As I said my my post early this AM, SHOW ME THE BILL!
oh my… there *is* no bill, per Steny Hoyer today.
Democratic leaders are contending with a host of undecided lawmakers who want to see the fine print before making a decision. Hoyer said final language and a cost estimate should come back from the Congressional Budget Office by the end of next week.
“At this point in time we don’t have a bill,” Hoyer said. “It’s a little difficult to count votes if you don’t have a bill.”
Wait? Obama’s rushing Congressional votes on a bill that doesn’t exist? Or is he just accepting the failure, pushing for a vote on two existing bills that haven’t a chance of passage until Al Gore admits he freezes over?
Obama is desperately seeking Dem redemption. It’s time for the Herculean push to break the gridlock. The last thing the Dems need is the health care issue hanging over their heads, incomplete, during the campaign season. So it’s vote, take the loss, blame it on the GOP, and set to work to keep the chamber power in progressive hands to fight another day.
And if the pressure from Obama and Pelosi/Reid leadership were not enough, those incumbents are looking for any way possible to avoid the tea parties and rallies awaiting them. Again, from the mouthpiece of Steny Hoyer’s offices:
Democrats are racing the clock to pass health care reform ahead of a wave of Tea Party-driven town hall meetings planned for the spring recess — the kind of gatherings that nearly derailed the package last August.
But there’s a big difference this time around. Last summer, Democrats were encouraged to hold the town hall meetings, and they were blindsided by the backlash, which was recorded and promoted in countless YouTube clips. This time around, they have a good idea of what’s coming — and they’re lying low, in case work on health care carries over into the recess.
“There’s not been the same push as there was in August to encourage members to do town halls,” said Stephanie Lundberg, spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
“Not the same push”…? I’d guess not. I’d say “katie bar the door”, is more like it.
But this little aside by Steny certainly clears up a few questions about Obama’s Dem campaign strategy … the House will not be voting on the existing Senate bill, so that eliminates the “trust me” moment that few have the appetite for.
Ms. Pelosi does not yet have the votes she needs to pass the legislation. She faces complex negotiations with both the moderate and liberal wings of her party to come up with a package that can pass the House without deviating so much from the existing Senate version that Mr. Reid would have trouble assembling a majority for the final vote in the Senate.
“I am not inclined to support the Senate version,” said Representative Shelley Berkley, Democrat of Nevada, who voted for the House bill in November. “I would like something more concrete than a promise. The Senate cannot promise its way out of a brown paper bag.”
As Democrats prepared for a final showdown with Republicans, other potential stumbling blocks emerged. House Democrats from New York met Wednesday with Ms. Pelosi to discuss their concern that the emerging bill would shortchange their state on Medicaid and other issues.
“I am very, very disappointed and unhappy,” said Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York. “The White House is taking us for granted, and they shouldn’t.”
As ABC’s Jake Tapper points out, Pelosi had 216 votes when times were good and the seat filled with obedient Dems.
With the pending retirement of Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga., there will soon be only 431 members of Congress total, meaning a majority will be 216 votes.
And now we have word from two sources that the phantom reconciliation bill, churned by by the chosen few, is somewhere in status between those that wrote the bill, and CBO’s offices.
But wait… if it’s already at the CBO, does that bill include the GOP suggestions Obama spoke of in his WH proposal bill? Or the additional ones he noted he would include just days ago?
If that bill is in the CBO’s offices, then it’s got to be the quickest and least detailed construct of laws that include complex issues like tort reform, undercover patients to reveal more fraud (sorta a mystery patient shopping, I guess…), increasing payments to Medicaid providers and expansion on health savings accounts.
Still included, but getting a stay of execution for a few years, are the fees and taxes on medical providers and medical equiment…. meaning they’re still there. The feds just won’t collect from the onset. This means, of course, that these fees will increase the operational overhead of being a medical service provider downline, if not immediately.
Also in there is the pertinent language that any amount of money they take in thru revenue avenues can be slid over to Social Security… which is in the red years in advance. A laughable thought anyway simply because it’s a lock box filled with decades of Congressional IOUs.
And of course, being ever mindful that the future of medical providers is one filled with underpayment and no profits allowed, funding for scholarships and loan repayments will be increased.
Yes, lots of spending in the bill still. And zip, nada, nothing to control the runaway overhead costs of doctors and medical facilities.
Oh wait! What am I saying? There IS no bill!
Which bring us right back to the obvious. This little stage play is all for us, folks. The chicken little dying throes of O’health care, and a cast and crew consisting of a desperate party, trapped by their own divisions.
But fear not… somehow this will still be all the GOP’s fault.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Can you believe the hubris? The arrogance? The unmitigated gall?
No, not that Obama expects to be able to get the liberals to vote for his ? bill.
It’s that he dares to brow beat those who wont vote for what hasn’t even been written, let alone read, understood, or discussed in detail.
Which bill? Aren’t there like 9 or 10 variations of the same thing? Do we get to pick the one we want, sort of like Burger King? How about voting in the variation that leaves everything just as it is. I prefer the bill that makes them leave me alone. I’ll call if I need your help in a case where I’ve fallen and I can’t get up.
Obama picks the variation depending upon whom he is talking to. That is how he wants to get it passed, he can promise everything to everybody because at least one variation has what he claims.
so if you fall and callon them, the ambulance will ask you questions and they must take time to check on what bill you are include then at your entry in the hospital they will ask you questions and check with OBAMA wich bill is you are on and call the doctor and the doctor will ask you question and check with OBAMA wich bill you fit in and say IDON KNOW
Wow, this reminds me of giving the local thug a blank check… Sure, I will only trust these guys when they are gone…in the biblical sense.
If there is No Bill, the CBO has nothing to score so no one knows it’s content, it’s cost or it’s long term implications on Medicare or Private insurance. This appears in a military context to be the Democrat Leadership’s Picketts Charge at Gettysburg only the number of casualties cannot be counted until after the November elections.
With the .GOV operating in the red, and both parties are at fault for the irresponsible spending, Medicare on the rocks, Social Security, Fannie and Freddie in fiscal difficulties, do We as a Nation have higher priorities than this mythical bill?
Social Security, a promise made by FDR in 1935, Medicare, a promise made in 1965 by LBJ are older promises that need to be kept before launching this Health Care Bill that appears to reform nothing but offers additional cost and nothing but more than .Gov interference in your lives regarding level of care or limits on your choices.
Rob in Katy, it does appear to be a “blank check” at this point. No amount of posturing or new promises need to be made until the older promises are kept. as some of you may know, I am not Party affiliated but despite being deployed I am an informed Tax Payer and am tired of being the victim of anyone’s political ambitions or additional taxation, paying “more for less”.
Honoring promises made to Retirees and Veterans are more sacred than honoring campaign promises made by anyone that is just the temporary resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
OT2 funny i just wrote your name on the post CAPTION THIS …older about karzei pres election,must see and your guys will crack bye
“Honoring promises made to Retirees and Veterans are more sacred than honoring campaign promises made by anyone that is just the temporary resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.”, beautiful, nothing says it better!
ROB IN KATY how would you beleive who want to honor a new promises if they have not honor the old promisses? bye specialy for your elders and veterans
This herring is so red, it looks like its been dunked in salsa! The “bill” that you will want to read is the bill that passed the Senate by a 60-40 margin. If the House approves it, that becomes the law of the land. THEN the Senate and House will put together the reconciliation bill. With stuff like addressing the abortion language, the Nebraska deal, etc. So, in short, you have had several months to read the bill that they will vote on. What comes out from reconciliation is yet to be determined, especially since Obama just said he wants to add those four GOPer ideas in.
@BRob:
Mr. ParaLegal2….you might wanna give Hoyer’s office a call:
Little dog —
Didn’t I just friggin say that?! They won’t have a bill until reconciliation starts! There is nothing to reconcile yet!
Little-dog-turd,
Then you admit that it is incredibly dishonest to berate someone for not supporting what hasn’t been created yet? Hmm Little-dog-turd?
@BRob:
Errrr….You claimed that the “no bill” thing is a “herring [ ] so red, it looks like its been dunked in salsa!”
What was your point again?
Who’s the dumbest dem in Washington?
BRob, from the outskirts of Kandahar in Obama’s War comes sage advice:
My SJA guy has read your posts and assured me that you are comedy and don’t quite frankly know “dick” about much.
The “Bill” does not exist except in backrooms and cannot pass because most Americans don’t want that POS.
You are most likely a clown that never passed a bar exam and come off as a Punk, a Lout and a Bar Room Bully that has the vocabulary of a thug and no lifetime achievements that merit my respect.
You are dipweed league and minor league as a poster here. The Mods here smoked your sorry a$$ like a cheap cigar and you come back for more?
You just have a desire to see your crap to hit the internet. I would ban you now if I was a mod here.
You wipe your backside on wiser folks than you are ,courtesy of far better folks than you are.
Get a passport and come to the Stans and I will will buy you lunch and intro You to reality, Punk!
Finally, a con journalist from the Moonie Times explains why you guys are screwed:
“The ‘Blazing Saddles’ of reconciliation”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/05/the-blazing-saddles-of-reconciliation/
“The Democratic leaders’ “Blazing Saddles” hocus-pocus comes via their proposal to use the rare parliamentary maneuver of “reconciliation” to force their health care takeover into law. As currently described, the reconciliation plans are a charade.
“It’s like this: Toward the end of “Blazing Saddles,” Messrs. Little and Wilder convince the townspeople to build an entirely fake town of plywood storefronts, luring their opponents into the climactic fight in a place where the real town wouldn’t be damaged. Likewise, all the focus on reconciliation is intended to keep the takeover bill pristine by directing attention on a false battle. Opponents can fight all day on reconciliation, and Mr. Obama still wins.
“To listen to the current debate, one would think the big question is whether the Senate is going to use reconciliation – in other words, to pass the overhaul with only a 51-vote simple majority in the Senate, rather than the 60 votes usually needed to overcome a filibuster. But as now anticipated, the reconciliation procedure would be used not on the main health care bill, but only on a companion bill to “fix” the areas of House and Senate disagreement. The problem is that by that time, opponents will have already lost.
“To make the reconciliation gambit work, the House has to pass the existing Senate bill as is. Then, immediately, the House would pass the smaller bill of ‘fixes’ meant for a reconciliation vote in the Senate. The Senate would then take up that second House-passed “fix,” pass it with 51 votes, and then the two bills would be sent to the president for signature.
“In the Senate, Republican after Republican has vowed to do everything humanly possible to block that historically unprecedented use of reconciliation, which originally was meant for budgetary savings rather than for substantive policy changes. They promise a real donnybrook.
“Well, there was a real donnybrook in ‘Blazing Saddles,’ too. The Klan and the Mexican bandits and the gangsters rode into the fake town, and some of the townspeople gave them a real brawl. But it was under false pretenses. The buildings being protected weren’t real. Nor will be the reconciliation bill.
“After a huge and messy fight, the Republican opponents may even win the reconciliation battle. Ten or more Democrats may wax eloquent about the need to maintain harmony in the Senate and denounce the unwise use of reconciliation rules for such a major overhaul. And why shouldn’t they? They win either way. If the Senate refuses to pass the second bill through reconciliation, the first bill already will have been passed by Congress, and will remain passed, regardless. President Obama can sign it into law with a flourish, no matter what the Senate does on the smaller bill with its fixes.”
* * * * *
See, this is what is so funny! Brown came in guaranteeing that he would NOT be the 60th vote to beat back an obstuctionist GOPer filibuster. SINCE HE GAVE THEM A HEADS UP that he was never going to play ball (idiot!), the Dems decided to “ping pong” the bill, instead of do a conference bill, which is how it usually works.
If the House passes the Senate bill, health care reform is done. They may TRY to do reconciliation after that, but that is more like doing the extra point when time has expired and your touchdown just put you up 10 points: it doesn’t matter.
But the writer gets one thing wrong, though:
“Even liberal Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat, called that last Senate idea ‘stupid at best, childish, unworkable, idiotic.’ But the House, and the country, could be stuck with it if it tries the reconciliation two-step.
“Likewise for those who are attracted to the reconciliation bill because it may contain Republican ideas, such as health savings accounts or special health courts to cut down on lawsuit abuse. Likewise, on the other end of the political spectrum, for those liberals who voted for the bill expecting the reconciliation package to provide for a “public option” (government-managed) health plan. The health care overhaul would become law, without a specific public option.”
* * * * *
The Dems WILL submit a bill for reconciliation. They have to: to give Stupak cover for voting for it, to put on the table the four con ideas that Obama has endorsed, to undo the Nebraska deal, etc.
And THAT, my friends, is what the cons are afraid of: a reconciliation bill that is chock full of all the fixes the GOP said it wanted, just sitting there waiting for the cons to vote for it — ways to fix a “flawed” bill. How could they vote against their own proposals, and still claim with a straight face that they are not simply nihilistic ninnies? And if Obamacare works after the con fixes are approved, the cons could claim some credit for making it better. Alas, the GOPers are not very smart. Rather than snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, the cons will refuse to vote for their own proposals . . . again. And who will look like a fool? You guessed it: GOPers!
Obama has led you down a flower-strewn path, with beautiful fruited trees, a babbling brook, chirping birds, scurrying chipmunks . . . and a guillotine in the clearing, just waiting for you! LOL!
Get a real job Punk. Off topic anger cut and pasted is so far off from reality that I believe you are off meds and dangerous to yourself…
Off to win Obamas War and Fu*k You Punk.
That’s the part you need to focus on, the “IF”.
What’s the Yea / Nay count as of now?
Not good, eh? If it were, they would have voted already.
Old Trooper —
I read, from time to time, your nonsensical ramblings, and the only question that comes to mind is: who dropped him on his head? Mom or dad? And was in an accident, or on purpose?
The only people who say “there is no bill” are people who are not paying attention, or are too dumb to understand plain English. Read the Moonie Times article I just linked to and it explains the same thing I have been trying to say to you ‘tards for the last week! You have a fundamental lack of understanding of how this process is going to work, hence the continued WRONG statements that “there is no bill.”
The bill is what the Senate passed 60-40 in December! Reconciliation is a question of whether it will be changed a bit AFTER THE SENATE BILL IS ADOPTED BY THE HOUSE. If the House does not adopt the Senate bill, there is nothing to “reconcile.”
How many times does this have to be said to get through your thick heads? You people remind me of the “Brawndo’s got electrolytes” scene in “Idiocracy”!
Little dog —
Let me ask you a question: if I told you two years ago that a Black frost belt liberal from a big city, who had worked as a community organizer and a law professor, would be president in two years, what would you have given me on that, odds wise? Probably nothing, right? Yet here we are.
Trust me on this: it will pass. And we will be better off for it passing. You know why it will pass? Because Anthem California decided to raise rates 39% just when Obama was having a hard time putting together a pithy, concrete example of why the reform is needed. Thanks Anthem! You went all bonkers at the perfect time!
Hmmmm…
Which category does Steny fit into there Mr. ParaLegal Man?
Is he “not paying attention”….or is he “too dumb to understand plain English?”
Little dog —
You are being intentionally obtuse. He is talking about the RECONCILIATION part, not the main part that the House will vote one. The part that has been on the internet since before Christmas time, as we now approach “drunken people booting in the gutters of downtown Cleveland” Day — which is known as St. Patty’s Day to some.
Huh? What’s that? Speaking of Irissh . . . more news on the health care bill?
“Bishops offer help with Senate”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33962.html
Holy, schneikies! So we are going to have a picture of Stupak, Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the head of the conference of bishops announcing a deal on the Senate reconciliation language? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Cons, you have oh so played yourselves!
@BRob:
The problem with your logic here is that the Dims know that they will lose the House this Nov.
They know that Charlie Cook, perhaps their most trusted analyst, has been telling them that its’ no longer a question of “if” but how badly they will be shellacked.
Pelousi, who once was good at arm twisting, is now a lame duck. She is soon to be “former” Speaker and so the big stick she once carried has now withered to nothing more than a Botox injected twig.
The Dims, in the interest of self-preservation, are already backing away from this thing looking for political cover for the fall.
The Stupak bloc knows that if they vote “Yea” on the Senate bill which includes all of the abortion provisions that they find so repulsive they have absolutely NO guarantee that the Senate will fix it up later.
Stupak et al know that under the Byrd rules anything that is non-budgetary can be stripped out upon the objection of a single Senator.
Abortion clearly is not budgetary. Why would Dim Senators allow the abortion language to be stripped out when they are the ones who inserted it anyway. Are they gonna do that just to please the House on a bill that has already been signed into law. No, I don’t think they’re gonna do that. Not at all.
Senator Graham comments (thanks Missy):
Furthermore, if my memory serves me, the members of the Senate will have to overcome 60 vote margins on every single amendment that is submitted if/when reconciliation happens. What are the chances of that happening? Slim and none.
Nope, I don’t see reconciliation happening for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which is the atmosphere of distrust between the two chambers.
Little dog —
A few things. First, that is Cook’s prediction now, eight months out from the election. It may get better for Dems, it may be worse. But I say again — in early March 2008, just after Reverand Wright, how much money would you have put on Obama to not only win in November, but dominate and have coattails? Same things here. A lot can happen to the cons between now and then . . . like having no money, or mismanaging what you do have:
“Republican National Committee official behind ‘fear’ pitch under fire for fees”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33995.html
“Money worries curb GOP optimism”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33951.html
Second, because you cons keep focusing on the Rasmussen number, you are overestimating the opposition to the reform stuff. I understand the psychological and political reasons for touting the outlier poll, but it is an outlier nonetheless. And that is the polling now; can you guarantee that it will be the same eight months from now? No.
Third, Graham is whistling past the graveyard. Let’s say the GOPer are able to sink reconciliation? OK. So you object to the Stupak abortion fix being in reconciliation. The Senate bill was already passed by the House, so the Nebraska deal and the weaker abortion language is law. So what do you cons GAIN by f-ing up the reconciliation fix, which will probably contain stuff you like? How is it a prolife position for you cons to object to the Stupak fix?
See how the noose is tightening?
As the Moonie Times article mentioned, you are focusing on the wrong thing. And I see another “no” vote in the House just retired, so Pelosi now needs one less vote than she needed yesterday.
Nope, son, this is going to pass. And when 30 million people have health insurance coverage (over your best efforts) and pre-existing conditions go the way of the polio epidemic (against the cons best obstruction), you think anyone is going to be THANKING you guys?
Scott Brown, the fool, is probably the one to thank for announcing, in advance, that he was bringing a skunk to the picnic! So the Dems just changed the date and time of the picnic and Brown is not invited to it, so he can’t f it up! Ha ha ha ha ha! You played yourself!
B-Rob the Liar writes:
Well.. if the House does not adopt the Senate bill then their is no legislation which is even better than “reconciliation”.
You must have failed classes in “logic” at the Moron’s School of Paralegal Studies.
It’s one con brob, #41 and if the dums hadn’t screwed it all up while have the super majority and the OO, he wouldn’t be there. Your crowd failed, big time. Time to man up.
BRob, thanks for showing your ass as your face.
Lets have a meeting in November 2010 and have your Momma with You to call the ambulance.
You will need that Punk!
Whoops, the botox queen just lost another vote, one of her reps leaves the swamp, Monday.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/03/dem-rep-massa-resigns-after-allegations-of-sexual-harassment/
The amusingly ignorant dissertations of billy bob:
Let’s try to straighten your rude, ignorant arse out, billy bob.
Per RollCall, the Dem leadership are… just as Hoyer said… putting “finishing touches” on the legislative language for a reconciliation bill by the end of this week. It then goes to the CBO for scoring. They want a vote before Easter recess because they’re terrified to go home to a ton of rallies against the bill.”
In other words, they are being proactive in writing a reconciliation bill BEFORE the House votes to accept the Senate bill. What they are doing is banking on the ol’ SF windbag speaker to strong arm her compadres into passage before it gets back from the CBO.
This is going to require some fast talking on her part because they haven’t seen the little WH backroom bill that the progressive fiscal vampires have concocted. The only thing they can promise is that it’s shaved down, and doesn’t contain a public option. Why? Again, Senate parliamentarian and Byrd rule.
