Reconciliation On Health Care (or anything else), How Can You Defend It?

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

We don't need a supermajority to pass the budget, and that affects 100% of our economy. Which would be six times bigger than anything affecting 1/6 of our economy (if this healthcare even did, which it doesn't).

Lay that argument to rest.

Health Care is not a budget item but a new piece of legislation which affects 1/6 of our economy. It will become part of the budget but the bill itself is a new law not a budget item.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We don't need a supermajority to pass the budget, and that affects 100% of our economy. Which would be six times bigger than anything affecting 1/6 of our economy (if this healthcare even did, which it doesn't).

Lay that argument to rest.

Health Care is not a budget item but a new piece of legislation which affects 1/6 of our economy. It will become part of the budget but the bill itself is a new law not a budget item.

That wasn't my point.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

We don't need a supermajority to pass the budget, and that affects 100% of our economy. Which would be six times bigger than anything affecting 1/6 of our economy (if this healthcare even did, which it doesn't).

Lay that argument to rest.

Health Care is not a budget item but a new piece of legislation which affects 1/6 of our economy. It will become part of the budget but the bill itself is a new law not a budget item.

That wasn't my point.

Well from your statement its obvious i missed your point, would you mind stating it in a different way or explaining what I missed?

 

[maineman]

Thanks again, this is going to come in handy in 2012.

so you missed civics class too, eh?

Don't cry like a little girl when we use reconciliation to sell off ObamaMotors, Freddie and Fannie and privatize Social Security

why would I be upset if a majority of both houses of congress passed valid legislation and the president signed it?

a bigger question is: why, apparently, are YOU?

 

[VaYank5150]

Jan 20, 2012

List of things we will Reconcile

1. English Official Language of the USA
2. National Voter ID
3. Partial privatization of Social Security
4. Eliminate Dept of Education and Energy
5. Repeal Minimum Wage
6. Immigration Reform/Annex Mexico

This is a lot of fun! Sweet!

So much for that whole "big tent" idea the GOP was throwing around, eh? Kinda like Steele's idea to bring in the hip-hop crowd....

 

[maineman]

Jan 20, 2012

List of things we will Reconcile

1. English Official Language of the USA
2. National Voter ID
3. Partial privatization of Social Security
4. Eliminate Dept of Education and Energy
5. Repeal Minimum Wage
6. Immigration Reform/Annex Mexico

This is a lot of fun! Sweet!

wanna bet? I'll bet you $20K that the USA will not do a single one of those things in 2012.

When the Republicans win Congress (probably 100 seat pick up in 2010) and the Presidency in 2012, you will have to reconcile yourself to this.

so... in other words, you're too chicken to bet? I understand. As my grandfather used to say, all hat and no cattle.

 

[VaYank5150]

wanna bet? I'll bet you $20K that the USA will not do a single one of those things in 2012.

When the Republicans win Congress (probably 100 seat pick up in 2010) and the Presidency in 2012, you will have to reconcile yourself to this.

so... in other words, you're too chicken to bet? I understand. As my grandfather used to say, all hat and no cattle.

He's almost as bad as Xenophon....don't make bets with him either. He never pays up when he loses.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Yawn.

 

[maineman]

Yawn.

stupid thread started by a moron who failed junior high civics.

it IS boring.

 

[maineman]

I never said it was unamerican. I called it a bastardization of our political system. In our system you need 3/5 of a vote to pass a law, not 51/100.

show me a link to anything in our constitution where it says that you need 3/5 of a vote to pass a law.

I think you missed civics class pilgrim.

In order to end debate, vote on and pass the bill, and invoke cloture they need a 3/5ths vote. Its how it works. read up on the senate rules.

They can't just "shut down debate" by invoking reconciliation/nuke option/simple majority. Its how the system works

Here is a good read for you Project Vote Smart - GOVERNMENT 101: How a Bill Becomes Law

senate rules change all the time. they are the purview of the senate alone. Filibusters used to be different than they are today. the constitution requires that a bill becomes a law by passing both houses by simple majority votes. period. Helath care reform already passed the senate by a super majority. Health care reform already passed the house. The senate can certainly use reconciliation if it wants to pass small items that serve to reconcile differences between the two. don't like? move.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

wanna bet? I'll bet you $20K that the USA will not do a single one of those things in 2012.

When the Republicans win Congress (probably 100 seat pick up in 2010) and the Presidency in 2012, you will have to reconcile yourself to this.

so... in other words, you're too chicken to bet? I understand. As my grandfather used to say, all hat and no cattle.

Yeah, that has to be it.

 

[Vanquish]

A simple majority is needed to pass something in the Senate, UNLESS there's a filibuster, then 60 votes are needed and a 2/3rd's is a veto over-ride.

