Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (80847)	3/11/2010 8:19:25 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224749

Its supposed to be applicable only to budgetary concerns, the difference between the bills goes beyond such items, which is why the House has to pass the Senate bill first. The house members don't want the Senate bill, which is why they want changes to it made by reconciliation after they pass the Senate bill. That procedure would be legitimate, but there is no guarantee that the changes the house wants would pass in the senate. If they don't and Obama signs the bill in to law, the house members who object to parts of the senate bill would just have to lump it. Which is why they are reluctant to pass the senate bill, and which is why they are trying to game the system by considering a vote for a reconciliation bill passed by the senate to be a vote for the senate bill, that enables the reconciliation, without ever having actually passed the senate bill. In other words, as an article I've read and posted stated, they've gone from voting on bills without reading them, to "passing" bills without voting for them. Trying this procedure would result in a law that didn't legitimately pass. It might take effect, because if congress wants it, and the administration considers it a law, the courts would be a bit reluctant to strike it down. If they don't theoretically a future administration could decline to put the law in to place because it wasn't actually valid law, but that would create quite a crisis in government. That's the type of mess you create when you try to pass a law outside of established procedures.