The "Slaughter Solution"

[Nanker]

Louise Slaughter - House Rules Committee Chair is proposing what some consider a circumvention of Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitution.

House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.

Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version

.

Each bill that comes before the House for a vote on final passage must be given a rule that determines things like whether the minority would be able to offer amendments to it from the floor.

In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House "deems" the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but

they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself

.

 

How low will they go?

[Magox]

Louise Slaughter - House Rules Committee Chair is proposing what some consider a circumvention of Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitution.

House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.

Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version

.

Each bill that comes before the House for a vote on final passage must be given a rule that determines things like whether the minority would be able to offer amendments to it from the floor.

In the Slaughter Solution, the rule would declare that the House "deems" the Senate version of Obamacare to have been passed by the House. House members would still have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but

they would then be able to say they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself

.

 

How low will they go?

Well, did you happen to hear her Dentures story in support in why we must pass Health Care legislation at the "Heath Summit"?

 

Nuf said

[Adam]

They still use the constitution? I hear they call it a living document.....has Dr. Kevorkian showed up yet?

[Keukasmallies]

That's "our" Weeeezzy! You go girl; back to the senior living facility, and let some of those who will have to live with the wreckage you're trying to promote have a chance at government that represents the will of the electorate.

[Nanker]

Slaughterhouse Rules

We're not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely "deem" that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway.

 

But Mrs. Pelosi & Co. fear they lack the votes in the House to pass an identical Senate bill, even with the promise of these reconciliation fixes. House Members hate the thought of going on record voting for the Cornhusker kickback and other special-interest bribes that were added to get this mess through the Senate, as well as the new tax on high-cost insurance plans that Big Labor hates.

 

So at the Speaker's command, New York Democrat Louise Slaughter, who chairs the House Rules Committee, may insert what's known as a "self-executing rule," also known as a "hereby rule." Under this amazing procedural ruse, the House would then vote only once on the reconciliation corrections, but not on the underlying Senate bill. If those reconciliation corrections pass, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate bill is presumptively approved by the House—even without a formal up-or-down vote on the actual words of the Senate bill.

[Alaska Darin]

The Democrats are all about making everyone ELSE play by the rules.

[IDBillzFan]

Slaughterhouse Rules

We're not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely "deem" that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway.

 

But Mrs. Pelosi & Co. fear they lack the votes in the House to pass an identical Senate bill, even with the promise of these reconciliation fixes. House Members hate the thought of going on record voting for the Cornhusker kickback and other special-interest bribes that were added to get this mess through the Senate, as well as the new tax on high-cost insurance plans that Big Labor hates.

 

So at the Speaker's command, New York Democrat Louise Slaughter, who chairs the House Rules Committee, may insert what's known as a "self-executing rule," also known as a "hereby rule." Under this amazing procedural ruse, the House would then vote only once on the reconciliation corrections, but not on the underlying Senate bill. If those reconciliation corrections pass, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate bill is presumptively approved by the House—even without a formal up-or-down vote on the actual words of the Senate bill.

Can you imagine what November will be like for Congressional races if they do this? They someone think that if you can't tell who voted for it, then everyone can deny voting for it, when in reality, voters will take no chances and assume THEY ALL voted for it.

 

This is getting pretty embarrassing.

[Magox]

Can you imagine what November will be like for Congressional races if they do this? They someone think that if you can't tell who voted for it, then everyone can deny voting for it, when in reality, voters will take no chances and assume THEY ALL voted for it.

 

This is getting pretty embarrassing.

Oh, they're gonna do it.

[IDBillzFan]

Oh, they're gonna do it.

It's hard for me to believe they would be that stupid. It would seem to me that not a single Dem congressperson would be safe if they took that path. I mean, not a single one.

[Magox]

It's hard for me to believe they would be that stupid. It would seem to me that not a single Dem congressperson would be safe if they took that path. I mean, not a single one.

They are desperate to get across the finish line, and they believe by not having to directly vote on the Senate Bill that it will make it alot easier for some of those wavering democrats that don't want to officially vote on the Cornhusker, Gatoraid and Lousiana purchase deals.