So...going back to the first poster (Care4all) that took a stab at this (and did a fine job I might add)...the Senate and House have both passed something they can live with. The spirit of the process is to pass something that looks like a mirror image AND THAT'S WHAT RECONCILIATION WOULD DO HERE.

The point that someone made about the budget being passed this way is not a small one. If it's good enough to monkey with the national economy, it's more than fine to gussy- up 2 bills that look 85% the same.

 

[Claudette]

Good, simple explanation Van.

A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill. I wonder if the Dems will be willing to walk the plank for Pelosi and OL'BO to pass this bill??

Thats the big question.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Health Care is not a budget item but a new piece of legislation which affects 1/6 of our economy. It will become part of the budget but the bill itself is a new law not a budget item.

That wasn't my point.

Well from your statement its obvious i missed your point, would you mind stating it in a different way or explaining what I missed?

The Republican (and others') argument is that since this bill allegedly affects 1/6 of the economy then it should require a supermajority to pass.

The budget is exempt from the supermajority rules, and yet the budget is a bill that affects 100% of the economy.

If the amount of impact on the economy that a bill has is a meaningful criterion for determining whether or not a supermajority should be required to pass it, why isn't that applied to the budget, moreover, why is the budget explicitly exempted from those rules?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That wasn't my point.

Well from your statement its obvious i missed your point, would you mind stating it in a different way or explaining what I missed?

The Republican (and others') argument is that since this bill allegedly affects 1/6 of the economy then it should require a supermajority to pass.

The budget is exempt from the supermajority rules, and yet the budget is a bill that affects 100% of the economy.

If the amount of impact on the economy that a bill has is a meaningful criterion for determining whether or not a supermajority should be required to pass it, why isn't that applied to the budget, moreover, why is the budget explicitly exempted from those rules?

Bush could have used that logic to privatize Social Security

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

A simple majority is needed to pass something in the Senate, UNLESS there's a filibuster, then 60 votes are needed and a 2/3rd's is a veto over-ride.

So...going back to the first poster (Care4all) that took a stab at this (and did a fine job I might add)...the Senate and House have both passed something they can live with. The spirit of the process is to pass something that looks like a mirror image AND THAT'S WHAT RECONCILIATION WOULD DO HERE.

The point that someone made about the budget being passed this way is not a small one. If it's good enough to monkey with the national economy, it's more than fine to gussy- up 2 bills that look 85% the same.

Thank you for a good, rational post.

I understand the premise you are putting forth but this is no longer the same bill which is why I disagree with it. Obama himself yesterday and the day before in speeches said they have made changes to it. Based on his statements to the bill being changed it needs to go back through the process again and looked over.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Good, simple explanation Van.

A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill. I wonder if the Dems will be willing to walk the plank for Pelosi and OL'BO to pass this bill??

Thats the big question.

That is not true cluadette

What the overwhelming majority of americans, including myself, are in favor of is health care reform. However the majority of americans do not favor this specific bill.

Care4All and I disagree on some of the types of reform needed but we both agree reform is needed and this bill isn't good.

 

[boedicca]

[The senate can certainly use reconciliation if it wants to pass small items that serve to reconcile differences between the two. don't like? move.

I just love it when lefties who hyperventilate about the right loving America resort to the Love It or Leave It argument.

There really should be a name for this similar to Godwin's Law (perhaps there already is - anyone?).

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

That wasn't my point.

Well from your statement its obvious i missed your point, would you mind stating it in a different way or explaining what I missed?

The Republican (and others') argument is that since this bill allegedly affects 1/6 of the economy then it should require a supermajority to pass.

The budget is exempt from the supermajority rules, and yet the budget is a bill that affects 100% of the economy.

If the amount of impact on the economy that a bill has is a meaningful criterion for determining whether or not a supermajority should be required to pass it, why isn't that applied to the budget, moreover, why is the budget explicitly exempted from those rules?

Thank you for clarifying.

I understand what the talking points have been but my opinion on it is different from those talking points.

Its not a budget item yet, it is a new law. That is where my issue with saying "its a budget item so reconciliation is acceptable" comes from. Yes the bill will have a huge impact on the economy, for better or worse, however it is not a budget bill.

Thats a good question at the end BTW. Here is the background on that question and its answer. Yes its wiki but its a good article Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[NYcarbineer]

[Bush could have used that logic to privatize Social Security

Hardly. This is from 2005:

Following a meeting at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said that he did not expect fellow lawmakers to pass Social Security reform legislation until after the next presidential election.

"I can't even get a consensus among Republicans," he said, according to a Grassley staff member who in an e-mail confirmed comments reported earlier.

Social Security reform not likely until 2009: Grassley - Nov. 8, 2005