Could the Republicans really repeal Obamacare?

[Donger]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/c...091546012.html

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of key provisions in the Affordable Care Act, the health care law commonly known as Obamacare, on Thursday, but on Capitol Hill, Republicans are vowing to press on with plans to fully repeal the law.

Repealing the law won't happen before January 2013. It would be dependent on a triple Republican victory this November: Mitt Romney would need to defeat President Barack Obama, Republicans must hold their majority in the House, and they must also gain enough seats in the Senate so they have at least 50 of their own in the upper chamber.

What about the filibuster? Don't you need 60 votes to do anything in the Senate?

Not in this case. Because Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion ruled the individual mandate a "tax," a Republican-led Senate could repeal that provision--and others--using what is called "budget reconciliation," a procedural tactic that requires only a simple majority vote. The Republican vice president, in this hypothetical scenario, would break the tie. (Democrats used the same method in 2010 to pass the health care bill.)

Budget reconciliation is at least one option that Senate Republicans are considering.

"There are a lot of ways to protect the American people from this horrible law, and Republicans are looking at all of them," John Ashbrook, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, told Yahoo News when asked if the party's congressional leadership was open to repeal using that process.

In the meantime, House Republicans are scheduling their own vote to repeal the law on July 11, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced Thursday. The vote would be symbolic because it would never pass the Democrat-controlled Senate. Also, the same House already voted to repeal the law in January 2011, during the same Congress that is up for re-election in November.

Speaking outside the Senate floor Thursday, Senate Democratic leaders criticized Republicans for moving forward with another repeal vote after the Supreme Court ruled its key provisions constitutional.

"Now that all three branches of government have ratified the law, the time for quarreling is over," said New York Sen. Chuck Schumer. "The time for disputing its validity is over. Congress should now return to its full time focus: The issue of jobs and the economy in America."

"If you ask people what they want us to focus on," he added, "it's not rehashing health care."

[Garcia Bronco]

So to Chuck Schumer...the heatlhcare bill is a Ronco product...just set it and forget it.

[alpha_omega]

Because Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion ruled the individual mandate a "tax," a Republican-led Senate could repeal that provision--and others--using what is called "budget reconciliation," a procedural tactic that requires only a simple majority vote. The Republican vice president, in this hypothetical scenario, would break the tie. (Democrats used the same method in 2010 to pass the health care bill.)

Wouldn't that be ironic?

[mikey23545]

Originally Posted by Donger

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/c...091546012.html

Speaking outside the Senate floor Thursday, Senate Democratic leaders criticized Republicans for moving forward with another repeal vote after the Supreme Court ruled its key provisions constitutional.

"Now that all three branches of government have ratified the law, the time for quarreling is over," said New York Sen. Chuck Schumer. "The time for disputing its validity is over. Congress should now return to its full time focus: The issue of jobs and the economy in America."
"If you ask people what they want us to focus on," he added, "it's not rehashing health care."

Yes, because obviously this outrageous violation of the constitution and obscenely expensive legislation has no effect on the economy, you retarded ****.

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by mikey23545

Yes, because obviously this outrageous violation of the constitution and obscenely expensive legislation has no effect on the economy, you retarded ****.

It does not violate the constitution, it violates your interpretation of the constitution.

[go bowe]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

It does not violate the constitution, it violates your interpretation of the constitution.

oh c'mon...

who cares what those black-robed traitors think?

mikey has it right...

it's unconstitutional...

oh, wait...

[mikey23545]

Originally Posted by go bowe

oh c'mon...

who cares what those black-robed traitors think?

mikey has it right...

it's unconstitutional...

oh, wait...

oh wait...Four of the justices thought so too, and it was five until the last moment...so yeah, I'm a real nutjob, huh?

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by mikey23545

oh wait...Four of the justices thought so too, and it was five until the last moment...so yeah, I'm a real nutjob, huh?

So the 4 that thought it was right were wrong and the four that thought it was wrong were right and then the strong arming on the 9th member.

I get it. I'm going to buy stock in reynolds wrap today.

[tredadda]

Could the Republicans repeal Obamacare? Sure. Will they? Highly doubtful.

[Direckshun]

Here's a technical question...

How long does a bill exist after it's been passed by one chamber?

The House has already voted to repeal Obamacare. The Senate's going to need 60, but right now they only have (I think) 49.

What if, in like eight years, the Republicans actually do score 60 votes on the issue?

Can they just pick up the House-passed repeal where it was left lying 10 years ago?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Could the Republicans repeal Obamacare? Sure. Will they? Highly doubtful.

I posted this because Romney is getting in the habit of saying "I'll repeal Obamacare on my first day" without mentioning that two other things have to happen for that to come to fruition (not including him becoming POTUS).

[mikey23545]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

So the 4 that thought it was right were wrong and the four that thought it was wrong were right and then the strong arming on the 9th member.

I get it. I'm going to buy stock in reynolds wrap today.

Are you actually questioning that the vote was 5 to 4, and that many court experts feel that Roberts changed his mind for some reason at the last moment?...Really?

Really?

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by J Diddy

It does not violate the constitution, it violates your interpretation of the constitution.

As if your and the four socialist justices, and one RINO/NeoCon, haven't enforced their interpretation either. Actually it wasn't an interpretation that much anyway—they rewrote the law to make it Constitutional.

Still, just because one justice outweighed the matter doesn't make it Constitutional. It just means they had the numbers.

[FD]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Here's a technical question...

How long does a bill exist after it's been passed by one chamber?

The House has already voted to repeal Obamacare. The Senate's going to need 60, but right now they only have (I think) 49.

What if, in like eight years, the Republicans actually do score 60 votes on the issue?

Can they just pick up the House-passed repeal where it was left lying 10 years ago?

I'm pretty sure bills have to be passed in the same Congress.

[BucEyedPea]

Yes, the Rs could repeal it. The real question should be, do they really have the will.