Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Shouldn't the "skinny repeal" have required 60 votes anyway? (Original Post) Goodheart Jul 2017 OP
Well, that's a moo point now. dawg Jul 2017 #1
I guess the days of filibustering are over. Goodheart Jul 2017 #2
Republicans can still filibuster. dawg Jul 2017 #3
It would have gone to conference as well Johonny Jul 2017 #4
the fear was that it would *not* go to conference and the house would pass it as is unblock Jul 2017 #5
I think the skinny repeal only included items that didn't need 60 votes marylandblue Jul 2017 #6

Johonny

(21,421 posts)
4. It would have gone to conference as well
Fri Jul 28, 2017, 10:19 AM
Jul 2017

where the house was planning to stick crap the senate wouldn't vote for back in it.

unblock

(53,281 posts)
5. the fear was that it would *not* go to conference and the house would pass it as is
Fri Jul 28, 2017, 10:26 AM
Jul 2017

precisely to avoid any further disagreement with the senate.

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)
6. I think the skinny repeal only included items that didn't need 60 votes
Fri Jul 28, 2017, 10:36 AM
Jul 2017

That is one reason it was so skinny.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Shouldn't the "skinny rep...