protests, civil disobedience as to compliance, finding good candidates to beat them and whatever else it takes to shake this off.
I’m not sure what you’re saying. Do you mean that nobody in the House ever took the recon bill seriously, or that it was a scam by the House leadership to get the senate bill through for all the reasons they and zero want it......or what? Because if nobody took it seriously, what was the purpose in the exercise? If they said it was a “fix” and then they don’t get the “fix”, it makes them look worse, not better, to the public.
When adjudicating on the meaning of a law, courts often look to the “intent of the legislature.” Can it really be said that there was a unified intent of the legislature here?
Overruling the parliamentarian is quite rare. I think the last VP (prez of senate) to do it was Hubert Humphrey. That’s not to say Biden wouldn’t do it, but he’s someone who’s relied on the comity of the senate for 36 years.
Tough call, but my point is that it isn’t a casual, common practice at all.
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.