Posted on 03/09/2010 8:38:20 PM PST by St. Louis Conservative
Determined to block President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, Senate Republican leaders signaled Tuesday that they plan to object to any abortion language included in a proposed reconciliation package — even if they agree with the provision on policy grounds.
House Democrats who oppose abortion rights, whose votes could prove crucial to passing Obama’s health care reform package, have threatened to withhold their support if language limiting federal funding of abortions in the underlying $871 billion Senate bill isn’t strengthened in reconciliation. But Senate Republicans and even some reconciliation experts argue the procedure’s narrow guidelines don’t allow for policies like abortion to be addressed.
Republicans, hoping to sow doubts among House Democrats about reconciliation’s prospects for passing the Senate, revealed Tuesday they intend to raise procedural objections over any abortion language that shows up in a reconciliation package — even if it toughens prohibitions against federal funding. Specifically, Republican Senators plan to raise a budget point of order, a procedural move objecting to the reconciliation process that requires 60 votes to defeat.
“If there is anyone left in the House who believes Senate Republicans will help carry their water on abortion or anything else so they can vote in favor of the health bill, they are radically misreading our Conference,” a senior Republican Senate aide said Tuesday. “Republicans intend to raise every point of order and will not waive a single one regardless of merit to assist Democrats in passing this $2.5 trillion health care boondoggle.”
(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...
B U M P !
I agree that this is a good move. Republicans (in the Senate as well as in the House) need to send message that the House Democrats are not alone in this fight so they don’t need to feel pressed from all directions. If those Dims get some reasons to reject the Bill, they might stick to their ‘no’ votes, and even make some of the ‘yes’ to switch.
SO hopefully the pro-life organizations won’t make this a “pro-life vote”.
This, plus bribes and attacking other Dems in the shower are out for the thugs. Things are looking much better for killing this health care takeover monstrosity.
The Republicans can easily object to the abortion rider on Senate rule/constitutional grounds. So now the stupid Stupak people will be boxed in by voting for a pro abortion Senate bill that will surely not have abortion funding stripped. I do agree that any 0bamacare bill will allow abortion funding through a loophole during the rules writing process. After all, Pelosi says that we will know what’s in it AFTER it passes. So it should be clear to the pro-life movement that no 0bamacare bill is acceptable.
BTW, did anyone see a new Gallup survey on the fox crawler? Opposing health care bill was only 48% oppose to 45 support? This cannot be right. Must be faux push polling.
One Republican (can’t remember who right now)said last week that they can offer Amendments under Reconciliation. And, per the rules, they could hold the vote up for 9 days just by presenting Amendments. Each one has to be debated for one minute by each side and then the vote. Each Amendment takes 10-20 minutes.
“BTW, did anyone see a new Gallup survey on the fox crawler? Opposing health care bill was only 48% oppose to 45 support? This cannot be right. Must be faux push polling.”
Maybe Obama’s push is moving the numbers? we havent had the reminders of what is wrong with the bill, but a BIG media push in FAVOR of it.
“One Republican (can’t remember who right now)said last week that they can offer Amendments under Reconciliation. And, per the rules, they could hold the vote up for 9 days just by presenting Amendments. Each one has to be debated for one minute by each side and then the vote. Each Amendment takes 10-20 minutes.”
They could offer 10,000 amendments and keep it going for 9 MONTHS.
“If there is anyone left in the House who believes Senate Republicans will help carry their water on abortion or anything else so they can vote in favor of the health bill, they are radically misreading our Conference,” a senior Republican Senate aide said Tuesday. “Republicans intend to raise every point of order and will not waive a single one regardless of merit to assist Democrats in passing this $2.5 trillion health care boondoggle.”
- - - - -
HOLD TO THAT, REPUBLICANS!
I don’t believe it.
I pray for a mega-infusion of fortitude
and relentlessness for this showdown.
I called Stupak’s office and told the
aid ‘we’re onto him.. don’t .. DO NOT
vote yes!’
I think he could be holding out for a
deal. That’s what they’ve done to
trust in government for us .. we trust
NO ONE.
They have to take this stand.
Good on you for calling!
I hope he pays attention.
I think that according to the Rules, they are limited to the number of Amendments they can submit.
I subscribe to Rush's theory that the very moment the House passes this thing, it will go to Obarry, signed and forgotten ("we'll take care of that later... promise") and the House dems will find out what the bottom of the bus looks like.
"Reconciliation" is a hoax and a sham, a cheat and ultimately a betrayal. Obarry has betrayed his country many times over without blinking - why should he hesitate to screw the dims now when he knows he, the House and probably Senate are toast?
No limit on amendments to reconciliation.
otoh, amendments need to satisfy Byrd rule.
so GOP should file 10,000 amendments that tweak the tax implications ie the business and individual mandates...
get 10,000 DEMOCRAT VOTES FOR HIGHER TAXES ... and defeat the abortion changes, preventing any compromise on it.
The trouble is that, if we get to reconciliation, Obama has already signed the senate bill into law. The value of the threat of senate Rs voting against abortion changes is, it could get some NO votes from the Stupak gang on the senate bill.
"The threat is stronger than the execution."
- Nimzovich
Hey, sounds good to me. If the Pubbies will do it; that’s the problem.
Just a 20 hour time limit. I looked at the statutory provision that sets out the process for consideration under reconciliation, and that part doesn't provide a hook for extending the time.
So, what is the support for the proposition that there is some procedure that can extend the 20 hours on an interminable basis?
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.