Via Roll Call
The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress’ original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package, senior GOP sources said Thursday.
The Senate Parliamentarian’s Office was responding to questions posed by the Republican leadership. The answers were provided verbally, sources said.
House Democratic leaders have been searching for a way to ensure that any move they make to approve the Senate-passed $871 billion health care reform bill is followed by Senate action on a reconciliation package of adjustments to the original bill. One idea is to have the House and Senate act on reconciliation prior to House action on the Senate’s original health care bill.
Information Republicans say they have received from the Senate Parliamentarian’s Office eliminates that option. House Democratic leaders last week began looking at crafting a legislative rule that would allow the House to approve the Senate health care bill, but not forward it to Obama for his signature until the Senate clears the reconciliation package.
This just confirms what I’ve been saying all along: the House vote is the final vote.
Now, will the House Democrats trust the Senate Democrats and Obama? Harry Reid now appears to have a change of heart and will now allow Republicans input and to offer amendments. Reid states:
“Reconciliation is designed to deal with budget-related matters, and some have expressed doubt that it could be used for comprehensive health care reform that includes many policies with no budget implications. But the reconciliation bill now under consideration would not be the vehicle for comprehensive reform — that bill already passed outside of reconciliation with 60 votes,” Reid wrote to McConnell.
“Reconciliation will not exclude Republicans from the legislative process. You will continue to have an opportunity to offer amendments and change the shape of the legislation. In addition, at the end of the process, the bill can pass only if it wins a democratic, up-or-down majority vote. If Republicans want to vote against a bill that reduces health care costs, fills the prescription drug ‘donut hole’ for seniors and reduces the deficit, you will have every right to do so,” he said.
Obviously, Republicans would have to be a part of the legislative process; however, does anyone actually think that a single GOP amendment would really be passed to amend the bill. Furthermore, for Reid to say “a democratic, up-or-down majority vote” is simply disingenuous. Reid knows that he does indeed 60 votes to pass amendments and he is circumventing the GOP filibuster to make any further changes.
That is the bait for the House Democrats–to use the up-or-down vote, which requires only 51 votes to pass the ObamaCare bill changes. The House Democrats must trust that the Senate Democrats will hold true to their word. They also have to make certain that Obama will sign the amended legislation.
As for Obama’s track record of broken promises and bait and switch, I’d go over to Change.gov for a serious reminder of what health reform should look like and what he originally promised voters.
Crossposted at Big Government
Moe Lane
Steve Maley
KnightsofMalta
Dan Spencer
Dan McLaughlin
This really isn't a surprise to those who know the process...
APA Guy (Diary) Thursday, March 11th at 3:50PM EST (link)It has always been the House passing the senate bill or bust. Now, we will get to see exactly where House members’ interests truly rest.
This article is talking about the "Slaughter Rule"
fsured Thursday, March 11th at 4:30PM EST (link)Which I believe would allow the House to go directly to the reconciliation package by passing a Rule to the reconciliation bill that “deems the Senate bill passed.” This idea was floated so the Blue Dog and Pro-life dems wouldn’t have to take a tough vote on the original Senate bill. This is an extremely shady, but in a sick way, clever, way to proceed.
If I understand this article correctly, the parliamentarian is saying that the Senate cannot take up a reconcilation bill if Congress proceeds this way. So, that sounds great, but there is one last caveat: The Vice President can overrule the Senate Parliamentarian. So, technically Biden gets to decide if the Senate can consider the House reconciliation bill before it gets to Obama’s desk.
I could be wrong
Return to Revolution (Diary) Thursday, March 11th at 4:47PM EST (link)but I thought this refers specifically to reconciliation – Pelosi wants to “fix” the bill before voting on it because no one trusts that any changes will ever be made if the President signs into law first. This ruling said the President must do just that: sign it into law first, before any changes can be considered, thus forcing house dems to trust the senate in going back to make changes (which they clearly don’t and for good reason).
The slaughter rule being considered is to change parliamentary procedure so the house can “deem” the senate bill already passed without actually voting on it. (see http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/House-Democrats-looking-at-Slaughter-Solution-to-pass-Obamacare-without-a-vote-on-Senate-bill-87267402.html )
I think its funny that the parliamentarian found it fit to dot the i’s and cross the t’s now that democrats have abandoned reconciliation and are already moving on committing the most ostentatious constitutional rape in 100 years.
