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

[Midnight Marauder]

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

Easy.

Just say "Mom, the other kid did it too!" over and over. No matter that it totally belies the "change" mantra. That went out the window long ago.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So how does that back up overlooking the senate rule of needing a 3/5's majority to shut down debate on new laws in regard to health care?

again...please show me where the constitution of the united states requires that the sentate needs 3/5's to shut down debate. Senate rules are written by senators and can - and have been - changed at the beginning of each term. Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?

Why do you refuse to see that changes to the Bill other than budgetary items require a 60 vote majority?

 

[maineman]

So how does that back up overlooking the senate rule of needing a 3/5's majority to shut down debate on new laws in regard to health care?

again...please show me where the constitution of the united states requires that the sentate needs 3/5's to shut down debate. Senate rules are written by senators and can - and have been - changed at the beginning of each term. Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?

Go back to my response the first time you asked that. I provided you a link with that information.

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

you answer does not answer my question. The constitution does not create the senate rules. senators do. those rules have changed over time. and we have a non-elected post called the congressional parliamentarian whose sole job it is to ensure that both houses play by their own rules. He has not stated that reconciliation is a violation of those rules not... nor did he say that when Bush &Co. used to in the past.

 

[maineman]

Why do you refuse to see that changes to the Bill other than budgetary items require a 60 vote majority?

show me that requirement in the constitution.

 

[VaYank5150]

Why do you refuse to see that changes to the Bill other than budgetary items require a 60 vote majority?

show me that requirement in the constitution.

Good luck with this one. Now, the spin and name calling will begin.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

No explanation needed its right there in the language.

PROVIDE for the common defense
PROMOTE the general welfare

They differentiated rigth there. One must be provided, the other must be encouraged (promote is not the same as provide)

are you suggesting that providing some baseline level of marginal support is NOT promoting general welfare?

Obviously you have never heard of Medicaid/Medicare

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Why do you refuse to see that changes to the Bill other than budgetary items require a 60 vote majority?

show me that requirement in the constitution.

Read the Senate rules!!!!

 

[VaYank5150]

Why do you refuse to see that changes to the Bill other than budgetary items require a 60 vote majority?

show me that requirement in the constitution.

Read the Senate rules!!!!

There are Senate rules in the Constitution?????

 

[boedicca]

show me that requirement in the constitution.

Article I Section 5 - then refer to the Rules of the Senate.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

show me that requirement in the constitution.

Read the Senate rules!!!!

There are Senate rules in the Constitution?????

What are you babbling about? Read the rules in the Senate that refer to what can and cannot be voted on with a simple majority aka reconciliation.

 

[Dr.House]

Read the Senate rules!!!!

There are Senate rules in the Constitution?????

What are you babbling about? Read the rules in the Senate that refer to what can and cannot be voted on with a simple majority aka reconciliation.

It's sad that you have to spell the simple shit out to some of the brain-dead leftists...

 

[VaYank5150]

Read the Senate rules!!!!

There are Senate rules in the Constitution?????

What are you babbling about? Read the rules in the Senate that refer to what can and cannot be voted on with a simple majority aka reconciliation.

Sorry. I was still waiting for you to tell him where this was in the Constitution. I must have missed that response...

 

[maineman]

Read the Senate rules!!!!

There are Senate rules in the Constitution?????

What are you babbling about? Read the rules in the Senate that refer to what can and cannot be voted on with a simple majority aka reconciliation.

you are aware, are you not, that senate rules are written on paper and not chiseled in stone? you are aware that the congressional parliamentarian has not stated that the use of reconciliation in this matter is in violation of the senate rules... nor did he when reconciliation was used to pass Bush's enormous deficit raising tax cuts for rich folks.

 

[maineman]

show me that requirement in the constitution.

Article I Section 5 - then refer to the Rules of the Senate.

who writes the rules of the senate? who arbitrates them?

 

[maineman]

Obviously you have never heard of Medicaid/Medicare

I have indeed. Are you admitting that Medicaid and Medicare are examples of the promotion of the general welfare?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Bush could have used that logic to privatize Social Security

You realize that when push came to shove, nobody wanted that, right?. Nobody.

If the GOP thought even 10% of the population would have supported them, then they'd have used Bush's "Mandate" from the 2004 election to pass it. As soon as people thought it through though, they called up their congressmen and said stuff it.

Frank, I hope the GOP tries it again in 2010. I'd like to see how a second Obama term would play out.

The Senate recently voted 97 to 0 to exempt Social Security from consideration by the bi-partisan deficit reduction commission that was/is being put together. I guess Frank is expecting a whole new Senate to be elected by 2012.

 

[Vanquish]

Pages back someone used the really imprecise language "a senate bill did not pass the House"...errmmm the Senate and the House are two different bodies.

So either you meant that the same bill didnt pass on both sides...or you meant imprecisely that a bill didnt pass in the Senate...

Obviously the same bill didn't pass on both sides...so did someone really back up their argument with the more imprecise of the two wording?

Weird.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

There are Senate rules in the Constitution?????

What are you babbling about? Read the rules in the Senate that refer to what can and cannot be voted on with a simple majority aka reconciliation.

you are aware, are you not, that senate rules are written on paper and not chiseled in stone? you are aware that the congressional parliamentarian has not stated that the use of reconciliation in this matter is in violation of the senate rules... nor did he when reconciliation was used to pass Bush's enormous deficit raising tax cuts for rich folks.

You are aware that we haven't heard about any changes to the Senate rules regarding the use of reconciliation or what requires a 60 vote majority and what doesn't when you CHANGE A BILL FROM IT'S ORIGINAL FORM THAT WAS PASSED WITH 60 VOTES.
You are also aware of the Medicaid program right?
You are also aware of the definition of promote vs. provide right?

 

[VaYank5150]

Obviously you have never heard of Medicaid/Medicare

I have indeed. Are you admitting that Medicaid and Medicare are examples of the promotion of the general welfare?

That can't be. They already told us we can't read. MediCaid/MediCare could not be examples of PROVIDING general welfar, right?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Pages back someone used the really imprecise language "a senate bill did not pass the House"...errmmm the Senate and the House are two different bodies.

So either you meant that the same bill didnt pass on both sides...or you meant imprecisely that a bill didnt pass in the Senate...

Obviously the same bill didn't pass on both sides...so did someone really back up their argument with the more imprecise of the two wording?

Weird.

That's what I cleared up. The claim that the Senate Bill passed the House already was incorrect.