Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wouldn't Obamacare automatically expire after 10 years due to reconcilliation? (Vanity)
3/23/10 | Me

Posted on 03/23/2010 10:19:27 AM PDT by LdSentinal

From my understanding and research (mainly Google), the Senate Health Care bill doesn't have a "sunset provision" which would put an expiration data on the bill. The Bush Tax Cuts of 2001 had a "sunset provision" which would be in 2011.

Any bill that raised the deficit in the first four years would have a "sunset provision" of 5 years. However, the Democrats made sure the CBO would not score the bill as raising deficits in the first four years or even from 2020-2029 (which is pure BS).

HOWEVER, from my understanding of the Byrd Rule, any part of a bill that does not contain a sunset provision outside the 10-year budget window could easily increase the deficit in future years (eg. 2100, which the CBO can't score), so any Senator can raise a point of order which would require 60 votes to overturn effectively killing the process. The Democrats no longer have that due to Scott Brown. Thus, a 10-year sunset provision" would be put on the HCR-reconcilliation bill.

So, if worse comes to worst (no repeal, courts fail us), Obamcare would expire in 2020 if Republicans control the Presidency or one chamber of Congress.

Does anybody know if this is correct?


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: obamacare; question
I think this is my first vanity ever.
1 posted on 03/23/2010 10:19:27 AM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

It was not reconciliation. It was passed in both houses. The “reconciliation” portion now goes to the Senate after the House has approved it. If it fails, we still have the Senate obamanation.


2 posted on 03/23/2010 10:21:05 AM PDT by Ingtar (Congress: proof that Entropy trumps Evolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

Just the parts that are added in by process of reconciliation, by my understanding.


3 posted on 03/23/2010 10:22:16 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction (LOLcat sez: "ObamaCare: Do Not Want!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

I received this in an email. I don’t know if this is true.

Look what that scondrel Harry Reid
hid deep in the Senate HealthCare...

The impudent tyranny of Sen. Harry Reid

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is proving once again the maxim that darkness hates the light.
Buried in his massive amendment to the Senate version of Obamacare is Reid’s anti-democratic poison pill designed to prevent any future Congress from repealing the central feature of this monstrous legislation!
Beginning on page 1 , 000 of the measure , Section 3403 reads in part: “. it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill , resolution , amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.”

In other words , if President Barack Obama signs this measure into law , no future Senate or House will be able to change a single word of Section 3403 , regardless whether future Americans or their representatives in Congress wish otherwise!!
Note that the subsection at issue here concerns the regulatory power of the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to “reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending.”

That is precisely the kind of open-ended grant of regulatory power that effectively establishes the IMAB as the ultimate arbiter of the cost , quality and quantity of health care to be made available to the American people. And Reid wants the decisions of this group of unelected federal bureaucrats to be untouchable for all time.

No wonder the majority leader tossed aside assurances that senators and the public would have at least 72 hours to study the text of the final Senate version of Obamacare before the critical vote on cloture. And no wonder Reid was so desperate to rush his amendment through the Senate , even scheduling the key tally on it at 1 a.m. , while America slept.

True to form , Reid wanted to keep his Section 3403 poison pill secret for as long as possible , just as he negotiated his bribes for the votes of Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana , Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bernie Sanders of Vermont behind closed doors.

The final Orwellian touch in this subversion of democratic procedure is found in the ruling of the Reid-controlled Senate Parliamentarian that the anti-repeal provision is not a change in Senate rules , but rather of Senate “procedures.” Why is that significant?

Because for 200 years , changes in the Senate’s standing rules have required approval by two-thirds of those voting , or 67 votes rather than the 60 Reid’s amendment received.
Reid has flouted two centuries of standing Senate rules to pass a measure in the dead of night that no senator has read , and part of which can never be changed. If this is not tyranny , then what is?

DON’T SIT BY AND LET THIS APPEN IN THE DARK!!! FORWARD TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!


4 posted on 03/23/2010 10:24:48 AM PDT by COUNTrecount (Barry...above his poi grade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Actually, the bill calls for a 3/5 vote of whichever house tries to change that section.


5 posted on 03/23/2010 10:26:47 AM PDT by hocndoc (http://www.LifeEthics.org (I've got a mustard seed and I'm not afraid to use it.) (RIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

Reconciliation isn’t going to pass Congress.


6 posted on 03/23/2010 10:33:58 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

What is it with Dems and that 3/5 number? 3/5 vote here, 3/5 count for a vote in the 2008 Primaries. Keeps reminding me about the slave count for the census in the original Constitution.


7 posted on 03/23/2010 10:34:34 AM PDT by hocndoc (http://www.LifeEthics.org (I've got a mustard seed and I'm not afraid to use it.) (RIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
Without a Constitutional Ammendment, no Congress can tie the hands of a future Congress.

In other words this bill can be repealed just like it was passed. By a majority vote.

8 posted on 03/23/2010 10:40:13 AM PDT by snowtigger (It ain't what you shoot, it's what you hit...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Sounds like IMAB is a death panel.

Probably one of many hidden in the bill.
Kill the death panels should of been the chant.


9 posted on 03/23/2010 10:49:57 AM PDT by revtown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: snowtigger

Just another one of the many reasons why this bill is unconstitutional.


10 posted on 03/23/2010 10:55:28 AM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
it will expire in 5 years if its not voted in again.
I don't recall if a 2/3 majority is required or not.
11 posted on 03/23/2010 10:55:55 AM PDT by ncalburt (e)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt
it will expire in 5 years if its not voted in again.

Do you have any links to that, please?

12 posted on 03/23/2010 11:06:07 AM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

It easier for you to post a vanity than to spend 5 minutes researching it on google.


13 posted on 03/23/2010 11:07:43 AM PDT by AlanD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlanD
It easier for you to post a vanity than to spend 5 minutes researching it on google.

I've spent hours trying to find an answer, but no-go. Do you know?

14 posted on 03/23/2010 11:11:21 AM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

The answer has two letters.


15 posted on 03/23/2010 11:18:05 AM PDT by AlanD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

“The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”- Patrick Henry


16 posted on 03/23/2010 11:26:41 AM PDT by marauderman (Re: the dark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
Section 3403 reads in part: “. it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill , resolution , amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.”

If that language is in there it must be meaningless. I know they are making up the rules and all. However, why should any future congress respect that fact that Harry Ried declared this particular law as holy writ? We have allot to worry about but I don't think this is high on the list/

17 posted on 03/23/2010 11:35:44 AM PDT by outofstyle (Anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

goggle it . the references are everywhere.


18 posted on 03/23/2010 11:44:11 AM PDT by ncalburt (e)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

I’ve tried. Could you please help me find a link? Thank you in advance.


19 posted on 03/23/2010 11:45:06 AM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
Section 3403 reads in part: “. it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill , resolution , amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.”

It has always been in order to repeal a tyranny.

20 posted on 03/23/2010 11:46:26 AM PDT by sionnsar (IranAzadi|5yst3m 0wn3d-it's N0t Y0ur5:SONY|Remember Neda Agha-Soltan|TV--it's NOT news you can trust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Pooh. No Congress is bound by its predecessors.


21 posted on 03/23/2010 1:08:40 PM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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