Nor are they feeling comfortable with some “gesture” by the Senate on the *real* non-existent reconciliation bill. Per Time yesterday:
And none of this includes the floor debate time… assuming Pelosi can talk them into passing the Senate bill before the REAL BILL… the same one which doesn’t yet exist and has gotten to CBO … on Reid’s handshake, a letter with 51 Senators’ signatures, and a prayer.
So let me ‘splain it to your dumb ass one more time… THERE IS NO BILL. To vote on the Senate bill is only to accept – in a leap of faith – the terms and results of a bill that is not yet completed, and will be a shadow of it’s former self after the Parliamentarian gets to it.
And that’s assuming it does live in any form after which, fiscally, the CBO and Parliamentarian goes at it with an axe.
Now if you want to parse the few nouns and verbs you possess in your vocabulary, and defend your truly ignorant assertations that the Senate bill is “the bill”, you have… as Old Trooper stated…shown your ass as your face.
And frankly, I’m tired of looking at your ass….
Oh yes… this billy bob dumb’ism deserved it’s own spot:
No, you idiot…. the POTUS has to sign it before it’s enacted.
Thus the leap of faith. Because, you see, even your own party doesn’t trust it’s corrupt leadership
@BRob:
Dude!
You’re showing yourself to be much more of a dumb ass than we already knew you were.
Where is your skilled staff of legal assistants when you need them? You’re blogging from the office there, at the expense of your employer, so call in some assistance…you really do need it.
Scroll all the way up and read Mata’s post….that should have been your starting point anyway, you dolt. Hell, I’ll even give you a link to it so that all you have to do is click right here.
The entire post, this entire thread, has been focused on…wait for it…THE LACK OF PROPOSED RECONCILIATION LANGUAGE (THE BILL) for those in the House and Senate to negotiate over and, ultimately, for We the People, to familiarize ourselves with…even those of us who should “remember our place” as you so eloquently worded it yesterday.
You, being both reading and comprehension challenged, proceeded to declare the “no bill” talk to be a “herring [ ] so red, it looks like its been dunked in salsa!”
Then, you go on to declare that “the only people who say “there is no bill” are people who are not paying attention, or are too dumb to understand plain English.”
The problem with your comprehension and logic abilities rears its’ pointy little head again because not only does Steny Hoyer say “there is no bill,” so do you. Here:
and here:
So, are you “not paying attention,” or are you “too dumb to understand plain English”?
Once again you let your loud mouth get out ahead of your pea-brained intellect as those of us in The Great UnwashedTM run circles ’round and ’round and ’round you.
Game. Set. Match.
I forgot to note that the Obama/Pelosi/Reid timeline is to have the non-existent reconciliation bill voted on and passed by Easter… after the 20 hours floor debate time. Tho this report says 30 hours.
I suspect that Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are running this “reconciliation along with the non existent reconciliation bill as a red herring to their true diabolical plan.
If the House passed the Senate bill and then the Senate takes it up to reconcile it and make the House Reps happy, then when the Republicans attempt to strip it down or stall it, the Dem’s will claim that it can’t be reconciled because of those damn Republicans so they’ll just send the Senate bill, signed off on by the Congress, over to Obubbles for a signature.
Wham, the Senate bill becomes the law of the land, and the Republicans get the blame for the Democraps incompetence,,, again,,, as always.
This whole episode of the “nonexistent reconciliation bill” has been very confusing and, dare I say, frustrating for a very large number of people. It is no small wonder that the polling for this POS idea has gone from mild approval numbers to a resounding shout of “He** NO!” over the course of Obama’s year and change in office. For the libs and their eager followers such as BRob to tell basically 75-80% of americans to shut up and take it is really the most outrageous part of the whole thing.
I sincerely hope that the “undecideds” and “independents” from the 2008 elections have been paying enough attention and will help to vote out as many of these far-left radicals as we can in Nov.
Little dog and TSgt —
I will try this again. Neither one of you seems to get that the procedure is.