 

From what I've been tallying, this isn't a central issue, it's just a talking point reason why they wouldn't possibly vote for it. There are only 2 or 3 democrats who are citing this reason for not voting for it, that may be serious, but at the end of the day, I don't believe it is a serious issue. The real issues for the wavering democrats are the lack of abortion restrictions, cost containment and a tough election cycle in red districts.

 

The Slaughter solution is a calculated risk, and at the end of the day, I believe it will make it tougher for them to get it across the finish line because once again it just reinforces the argument that they are using unpopular parliamentary tricks to get the bill through, and I believe that some of those democrats that are in tough election battles that are in red districts may be more inclined to not support the bill.

[BillsNYC]

Can you imagine what November will be like for Congressional races if they do this? They someone think that if you can't tell who voted for it, then everyone can deny voting for it, when in reality, voters will take no chances and assume THEY ALL voted for it.

 

This is getting pretty embarrassing.

 

An article in Politico came out last night saying Dems are targeting our Congressman, Mike McMahon, as he's a moderate dem who voted no on healthcare and they're going to put a liberal up against him if he doesn't vote yes this time. He's a dem who won in our district that voted for McCain and has had a Republican congressman for 20 years.

 

Dems are idiots if they think a liberal would stand a chance here, and McMahon loses his seat in the next election if he votes yes.

[Magox]

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/87047-go...ughter-solution

 

It looks like the GOP is going to try to create a resolution to force them to vote on the Bill. It is a good move, because that means that they will have to vote on the resolution which will make it that much more unpopular.

[Magox]

They are desperate to get across the finish line, and they believe by not having to directly vote on the Senate Bill that it will make it alot easier for some of those wavering democrats that don't want to officially vote on the Cornhusker, Gatoraid and Lousiana purchase deals.

 

From what I've been tallying, this isn't a central issue, it's just a talking point reason why they wouldn't possibly vote for it. There are only 2 or 3 democrats who are citing this reason for not voting for it, that may be serious, but at the end of the day, I don't believe it is a serious issue. The real issues for the wavering democrats are the lack of abortion restrictions, cost containment and a tough election cycle in red districts.

 

The Slaughter solution is a calculated risk, and at the end of the day, I believe it will make it tougher for them to get it across the finish line because once again it just reinforces the argument that they are using unpopular parliamentary tricks to get the bill through, and I believe that some of those democrats that are in tough election battles that are in red districts may be more inclined to not support the bill.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-roo...h-plan-is-wrong

 

This is exactly what I was talking about.

 

Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), a member of the Blue Dog and New Democrat Coalitions, said that the plan to pass the plan using the so-called "deem and pass" procedure is "wrong" and unpopular among his constituents.

 

There's a lot of discomfort with the reconciliation process, the self-implementing rule, where you wouldn't have a formal vote on maybe the most important policy of the past 40 years," he said on Fox Business Network. "I have a big issue with the way they're doing the process. I think it's wrong and my constituents don't like it."

 

This guys vote is very important.

[1billsfan]

Can you imagine what November will be like for Congressional races if they do this? They someone think that if you can't tell who voted for it, then everyone can deny voting for it, when in reality, voters will take no chances and assume THEY ALL voted for it.

 

This is getting pretty embarrassing.

 

It will make the VA, NJ and MA results look like child's play. This November we are going see an angry and energized anti-left, anti-liberal, anti-democrat electorate the likes of which we've never seen. Better hide the women and children.

 

Obama, Pelosi and Reid's health care bill process has been the most sick, most twisted and most shameful display ever of American democracy in action.

[erynthered]

A "NO" vote means no campaigning from obowma come November.

 

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...-Democrats.html

 

 

The president will refuse to make fund-raising visits during November elections to any district whose representative has not backed the bill.

 

A one-night presidential appearance can bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars in funds which would otherwise take months to accumulate through cold-calling by campaign volunteers.

 

 

 

Mr Obama's threat came as the year-long debate over his signature domestic policy entered its final week.

 

Mr Obama is personally telephoning congressmen who are still on the fence this week, in between several personal appearances devoted toward swinging public opinion.

[Wacka]

He's 0 for 3 so far, so smart dems shouldn't want him to campain for them.

