The Bill Number did. Nothing else.
That is fraud writ large in any other case.
It's like taking a Lamborghini "shell" and putting the guts of a Lada under it, and calling it a luxury Sports car.
How that transparent legal fraud originated I have never seen satisfactorily explained.
That bill number is enough of an opening for the supremes to leave it be 5-4
After which a buyer (the House of Representatives), fully aware of the new contents, buys the car.
The American people decided they wanted Communists to run the country and now we are paying for it.
This is the earliest example of this exact practise I have found:
“...(S. 115) ‘‘To modify the act of the 14th of
July, 1832, and all other acts imposing duties on imports,’’ introduced by Mr. Henry
Clay, of Kentucky, February 12, 1833.6 Objection was made by Mr. John Forsyth,
of Georgia, and others, that the bill was not constitutional, as the Senate did not
have the power to originate such a bill.7 The bill was considered and carried to
a third reading, when, on February 26, it was laid on the table,8 the bill of the
House (H. R. 641) being received in the Senate at that time. This House bill had
originally been reported on December 27,9 but, on February 25, on motion of Mr.
Robert P. Letcher, of Kentucky, the Senate bill proposed by Mr. Clay had been
moved as a substitute and adopted, retaining, however, the House number10 This
bill passed the Senate and became a law.11”
... from Hind’s Precedents Chapter XLVII pg 943
The basis is that our constitution did not forbid modification of revenue bills by the ‘upper house’ as the British did= but specifically allows it.
I believe it was a mistake today, and by Henry Clay in 1833, to allow this but wonder whether a court will repudiate such a long practise.