There is a Senate bill. It passed 60-40 in December and it will become the law IF the House passes it. It has been CBO scored and it reduces the deficit and it adds millions of people to the rolls of the insured. It has many pages to it because it creates new statutes and alters others. It also has a lot of big words in it. For all these reasons, the GOPers want to kill it.
There is no reconciliation bill yet. Repeat: There is no reconciliation bill yet.
Did I mention “There is no reconciliation bill yet.” But there is a CBO scored Senate bill that you cons have had more than two months to read and understand to see the general outlines of how the system will work if the House passes that bill. There is no excuse, at this point, for being ignorant about how it will work. If you don’t know, it’s because you don REALLY want to know.
Typically, once the House passes one bill, and the Senate passes another, they reconcile those two bills into one thing. Then the House considers the reconciled bill on a majority rules vote and the Senate considers it subject to filibuster.
But not-too-smart Scott Brown telegraphed that, no matter what came out of reconciliation, he an his fellow minority GOPers (the ones who lost the last election cycle big time) would filibuster and never let anything get voted on.
Rather than take that chance, the Dems have decided on a different strategy: have the House vote on the Senate bill as is. Then used reconciliation to tweak changes.
If reconciliation fails, then the Senate bill that CBO scored in December 2009 and which the Senate passed by a supermajority 60-40 vote in 2009 is the law of the land. Which is why the the “ramming through” talk is total b.s. If anything, having the House vote on the Senate bill is how things SHOULD WORK . . . or have the Senate vote on a House bill. It would save a lot of time and opportunitued to festoon extraneous stuff on a bill like it is a Christmas tree or something.
TSgt — as explained your sentences make no sense. You said:
“If the House passed the Senate bill and then the Senate takes it up to reconcile it and make the House Reps happy, then when the Republicans attempt to strip it down or stall it, the Dem’s will claim that it can’t be reconciled because of those damn Republicans so they’ll just send the Senate bill, signed off on by the Congress, over to Obubbles for a signature.”
For one thing, if the House passes the Senate bill, it is immediately ready for signature, veto, or letting it go into law. I think Obama has 10 days to sign or veto.
The proposed fixes to the Senate bill that I have heard about include toughening the abortion language, eliminating the Nebraska deal, adding four GOPer proposals that Obama likes(including tort reform), and delaying the new taxes on high cost health insurance plans. From a philosophical position, there is no good reason the GOPers should oppose these fixes. Oh, but they will, I predict, because today’s GOP is simply not very smart. So expect a GOP filibuster, or an objection that the abortion fix should not be in a reconciliation bill. (In theory, aren’t you then ensuring MORE federally subsidized abortions, pro-life cons? I digress . . . .)
If the GOPers in the Senate successfully filibuster the proposed fixes or stop them some other way, or delay them more than the 10 days Obama has to sign, then the bill that passed the Senate 60-40 is the new law.
TSgt wrote “Wham, the Senate bill becomes the law of the land, and the Republicans get the blame for the Democraps incompetence,,, again,,, as always.” No, the GOPers will have simply shot themselves in the foot by (a) blocking anti-abortion language that the Dems proposed, (b) ensuring that a new tax goes into effect earlier than the Dems proposed, (c) cutting the legs off a new tort reform proposal, etc. GOPers will get blamed, rightfully, for their own mendacity, because that will have killed fixes that GOPers should have supported. The Dems, on the other hand, will have played their hand masterfully and gotten a reduction in the deficit, and an expansion in health care, with no tort reform (because cons opposed reconciliation).
Don wrote “Well.. if the House does not adopt the Senate bill then their [sic] is no legislation . . . .” Don, you ‘tard, thanks for stating the obvious — if the House rejects the Senate bill, then the Senate bill does not pass. Pat on the head to you, Don. Want a cookie?
Missy — You need to do a little friggin research before you spout off. The guy who just retired, Massa? He was a “no” vote the last time. So not only is his “no” off the table, but it lowers, by one vote, the number she needs to pass the Senate bill. LOL! “Drat! Foiled again!”
@BRob:
Still arguing with yourself, eh?
No one here was talking about the supposed lack of a Senate Bill….except you.
I laid out, in detail, your faulty logic here.
