All 41 GOP senators sign letter to Reid vowing to uphold “Byrd rule” in reconciliation

posted at 6:04 pm on March 10, 2010 by Allahpundit

Yes, even the wonder twins from Maine and the blogosphere’s favorite Massachusetts RINO. The Byrd rule, of course, is the rule that says reconciliation can only be used for budgetary provisions. If you read the Pelosi post earlier, you already know who this letter is aimed at. Hint: Not Reid.

The GOPers’ pledge amounts to a threat to block any changes sought by Senate Democrats on issues like abortion or immigration, or perhaps the reintroduction of the public option to the healthcare bill.

“We wish to inform you that we will oppose efforts to waive the so-called Byrd Rule during Senate consideration of any reconciliation bill concerning health reform,” the senators wrote. “As it takes 60 votes to waive the Byrd Rule, we can ensure that any provision that trips the Byrd Rule will be stripped from the bill, which will require that the bill be sent back to the House for further consideration and additional votes.”

The letter has the effect of putting Reid and Democrats on notice that any attempt to go beyond the scope of budget reconciliation rules will be met with fierce GOP opposition.

Specifically, it has the effect of putting Stupak and wavering House Democrats on notice that if they pass the hated Reid bill on the assumption that reconciliation will fix it later, they’re in for a major disappointment — and not necessarily because of Republicans. Remember, pro-choice Dems could raise a point of order too to strip out any pro-life language; so long as they have 41 votes on their side, they can block any attempt to reinsert it. Which means Stupak had better be awfully careful about voting for the Reid bill, n’est-ce pas?

I’m trying to figure out if Biden would have the authority to shoot down points of order raised by Republicans without putting them to a vote. Here’s what I think is the relevant Senate rule:

1. A question of order may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, except when the Senate is voting or ascertaining the presence of a quorum, and, unless submitted to the Senate, shall be decided by the Presiding Officer without debate, subject to an appeal to the Senate. When an appeal is taken, any subsequent question of order which may arise before the decision of such appeal shall be decided by the Presiding Officer without debate; and every appeal therefrom shall be decided at once, and without debate; and any appeal may be laid on the table without prejudice to the pending proposition, and thereupon shall be held as affirming the decision of the Presiding Officer.

2. The Presiding Officer may submit any question of order for the decision of the Senate.

Section two says Biden can, if he wishes, ask the Senate to decide a point of order by voting on it. Fair enough, but what about if Biden rules on a point of order himself? Does the appeal provision mean the GOP can demand that his ruling be put to the entire Senate for a vote or is it up to Biden to decide if the Senate should consider the appeal? In other words, is it an appeal by right or a discretionary appeal? If the latter, then it ain’t much. Anyone know this answer for certain?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I got a “BIRD” for those scum, you betcha!

seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:05 PM

awesome

ginaswo on March 10, 2010 at 6:05 PM

Freaking awesome.

Chuck Schick on March 10, 2010 at 6:05 PM

After all, what’s good for the BYRD, is good for the GANDER.

RIGHT????

seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:06 PM

You go GOP!

gophergirl on March 10, 2010 at 6:06 PM

I thought he’d have gone to lick Teddy’s loafers by now.

seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:07 PM

If it’s this razor-thin, the bill is a failure.

John the Libertarian on March 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM

Ok…who sneaked into the senate chambers and gave the GOP some spine?

Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM

I love it when a plan comes together.

portlandon on March 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Wow! Senate Republicans doing something right? How long have I been asleep?

Jim-Rose on March 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM

So you are asking about rules and ethics? And if the Dems will follow the correct rules? Surely you jest, these criminals laugh at the Constitution and all of our silly rules of the Republic.

bbz123 on March 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM

n’est-ce pas?

Oh, ALLAH>>>>> your metrosexual vim is making me positively H*A*W*T.

***gag***

seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Hit ‘em hard
Hit ‘em fast
Hit ‘em low

And if they get up,
Hit ‘em again.

UltimateBob on March 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM

I’m always stunned when the gals from Maine do the right thing.

myrenovations on March 10, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Ok…who sneaked into the senate chambers and gave the GOP some spine?

Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM

They must have gone to a chiropractor recently. They needed someone to show them where the spine was and what it was for.

UltimateBob on March 10, 2010 at 6:11 PM

If you read the Pelosi post earlier, you already know who this letter is aimed at. Hint: Not Reid.