[1billsfan]

He's 0 for 3 so far, so smart dems shouldn't want him to campaining for them.

 

 

There's an SNL skit just waiting to be written there...

 

Obama..."Look...ahhhhh...I won't come on the road and campaign for you if you don't vote yes on this health care bill..."

 

Congressman..."Good!! I don't want you there. In fact, do me a favor and start trashing me in front of the media and tell everyone what a son of a bi*ch I am!"

[IDBillzFan]

This November we are going see an angry and energized anti-left, anti-liberal, anti-democrat electorate the likes of which we've never seen. Better hide the women and children.

Which is all well and good, but it still leaves us with a bad bill and a trillion+ dollar entitlement on the books that will never, ever be removed.

 

We're getting what we deserve, unfortunately, and as I've said before, I believe it's gonna get really, really ugly soon.

[Magox]

Which is all well and good, but it still leaves us with a bad bill and a trillion+ dollar entitlement on the books that will never, ever be removed.

 

We're getting what we deserve, unfortunately, and as I've said before, I believe it's gonna get really, really ugly soon.

If they thought gridlock is bad now, it will be much worse moving forward. The well will be poisoned for the rest of his presidency and many of the house democrats that are left with their arms all contorted won't have the courage to take the tough votes again.

 

This is it, the final stand. The President and Democratic leadership are going to pull out all the stops, the desperation is all over Washington, for god's sake, he's even going on FOX news tomorrow to plead the American Public (Wavering Democrats) that this is for the "good of the country".

 

My guess is that they will squeek it out with just a few votes, and that come November, there will be a landslide for the GOP, not because the GOP is liked but because many Americans feel that they have been shut out of the entire process and were betrayed by their elected leaders that represent their districts.

 

However there is a caveat, and I don't mean taking the pleasure of seeing many Democrats getting booted, but there is a small chance at repealing this horrendous piece of legislation.

 

While it is true that it is nearly impossible to undo an entitlement program, the subsidies don't kick in until 2014. Which means that people won't be benefitting from these subsidies for quite a while. If the GOP can win back the House in 2010, the Senate and presidency in 2012, then they could repeal it in 2013. It's a tall order, but I believe it is doable, and the GOP platform should definitely include repealing Health Care as a centerpiece of the elections moving forward and punish the Libs for making such an unwise, arrogant bill without trying to truly craft the bill in a bipartisan fashion.

[IDBillzFan]

This is it, the final stand. The President and Democratic leadership are going to pull out all the stops, the desperation is all over Washington, for god's sake, he's even going on FOX news tomorrow to plead the American Public (Wavering Democrats) that this is for the "good of the country".

We still need to see the reconciliation bill as well as how the CBO scores it. According to this article from American Spectator, the bill was already scored, and it scored poorly, so the scrambling happening right now is tweaking the reconciliation bill to derive better numbers in hopes of tilting some Blue Dogs back to the Yes column.

 

There are several things that Democrats are up against when it comes to the CBO score. The most important is that, based on reconciliation instructions, the “fix” bill must be shown to reduce the deficit by at least $1 billion. The challenge is, that’s after assuming that the Senate bill is law. In other words, the reconciliation bill can’t claim any of the deficit reduction from the Senate bill, but rather it must reduce the deficit relative to the Senate bill. Yet the changes that are being talked about will cost a lot of money. This includes eliminating the “Cornhusker kickback” and offering enhanced Medicaid subsidies to all states, increasing subsidies for the purchase of insurance, eliminating the so-called "donut hole" on Medicare prescription drug benefits, and whatever else they put in the bill. At the same time, delaying until 2018 the enactment of the “Cadillac tax” would be scored as a reduction in revenue, and thus add further to the deficit. They’d have to make up the gap through tax increases as well as try to siphon “savings” away from the student loan bill. (More on that here.) But evidently it seems like they’re running into trouble on this front.

Given the administration's embarrassing smoke and mirrors just to show the Senate Bill as deficit neutral, you have to figure the finagling for the reconciliation bill is going to be a complete mess. The most optimistic thing I can hope for right now is that they have to wait until after Easter break. That will permit the Paul Ryans of the world to rip into this garbage and show everyone what a complete scam it's set up to be.