Democrats have used self-executing rule over a hundred times

[Oldandtired]

You made no point in response to the specifics of my post.
You just asked a question.

Which you didn't answer, I noticed.

Rick

the dems have few high level pundits like the right does.
Aren't you all always bragging on Fox Pundit and Rush ratings?

I used to be a Hannity watcher when he had Colmes....but I gotta admit...put him on camera alone and he is nothing but a dictionary of talking points.

Beck? Rarely get to see him...but when I do, I find him entertaining, but I dont let hiim rile me up.

Oreilly? Everynight the same thing...I watch his "talking points " segement and then turn it off...especially when I see Dick Morris sitting there.

I will admit though...I like Greta...not sure why.....but she has a right lean to her that I appreciate (yep...not proud to admit I like to hear my kind)...but she does not pound in the same dam talking points over and over like Hannity, Rush and Morris.

I also appreciate her guests...except for that WSJ guy....he makes my skin crawl....I mean...and saying this as a conservative...he seems to be happy to report bad economic news....

Oh yeah...I forgot...I am in love with Dana Perino.....Even asked my wife if she would mind if I invited her on vacation with us.

 

[Truthmatters]

"rule was used to expedite House action in disposing of Senate amendments to House-passed bills."

WHY do you REFUSE to accept the house rules committees OWN definition of this?????

 

[hboats]

The bill has passed the house and then was amended in the senate and now the house is tasked with reconciling the two bills.

This house rules definition clearly states that IS the traditional use of the Self Executive rule.

The house is not only perfectly within the house rules committees definition on this one but they are even in the TRADITIONAL definition according to the house rules committee.

The right is PRETENDING that they are not to make political hey/.

Its called lying in comman vernacular.

That isn't true, the bill that passed the House is not the same bill that was voted on in the Senate. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE BILLS.

Therein lies the problem with Reconciliation.

Rick

 

[MikeHoncho]

The bill has passed the house and then was amended in the senate and now the house is tasked with reconciling the two bills.

This house rules definition clearly states that IS the traditional use of the Self Executive rule.

The house is not only perfectly within the house rules committees definition on this one but they are even in the TRADITIONAL definition according to the house rules committee.

The right is PRETENDING that they are not to make political hey/.

Its called lying in comman vernacular.

you really are an idiot. the bills have to be the same that pass both the house and senate.....you moron. the bill they are pushing right now is the senate bill which got sent to the house because it needs to pass there to move any further. any of this crap your referrring to with rules and amendments is afterwards.

you do understand that the same bill must pass the senate and house right?

 

[uscitizen]

Which you didn't answer, I noticed.

Rick

the dems have few high level pundits like the right does.
Aren't you all always bragging on Fox Pundit and Rush ratings?

Not once have I said anything here about Fox or Rush ratings. Others, maybe, but not me.

Rick

True I cannot say that you have on here.
Do you deny that the republican pundits have much more exposure than the dem pundits do?

 

[Truthmatters]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health...milarities_between_the_House_and_Senate_Bills


[edit] Debate after passage of Senate and House bills
The Senate bill was passed with 60 senators voting in favor during December 2009.[197] The House bill was passed in November 2009 by a vote of 220-215.[198] The next legislative step is for a reconciled bill to be voted on in both chambers, or either chamber could pass the other's bill as-is.[199]


The vote on sunday is a procedural step which combines the SENATE bill with other bills and votes on its passage as an understanding that it is in the package.

It is nothing different than any other useage of this tactic.

 

[Truthmatters]

Now what LIE will you use to try and claim I'm wrong?

 

[hboats]

Now what LIE will you use to try and claim I'm wrong?

Sorry, I'm still waiting for you to point out ANY lie that I've posted here.

But, you could at least admit that you're wrong about there being just one bill with amendments. Because that just isn't the case.

Rick

 

[boedicca]

She can't. Her MO is to link to things she hasn't bothered to read and to repeat the same misinformation over and over and over again. It's boring - and not very effective.

 

[MikeHoncho]

Health care reform debate in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


[edit] Debate after passage of Senate and House bills
The Senate bill was passed with 60 senators voting in favor during December 2009.[197] The House bill was passed in November 2009 by a vote of 220-215.[198] The next legislative step is for a reconciled bill to be voted on in both chambers, or either chamber could pass the other's bill as-is.[199]


The vote on sunday is a procedural step which combines the SENATE bill with other bills and votes on its passage as an understanding that it is in the package.

It is nothing different than any other useage of this tactic.

it says to it either gets combined which would then have to pass in both chambers, or the chamber could pick one of the bills and pass it as it. which would require the house to pass the senate bill. you examples dont support what you claim they do.

 

[Modbert]

When we win it all back in 2012, we'll use the same procedure to undo ObamaCare, eliminate the Department of Ed, and partially privatize Social Security and Medicare

You want to be banished from the White House and Congress for the next hundred years that badly?

 

[Truthmatters]

On Sunday you can stop all this lying.

Then you will have to accept the bill just like you have to accept that Obama is the legal president of this country.

Your lies will just be tossed aside by the sane in this country

 

[Yurt]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When we win it all back in 2012, we'll use the same procedure to undo ObamaCare, eliminate the Department of Ed, and partially privatize Social Security and Medicare

You want to be banished from the White House and Congress for the next hundred years that badly?

Oh, we're going to deem ourselves winners in the next few election and skip right over the dimpled chads and SCOTUS

 

[CrusaderFrank]

On Sunday you can stop all this lying.

Then you will have to accept the bill just like you have to accept that Obama is the legal president of this country.

Your lies will just be tossed aside by the sane in this country

Cough cough Kennedy Seat cough

 

[hboats]

On Sunday you can stop all this lying.

