« | »

Text Of The Reconciliation Act of 2010

From Louis Slaughter’s House Committee On Rules:

Members of the House Budget Committee meet on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, March 15, 2010, during the committee’s markup on the Reconciliation Act of 2010.

H.R. 4872 – Reconciliation Act of 2010

  • Text of the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
  • Text of the Senate Amendments to H.R. 3590 (Senate health bill)
  • Text of the bill as reported (reported by the Budget Committee)
  • It’s 153 pages of gibberish, of course.

    But you will notice that some variation of ‘tax’ shows up 124 times.

    This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, March 18th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

    13 Responses to “Text Of The Reconciliation Act of 2010”

    1. bill says:

      They will do this again and again… It’s what commies do.

      The Constitution is in the balance.

    2. TwilightZoned says:

      And to think…this is just the beginning.

      Alexander Tyler, history professor U. of Edinburgh 1787 has been credited with this; I doubt it. There is some food for thought here though.

      “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

      “The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence

      1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
      2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
      3. From great courage to liberty;
      4. From liberty to abundance;
      5. From abundance to complacency;
      6. From complacency to apathy;
      7. From apathy to dependence;
      8. From dependence back into bondage.”

    3. CIV says:

      We in Virginia got a bad deal. Everybody’s getting a bonus for voting YES and my two clueless Senators gave their votes away free. They didn’t even get a little something for themselves.

      Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.) will get a job as NASA administrator
      Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.) will become U.S. Ambassador to NATO

      Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) arranged for Bank of North Dakota to be the only bank in the nation that gets to originate student loan program.”

      And all I will get is a… increased tax bill.

      • Rusty Shackleford says:

        That’s actually pretty funny because NASA is going to be defunded to the point of working out of the back of a U-Haul truck and US Ambassador to Europe does diddly squat save hanging out in Belgium and eating fatty foods and drinking wine. So, it’s fun and all, but anyone in that position becomes truly invisible…which may be what he wants.

        As for Pomeroy, he’s a tool. Always been a tool, always will be a tool.

      • proreason says:

        And all I will get is a… increased tax bill.


        – an increased health insurance premium
        – 3rd world health care
        – several fewer years to enjoy your parents and other older friends and relatives
        – and big brother looking over your shoulder every time you look at an aspirin

      • Liberals Demise says:

        pro, I’m headed to the barber in a few minutes for a good leeching or ‘Bad Blood’ letting.

        If it was good enough for President Washington…………

      • jobeth says:

        LD…He can also pull that tooth for ya as well.

    4. MinnesotaRush says:

      A timely walk back into history ..

      “The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

      God Bless us .. God Bless America!!!

    5. wardmama4 says:

      53% of America did not vote for Obama – 53% of those who voted in the 2008 Presidential Election, voted for Obama (Fact, big diff) – which is about 23% of the total population (hardly a majority or a mandate).

      At the start of this healthcare ‘reform’ mess – between 73 – 82% of Americans were satisfied with their insurance and healthcare options – So why was this ‘reform’ push even necessary?

      The number (gradually coming down) of uninsured has hovered around 40 million – take out those who can afford health insurance but deem not to buy it, those who qualify for ______(fill in the blank SCHIP, Medicaid, Medicaid, Public Health Service and/or VA) and do not use it and finally Illegal aliens who are not citizens and should not ever, ever be considered at all – it leaves 6 million people – I am pretty sure we can provide them with Insurance and/or coverage for a damn site less than 1 trillion dollars a year much less why this massive takeover, taxation bill for such a small number of Americans – thus – why is this ‘reform’ even necessary?

      Making health insurance portable (not a job ‘benefit’), national – able to purchase over state lines, removing State/Federal Mandates as to what is required to be in policies, Tort reform (pay all economic costs -medical costs past, present and future but limit punitive awards (i.e. the Legal Lottery)) – all of the above (which, ahem, were caused by previous Congress’s legislation) are not in the current healthcare ‘reform’ (other than euphemistically in the resultant single payer/government option – when all of the above becomes moot, forever) – thus – why is this ‘reform’ even necessary?

      And finally – if this is truly about healthcare ‘reform’ and if the majority of the 2 Houses of Congress- why are so many bribes, deals and un-Constitutional violations of the ‘rules’ necessary to pass this?

      I fear for my Government – but more I fear for the future of America – it is more than unsustainable debt – it is the core of what created America and made her great – how dare a ‘usurper’ come in and attempt to transform America into some 3rd World socialist cesspool – but worse – how dare those people we elected to represent us (Congress) – allow it to happen.

      Impeach Congress – Repeal the 16th Amendment – Term Limits – We The People need to stop this Today.

    6. tranquil.night says:

      Today it was clear the rules committee laughably can’t even figure out their own scam: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Rules-Committee-meeting-descends-into-chaos-88725962.html

      The Rules Committee meeting turned into mass confusion when Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman said, “We’re not going to ‘deem’ the bill passed. We’re going to pass the Senate bill…I would be against the idea of ‘deeming’ something — we either pass it or we don’t.”

      With the Senate vowing to crush the reconciliation effort, it should be crystal clear by now that this whole ammendment process is just a ploy to pass the Senate bill. Waxman flat out flubbed it just like Biden and the insurance companies or Pelosi and the “pass it and find out” comment.

      This should indicate that the Deem-ocrats never really had such opposition to the Senate bill; whatever opposing stance they took was just political cover for their districts probably. Now they can claim they didn’t support the Senate bill even though its signed to law, and meanwhile blame the Republicans for any failure to pass the Reconciliation passage.

      Good news is it might all be held up in the courts, even the Senate Bill. I’ve been wanting clarification on this all week but doesn’t Article I Section VII also have an origination clause demanding all bills start in the House? Since the Senate Bill is just that – originated from the Senate – doesn’t that itself violate the clause? Well, I’m sure they used some obscure parliamentary maneuver that “every party and every congress uses all the time” to avoid the true intent, oh well.

      Wikianswers: “The reason for this is that at the time the Constitution was written, it was felt that Senators would be more wealthy than Representatives and might be willing to spend more government money than the Representatives would. Also, the House with its greater numbers was seen as being the better gauge of the wishes of the people for spending measures.”

      Har har.

    « Front Page | To Top
    « | »