House members are openly talking about not financing HCR. What can Obama do?

[LeftyAndProud60]

Do these nuts make the final decision on where the money goes?

[azurnoir]

I think the word here is VETO which Obama can do

Bush did

[golfguru]

24. How can he veto something which has not even become a "bill"?

The president can only veto a bill. Since all funding proposals start in the House,
if the Repugs do not include funding for Health Care for the 30 million uninsured, and other requirements, the money never gets spent.

[Massacure]

26. He can veto any budget which doesn't fund healthcare refrom.

of course, the government shuts down without a budget.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. the insurance companies will rip their heads off and shit down their necks.

I think that without funding, the insurers will be stuck with expensive provisions that they signed up for without the compensating mandatory enrollments that were the other half of the bargain, but that is just a guess on my part.

Oh and regarding the veto, you can't veto something that doesn't happen. It is unlikely that Obama will veto all other bills until one funding healthcare reform shows up.

[Monk06]

23. Excellent observation. Repugs should stop cheering until they take the ball into the endzone.

[Cali_Democrat]

2. Obama can tell them to go fuck themselves.

Hard

[onenote]

3. they would still need to get legislation through the senate

and it would face a veto.

They'll try to bury it in other legislation, but the Senate will try to take it out and with the threat of a veto, its going to be hard to have it survive in conference.

If it gets to that.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Is this like a zen veto?

The veto of the bill that does not exist that funds HIR?

[DonP]

4. All funding bills must originate in the House

The Senate may amend but they cannot constitutionally originate a funding bill.

[joshcryer]

6. All new funding bills must start in the House, the Senate can do a continuation, as far as I know.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. Actually what the senate does is grab any failed house bill

rip the guts out of it and make it their own 'house' funding bill. It is a total bullshit maneuver, but one it seems with a long history.

[tritsofme]

12. The leaders of both chambers have to cooperate for this strategy to work.

If Boehner did not allow for the use legislative vehicles like you describe, all funding bills would have to originate in the House.

[Imajika]

5. Yes, the House can simply refuse to fund HCR...

..I am not sure many people realize what the House can do. The scenario may play out something like this.

The House can simply refuse to fund it and send a budget/spending bills to the Senate without the money for HCR, and then we arrive at a stalemate. The Senate won't pass such a bill so it won't go the President, and even if the Senate did the President would simply veto it.

So now the problem. The House can still just refuse to fund it, the Senate and President can refuse to sign a budget/spending bill without it. So we are now at a logjam that would involve an eventual government shutdown OR some sort of continuing resolution. The Republicans will want to avoid a government shutdown since Clinton beat them over the head with it in 94'-95', so they will offer a bare bones continuing resolution to keep the government going. That CR will not contain the funds for HCR and will be just the minimum funds needed to keep the federal government going. The President then has to decide whether to sign the CR until a budget agreement is reached, or veto the CR and we're back to square one.

This will all be decided in the court of public opinion. If the President and the Democratic Senate play their cards right, the GOP will lose this argument and be forced to back down. Obama will give them some crumb to save face, but one can see how this will likely go.

We are weak in one area. The individual mandate. It is my guess the GOP House will push a bill to repeal ONLY that part of HCR knowing that without that piece the entire bill falls apart. The problem here is, there are some Senate Democrats that might go along with this because that portion of the bill really is fairly unpopular. Reid will have to prevent a vote on this but it will be somewhat difficult, but even if he can't, the President will veto it. Problem is, the individual mandate is not super popular and may put Democrats on the defensive.

When all is said and done, HCR will not be defunded.

[Clio the Leo]

7. Cantor basically conceded as much at the GOP retreat...

.... that they CANT NOT raise the debt ceiling, but should use the matter for leverage. Sorry I cant cite that, saw a Tweet on it sometime last week.

[Imajika]

8. Yup, they will have to raise the debt limit...

They can grandstand for awhile, but everyone knows they have to raise it. It won't even go to the wire because that has the potential of setting off a financial panic which would be 100% blamed on Republicans.

The Republicans can make life difficult, but they can't defund HCR and they can't block raising the debt ceiling.

[tritsofme]

14. House Republicans played chicken with the debt limit in 2003 IIRC.

I believe the limit was reached for a period of at least a few weeks, and the Treasury was forced to take extraordinary measures to avoid default.

They pushed it that far with a GOP president, who knows how it will go this time, but there will obviously be some sort deal before an actual default.

However I think House Republicans will find more success in defunding HCR. The death of the omnibus appropriation bill in the lame duck was really bad for HCR funding, I have a hard time believing House Republicans will vote for HCR funding of any type under any circumstances.

[WingDinger]

22. Yes, but htey are going to issue us orders on the order we pay our creditors.

And allow us just enough time to then come begging at excruciatingly often intervals. And they will be doing this, cuz, THE PEOPLE.

[tritsofme]

16. This was an interesting read about debt limit fights over the last decade:

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/105193.pdf

At some points in 2002 and 2003 Republicans allowed the government to get within $25 million of the limit.

[davidpdx]

18. While that sounds like a lot, for the government it is very close

[whosinpower]

13. The the democrats should take a play from their book

And signal that they will ALL vote NOT TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING unless HCR is fully funded.

CALL THEIR BLUFF.

Be the party of no. Make the majority actually have to increase the debt ceiling. Force them. Take the debt ceiling hostage.

[zulchzulu]

9. Congress has the "power of the purse" to stop funding

I'm not quite sure if they can stop funding that has already been passed as the Affordable Health Care Reform Act was done.

FDR had to deal with the same antics from Republicans in the 1930s and used commerce clause authority to override their crap.

Legal minds might know more about this...

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. Obama can scare them by getting the people on his side

the GOP will get rid of Medicare - it is in writing!

[CreekDog]

17. Another day, another OP by you where you don't participate

:sigh:

Why does anyone answer you?

[LeftyAndProud60]

19. Was watching "The President's Photographer" on PBS and they showed BTS footage of the Health Care

fight. So much work put into this, it would be a shame to never see it get a chance to work

[martymar64]

20. Three Words: Base Closure Commission

He can appoint a Base Closure Commission to examine what military bases can be closed in Republican Districts (that last part being unspoken).
That'll put the fear of god into them. This Commission won't even have to do anything, just the knowledge of its formation would freak them out.

[StarsInHerHair]

21. LEAD perhaps?

maybe give more speeches that rouse our Reps?

[sabrina 1]

25. Too bad Democrats didn't refuse to fund Bush's wars.

They could have ended them four years ago if they had done that, which many, many people implored them to do.

But we always hear how we are naive and that politics is pragmatic. If WE do something like that, then THEY might do it to us on something we want.

The truth is THEY will do it regardless of what we do. And I hope this ends the argument that we have to be willing to 'compromise' so this kind of thing doesn't happen.