Then you will have to accept the bill just like you have to accept that Obama is the legal president of this country.

Your lies will just be tossed aside by the sane in this country

I've asked you three times now to show me ANY lie from my posts. And I've gotten no response from you. Therefore I guess there are no lies. Thanks for once again proving me right.

Rick

 

[oreo]

Nah, I'm screwing with you USMB, it was the Republicans.

The impeccable bipartisan pedigree of "deem and pass" - Healthcare Reform | Obama Health Care Plan - Salon.com

On the American Enterprise Institute blog, for instance, congressional expert Norm Ornstein writes:

Any veteran observer of Congress is used to the rampant hypocrisy over the use of parliamentary procedures that shifts totally from one side to the other as a majority moves to minority status, and vice versa. But I can’t recall a level of feigned indignation nearly as great as what we are seeing now from congressional Republicans and their acolytes at the Wall Street Journal, and on blogs, talk radio, and cable news. It reached a ridiculous level of misinformation and disinformation over the use of reconciliation, and now threatens to top that level over the projected use of a self-executing rule by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In the last Congress that Republicans controlled, from 2005 to 2006, Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier used the self-executing rule more than 35 times, and was no stranger to the concept of "deem and pass."

That strategy, then decried by the House Democrats who are now using it, and now being called unconstitutional by WSJ editorialists, was defended by House Republicans in court (and upheld). Dreier used it for a $40 billion deficit reduction package so that his fellow GOPers could avoid an embarrassing vote on immigration.

He also posted that essay on the Web site of the Woodrow Wilson Center, where he runs the Congress Project:

When Republicans were in the minority, they railed against self-executing rules as being anti-deliberative because they undermined and perverted the work of committees and also prevented the House from having a separate debate and vote on the majority’s preferred changes. From the 95th to 98th Congresses (1977-84), there were only eight self-executing rules making up just 1 percent of the 857 total rules granted. However, in Speaker Tip O’Neill’s (D-Mass.) final term in the 99th Congress, there were 20 self-executing rules (12 percent). In Rep. Jim Wright’s (D-Texas) only full term as Speaker, in the 100th Congress, there were 18 self-executing rules (17 percent). They reached a high point of 30 under Speaker Tom Foley (D-Wash.) during the final Democratic Congress, the 103rd, for 22 percent of all rules.

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). [Naturally, Gingrich can now be seen everywhere on cable television complaining about such mischief.] There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

Wolfensberger was inspired by a 2006 episode when the Republican majority -- in order to secure their own loophole-ridden, watered-down version of ethics and lobbying reform -- used not just one but three self-executing rules on a single bill.

So uh, conservatives, where has your outrage been for the last, oh I dunno, fifteen years?

UH--I already knew that Republicans used this over "budget disagreements"--especially when democrats threatened to stop funding our troops overseas.

So you're talking about a 40 billion dollar "budget" bill that democrats were holding up in procedural matters, & comparing that to TAKING OVER & RESTRUCTURING 6% OF THIS ENTIRE ECONOMY--over a massive, corruptly done, health care bill that the majority of Americans do not want.

Nice try---

 

[jeffrockit]

Nah, I'm screwing with you USMB, it was the Republicans.

The impeccable bipartisan pedigree of "deem and pass" - Healthcare Reform | Obama Health Care Plan - Salon.com

On the American Enterprise Institute blog, for instance, congressional expert Norm Ornstein writes:

Any veteran observer of Congress is used to the rampant hypocrisy over the use of parliamentary procedures that shifts totally from one side to the other as a majority moves to minority status, and vice versa. But I can’t recall a level of feigned indignation nearly as great as what we are seeing now from congressional Republicans and their acolytes at the Wall Street Journal, and on blogs, talk radio, and cable news. It reached a ridiculous level of misinformation and disinformation over the use of reconciliation, and now threatens to top that level over the projected use of a self-executing rule by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In the last Congress that Republicans controlled, from 2005 to 2006, Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier used the self-executing rule more than 35 times, and was no stranger to the concept of "deem and pass."

That strategy, then decried by the House Democrats who are now using it, and now being called unconstitutional by WSJ editorialists, was defended by House Republicans in court (and upheld). Dreier used it for a $40 billion deficit reduction package so that his fellow GOPers could avoid an embarrassing vote on immigration.

He also posted that essay on the Web site of the Woodrow Wilson Center, where he runs the Congress Project:

When Republicans were in the minority, they railed against self-executing rules as being anti-deliberative because they undermined and perverted the work of committees and also prevented the House from having a separate debate and vote on the majority’s preferred changes. From the 95th to 98th Congresses (1977-84), there were only eight self-executing rules making up just 1 percent of the 857 total rules granted. However, in Speaker Tip O’Neill’s (D-Mass.) final term in the 99th Congress, there were 20 self-executing rules (12 percent). In Rep. Jim Wright’s (D-Texas) only full term as Speaker, in the 100th Congress, there were 18 self-executing rules (17 percent). They reached a high point of 30 under Speaker Tom Foley (D-Wash.) during the final Democratic Congress, the 103rd, for 22 percent of all rules.

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). [Naturally, Gingrich can now be seen everywhere on cable television complaining about such mischief.] There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

Wolfensberger was inspired by a 2006 episode when the Republican majority -- in order to secure their own loophole-ridden, watered-down version of ethics and lobbying reform -- used not just one but three self-executing rules on a single bill.

So uh, conservatives, where has your outrage been for the last, oh I dunno, fifteen years?

No political side has ever used it on a bill this size, one that will take over 1/6th of the economy and will throw this country into an unrecoverable deficit. If you have children and/or grandchildren, look to them as they will carry the burden of these political games each side uses to get their way.