5. Didn't the parliamentarian give Republicans a victory by telling them that reconciliation couldn't move unless the president has signed the original legislation into law? (This would play upon the House-Senate mistrust dynamic because the House would have to rely on faith that the Senate would act after its bill had already acquired the force of law.) There's a dispute about what the parliamentarian said, and
Democratic leaders say that they do not believe that he meant to say that Congress could not function as an independent branch of government until the executive branch performs its role in the legislative process. In general, the House has the most to gain by introducing its reconciliation package first. As National Journal reports, the
larger obstacle for Democrats is the number of Republican reconciliation amendments they have to contend with.
link The law is
explicit.
The bogus claim was made by a McConnell spokesperson, who is now blaming the misinterpration on reporters:
Dems Confident That Senate Parliamentarian Was 'Misinterpreted' On Reconciliation<...>
Asked about reports that Senate Republicans had misinterpreted the parliamentarian's comments, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's office told the Huffington Post that they were "very precise about what he said."
"I think some reporters misinterpreted," said spokesperson Don Stewart.
By David M. Drucker
Roll Call Staff
March 12, 2010, 11:57 a.m.
After first signaling to Senate aides that the Senate-passed health care reform bill must be signed into law before Congress acts on companion reconciliation legislation, the Senate Parliamentarian has acknowledged that there are perhaps ways to draft a reconciliation measure that could move first.
However, it appears that if Democrats choose to pursue reconciliation before the Senate bill is enacted, they likely would have to narrow the scope of the reconciliation bill.
The Parliamentarian has indicated that attempting to move a comprehensive reconciliation package absent the $875 billion Senate-passed bill becoming law could create challenging procedural hurdles for Senate Democrats to overcome. Reconciliation bills operate under a narrow set of guidelines, and Senate Republicans are vowing to raise procedural objections over any portions of the legislation that they believe break the rules.
<...>
However, it appears the Democrats might not face such procedural obstacles if they chose to slim down the reconciliation package and only make changes to current law. For example, if they chose to include only adjustments to things such as Medicare or Medicaid, they would probably be on solid ground, even if reconciliation cleared prior to Obama signing the underlying Senate bill.
moreWhy the hell are so many MSM reports pushing the bogus claim and so few correcting it?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
