Posted on 03/05/2010 5:17:48 AM PST by Kaslin
Using reconciliation to pass the health care bill promises to transform Congress into a bunch of angry chickens, picking through pages of the bill like feed in a trough. The big question that remains is: can reconciliation even happen?
Despite Obama’s bluster, Senate sources are dubious.
In order for reconciliation to occur in the Senate, the House must first pass the Senate bill exactly the way it was passed on Christmas Eve – with the abortion language opposed by Rep. Bark Stupak, with the "Cornhusker Kickback" and "Louisiana Purchase," and with unpopular taxation proposals. 217 House Members need to vote for all of these things in order for reconciliation to proceed in the Senate.
If those 217 votes exist, it would be the most politically charged and electorally-fatal roll call in recent memory. It’s an election year. It is "The Year of Scott Brown." But rumor has it that, urged by the President, the votes are in line.
The votes are supposedly there because House members have been promised that the Senate reconciliation process will address the concerns that the House cannot address in this initial vote. Congressmen might even be able to revise it some more when it comes back from the Senate.
What exactly will emerge from the Senate reconciliation process is anyone’s guess. Three major questions loom: what the Senate parliamentarian will allow under reconciliation, whether Joe Biden will take unprecedented steps and overrule him, and what tactics the Republicans can pull as far as blocking up the Senate with inane amendments to stall the entire process.
There are no answers to any of those questions.
Alan Fruman, the parliamentarian, is not allowed to give interviews. Biden has also said nothing. And House Republicans are vowing they’ll gum up the process as much as possible, but since nothing like this has ever been done before, it’s unclear exactly what their (warranted) antics would accomplish.
About the only source to glean useful information from is Frumin’s predecessor, Robert Dove, who speaks in veiled messages to the press.
Here’s what Dove has said to the Wall Street Journal about Frumin and reconciliation:
"The whole process in my experience as parliamentarian is a rather wrenching one… It's just long and grueling.…I don't envy [Frumin].”
Dove has also said that while anything is possible, he’s never seen reconciliation used in the manner it might be used now. Reconciliation can only be used with budgetary matters, and while it might seem that every issue can be boiled down to a budgetary matter, that’s not really the case. Back in 2001, Dove threw out hundreds of amendments that he determined to have “alternative” goals, like abortion funding. That issue, he said, had too many policy ramifications to be ruled a fiscal issue.
No one can ascertain Frumin’s opinion on what alternative goals exist for what issues in the health care bill. Frumin works for the Democrats, but was originally appointed by Republicans. Most accounts paint him as judicious and to-the-letter in terms of abiding by Senate rule, but if he had an agenda, no one would know. This is a heck of an issue over which to exert control.
Furthermore, Joe Biden has the authority to overrule Frumin, though that hasn’t really been done before. Vice Presidential intervention hasn’t been done on an issue of this magnitude since 1968, and the use of reconciliation for anything but budgetary matters was outlawed in 1974.
The only thing that’s clear is that Obamacare will clear new ground in policy, procedure, and politics.
This is beginning to sound like the Senate scenes in “Star Wars” prequels.
I watched the movie “the terminator” last night, this health care bill really reminds me of the end of that movie
Stupak’s first name is Bart, not Bark (as the lead calls him.) But picking up on the point, I hope his bite is as good as his bark.
This is exactly why Stupak and his group of pro-life Dems MUST vote No on the Senate bill. If it passes, then they first must trust to Senate to actually take up a reconciliation bill to correct the Senate bill the House would have passed.
Then, the reconciliation bill will be stripped of any abortion language. That means that the current Senate bill, which spends millions (billions?) for abortion, would rule.
I really doubt that.
If that were the case Nancy would be calling for a vote. That could not possibly happen until there was some word from the Senate "promising faithfully" to make legal changes to the bill via the reconciliation process. Has anyone heard diddly squat coming from the Senate vis a vis the kinds of changes they would agree to? Not me. Until we start seeing some action in the Senate you are not going to see Pelosi calling for a vote. And even then you may not see a vote. They will not vote at all if it's a loser.
They don’t care what the people think. This is their big opportunity to push the government’s share of the GDP over 50%. They don’t care if they get reelected or not. They will get high-paying jobs with liberal organizations and will become part of the liberal elite that lives better than everyone else.
Laws? We don't need no stinkin' laws.
As I told my worthless Senator (McConnell) before the first vote, this is an unconstitutional bill, being passed in violation of the law. It is the Republican's Constitutional duty to stop it by any means necessary. IOW, it is lawful for them to shut down or blockade the Senate to stop a vote. I believe that the founding fathers would have demanded such action in this situation.
Soylent Green.
OBAMANOMICS—TRICKLE DOWN DESTRUCTION of the economy
Bambi doesn’t keep his promises...so buyer beware!
SET THEIR LOCAL AND DC LINES ON FIRE!
PLEASE ASK THEM TO REPEAL THE BIG NEW FEES in TRICARE for Life, the retired Military over 65 secondary health ins. which they passed in a DOD bill. They promised our Military these benefits, and our Military have earned them.
Sen Scott Brown’s number is 202-224-4543
Capitol Hill switchboard is 202-224-3121
Lots of local demwit phone numbers on this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2408217/posts
Rename, repackage, rewrite it a tad smaller, and sell another pig in a poke. NO COLAs for granny, retired Military or retired fed employees. BIG NEW fees for Tricare for Life retired over 65 Military’s secondary health ins. (DOD bill already passed, delayed but goes into effect 2011 NEEDS TO BE REPEALED!
