No, the bill originated in the Senate. The House voted on a similar version. The Senate then tacked on myriad amendments and voted on it with a very narrow majority voting Aye. They had to ramrod an unamended version through the House on the “auspices” that the Senate would simply vote through the entirety of the amended act without any changes to prevent reconciliation.
Essentially, the House and the Senate conspired to push through poor legislation, because they knew overall support wasn’t there but managed to get the bare minimum to push it through quickly.
Regardless of the history, the bill was first offered in the Senate, which is against parliamentary procedure.
No. The bill originated in the House. However, it was an unrelated bill on veterans issues. The Senate took that bill number as a shell, substituted the healthcare language and rammed that through reconciliation. The House did ultimately vote on it... but the original language was not on the bill originated by the House.
The fact of the matter is that HR 3590, as originally passed by the House, was concerned with certain veterans' benefits. It was never taken up by the Senate in its original form, however.
Instead, Harry Reid stripped out the entire contents of HR 3590 and "amended" the bill with the text of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"). It was this bill that was passed by the Senate and sent back to the House for action.
So, technically, Obamacare and its various taxes did originate in the House.
Does Harry Reid's act fly in the face of Constitutional principles? Of course, it does. However, majority leaders of both parties have been following this practice for well over a hundred years. It's not a new trick.