A question about repealing 0bamacare?

[Freeper]

Let's say that we win big in Nov, we have the house, the senate, and the white house. In Jan would the Republican controlled senate be able to reach into the garbage can where Harry Reid placed the repeal bill and vote on that bill and send it to president Romney to sign? Or would we have to start all over again?

[Mike220]

New congress, so pretty sure they're starting from scratch. Though with both houses and the WH, I don't see that being much of an obstacle.

[Freeper]

New congress, so pretty sure they're starting from scratch. Though with both houses and the WH, I don't see that being much of an obstacle.

I don't either, but I was curious as to whether they could take up the passed bill and go from there.

[Mike220]

I don't either, but I was curious as to whether they could take up the passed bill and go from there.

Best answer I've found.

Bills have to be passed by both houses in the same congress to become law, so bills not passed by the Senate before the session ends will have to be re-introduced in the 112th Congress. The time the current House spent passing them this time will have been wasted, and they will have to wait months to go through the process again (assuming they are re-introduced at all).

Open Congress

[Freeper]

Best answer I've found.

Open Congress

Cool thanks I was too lazy to google it. 

I suspected that we would have to start all over again, but I wasn't sure.
If it was a stupid question I apologize, but the thought crossed my mind.

If Romney wanted to be slimey like 0bama he could simply refuse to enforce the law and wait for congress to repeal it again. 

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

[BigTex]

were going to need 60 votes in the senate, that will be the obstacle, getting the votes from the dem senators from red states that will need the political capital to get reelected

[BlueStateSaint]

were going to need 60 votes in the senate, that will be the obstacle, getting the votes from the dem senators from red states that will need the political capital to get reelected

No, we won't.  Lately, it's come out that since Obamacare was passed under the reconciliation process, which requires only 51 votes to pass a spending bill, so only 51 votes are going to be needed to repeal it.  Dingy Harry will try to change Senate rules to alter that, but the rules only apply to that particular Congress--i.e., they change every two years.  So, Dingy Harry and the Dems can change them, but they will be changed right back in 2013.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

No, we won't.  Lately, it's come out that since Obamacare was passed under the reconciliation process, which requires only 51 votes to pass a spending bill, so only 51 votes are going to be needed to repeal it.  Dingy Harry will try to change Senate rules to alter that, but the rules only apply to that particular Congress--i.e., they change every two years.  So, Dingy Harry and the Dems can change them, but they will be changed right back in 2013.

And the best part of all is:

When Roberts got the liberals of the SCOTUS to agree with him that the mandate was a tax he sealed ObamaCoups fate as a budgetary item. The liberals cannot claim we need 60 votes because they used 52 votes and they celebrated the SCOTUS decision that affirmed their action.

Even when liberals think they're being clever they're still idiots setting themselves up for failure.

[docstew]

My question would be: Why should a bill totaling one page (really one sentence: "The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is hereby repealed and all provisions are null and void.") take that long to get through? I would think that would be official item #2 in both houses the first day of business, so that it would be waiting on Romney's desk when he walks into the office.

[obumazombie]

My question would be: Why should a bill totaling one page (really one sentence: "The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is hereby repealed and all provisions are null and void.") take that long to get through? I would think that would be official item #2 in both houses the first day of business, so that it would be waiting on Romney's desk when he walks into the office.

The owebuma care act was literally ramrodded through, and look how long that took.

[CG6468]

My question would be: Why should a bill totaling one page (really one sentence: "The Affordable Care Act of 2010 is hereby repealed and all provisions are null and void.") take that long to get through? I would think that would be official item #2 in both houses the first day of business, so that it would be waiting on Romney's desk when he walks into the office.

Or by Romney's executive order. blammo did it all the time.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Or by Romney's executive order. blammo did it all the time.

Let's not legitamize rule by diktat.

[thundley4]

Let's not legitamize rule by diktat.

No, but Romney should use EOs to cancel the EO's and other directives that Obama put through without congress.   Things like not having the DOiJ defend DOMA, the partial DREAM/Amnesty act.

[docstew]

No, but Romney should use EOs to cancel the EO's and other directives that Obama put through without congress.   Things like not having the DOiJ defend DOMA, the partial DREAM/Amnesty act.

And he COULD put all action to implement Obamacare on indefinite hold "pending repeal legislation", but it would be better to have the bill voted on and approved on 21 Jan 2013, ready for signature.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

No, but Romney should use EOs to cancel the EO's and other directives that Obama put through without congress.   Things like not having the DOiJ defend DOMA, the partial DREAM/Amnesty act.

Concur

[BigTex]

No, we won't.  Lately, it's come out that since Obamacare was passed under the reconciliation process, which requires only 51 votes to pass a spending bill, so only 51 votes are going to be needed to repeal it.  Dingy Harry will try to change Senate rules to alter that, but the rules only apply to that particular Congress--i.e., they change every two years.  So, Dingy Harry and the Dems can change them, but they will be changed right back in 2013.

only certain parts of obamacare can be repealed with reconciliation, we will need 60 votes to get the most harmful parts removed

[BlueStateSaint]

only certain parts of obamacare can be repealed with reconciliation, we will need 60 votes to get the most harmful parts removed

The whole thing has been called a "tax" by SCOTUS.  That means that the whole thing can be repealed by 51 votes.  (Yes, I changed my argument, but the final result is still the same.  51 votes in the Senate and it's gone.)

[BigTex]

The whole thing has been called a "tax" by SCOTUS.  That means that the whole thing can be repealed by 51 votes.  (Yes, I changed my argument, but the final result is still the same.  51 votes in the Senate and it's gone.)

Only the mandate was called a tax

[BlueStateSaint]

Only the mandate was called a tax

Severability, or the lack thereof, says that if one part goes, the whole thing goes.  The whole thing is going in January of 2013.

[BigTex]

Severability, or the lack thereof, says that if one part goes, the whole thing goes.  The whole thing is going in January of 2013.

Severability only has to due when a court strikes down a law, it doesnt apply to repealing

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

The mandate is the tax but the collection and disbursement of revenue is budgetary. You can write a law for anything but absent the money to actually do anything its pointless. How would ObamaCoup work is congress simply refused to salary the hordes of bureaucrats or to reimburse medical providers?

[obumazombie]

Could a horde of bureaucrats bring down an horde of Visigoths ? I often wondered that.

[Undies]

What if we just ignore the law known as obamacare?  We ignore lots of laws.  No one in Dallas has a companion walk in front of their horseless carriage waving a lit lantern as they drive through town.  It is the law, though.

[obumazombie]

The reconciliation is what passed owebumacare, reconciliation can repeal it.