« | »

GOP May Use Reconciliation To Repeal O-Care

From the Heritage Foundation:

Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation in Attempt to Repeal Obamacare

Lachlan Markay
June 28, 2012

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that Obamacare’s health insurance mandate is in fact a tax levied on those who do not purchase insurance, Senate Republicans will look to repeal the full law through the budget reconciliation process.

Reconciliation was used to push Obamacare through the Senate in 2009. Generally reserved strictly for budget-related measures, it eliminates the possibility of a filibuster, meaning Republicans would only need 51 votes to repeal that portion of the law – or even the full law itself.

Unfortunately, there are not currently 51 Republicans in the Senate. And several of those Republicans in the Senate might not be counted on to vote for repeal.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) seemed open to that approach during a speech at The Heritage Foundation shortly after the Supreme Court handed down its decision. The court’s ruling “does present some options for us” to pursue more unconventional options for repeal, DeMint said. He mentioned reconciliation as a potential avenue.

A senior Senate Republican aide involved in the repeal effort later confirmed to [Heritage's] Scribe that the GOP will use the budget reconciliation process in an attempt to repeal the full law, not just the portion requiring all Americans purchase health insurance.

While a repeal effort via reconciliation would only require a majority of senators to pass, Republicans will likely wait until next year to employ the tactic.

Doesn’t it seems like we are always being told to wait?

Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said he expects Republicans to use reconciliation in the repeal effort during the 113th Congress. Kyl is not running for reelection.

Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:

Now that the individual mandate has acquired the official constitutional status of a “tax”, there is no longer any doubt that the Congress, and more specifically the Senate, can repeal it pursuant to the simple majority vote threshold available under the Budget Act’s reconciliation process. Some Senate insiders were concerned that the reconciliation process would leave too much of Obamacare intact, including the individual mandate. But today’s decision, while alarming in so many other ways, dispels with that concern.

The mandate is now a revenue provision. Therefore, it is germane and not subject to a Senate parliamentary point of order to strike it from a repeal bill. The Senate’s filibuster process that would require a supermajority of 60 Senate votes to approve repeal is now irrelevant.

So if there is a silver lining in yesterday’s terrible Supreme Court ruling, this could be it. By declaring Obama-Care to be a tax, they have made it easier to repeal.

But it will requires us electing more dependable conservatives to the Senate in November.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Friday, June 29th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

7 Responses to “GOP May Use Reconciliation To Repeal O-Care”

  1. Mithrandir

    SEE, I TOLD YOU SO!

    I am zero % shocked by the Supreme Court outcome. It doesn’t matter who you vote into office, it’s all RIGGED, and similar to Moore’s Law: the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years, call it Moron’s Law: The government doubles the amount of freedoms it takes away from you approximately every two years.

    You thought voting in George Bush would help? He selected John Roberts, and where did that get us? It got us another David Souter, thanks to George H.W. Bush.

    Oh, we are going to repeal it, vote RINOmny, he will do this, do that, blah blah blah blah…..ZIP IT, it ain’t EVER going to happen–ever. It’s just RINO lip service, and they will fold like the jelly-spines that they are when push comes to shove. The jig is up, the game is over, it is now just a matter of time before this and other programs destroy the country in the way of GREECE. Don’t prepare for battle, the war is lost, it has been lost for many decades, prepare for wide-spread tyranny.

    • Rusty Shackleford

      When I look back in our past and see the bad things government has done, and how long it takes for them to do things, except when they are bad for the people, I am left with the conclusion that the people who enter professional politics are inept, incapable, self-serving, populists.

      Romney will only slow down our path to socialism, as will a republican congress and senate. Why? Because they ALL feel their job is to create more laws in order to justify their very existence. None of them feel that doing nothing is an appropriate attribute. By that, I mean leaving well enough alone.

      The perfect example is “hate crimes”. They are ridiculous, feel-good, appeasement laws to allow the people who whined for them to feel “empowered” (whatever the hell that means) and the people who introduced them to feel that they did something. More often than not, the existing laws and method of handling a crime are more than sufficient to deal with the perpetrator.

      We are in the age of “feelings over substance”. It’s a fool’s errand to try to appease everyone’s feelings. And, as has been shown time and again, they won’t be satiated. They keep demanding more. There is no end. There is no equilibrium. Not until the whole structure has been torn down and demolished and is rendered useless. Then the whiners still don’t shut up because they got what they wanted.