OBAMA’s WAR ON SENIORS http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2433867/posts/
New Dem mantra: Woof, woof eat dog food granny....ala let them eat cake.
Obama says slight fix will extend Social Security, http://townhall.com/news/us/2010/02/19/obama_says_slight_fix_will_extend_social_security
Health Care Rationing for Seniors Another Problem in New Obama Plan http://www.lifenews.com/bio3058.html
Medicare tax may apply to investment income (ObamaCare tax hike)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2460988/posts
Obama: No reduced Medicare benefits in health care reform
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/28/obama.health.care/index.html
Will healthcare reform mean cuts in Medicare for seniors?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2009/1017/will-healthcare-reform-mean-cuts-in-medicare-for-seniors
Health Reform’s Hidden Victims Young people and seniors would pay a high price for ObamaCare.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574306303720472842.html
SOCIALIZED MED THREAD http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2464538/posts
MILITARY & Retired MILITARY
TRI CARE FOR LIFE This from a google search:
http://economicspolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/tricare-for-life-is-obama-trying-to.html
This option would help reduce the costs of TFL, as well as costs for Medicare, by introducing minimum out-of pocket requirements for beneficiaries. Under this option, TFL would not cover any of the first $525 of an enrollee’s cost-sharing liabilities for calendar year 2011 and would limit coverage to 50 percent of the next $4,725 in Medicare cost sharing that the beneficiary incurred. (Because all further cost sharing would be covered by TFL, enrollees could not pay more than $2,888 in cost sharing in that year.) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9925/12-18-HealthOptions.pdf
Bill Would Restrict Veterans’ Health Care Options 11/06/09
Buyer and McKeon Offer Amendments to Protect Veterans and TRICARE Beneficiaries
Congress plans to block Tricare fee increases
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w/
By Rick Maze - Staff writer, Oct 7, 2009
Tricare fee increases imposed last week by the Defense Department will be repealed by a provision of the compromise 2010 defense authorization bill unveiled Wednesday by House and Senate negotiators.
The fee increases were announced on Sept. 30 and took effect on Oct. 1, but the defense bill, HR 2647, includes a provision barring any fee increases until the start of fiscal 2011.
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Bill Matz, president of the National Association for Uniformed Services, said the announcement of fee increases was shocking considering that the Obama administration promised earlier this year to hold off on any new fee Tricare fee increases until fiscal 2011.
“President Obama and DoD assured NAUS and the entire military family earlier this year that there would rightly be no increases in any Tricare fees” in fiscal 2010, Matz said. “We took them at their word, and I can’t believe that a co-pay increase like this was allowed to go forward,” he added.
How Democrats could pass health bill with 51 votes
PLEASE CALL! DC OFFICE LOCAL OFFICE State District
Harry Mitchell (202) 225-2190 (480) 946-2411 AZ 5th District
Gabrielle Giffords (202) 225-2542 (520) 881-3588 AZ 8th District
Ann Kirkpatrick (202) 225-2315 (928) 226-6914 AZ 1st District
Jerry McNerney (202) 225-1947 925-833-0643 CA 11th District
John Salazar 202-225-4761 970-245-7107 CO 3rd District
Jim Himes (202) 225-5541 (866) 453-0028 CT 4th District
Alan Grayson (202) 225-2176 (407) 841-1757 FL 8th District
Bill Foster (202) 225-2976 630-406-1114 IL 14th District
Baron Hill 202 225 5315 812 288 3999 IN 9th District
Mark Schauer (202) 225-6276 (517) 780-9075 MI 7th District
Gary Peters (202) 225-5802 (248) 273-4227 MI 9th District
Dina Titus (202) 225-3252 702-256-DINA (3462) NV 3rd District
Carol Shea-Porter (202) 225-5456 (603) 743-4813 NH 1st District
Tim Bishop (202) 225-3826 (631) 696-6500 NY 1st District
John Hall (202) 225-5441 (845) 225-3641 x49371 NY 19th District
Bill Owens (202) 225-4611 (315) 782-3150 NY 23rd District
Mike Arcuri (202)225-3665 (315)793-8146 NY 24th District
Dan Maffei (202) 225-3701 (315) 423-5657 NY 25th District
Earl Pomeroy (202) 225-2611 (701) 224-0355 ND At-Large District
Steven Driehaus (202) 225-2216 (513) 684-2723 OH 1st District
Mary Jo Kilroy (202) 225-2015 (614) 294-2196 OH 15th District
Zach Space (202) 225-6265 (330) 364-4300 OH 18th District
Kathy Dahlkemper (202) 225-5406 (814) 456-2038 PA 3rd District
Patrick Murphy (202) 225-4276 (215) 826-1963 PA 8th District
Christopher Carney (202) 225-3731 (570) 585-9988 PA 10th District
Paul Kanjorski (202) 225-6511 (570) 825-2200 PA 11th District
John Spratt (202) 225-5501 (803)327-1114 SC 5th District
Tom Perriello (202) 225-4711 (276) 656-2291 VA 5th District
Alan Mollohan (202) 225-4172 (304) 623-4422 WVA 1st District
Nick Rahall (202) 225-3452 (304) 252-5000 WVA 3rd District
Steve Kagen (202) 225-5665 (920) 437-1954 WI 8th District
Make those calls Freepers! Let them know they DO NOT HAVE THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED!
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.