You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #36: While I don't completely understand it all, I have read that the bill [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
razorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #29
36. While I don't completely understand it all, I have read that the bill
would have to be dramatically altered, and have to be renewed in a few years. Does anyone else know more about how this would work?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Health Bill Can Pass Senate With 51 Votes, Van Hollen Says sabrina 1  Jan-16-10 01:12 AM   #0 
  - If am wrong the HCR will be that of said no more in 2012. n/t  BunkerHill24   Jan-16-10 01:24 AM   #1 
  - Only looks like time wasted to those outside the beltway  Mithreal   Jan-16-10 01:49 AM   #2 
  - Great!  PoliticalOne65   Jan-16-10 06:06 AM   #12 
  - if they only need 51 votes  endless october   Jan-16-10 01:54 AM   #3 
  - Good question and one that many people will be asking.  sabrina 1   Jan-16-10 01:58 AM   #4 
  - It sure seems like smoke and mirrors to me. A big game staged so that corporations get what they  IsItJustMe   Jan-16-10 09:12 AM   #17 
  - Yes, I have never understood why Republicans are being included in this process  TheEuclideanOne   Jan-16-10 05:37 AM   #9 
  - So they say....But will they actually do it?  LaPera   Jan-16-10 03:02 AM   #5 
  - Just as important, how will we respond if they don't?  Mithreal   Jan-16-10 03:41 AM   #6 
     - At this point, I would be surprised if they  sabrina 1   Jan-16-10 05:14 AM   #7 
        - So the fight really is not over until the bill is signed.  Mithreal   Jan-16-10 05:22 AM   #8 
        - Well, I think the fight is over  sabrina 1   Jan-16-10 05:39 AM   #10 
           - And since Senator Dorgan is retiring, he knows better than us  Mithreal   Jan-16-10 05:46 AM   #11 
              - I wonder if he feels he can no longer be of use to those he  sabrina 1   Jan-16-10 05:30 PM   #21 
        - They could at the least include the waiver of ERISA that would allow the states to do single payer  clear eye   Jan-17-10 07:19 AM   #23 
           - Pelosi removed it from the House bill -  dflprincess   Jan-17-10 08:45 PM   #120 
  - If they go for reconciliation, they should ram through what the people  Vinca   Jan-16-10 07:47 AM   #13 
  - This was posted here early Friday evening. What makes Van Hollen all knowledgable?  elocs   Jan-16-10 07:50 AM   #14 
  - Well, it was shouted all over the place. Many times in  sabrina 1   Jan-16-10 04:34 PM   #20 
  - I don't think reconciliation is the miracle people expect it to be.  shotten99   Jan-16-10 08:22 AM   #15 
  - I don't think they would have to start over again.  sabrina 1   Jan-16-10 12:19 PM   #19 
  - I can't even read anymore crap about health reform. Nothing means anything  eagertolearn   Jan-16-10 08:42 AM   #16 
  - Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, still? just let the ship sink  Mari333   Jan-16-10 09:42 AM   #18 
  - Reconciliation shouldn't be able to include a mandate  clear eye   Jan-17-10 07:15 AM   #22 
  - Dems threaten to use 51-vote tactic for health bill if they lose in Mass.  kpete   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #24 
  - A little late don't ya think.  yourout   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #25 
  - They should have used reconciliation to push for Single Payer, instead  IndianaGreen   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #38 
  - Thank you. Exactly stated.  mbperrin   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #42 
  - +1  Fearless   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #49 
  - Please list 51 Senators who would have supported Single Payer  brooklynite   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #58 
  - HR676, Single Payer, a 15-page long bill was about expanding Medicare  IndianaGreen   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #68 
     - Yes. That was a 2003 bill with about 100 co-sponsors. And what happened to it?  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #88 
  - Provide some support for your argument that could have been done  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #61 
  - I don't dispute that SIngle Payer could have been brought up under Reconciliation...  brooklynite   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #81 
  - This is the Byrd Rule.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #93 
     - And then imagine what 641(g) says and what the case law is  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #105 
  - +1  Land Shark   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #80 
  - +2  wordpix   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #83 
  - What makes you think they could have gotten 51 Dem. Senators to vote for single  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #87 
  - BINGO!  DisgustedInMN   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #99 
  - +1  Blue_Tires   Jan-20-10 08:23 AM   #124 
  - Not at all.  liberalmuse   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #70 
  - Do it already.  truthisfreedom   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #26 
  - If they are serious, then bring back the Medicare option to it /nt  still_one   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #27 
  - yes, open up Medicare Part E and improve on Medicare. (Oh, too simple... and not beholden enough to  nightrain   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #41 
  - Now it's time...  DAMANgoldberg   Jan-19-10 11:16 PM   #122 
  - They are only serious about implementing the fascist Individual Mandate.  New Dawn   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #79 
  - +1 nt  laughingliberal   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #115 
  - Dream on.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #89 
  - Yeah, if they're going reconciliation (which we have wanted from the jump) there is no excuse  laughingliberal   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #114 
  - I'll believe it when I see it  niceypoo   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #28 
  - It's not about courage. It's about what they do and do not want in the bill.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #91 
  - Totally agree.  harun   Jan-20-10 09:45 AM   #126 
  - From what I understand, reconciliation limits the scope of the bill  elocs   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #29 
  - No, they can do better.  Pab Sungenis   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #31 
  - Right... if they can expand Medicare through reconciliation  Blasphemer   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #82 
  - I vaguely remember reading that reconciliation would cover different parts of the bill...  sweetloukillbot   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #33 
  - I've googled this and read about it but still don't understand it  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #51 
  - Check this thread I posted about reconciliation, what it is, and how to understand it:  elocs   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #53 
     - Bookmarked that post, thank you elocs  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #59 
     - hey, if * could pass all those signing statements, why not Obama sign one for expanding Medicare?  wordpix   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #84 
        - You cannot have a signing statement unless a bill gets through Congress.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #92 
  - I think the exchange probably could be done  laughingliberal   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #116 
  - While I don't completely understand it all, I have read that the bill  razorman   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #36 
