Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Coug
It isn't a "we'll fix it later" approach. It would get fixed concurrently. I don't think you are following the process closely.
The Senate passed a bill. The House can now vote on that bill, or, alternatively, they can ask the Senate to modify it. The Senate can modify through reconciliation rather than through a formal amendment so it only takes 51 votes. The Senate can pass reconciliation before the House takes any act at all. The House can adopt the reconciliation bill first, and then adopt the Senate bill. That way, there is no risk at all to the House.
|
I don't think you are following the process closely either. Here's Kent Conrad:
Quote:
|
[Senator Kent Conrad's] comments lend weight to speculation that congressional Democratic leaders plan to have the House pass the Senate healthcare reform without changes, then pass a second bill with changes hashed out between the two chambers' leaders and the White House.
|
I don't hear anyone talking seriously about the option you are advocating.
Either way, this is all a complete bastardization of the purpose of reconciliation, but we've already seen the Dems don't play by the rules.
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?"
"And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..."
- Cali Coug
"Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got."
- Brigham Young
|