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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (775671)	3/19/2014 2:59:33 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578934

>> Which was the same methodology that was used to enact the Bush tax cuts... >> I don't remember you complaining about it then. And I don't remember you supporting the Bush cuts, either. While it is true that the 03 cuts were a partisan vote (and both 01 and 03 were done with reconciliation, although the 01 cuts were bipartisan), I don't remember any corrupt "Cornhusker Kickback" or "Louisiana Purchase" in the Bush tax cuts -- these corrupt measures were used to enact law that not even ONE PARTY supported. This was aside from the corrupt strip-and-amend procedure which violated the origination clause of the Constitution, which if the Court has a shred of integrity left, will itself end up being grounds for throwing the entire law out when the Supremes finally hear that litigation. That stuff may be the real point; but you missed another important point. Under Senate rules, reconciliation is used for budget (revenue and spending) legislation. Not for sweeping social legislation. Reconciliation was appropriate for the Bush Tax Cuts, but not for Obamacare. One can hardly expect to have Republican support for legislation that was corruptly enacted.