This is fine… but is there a way they can write it which doesn’t violate the Byrd rule?

ninjapirate on March 10, 2010 at 6:11 PM

nice

CWforFreedom on March 10, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Once again… Reconciliation is a FARCE.

If the House passes the Senate bill, it’s OVER. We will now have Obamacare. Reconciliation means NOTHING in terms of stopping Obamacare from happening.

Enoxo on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Somehow, I get the feeling that the disputes in the Senate will become physical.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

It would be so nice, for once, just ONCE the Republicans get tough with the Democrats.
I’m taking bets they’re going to puss out. I just don’t trust the Republicans anymore. Ever since Newt resigned over a non issue in order to be “fair” and show the world Republicans can follow the “rules” I’ve distanced myself more each year from the (R).

SuperManGreenLantern on March 10, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Serious question:
 
What does Byrd think about this? Has he started grandstanding about foregoing it for such a noble moral issue made a public statement?

rogerb on March 10, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Once again… Reconciliation is a FARCE.

If the House passes the Senate bill, it’s OVER. We will now have Obamacare. Reconciliation means NOTHING in terms of stopping Obamacare from happening.

Enoxo on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

That’s dependent on whether the House tries to bypass actually voting on the Senate version by stipulating that its passage of Wreconciliation means House acceptance of the underlying Senate bill.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Like John Wayne said in They Were Expendable “Pour it in”.

creek on March 10, 2010 at 6:16 PM

No one understands it not even the senators.

Spathi on March 10, 2010 at 6:16 PM

Anyone know this answer for certain?

This question has been floating around long enough for the experts to have figured it out, no? It’s kind of a big deal as the future of this POS bill may hinge on it.

toliver on March 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Ok…who sneaked into the senate chambers and gave the GOP some spine?

Bishop on March 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM

The American Public.

Key West Reader on March 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Scott Brown saves the day.

Knucklehead on March 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Once again… Reconciliation is a FARCE.

If the House passes the Senate bill, it’s OVER. We will now have Obamacare. Reconciliation means NOTHING in terms of stopping Obamacare from happening.

Enoxo on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I still say it’s a farce from helping ObamaCare to pass as well. There’s still a filibuster they have to overcome, then there is a chicken and egg problem on scoring.

It’s like trying to line up soldiers alphabetically by height. I don’t see how it can be done without an extra-procedural promise and a leap of faith.

Chuck Schick on March 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Serious question:

What does Byrd think about this? Has he started grandstanding about foregoing it for such a noble moral issue made a public statement?

rogerb on March 10, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Byrd has already said that he supports using Wreconciliation only to save the unions.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

God bless them! When they’re good, they’re good!

JellyToast on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I certainly hope so.

PappaMac on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Somehow, I get the feeling that the disputes in the Senate will become physical.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Then CSpan will become PAY-PER-VIEW.

KWeeeeel.

seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Enoxo on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I believe the Senators know that. I think this letter is being sent so that the House Dems know that they have no cover for their votes and cannot plead they voted for the bill because they thought things would be fixed via reconciliation.

INC on March 10, 2010 at 6:19 PM

It’s like trying to line up soldiers alphabetically by height. I don’t see how it can be done without an extra-procedural promise and a leap of faith.

Chuck Schick on March 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

I say let’s ask Obama to give us another speechifying session. Let him interrupt National TV at 8pm and get on every TV in America and broadcast himself live in Times Square! That’ll tame those GOP meanies.

/

Key West Reader on March 10, 2010 at 6:19 PM

this whole thing is probably a deception strategy.

Looks like the hard work of Pelosi figuring out the details of the final push may be this:

‘The Rules Committee Can Do Just About Anything’ [Daniel Foster]

As I noted below, Democrats on the House Rules Committee are considering adopting a special rule that would allow the House to “deem” the Senate health-care bill to have been passed by the very act of voting on reconciliation fixes to it.

The House passes a “fix” bill which automatically passes the Senate bill.

Obama/Left 1, Average American 0

Game over

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWE1Zjk4MjlkNDAyOGI4ZGNmMzNiYzYyMzI5ZDc0YmQ=

r keller on March 10, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Reconcile that!!

ConservativeTony on March 10, 2010 at 6:20 PM

K…K…Kooooool!!!

LibTired on March 10, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Somehow, I get the feeling that the disputes in the Senate will become physical.
steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Then CSpan will become PAY-PER-VIEW.
KWeeeeel.
seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Coffee, spray, monitor. Good one.

WitchDoctor on March 10, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Who are these GOP Senators…

… and what have you done with our RINOs?

Seven Percent Solution on March 10, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Yes, even the wonder twins from Maine and the blogosphere’s favorite Massachusetts RINO.

That’s not entirely fair. He’s more of a RINAOCFO. The Obamacare filibuster is pretty important.

RINO in Name Only on March 10, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Thanks, AP.

Spirit of 1776 on March 10, 2010 at 6:24 PM

It’s like trying to line up soldiers alphabetically by height. I don’t see how it can be done without an extra-procedural promise and a leap of faith.

Chuck Schick on March 10, 2010 at 6:17 PM

They have jumped off El Capitan and are heading for the ground. Now they are arguing over whether they should land feet first, head first or jump up when they hit the ground.

txmomof6 on March 10, 2010 at 6:24 PM

I wonder if there really is an answer to your question, AP. Have we ever seen a situation like this before? I wonder if we’re heading towards a real constitutional crisis if Biden gets involved.

If he overrules any and all GOP actions, what recourse do they have? Can they file suit against the Senate? Can they simply make a direct appeal to the SCOTUS? Are there actions they can take to effectively shut Congress down?

I really don’t have the chops to digest this in any way, or provide real insight. Are there any constitutional lawyers (real ones, not the kind that get elected to POTUS) around who have anything to contribute?

nukemhill on March 10, 2010 at 6:24 PM

Fox News is reporting that seven House Dems that supported the HealthCare bill last fall will oppose the bill because it lifts the ban on federal funded abortions.

PappaMac on March 10, 2010 at 6:26 PM

Its really something that we are having to read every freakin’ line in the Constitution in order to learn exactly how the Democrats want to screw us.

We’ve run this country for 200+ years basically just doing what we’ve done during previous Congresses and presidencies and so far, we’ve made it. Until now. Now the Democrats parse every line in the Constitution and find new avenues to take even more power.

ConservativeTony on March 10, 2010 at 6:29 PM

Fox News is reporting that seven House Dems that supported the HealthCare bill last fall will oppose the bill because it lifts the ban on federal funded abortions.

PappaMac on March 10, 2010 at 6:26 PM

220 minus 4 minus 7 equals 209 with no switches from nay to yea. How many did Nancy have in reserve to switch the other way?

txmomof6 on March 10, 2010 at 6:30 PM

I’m always stunned when the gals from Maine do the right thing.

myrenovations on March 10, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Their internal polling must be ugly.

Del Dolemonte on March 10, 2010 at 6:30 PM

Little by little the re-training of the Republicans seems to be taking hold … Slowly they rise for America, freedom and liberty.

It’s a painfully slow process but the Republicans are joining ranks, they are doing it, and a tip of the hat is in order.

The last who disobeyed the ‘consent of the governed’ was King George and we know how that turned out. Maybe that’s why we have a second amendment, and it’s not about ducks after-all.

tarpon on March 10, 2010 at 6:31 PM

Republican stones … love it.

darwin on March 10, 2010 at 6:32 PM

If you read the Pelosi post earlier, you already know who this letter is aimed at. Hint: Not Reid.

Yes, but she’ll actually have to read the letter before she knows what’s in it.

BigWyo on March 10, 2010 at 6:37 PM

Its like Dorothy throwing a bucket of water on Pelosi, Reid and Barry.

Vashta.Nerada on March 10, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Byrd has already said that he supports using Wreconciliation only to save the unions.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

The old Byrd can’t recall all his principles. Too bad, because he used to love the rules of the Senate.

Decent men retire when they still have some decency left. Morons don’t, and the bigger ones are the their constituents for voting for incontinent men to run our country.

Schadenfreude on March 10, 2010 at 6:40 PM

Somehow, I get the feeling that the disputes in the Senate will become physical.
steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Then CSpan will become PAY-PER-VIEW.
KWeeeeel.
seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

We can dream! Although iut would be more like a bar i knew in the ’60′s. Sign read
“Fights tonight
No TV”

katy the mean old lady on March 10, 2010 at 6:40 PM

Section two says Biden can, if he wishes, ask the Senate to decide a point of order by voting on it. Fair enough, but what about if Biden rules on a point of order himself? Does the appeal provision mean the GOP can demand that his ruling be put to the entire Senate for a vote or is it up to Biden to decide if the Senate should consider the appeal? In other words, is it an appeal by right or a discretionary appeal? If the latter, then it ain’t much. Anyone know this answer for certain?

I’m a bit rusty on Robert’s Rules of Order, but I’ll take a shot at it:

- Section one gives any Senator the ability to appeal a ruling from the chair to the entire floor. The bad news is, unless a majority (I believe it would be 3/5ths of duly-chosen, or 60, instead of a simple majority of those present because of the use of reconciliation, but do not quote me) votes to overturn the chair’s ruling, the ruling of the chair would stand.

- Section two gives the chair the discretion to go to the entire floor without rendering a ruling. In that case, unless the majority (again, likely 3/5ths) votes to ignore the point of order, it is considered to be accepted.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:41 PM

Their internal polling must be ugly.

Del Dolemonte on March 10, 2010 at 6:30 PM

Maine, like Massachusetts, already has government health care. We should be working on the Senators and Congressmen from Oregon.

Kafir on March 10, 2010 at 6:44 PM

This is nice, but does it matter?

I’ll be anxious and sick to my stomach until at least March 18th. That’s not including the hangover from the 17th, either.

UNCLE!!!! MAKE IT STOP!!!

NTWR on March 10, 2010 at 6:45 PM

katy the mean old lady on March 10, 2010 at 6:40 PM

You must live in Texas.
At the bars, they check you for weapons at the door.
If you don’t have a gun, they give you one.

Cybergeezer on March 10, 2010 at 6:46 PM

Relevant Senate rules? Since when have “rules” had any bearing on any of this, whatsoever?

Cylor on March 10, 2010 at 6:47 PM

Wreckonciliation

rjoco1 on March 10, 2010 at 6:47 PM

Then CSpan will become PAY-PER-VIEW.

KWeeeeel.

seejanemom on March 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Coffee, spray, monitor. Good one.

WitchDoctor on March 10, 2010 at 6:22 PM

We can dream! Although iut would be more like a bar i knew in the ’60’s. Sign read
“Fights tonight
No TV”

katy the mean old lady on March 10, 2010 at 6:40 PM

I’m thinking along the classic battles in the Taiwan Legislative Yuan.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Score!!

califcon on March 10, 2010 at 6:49 PM

You must live in Texas.
At the bars, they check you for weapons at the door.
If you don’t have a gun, they give you one.

Cybergeezer on March 10, 2010 at 6:46 PM

Nope, South Florida. That was in NYC. Place called Tinkers on 74th and 2nd. And vey true it was.

katy the mean old lady on March 10, 2010 at 6:50 PM

I’m thinking along the classic battles in the Taiwan Legislative Yuan.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Think Canada too. Been some doozies in Ottawa.

katy the mean old lady on March 10, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Now Obama is hot on health care
He’s made it his personal affair
National Socialist the country will be
As he goose-stepped, said he
‘Cause you see, anything that brings more power to me, you must all bare

Cheshire Cat on March 10, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Anyone know this answer for certain?

The question is, does Joe know?

BacaDog on March 10, 2010 at 6:56 PM

The question is, does Joe know?

BacaDog on March 10, 2010 at 6:56 PM

The White House lawyers do it seems.

toliver on March 10, 2010 at 7:00 PM

History may not always repeat but it often ryhmes.

The take over of GM was Obama’s Sudetenland.
Health care takeover would be his Czechoslovakia.
Cap-N-Trade or McAmnesty would be his Poland.
November 2010 could be his Stalingrad.
November 2012 could be his Bunker in Berlin.

MB4 on March 10, 2010 at 7:01 PM

Somehow, I get the feeling that the disputes in the Senate will become physical.
steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Do you also get the feeling that we get to participate? If we have to register and beat Senators from our own party I am fine with that too.

antisocial on March 10, 2010 at 7:04 PM

How soon before ogabe goes on national TV [maybe interrupting American Idol?] to condemn those nasty Republicans for being so brazen in defying his will?

lukespapa on March 10, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Shoe fight in the Senate? I’m in.

d1carter on March 10, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Again, if the house passes the senate bill, Obama will sign it into law and there will be no further votes. Game. Set. Match. Everything else is a smoke-screen.

Dale on March 10, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Under the normal rules of ethics and dignity I would consider this to be a serious blow to Obamacare. With the tules that are being practiced today it is little more than a speed bump to Obama and the Democrats.

Remember to exercise your vote and eliminate BO!

Hawthorne on March 10, 2010 at 7:16 PM

Have the Republicans held a prayer meeting or something. Such brash talk from a group of individuals who have a habit of exhibiting a spaghetti spine and three card monty principles. It is a nice thing to see, lets see if it holds up when the heat is turned up.

devolvingtowardsidiocracy on March 10, 2010 at 7:16 PM

I thought of the movie Red Dawn, in which the young men realize they have to fight like men…

Wolverines!

Wethal on March 10, 2010 at 7:26 PM

I’m thinking along the classic battles in the Taiwan Legislative Yuan.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:48 PM
Think Canada too. Been some doozies in Ottawa.

katy the mean old lady on March 10, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Not since the 70′s with Pierre Trudeau and the creation of canadacare. Now they just yell, no shoes on the table

tjexcite on March 10, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Ed, sorry I’m late to the thread, but here’s how the general appeal rule and the Byrd (recon rule) work.

Before consideration of the recon bill, the Dems will move to waive the Byrd Rule. It will take 60 votes to do so, thus it will fail based on the R letter today.

Then, as the recon bill proceeds , any R Senator can raise a point of order on any part of the recon bill on the grounds the part violates the Byrd rule, i.e, it has no deficit reduction effect.

Biden will overrule the PO. When he overrules, any R Senator can appeal his ruling to the entire Senate. The appeal is decided on a simple majority basis.

Now that the D House members know that the Senate Rs are in sync, they will know that any changes in the Senate bill trying to be made via the recon/Byrd rule could be scuttled by 10 Ds joining the Rs, something that should trouble greatly the Stupak pro-life group and the unions/libs wanting to kill the Cadillac Plan tax included in the Senate bill, among other stuff.

TXUS on March 10, 2010 at 7:34 PM

Having determined that they lack the votes in the House to pass the Senate bills as-is, House Democrats are attempting one of the most breathtakingly unconstitutional power grabs ever witnessed – a maneuver to deem the Senate bill ALREADY PASSED by the House by rule, despite the fact that it clearly has not. Now, as we have constantly reminded our ahistorical liberal friends who have already forgotten all of 2002-2006, the filibuster is constitutional because it is a Senate rule of debate, which is expressly authorized by Article I’s delegation of power to each house of Congress to set its own rules of debate. Apparently, some Democrats can’t seem to tell the difference between a rule of debate and just declaring by rule that the House has passed a bill that they have not, when the Constitution itself expressly states that “in all [] Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays[.]” What Slaughter and Pelosi here are attempting here is a blatant violation of the principles of bicameralism and presentment.

And unlike other Unconstitutional things Congress does, there’s caselaw here suggesting pretty clearly that when Congress attempts to pass a law in the absence of proper bicameralism and presentment, a person negatively affected by Congress’s action (e.g., a person required to pay a fine for not having health insurance) has standing to challenge the law’s validity in the Courts. This farce is illegal and unconstitutional on its face, and someone has to be advising the Democrats in the House of this fact. They already know the American people don’t want this bill. They know by now that what they’re trying to do is illegal. The question now is whether they still have the shame to care about either.

Leon Wolf at RedState on why a “deemed” vote might invalidate the bill (But SCOTUS would have to decide this).

Wethal on March 10, 2010 at 7:37 PM

It’s interesting to consider that in the future, historians will write that this show of unified opposition by the Republicans against the Lefts attempt to violate the spirit of our Constitution, (by misusing a parliamentary maneuver intended for mere budgetary matters to instead fundamentally transform our nation against the overwhelming will of the American people, thus violating their oath to those they serve), resulted in the Left either backing away from the brink or else carrying forward down an illegitimate, unconstitutional road.

Not that the show of unity alone might cause them to back down, but it will be particularly notable in history as our nation approaches this crossroad.

This attempt at a massive power grab by the left should be viewed by history in the context that only weeks ago Obama made history, (I think), as the first president to condescend to the Supreme Court, a coequal branch of government, during his State of the Union address—followed by the Left side of the third coequal branch standing up as a mob, jeering at them.

Interesting times.

CurpliTium on March 10, 2010 at 7:37 PM

nobody seems to have paid attention to this comment above

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWE1Zjk4MjlkNDAyOGI4ZGNmMzNiYzYyMzI5ZDc0YmQ=

r keller on March 10, 2010 at 6:20 PM

read the post at the corner and realize what it means.

windansea on March 10, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Thank you Mitch McConnell! Can you imagine if last June/July, when filthy liar was trying to pass ObamaCare before August recess, that we’d still have them on the run at St. Patty’s Day! Whatever he’s done, McConnell’s done a masterful job keeping this group together to get us to this point.

PatMac on March 10, 2010 at 7:45 PM

Fantastic shot across the bow. Actually, this one probably hit the democrat ship and left a gaping hole in the hull.

SouthernGent on March 10, 2010 at 7:47 PM

DON’T YOU REALIZE THAT THE REASON THEY WANT THIS HEALTHCARE LEGISLATION PASSED IS BECAUSE IT GIVES THEM TOTAL CONTROL?
IT’S NOT ONLY ABOUT HEALTHCARE!
IT’S ABOUT OBAMA PUTTING THE NEXT THREE GENERATIONS ON WELFARE!

Cybergeezer on March 10, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Somehow, I get the feeling that the disputes in the Senate will become physical.

steveegg on March 10, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Bring out the canes! Lieberman and Franken are just itching to go at it with each other.

Mallard T. Drake on March 10, 2010 at 7:56 PM

Begun, this GOP united front has

datadriver on March 10, 2010 at 8:00 PM

DON’T YOU REALIZE THAT THE REASON THEY WANT THIS HEALTHCARE LEGISLATION PASSED IS BECAUSE IT GIVES THEM TOTAL CONTROL?
IT’S NOT ONLY ABOUT HEALTHCARE!
IT’S ABOUT OBAMA PUTTING THE NEXT THREE GENERATIONS ON WELFARE!

Cybergeezer on March 10, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Thank you, Captain Obvious. ;-)

KSgop on March 10, 2010 at 8:03 PM

BYRD IS THE WORD!

RedNewEnglander on March 10, 2010 at 8:05 PM

A political civil war is being waged in the US at the moment. Our way of life is at stake over this and the Republicans in Congress understand this.

FireBlogger on March 10, 2010 at 8:08 PM

If you read the Pelosi post earlier, you already know who this letter is aimed at. Hint: Not Reid.
Yes, but she’ll actually have to read the letter before she knows what’s in it.

BigWyo on March 10, 2010 at 6:37 PM

They were talking about Stupak. :) The link was to his wiki page.

Oink on March 10, 2010 at 8:19 PM

This whole Mitch McConnell thing is a smokescreen in order to cover his azz. McConnell knows that when the Senate bill passes in the House, Obama signs it and it is the law of the land and will NOT be making a return appearance in the Senate.

Are our memories so short that we forget it was McConnell who wouldn’t allow the GOP in the Senate to exploit the rule that would have allowed all 2700 pages of the bill to be read in the Senate before Christmas? That it was McConnell who arranged the Christmas Eve vote with Harry Reid to pass the bill in the Senate and go home for Christmas?

If all parliamentary maneuvers had been deployed before Christmas, that is if the Girly-Republicans had a real man among them, this bill would still be in the Senate, blocked and locked.

At this stage of the game, this letter is an insult to anyone who they think will believe that these Senators expect the bill to come back to them after the House passes it. NO – it will go directly to obama -AND THEY KNOW IT!!

Mitch McConnell, villian in this tragic end of our nation because he is a coward and a fool.

tigerlily on March 10, 2010 at 8:21 PM

There is an interesting post on this topic over at the American Thinker.

Republicans are using the wrong “key talking point.” They should be talking about Democrats violating Senate rules of reconciliation designed to prevent changes in Social Security benefits. They should be talking about the Democrat Party’s willingness to force the disabled and the elderly to pay the price of their arrogance and greed. If they did, Senator Byrd’s own Social Security extraneous provision to effectively challenge reconciliation would turn on the Democrats and bite them in the butt.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/reconciliation_and_the_senate.html

shanimal on March 10, 2010 at 8:30 PM

tigerlily on March 10, 2010 at 8:21 PM

ever feel like your at a party with a bunch of drunks?

windansea on March 10, 2010 at 8:41 PM

tigerlily on March 10, 2010 at 8:21 PM

ever feel like your at a party with a bunch of drunks?

windansea on March 10, 2010 at 8:41 PM

Yeah, or like a kid on a carnival ride that is scaring you witless; that you know you shouldn’t have gotten onto and now the carnie is laughing at you every time you scream by; and he won’t stop the ride no matter how loud you yell…yeah, I think this whole nation is about to be treated to this Ride-into-Hell by our very own Carnie-in-Cheif.

tigerlily on March 10, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Is it up to Biden to decide if the Senate should consider the appeal?

The rule makes an appeal a matter of right. Biden cannot deny a vote on an appeal.

slp on March 10, 2010 at 8:51 PM

Every single response……………Makes me happy!!!!

Love it!!

thare on March 10, 2010 at 10:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2