Repeat: The Senate bill was not the topic of this post. Nor did anyone conflate the issues that are being discussed…except you, the sad, silly little man with reading and comprehension issues.
Mata —
If something is not yet completed, it is not in existence. It is “in process.” The fact that the reconciliation part is not done yet is not some grand mystery. Nor is it a sign of some “conspiracy” to keep the details away from “the people.” It won’t be done until it is DONE. This whole process started more than a year ago. For you to keep harping on the reconcciliation bill not being done yet is lunacy. But keep it up . . . it only makes you cons look nuttier than a fruitcake.
johngalt — this procedure is being handled this way because the GOP has made is apparent that they really don’t want to negotiate on health care reform. Why? Because they simply don’t believe in reforming the system. They don’t think the system needs to change at all. My proof?
(a) when the GOPers had the House, the Senate and the presidency, they did NOTHING to make the system better; they made it worse by expanding entitlements with the drug bill and not raising taxes to pay for that.
(b) Tort reform, the holy grail of GOPers, is a state law issue, primarily. Yet some of the states with the worst tort systems are, you guesses it, Red States! If GOPers truly believed in tort reform, they would have started in GOPer dominated states.
(c) The best way to do tort reform is through the tax system, such as a 100% federal tax on all punitive damages awards or pain and suffering awards in excess of $100,000. Think anyone will be fighting for punies knowing that 100% would go to the state? Problem solved! What have the cons done to put this kind of idea forward? Nothing. The dog that does not bark . . . .
(d) By and large, the states with the worst health insurance coverage rates (with Texas being the worst, if I recall correctly) are dominated by Red States. Whatever happened to the states being the labratory of democracy and showing the feds a new way to solve problems? Cons have not led by example on this, which is why Blue State models like Vermont, Hawaii, and Oregon are leading the way. If cons actually believed, for example, in everyone being covered, then con states would have great numbers, wouldn’t they? Instead, they are the worse of the worse as far as coverage and outcomes are concerned. Just check out the obesity and diabetes numbers and you’ll see what I am talking about.
Little dog —
After that arse whipping I gave you on the Clinton surplus (the one the Bush administration pissed away), I did not think you would want to try to tangle with me again. But here is a question:
if the reconciliation bill consists of a tax cut (the union negotiated delay on the new tax), an abortion rider (toughening the language from the Senate bill the House already passed), tort reform (a GOPer proposal), the three other GOPer ideas Obama likes, and elimination of the Nebraska deal, do you think GOPers will STILL try to kill reconciliation?
I am betting they will. Why? Because they have lost any political compass.
@BRob: When you talk of fruitcakes you are speaking from experience.
Your George Soros provided talking points are fruitier than usual.
To say the GOP did not want to negotiate on health care is absurd. I can’t count the number of times GOP Congressmen wrote to President Obama asking him to make good his pledge to meet with them anytime to discuss the matter only to get no reply at all.
Nevertheless, the GOP put forward countless ideas in the form of amendments in the charade process in both the House and the Senate despite the fact that the real bills were being written behind closed doors soley by Democrats. Nearly every GOP amendment was voted down by Democrats.
You simply cannot keep repeating the same big lies here over and over and over again. It’s not getting tiresome, it’s getting down right annoying.
Besides, no one but you believes your lies.
You’re only fooling yourself.
Mike —
If the GOPers had any interest in reforming the US health care system, they would have paid attention to it when they had a chance. They did nothing but make it worse. You can spin all you like, but the truth is that the GOPs actions have shown that, if they had their way, 2010 through 2012 would pass by with the same changes we had from 2001 through 2009: nothing.
Indeed, the mythic “Republican ideas on reforming the health care system” are up there with the unicorn — often discussed, sometimes believed in, but never seen.
@BRob:
Oh, you mean the supposed “arse whipping” where I supplied you with source after source after source after source to support my position?
The one where you never even bothered to come back to try to defend your position after it was exposed to be such a laughable farce?
Is that the one you mean?
Yeah, some “arse whipping” you gave me.
Exit question: Who, on this thread, confused or conflated the Senate bill and the reconciliation language? Yep, you. The sad, silly little man with reading and comprehension issues.