Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare

[Lakhota]

'Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.'


Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare



Justice Roberts is, indeed, a genius!

2) Congress can’t repeal the full law through reconciliation. Without the necessary 60 votes in the Senate for full repeal, Republicans are pledging to use a budget reconciliation bill to undo the ACA. But this process would only apply to the budget-related elements of the law and would thus leave many portions — including the mandate — intact. As health care expert Robert Laszewski put it, “Romney could end up creating a chaotic environment driven by enormous uncertainty over just which parts of the new health care law would be implemented–for consumers, health care providers, and insurers.”

More: 4 Reasons Why Republicans Won't Be Able To Repeal Obamacare | ThinkProgress

 

[Shogun]

watching the right wing meltdown on this forum is almost as hilarious as how many right wingers have threatened to move to CANADA after the ruling!

oyvay!

 

[Care4all]

'Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.'


Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare



Justice Roberts is, indeed, a genius!

While I will be happy the GOP uses any tactic within the rules to rid us of this insanity I have'nt alot to say about anything that comes out of Herritage. They started this ball rolling and now the GOP has to eat it regardless of involvement or not. All in an effort to fight Hillary.....

you mean with proposing a mandate?

 

[SniperFire]

'Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.'


Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare



Justice Roberts is, indeed, a genius!

2) Congress can’t repeal the full law through reconciliation. Without the necessary 60 votes in the Senate for full repeal, Republicans are pledging to use a budget reconciliation bill to undo the ACA. But this process would only apply to the budget-related elements of the law and would thus leave many portions — including the mandate — intact. As health care expert Robert Laszewski put it, “Romney could end up creating a chaotic environment driven by enormous uncertainty over just which parts of the new health care law would be implemented–for consumers, health care providers, and insurers.”

More: 4 Reasons Why Republicans Won't Be Able To Repeal Obamacare | ThinkProgress

The 'mandate' is a tax, dope. The Supremes just ruled thusly.

 

[Zander]

"We the people" will decide the fate of Obamacare and Obama in 131 days......

 

[Listening]

'Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.'


Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare



Justice Roberts is, indeed, a genius!

2) Congress can’t repeal the full law through reconciliation. Without the necessary 60 votes in the Senate for full repeal, Republicans are pledging to use a budget reconciliation bill to undo the ACA. But this process would only apply to the budget-related elements of the law and would thus leave many portions — including the mandate — intact. As health care expert Robert Laszewski put it, “Romney could end up creating a chaotic environment driven by enormous uncertainty over just which parts of the new health care law would be implemented–for consumers, health care providers, and insurers.”

More: 4 Reasons Why Republicans Won't Be Able To Repeal Obamacare | ThinkProgress

They don't need to repeal the full law...they'll just kill the taxing portion and the whole thing will dry up.

It won't be any more chaotic than it is now.

And I am looking forward to it.

 

[SniperFire]

I bet some Dims are thinking this is over now.

 

[SniperFire]

'The Supreme Court’s decision forces Obamacare to be litigated in the 2012 elections, and in virtually every case where Obamacare has been litigated by voters in an election, the law and its supporters lose. From Scott Brown’s wildly improbable victory in the 2010 Massachusetts special (where Obamacare was the overriding issue of the election) to the 2010 midterm elections (where Republicans picked up 63 house seats and six senate seats) when voters litigate Obamacare, Obamacare and its supporters lose.

Critically, Obamacare is no longer an abstraction – one of many datapoints that defines a candidate’s position in the electoral marketplace. It is no longer a past policy that a politician may have supported. Obamacare is now a real, concrete, tax-hiking and regulatory-expanding law that will or will not be repealed in January 2013 – depending on the outcome of the 2012 elections. Politicians who were safely able to passively support Obamacare in the past, will now have to actively defend their position against a repeal effort – with an election between now and then.'

Crossroads Memo: Democrat Electoral Doom on Obamacare | American Crossroads


Hell to pay.

 

[Lakhota]

I bet some Dims are thinking this is over now.

That will be decided on November 6...

 

[Dot Com]

While I will be happy the GOP uses any tactic within the rules to rid us of this insanity I have'nt alot to say about anything that comes out of Herritage. They started this ball rolling and now the GOP has to eat it regardless of involvement or not. All in an effort to fight Hillary.....

yep. The mandate originated at Heritage

 

[hortysir]

I bet some Dims are thinking this is over now.

That will be decided on November 6...

Better hope Obama has an even bigger turn out than he did in 08.



But given the number of disenfranchised voters he's created with his broken promise of not raising taxes on the middle class......

 

[SniperFire]

While I will be happy the GOP uses any tactic within the rules to rid us of this insanity I have'nt alot to say about anything that comes out of Herritage. They started this ball rolling and now the GOP has to eat it regardless of involvement or not. All in an effort to fight Hillary.....

yep. The mandate originated at Heritage

Not to worry. We can defund it now. Easy.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I think Sniperfire is holding a grudge against me....I can feel the crosshairs burning into my forehead.

 

[Care4all]

I bet some Dims are thinking this is over now.

That will be decided on November 6...

Better hope Obama has an even bigger turn out than he did in 08.



But given the number of disenfranchised voters he's created with his broken promise of not raising taxes on the middle class......

do you have insurance already? will you drop it so that you will be charged with a tax penalty?

who in the middle class's taxes are going up? it's the penalty if you do not take out insurance...yes a tax penalty, like me paying taxes late, i would be charged a tax penalty for it....but you don't and won't be taxed for MY CHOICE to refuse insurance....

i am presuming you and i are both middle class in my example....

was romneycare's penalty on those who did not buy insurance ''a tax hike on the middle class'' as well?

why ok for romneycare penalty tax and not obamacare, since it is constitutional according to the SC....?

just wondering

 

[Old Rocks]

You won't get a sane answer from the 'Conservatives' on the board. They are too much into their sack cloth and ashes schtick.

 

[GuyPinestra]

That will be decided on November 6...

Better hope Obama has an even bigger turn out than he did in 08.



But given the number of disenfranchised voters he's created with his broken promise of not raising taxes on the middle class......

do you have insurance already? will you drop it so that you will be charged with a tax penalty?

who in the middle class's taxes are going up? it's the penalty if you do not take out insurance...yes a tax penalty, like me paying taxes late, i would be charged a tax penalty for it....but you don't and won't be taxed for MY CHOICE to refuse insurance....

i am presuming you and i are both middle class in my example....

was romneycare's penalty on those who did not buy insurance ''a tax hike on the middle class'' as well?

why ok for romneycare penalty tax and not obamacare, since it is constitutional according to the SC....?

just wondering

I could be mistaken, but I haven't seen anyone but libs defend Romneycare. If cons defend it, it's usually argued as a state, rather than a Federal issue.

IOW, you're making a false comparison.

 

[hortysir]

That will be decided on November 6...

Better hope Obama has an even bigger turn out than he did in 08.



But given the number of disenfranchised voters he's created with his broken promise of not raising taxes on the middle class......

do you have insurance already? will you drop it so that you will be charged with a tax penalty?

who in the middle class's taxes are going up? it's the penalty if you do not take out insurance...yes a tax penalty, like me paying taxes late, i would be charged a tax penalty for it....but you don't and won't be taxed for MY CHOICE to refuse insurance....

i am presuming you and i are both middle class in my example....

was romneycare's penalty on those who did not buy insurance ''a tax hike on the middle class'' as well?

why ok for romneycare penalty tax and not obamacare, since it is constitutional according to the SC....?

just wondering

I have company-provided healthcare, for which I pay only a small percentage of the cost AND the company I work for has already been granted their waiver.


And it's really disingenuous to compare a State's choice of insurance coverage to a Federally mandated Tax for NOT buying a bicycle.

 

[salem.hills]

51 votes and its history is good news, that's within reach.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

'Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.'


Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare



Justice Roberts is, indeed, a genius!

2) Congress can’t repeal the full law through reconciliation. Without the necessary 60 votes in the Senate for full repeal, Republicans are pledging to use a budget reconciliation bill to undo the ACA. But this process would only apply to the budget-related elements of the law and would thus leave many portions — including the mandate — intact. As health care expert Robert Laszewski put it, “Romney could end up creating a chaotic environment driven by enormous uncertainty over just which parts of the new health care law would be implemented–for consumers, health care providers, and insurers.”

More: 4 Reasons Why Republicans Won't Be Able To Repeal Obamacare | ThinkProgress

The 'mandate' is a tax, dope. The Supremes just ruled thusly.

No, the "mandate" isn't a "tax". The fees for failing to abide by the "mandate" are a tax.

 

[Avatar4321]

'Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.'


Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare



Justice Roberts is, indeed, a genius!

While I will be happy the GOP uses any tactic within the rules to rid us of this insanity I have'nt alot to say about anything that comes out of Herritage. They started this ball rolling and now the GOP has to eat it regardless of involvement or not. All in an effort to fight Hillary.....

Just evidence that Progressive Republicans hiding amongst us conservatives can be more dangerous than those on the left at times.