      The difference between the republicans and the democrats is that the democrats cooperate amongst themselves to appease the whiners. And the whiners are part of their party. The republicans more slowly acquiesce to the demands of the whiners so that the adopted laws still have a crippling effect…just more slowly.

      If we had a republican-based government…we still would’ve ended up with this monstrosity of helathcare laws, but in increments over decades, not weeks and certainly not all at once.

      The other glaring characteristic of the republican party is that if they repeal the bill, they will replace it, for no other reason than to say they “did it better”, but with the same misbegotten notion that “government is supposed to take care of people”. So we’ll have an equally bad rendition from republicans, with their own favorite construct. It will be a “distinction without a difference”.

    • Mithrandir

      Ah Rusty……

      I was mulling nearly the exact same thing….rolling around in my head. The hate crimes, and some law name after some kid, are things that ruin America, and NO politician can withstand voting “no” against it. Look at the Lautenberg gun grabbing amendment? No one has the guts to stand up against that, even though the 2nd Amendment supposedly protects that right.

      Politicians want to say, “I created that law!” or “Look at me! I voted for that!” Term limits would eliminate the need for politicians to perpetually seek ways to stay in office for life, thereby instead, doing their job to the constitution, then getting kicked out. But lawyers are elected to office, and they are not going to write a law that makes their job obsolete.

      And yes, the Republicans are merely compromised versions of fascism brought by the democrats, and democrats know this. They will ask for a fascist moon and stars, and they know the Republicans will allow them to just have a fascist moon. Democrats are happy b/c that is what they originally wanted in the first place, and Republicans are happy they didn’t get stuck with a lot more.

      Both parties are not interested in just monitoring the actions of states, to check for fairness, to protect and defend our populace, our borders, AND the people from stupid unconstitutional bills politicians pass supposedly on their behalf. I guess if Congress passes, and the President signs, a bill giving America back to the Indians, the Supreme Court would shrug and say, “Hey, it’s not our job to protect you from your stupid choices.”

      *Why take an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States, if you don’t plan on doing that? And what are the consequences if you don’t? –Nada, zip, nothing. So feel free without threat to break any oath when it becomes inconvenient.

  2. Democrats are running away from this countries biggest tax hike in American history:

    1. http://weaselzippers.us/2012/0.....us-ruling/

    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wzs3aoRnl0E

    3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL7ak__MGyw

    4. Barack Obama evoking Jesus to sell us the more taxes while we are “broke”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCr7bP5pZ6I

    5. 20 New higher taxes that American citizens will “enjoy” now that Obamacare is constitutional:
    http://sweetness-light.com/arc.....gher-taxes

  3. canary

    Will Mitt Romney said he will reverse Obama care, as he believes it should be done on a state by state level as he did Massachusetts?

    • AcornsRNutz

      Yeah, I’m just not too confident in the romsters’ drive to get rid of obamacare once he has his hands on it. Reform it, twist it up, hide the more aggreigious stuff, sure, but out and out toss it? I’ll take Rinomney (as Mithrandir so artfully put it) over obama, but I don’t have the warmest and fuzziest feeling about it. I mean, this guy has a golden opportunity to take the job from our current Pres, but once he gets there, with the precedents now set for what the executive branch can do, how do we stop him from doing whatever he wants? Can we trust a middling conservative who cut his executive political chops in the moonbattiest liberal state east of the mississippi? Methinks it’s going to be a long hard road.

    • canary

      AcornsRNutz: “Methinks it’s going to be a long hard road.”

      Yes, the EPA will go into the bicycle business.

      1. Bicycles must be purchased from the EPA only.
      2. Bicycle license tags with taxes each year.
      3. Bicycle must be tagged in order to catch hit and runs, and drive by’s
      4. Bicycle insurance only available from EPA.
      3. Bicycle Safety Inspection every 30 days as the bikes will be made of “green smart material” that will degrade into the earth within one year of purchase.
      4. Bicycle Ed School from official EPA training school only.

      *Anyone using anything other than “EPA Paper Baskets” attached to bicycles will be penalized as followed:

      a) punishment fine or imprisonment
      b) confiscation of bicycle to include tow and disposal fine per each bike.
      …..


« Front Page | To Top
« | »