Thursday, March 11, 2010

The Senate Parliamentarian just nixed Obamacare. Ruled that law must exist before it can be fixed in reconciliation. The 'Slaughter solution is a no-go.


Anonymous said...


Eric said...

Was that sarcasm?

Anonymous said...

CQ: "Republican aides, reporting the decision, interpreted it to mean the House would have to clear the Senate bill and President Obama would have to sign it before the reconciliation bill could be passed. House leaders had been hoping that the two bills could be passed almost simultaneously.

The parliamentarian, however, later reportedly clarified his position to Senate aides, saying that the reconciliation bill could be written in a way that would not require Obama to sign the Senate bill into law before the reconciliation bill is voted on."

Politico: "According to reporting by POLITICO’s David Rogers, the accounts aren’t accurate and misconstrue what the Senate parliamentarians have said. That is that reconciliation must amend law but this could be done without the Senate bill being enacted first. “It is wholly possible to create law and qualify law before the law is on the books,” said one person familiar with situation.

For example, if the big bill itself amends some Social Security statute, reconciliation could be written to do the same --with changes sought by the House. Then if reconciliation is passed and signed by President Barack Obama after he signs the larger bill, the changes made in reconciliation would prevail.


Eric said...

Yeah, you got me again. Good thing nobody reads this blog with all this crow I've been eating.

I starting to think they're going to pass this monstrosity. They're like fanatics.