I won’t break my arm patting myself on the back. I’ve been doing this long enough to know that when it comes to predictions, I’m right exactly 50 percent of the time.
The end of the fight to defeat this health care bill came around 4 p.m. Sunday when the president promised Republican Bart Stupak (R-Mich.) that he would sign an executive order prohibiting the apply of federal money to fund abortions except in cases of rape, incest or life. mothers.
Once Stupak agreed to language in the executive order as an acceptable safety net for pro-life Democrats in the House, the problem was solved.
There are still a few steps left before this happens.
The Speaker and the president pro tempore of the Senate must sign an official copy of the bill, which will then be sent to the White House, where it will be signed, with justifiable flourish, by President Obama. This is in accordance with Art. I section 7 of the Constitution, which provides that every bill adopted by the House of Representatives and the Senate shall, before becoming a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approves, he will sign…
However, the bill passed by the House was the exact same bill passed by the Senate – including the Cornhusker bribe and a tax on so-called “Cadillac health care plans,” which many lawmakers do not like. Dear Mr Mullings:
This is where my head starts to hurt. Why did the House go through all this? Why didn’t they just pass the bill they wanted and introduce a bill that both houses would accept in a conference between them? CORSAIR
With the election of Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) in January, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) lost his 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority. This meant that a bill passed by the House that was not identical to one already passed by the Senate would be effectively killed by Senate Republicans.
My head doesn’t hurt any less. So what is this whole reconciliation thing?
I’m on shaky ground, but the main point is this: budget resolutions and bills that “reconcile” spending to fit within the budget resolution are not subject to the filibuster and therefore only require a majority of those voting (51 senators if they are all working that day ).
Here’s what the Senate’s dictionary page says about the reconciliation process: The process established in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 by which Congress amends existing laws to bring tax and spending levels in line with those established in the budget resolution. Changes recommended by the committees in accordance with the reconciliation instructions are incorporated in the reconciliation measure.
Which gives me a headache.
In any case, Democrats argue that the recovery bill coming out of the House is really a budget reconciliation bill and therefore requires only a straightforward majority.
As you can imagine, Republican senators disagree with this theory.
The Senate parliamentarian ruled that the reconciliation bill cannot be presented to the Senate until the President signs the basic bill – there must be something to reconcile. So the Senate will wait to introduce amendments until the signing ceremony at the White House.
Here’s where I think the plan will fail: If I have to buy insurance to drive, there’s nothing wrong with that. I don’t have to drive. I can walk, ride a bike, ride the bus, whatever.
If I have to pay airport taxes to aid cover TSA costs, that’s okay too. I don’t have to get on a plane. I can walk, ride a bike, ride the bus, whatever.
This law states that I must purchase health insurance. I don’t have to drive or fly, but I do have to live, so it appears to be a government activity prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.
If I were on shaky ground regarding reconciliation, given the single criminal justice class I took from Professor Robert Hill at Marietta College in Marietta, Ohio 45750, I might be on quicksand on this one, but there you go.
Last night at around 10:48 p.m., the vote made history and the bill was adopted by a majority of 219 to 212, i.e. three votes to spare.
