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: steve harris who wrote (138574)	7/18/2012 10:38:48 PM
From: Paul V.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224751

steve, at reconciliation, the Democrat's just accepted the House version of the ACA bill without any changes. It was a smart move. Since they just accepted the House version you are correct that it only took a majority vote rather than 60 votes that is the normal process if they wished to make changes. A good political move. If changes were made in the Senate then the changes would have had to return to the conference committee between the House for agreement where the House Republicans would have killed the bill. But, the Democrat's outsmarted the Republicans when the Senate Democrat's acceptance of the House version which had been passed by the Democrats in the House. Then, the President signed the version originally coming out of the Democrat House. When Senator Rep. Brown was elected to the Senate the whole dynamics in the Senate changed giving the Minority Republicans the 41 minority to stop any changes on the Senate side. That is why the reconciliation process was used since it only required a simple majority. The same process could be used after the election, if such a Senate bill would emerge out of the Senate. But, a lot of parliamentary moves, and Senate rules would come into play. The only catch, the ACA Rules would have been written, many rules would have been written and implemented, plus all the ACA benefits which individuals are receiving would possibly be lost. Talk about individuals being Pi--ed. Once individual have been given something, taking it away is almost impossible without extreme anger. Guess, we will just have to wait and see after the November elections - more negative campaigning for the next 4 months.