The Parliamentarian does not decide the propriety of reconciliation

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

It is a few days late to nip this "parlimentarian decides" thing in the bud. The Republicans ran with this and most of the chattering heads fell for it. (Since Republicans are such reliable sources of information...)

But for what it is worth...

The reconciliation eligibility of a measure can be challenged.

The challenge is made to the chair.

The chair rules.

The ruling by the chair requires 60 votes to overturn.

The Senate parliamentarian offers an opinion... advisory, not binding.

One can debate the politics of disagreeing with the parliamentarian. It might be terrible politically.

But procedurally, assuming Reid puts the right person in the chair then anything is reconciliation eligible unless there are 60 votes saying it isn't.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. This is the single worst unrec ever...

The OP is information.

If it is incorrect (which it may be) and you have better information then f'ing correct it.

And if it is correct then why unrec it?

[elocs]

2. If your OP is so important (and it is) why on earth would you use the first response

to point out an UnRec. You know as well as I do that responding is the best way to keep a thread read and not Rec/UnRec. My guess is that by this afternoon this thread will have plenty of Recs and your response will seem kind of petty in that light.

[jenmito]

3. They're just as bad as those who unrec threads telling posters when

Obama will be speaking/giving a town hall/etc.

[damonm]

4. Good info. Rec'd.

[Froward69]

5. opened at three reced to 4

reload back at three... good info. KICK!