Hoyer defends deeming the Senate healthcare bill passed without vote

[cal04]

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/87081-hoyer-defends-deeming-the-senate-healthcare-bill-passed-without-vote

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Tuesday defended a tactic that would allow the House to “deem” the Senate healthcare bill passed without actually voting on the bill.

Hoyer (D-Md.) said at his weekly news conference that a rule deeming the Senate bill passed is consistent with procedures and practices used by Republicans and Democrats alike, and that it’s appropriate for a bill that will be moments away from being amended anyway.

Use of such a maneuver is under harsh attack from Republicans, who say it’s at best an avoidance of accountability and at worst a violation of the House rules and an affront to the Constitution.

“If we pursue this process, it is consistent with the rules, it is consistent with former practice, and in my opinion will be consistent with having members express themselves on the Senate bill as amended by reconciliation,” Hoyer said.

(snip)
“We didn’t win and Republicans didn’t lose because they held a vote open for three hours,” Hoyer added, referring to the 2003 Medicare prescription drug vote in the House. “They lost because of substance.”

[Jennicut]

1. The conservative US Supreme Court said it was okay in 2005.

Rethugs need a taste of their own medicine. http://openjurist.org/486/f3d/1342/public-citizen-v-united-states-district-court-for-the-district-of-columbia

[ProdigalJunkMail]

3. No offense... but that is a slightly different scenario

that situation was a typo...this is a radically different bill than the one passed in the House originally.

sP

[DJ13]

4. this is a radically different bill than the one passed

Technically its not.

They're considering the Senate version passed, while voting on reconciliation at the same time.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

5. sorry...completely different than the one that passed the house

not a fucking typo...

sP

[DJ13]

6. Its not considered a vote on the House version

Its considered a vote on the Senate version, as the House had to approve that version before moving on to reconciliation.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

8. I agree...and this process would mean

deeming the senate version passing in the HOUSE without a vote prior to reconciliation. that is the problem. if the house leadership used this tactic to 'pass' the senate bill without a vote that would be a clear violation not only of the letter but of the intent of the Constitution.

sP

[Jennicut]

7. Slightly different but ultimately paved the way for being able to use deem and pass

without it being labeled unconstitutional.

Per Ezra Klein:
"The conservative case against "Deem and Pass" is getting very complex, very fast. Yesterday, the argument was that it was flatly unconstitutional. But it turns out that Republicans used Deem and Pass dozens of times while they were in power. So today's furor is that Nancy Pelosi and Louise Slaughter joined Public Citizen in a lawsuit arguing that a bill that George W. Bush signed was invalid because Deem and Pass is unconstitutional. But the court ruled against Public Citizen, Pelosi and Slaughter. Deem and Pass, well, passed. And now Democrats are using it, too." http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/03/process-yawn.html

[sabrina 1]

2. Funny to see Democrats arguing FOR

reconciliation now when their own corporate bill is at stake, when just weeks ago when pro PO Democrats suggested using it, we were told it was 'naive' that the process could not be used 'in these circumstances' and that were unaware of how 'politics works'.

I guess this means there will be a Public Option in the bill now! :sarcasm:

[mdmc]

9. deem or vote - either way you will be held accountable

If people have increased access to medical treatment they will vote for you.
If people have for-profit health insurance (like I currently do) and still lack access to affordable medical treatment (like I lack), then they will vote against you.