  - Good synopsis of Reconciliation and the "Byrd Rule" from Wiki :  BP2   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #60 
  - So what? They could take up the other issues separately. Or, they could use the nuclear option. nt  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #90 
  - Hey, Senate Minority Leader Bitch McConnell: how do you like OUR nukular option?  johnfunk   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #30 
  - Reconciliation is not the nuclear option. The nuclear option is eliminating the 60 vote rule .  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #96 
     - I see it more as a tacticl nukular weapon, not a strategic thermonukular tactic  johnfunk   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #113 
  - Sadly, Bernie Sanders thinks this won't work...  lapfog_1   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #32 
  - They didn't want to use reconciliation for Single Payer, Medicare for all  IndianaGreen   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #45 
  - You're clearly clueless about reconciliation  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #74 
     - No. Read Reply # 8 carefully and thoughtfully. See also Reply 69.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #95 
  - Bingo. Politics, not the Byrd rule, is the obstacle to passing single payer via reconciliation.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #94 
  - If this is a serious option  notesdev   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #34 
  - "We cant use reconcilliation to pass a public option"  DJ13   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #35 
  - The frakkers lied to us!  IndianaGreen   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #39 
  - +1  PassingFair   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #40 
  - Whether the public option fits  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #75 
     - Not sure about the public option, but single payer does fit.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #98 
        - That's just a statement with no back up  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #106 
  - Are you sure you understand this?  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #47 
  - I'm not sure but I'm thinking they could create the exchange with reconciliation  laughingliberal   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #117 
  - I am not sure if they could use reconciliation to pass a public option. They could use it to pass  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #97 
  - OK, Color Me Unbelievably Ignorant  Bigmack   Jan-17-10 08:05 PM   #37 
  - I've never been able to understand the fear of the filibuster, either.  mbperrin   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #43 
  - I debated this on DU a while back and did learn a few things  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #48 
     - I wasn't suggesting  Bigmack   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #56 
        - That is an interesting question too  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #62 
        - How do you "make them" talk? The rules don't require talking anymore.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #100 
        - I believe the rules were changed some time ago...  Iowa   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #66 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #44 
  - Umm... or they can still go for 51 regardless... maybe that would be better to hope for  Fearless   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #50 
     - Why would you have any faith that they will do the right thing unless forced into it?  bc3000   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #52 
        - Why would you think they'd do the reconciliation perfectly, then? n/t  skids   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #55 
        - Umm... Because I live here and I am one of "them"  Fearless   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #67 
           - You are one of whom? A Senator?  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #101 
              - Ha! Voter. n/t  Fearless   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #110 
  - Should have used Reconcilation months ago  Hawaii Hiker   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #46 
  - To understand reconciliation better, and that it's not a simple process, I have an OP:  elocs   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #54 
  - I am not sure you could use reconciliation for either a public option or the current Senate bill..  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #102 
  - How can you say flatly that we have 50+ votes for a public option?  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #103 
  - Then there is NO EXCUSE not to pass a REAL bill with the Public Option.  Faryn Balyncd   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #57 
  - +1  bvar22   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #63 
  - + 2 It's called the "nuclear option" for a reason.  BP2   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #64 
  - Reconciliation is not called the nuclear option. Please see Reply 72,  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #107 
  - Yes there is because reconciliation would do nothing for a public option,  elocs   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #69 
  - If that's the case, do Democrats risk more by forcing it through with 51 votes vs  BP2   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #71 
  - If I'm getting it right it has to affect the federal budget  treestar   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #73 
  - Please see Reply 78.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #104 
  - Sadly, this is saber rattling and bluster. If it were advantageous for them to do this,, they...  Wardoc   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #65 
  - The namesof all 60 members of the Democratic Caucus are already attached to it.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #108 
  - Oh, they'll threaten to get tough to push through a (R) worthy bill.  frog92969   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #72 
  - Reconciliation and its limits will not result in what most consider to be a "worthy bill"  elocs   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #77 
     - If they used reconciliation for single payer, it would be a worthy bill.  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #109 
  - why didn't they do this weeks ago?  Rosa Luxemburg   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #76 
  - Because if you understand reconciliation you know it's not a quick fix  elocs   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #78 
     - Again, they could use reconciliation for  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #112 
  - they'd suddenly figure out how to play hardball?  yurbud   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #85 
  - It may not be necessary. Election may not be certified for weeks  chelsea0011   Jan-17-10 08:06 PM   #86 
  - Typically, it takes ten days. Can you imagine the uproar if it took longer this time, absent  No Elephants   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #111 
  - Do the admins know there are Scott Brown adds appearing on this site?  shawmut   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #118 
     - Looks like the owners of DU don't care about Red/Blue - They only care about GREEN  Knockout   Jan-17-10 08:07 PM   #119 
  - What health bill?  dflprincess   Jan-17-10 08:47 PM   #121 
  - Bingo. And the GOP will happily let it pass into law as well.  New Dawn   Jan-20-10 01:08 AM   #123 
  - clarification: ANYTHING can pass the senate with 51 votes  Blue_Tires   Jan-20-10 08:25 AM   #125 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC