Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate to vote first... Don't all revenue bill start first in the House?
10/16/2013 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist

Posted on 10/16/2013 12:06:53 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist

I thought that all revenue bills had to start first in the House of Reps...

Is Reid's move unconstitutional?


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 113th; congress; democrats; elections; mcconnell; obama; obamacare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: Thane_Banquo

We should be so lucky. Then we get Cantor, the lady in waiting. That will be
even worse.


21 posted on 10/16/2013 12:33:23 PM PDT by tennmountainman (Just Say No To Obamacare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

0bamacare is said to be unconstitutional due precisely to that issue.

Fat lot of difference it makes.


22 posted on 10/16/2013 12:33:44 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tennmountainman

I know and I realize it won’t happen, but just think of the ratings for cable news if it did. The ads they could sell!


23 posted on 10/16/2013 12:34:03 PM PDT by jimbo807
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

The House will just “pretend” that they came up with the bill, and it will be all good.


24 posted on 10/16/2013 12:34:24 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist
To satisfy the Constitution all the Senate would need to do is take any House bill passed and sent to them by the House that authorizing any spending at all, strip its language including its title, vote to replace this with their own language (as an amendment) and return it to the House for concurrence.

I'm not saying that's what's happening here, but that's all it would take to satisfy the language of the Constitution.

25 posted on 10/16/2013 12:35:26 PM PDT by Prospero (Si Deus trucido mihi, ego etiam fides Deus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

Constitution? Laws? You must be mistaken. This is the Communist States of America, soon to be destroyed. Khrushchev was right - the communists will take over without firing a shot!


26 posted on 10/16/2013 12:36:42 PM PDT by RobertoinAL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

The Constitution was written in Olde English over a hundred years ago. Nobody can understand it.


27 posted on 10/16/2013 12:38:41 PM PDT by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro

If all vote no, then no. But the RINO’s will not vote no. They will stampede
to vote yes.


28 posted on 10/16/2013 12:43:05 PM PDT by tennmountainman (Just Say No To Obamacare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: IllumiNaughtyByNature

Even if there were, there would be little they could do once the bill was brought up to a House vote by Boehner. Once that happens, only around 20 Republican votes would be needed to pass it - and at this point it is all but guaranteed that the House has 20 Republicans who would pass it regardless of what Heritage and Club for Growth tells them.


29 posted on 10/16/2013 12:43:30 PM PDT by freedom462
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jimbo807
I think the EBT snafu is what really made up their mind. That was a shot across the bow and an indication of how far Obama would go if they pushed him on this. In the end, they feared what the madman would do. So they folded.

When I heard about that I immediately knew it was a demonstration to Boehner & McConnell about what would happen on a larger scale if the usurper's agenda were thwarted in any way. Serfdom here we are.

30 posted on 10/16/2013 12:44:40 PM PDT by Menehune56 ("Let them hate so long as they fear" (Oderint Dum Metuant), Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

“Is Reid’s move unconstitutional?”
No. The Constitutional power of the purse was given to the rats by the House, by not forcing a required yearly budget from the Senate. Instead the House allowed CR’s for the last 4 years to be common place. Pls correct me if I am wrong. This is my understanding.


31 posted on 10/16/2013 12:45:27 PM PDT by duckman (I'm part of the group pulling the wagon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Menehune56

It’s shocking how bad a man our President has turned out to be. You know, you sit back and say, “I may not agree with what you do, but you’re a good person.”, to most of the people you disagree with in life.

But not this guy. He really is a bad person. To the core.


32 posted on 10/16/2013 12:47:25 PM PDT by jimbo807
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: duckman

This package is not a revenue bill. It does not change the Internal Revenue Code. It’s a spending bill. There is a difference.


33 posted on 10/16/2013 12:47:43 PM PDT by mdwakeup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist

Article 1, Section 7 states “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.” To my thinking “raising revenue” means imposing taxes, fees, duties, etc. It does not mean spending monies. It does not mean increasing the debt limit. Therefore, it is irrelevant which chamber this bill originated in (unless it raises revenue).


34 posted on 10/16/2013 12:51:42 PM PDT by bagman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prospero

Spending bills can originate in the Senate; bills “raising revenue” cannot.


35 posted on 10/16/2013 12:53:10 PM PDT by bagman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Used to be that way, when the U.S. Constitution was operative.

That is no longer the case.

36 posted on 10/16/2013 1:00:14 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimbo807

Many of us realized that back in ‘08 before he was elected the first time.


37 posted on 10/16/2013 1:18:50 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

Frankly, I thought he was more of an empty suit back then.


38 posted on 10/16/2013 1:20:52 PM PDT by jimbo807
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RobertoinAL
Constitution? Laws? You must be mistaken. This is the Communist States of America, soon to be destroyed. Khrushchev was right - the communists will take over without firing a shot!

It's a done deal. It was over in 2008. Finalization will come with The Hildabeast. I seriously feel it may be best to leave this country will you still can.

39 posted on 10/16/2013 1:24:06 PM PDT by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
If he passes a budget deal that is not supported by the majority of his own caucus, I expect Boehner will resign his speakership in the next few days rather than have his caucus oust him after his capitulation to the Dems.

That would require some amount of shame. Something Boehner has none of.

40 posted on 10/16/2013 1:47:01 PM PDT by BubbaBasher ("Liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals" - Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson