Why are republicans whining about reconciliation?

M

Marcin

New member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
1
When Bush used it 3 tims

– The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts for the rich [HR 1836, 3/26/01]
– The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts for the rich [HR 2, 3/23/03]
– Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 [HR 4297, 5/11/06]
 
I hope they do use it. Most Americans don't want it so the Rep's will run on repealing the bill and Dem's will lose seats.
 
If they didn't whine about reconciliation or anything else they wouldn't be the party of "No".

Reconciliation and Republican are 2 words generally not found in the same sentence.
 
Seriously liberals, why are you always wrong. It is as if facts are your kryptonite.

reconciliation is for budgetary matters and wholly inappropriate for this healthcare bill.

you would know this if you had spent just a mere 30 seconds on google instead of pathetically repeating dailykos talking points.
 
becuase it shows VOTERs IN NOV

the GOP PARTY HAS DONE NOTHING

and is now party of USELESSNESS
 
They weren't tax cuts for the rich, they were across the board. In fact, they even raised the level when you had to start paying taxes. Just wait until you owe a few thousand more next year after they expire.
 
Sigh. Budget reconciliation can be used to pass budgets, not legislation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjdbjrXiobQ (ooh, burns doesn't it?)
 
Tax policy is no where near as big as nationalizing 1/6 of the economy. Yeah I know this bill doesn't do that. But it does set up the private insurance companies for certain bankruptcy, and when that happens, guess what jumps up to fill the void?
 
To quote democrat Sen. Robert Byrd who introduced the budgetary process known as the nuclear option "wasn't meant for health care" or to quote former Sen. Barrack Obama "you cannot do health care with 50 plus 1"

Those republicans Obama, Bidden and Byrd sure are whiners.
 
reconciliation has never been used to increase taxes! only to decrease them as you so kindly pointed out.
 
Why do people climb mountains?

Here's a news flash for those who seem to misunderstand the process:

The Senate bill already passed in the full senate. The use of reconcilliation would be restricted to things that have budgetary impacts.

Prior to the Bush tax cuts, the tradition was such that it would not have been used to increase the deficit, but that precedent went out the window with the Bush tax cuts, but nobody expects the final bill to increase the deficit. In fact, the instructions in the bill for reconcilliation clearly state that changes made in reconcilliation should meet the goal to reduce the deficit by at least 1 billion a year.

Everything I have read in here so far about reconcillation if factually incorrect.
 
I thought Reconciliation was about budgetary and finance matters, not trying take over 1/6th of the US economy, and make it illegal to not own insurance.

At least if the libbies thwart the American people and pass this monstrous legislation, it will have to sunset in 10 years, according to the Byrd Amendment.
 
They're whining because health care reform is too big to push through reconciliation. Reconciliation is usually used for budgetary bills. However, I also think that the Republicans know it will give Obama a boost because a lot of what both sides agree on kicks in right away if passed. So, this may affect the Republicans negatively going into an election year if Obama succeeds in passing this legislation. Typical politics from a minority party.
 
Back
Top