Out of hand Constitutional fetishist
Ok, looks like I am confused...
Return to Revolution (Diary) Thursday, March 11th at 4:56PM EST (link)per this, which is a bit clearer
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/did-senate-parliamentarian-just-kill-obamacare
however, this also points out that Reid can fire the parliamentarian in addition to VP overrule.
Out of hand Constitutional fetishist
Why doesn't Reid just fire all of the Republicans?
izoneguy (Diary) Thursday, March 11th at 5:06PM EST (link)Or anyone else who disagrees with tyranny?
Looks like they are taking lessons from Chavez.
A dictator in training pants is not very pleasant.
Obama would need to grow a huge pair before
he would be able to be the dictator to 300 Million Americans
and the US military who is sworn to defend & protect the
Constitution from enemies foreign & domestic.
The point cannot be made often enough: Modern liberalism, as embodied in the Obama presidency, is the defender of the status quo. And the status quo is a road to economic ruin. Political forces cannot redistribute the wealth that the economic system does not produce.
There is no way that the Senate would...
ColoradoRed Thursday, March 11th at 4:57PM EST (link)…take up a reconciliation bill AFTER their own bill becomes law. What I wonder is, assuming the Senate did pass a reconciliation bill with Stupak-style language, would that reconciliation bill even be able to pass the House? I would argue that Diana Degette and the rest of the Pro-Choice Caucus would never allow that to happen. Even Pelosi may be telling bald-faced lies to House Democrats, suggesting that she would get behind such a reconciliation package.
The fight over health care reform now ends in the House. Reconciliation is an after-thought, one which probably wont even come to fruition. Once the House passes the bill, we would be saddled with an awful, enormously expensive piece of legislation that could not be repealed until at least 2013, if ever.
Sexiest news I've heard in a while
RealQuiet (Diary) Thursday, March 11th at 5:32PM EST (link)If Biden wants to try to overrule the parliamentarian or Reid wants to dismiss the parliamentarian it is already too late. The majority of Americans are against this and it will just tick people off more if they try to do that. Pelosi has only one option now and that is she has to pass the Senate bill as-is. Stupak 12 says no deal on seperate bill, House progressive caucus up in arms over no public option, union caddy tax, and bill failing because of anti-abortion Democrats. At a minimum, no vote is going to happen before the Easter recess unless a bolt out of the blue appears. Time to turn up the heat on those vulnerable Dem congressmen. We have to because you know the White House and Pelosi are going to be whipping with unimaginable ferocity. Time to put this thing permanently in the crypt and pour the dirt over it.
I hope the Parliamentarian has his affairs in order. nt
Achance (Diary) Thursday, March 11th at 5:36PM EST (link)In Vino Veritas
I would like to agree with you...
ColoradoRed Thursday, March 11th at 10:45PM EST (link),,,but to a certain extent, Obama wont do something wild and very politically risky without at least being pretty sure it will get him where he wants it to go. And I think that a lot of the fence sitters (not the ones who want something for their vote, but the ones who are worried about their job come November) will object and retreat from Obama/Pelosi/health care reform altogether if they were to do something like fire or overrule the Parliamentarian.
He may in for a long nap at Ft Marcy Park -nt
texasgalt (Diary) Friday, March 12th at 2:13AM EST (link)This reminds
lunarmanathome (Diary) Sunday, March 14th at 1:15PM EST (link)me of a an HBO series, “Rome” where the Senate had erupted into fighting, was never properly adjourned, and the parliamentarian had to be cajoled into stating so – and it all ended badly anyway.
“They”, the “powers that be” could care less about the rules – witness the near riots we had last summer in the townhalls, yet the Senate went ahead and bribed the few who balked, and passed it anyway, Consequences be damned then.
I’ve become much more fatalistic, and with Senators like Cantwell and Murray of Washington state, and2 ZERO Republicans willing to campaign effectively or sway that mass of socialist voters in the greater Seattle metropolitan area – I’m afraid that none of this matters in the log run.
Ethics, morality, liberty and personal responsibility are words that have no context withing the Beltway.