• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Senate healthcare repeal bill fails - Collins, Murkowski, and McCain voted no

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Jun 9, 2004
24,925
1
0
Someone must have showed McCain that comic strip.
 
Dec 14, 2008
33,978
2,590
1,360
Yall have to admit that McCain no vote was fucking monumental. I'm still feeling hype from this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUVYYiRIuE4

breakdown of this moment

I actually thought he was the one who said "NO!" loudly but that was apparently someone else. All McCain did was



and then he strolled off LIKE A BOSS



and the rest was history.
 

NimbusD

Member
Jan 14, 2005
6,283
0
1,275
NYC
Preibus on CNN said they could still try again before reconciliation is over. The house said the same. So who's right?

They can try again... but they still need to win McCain over no? Either that or his cancer doesnt allow him to vote. If I have this scenario correct, holy fuck.
 

ShaunBRS

Member
May 12, 2006
646
0
1,385
...and when the Democrats have >50 senators? Does he ask them pwetty pwease to change the rules to what they were?

This orange object already considers democrat votes in and of themselves to be 'obstruction'. A dem majority would be treason!
 

epmode

Member
Jun 7, 2004
28,470
0
0
I hate him so much. Both sides have had the opportunity to get rid of the filibuster for the last ~150 years but it never happened.
 

rjinaz

Member
Feb 7, 2012
17,934
2
700
38
...and when the Democrats have >50 senators? Does he ask them pwetty pwease to change the rules to what they were?

Trump really doesn't care. He just wants to "win". If he has even thought about what will happen when Dems get back in power, which of course he hasn't really, he'd assume he wouldn't be around anyway. I am still disgusted with my fellow Americans that voted for a man that doesn't care about the good of the country but only the good of Trump. He proves it every damn day.
 

Garlador

Member
Mar 31, 2015
9,994
1
410
Oklahoma
Trump really doesn't care. He just wants to "win". If he has even thought about what will happen when Dems get back in power, which of course he hasn't, he'd assume he wouldn't be around anyway. I am still disgusted with my fellow Americans that voted for a man that doesn't care about the good of the country but only the good of Trump. He proves it every damn day.

To quote my mother, "but at least he's not Hillary."

That's the motto of many Republican voters.
 

Ms.Galaxy

Member
Jul 6, 2014
2,722
0
320
Boston, MA
Here's a new tweetstorm:



buuut you couldn't even get those 51 votes?

Never gonna happen, Trump. Republicans know that eventually the tides will give Democrats majority, and if the GOP decides to break the filibusterer, the Democrats will push whatever laws and budgets they want through congress without resistance and, well...
 

rjinaz

Member
Feb 7, 2012
17,934
2
700
38
To quote my mother, "but at least he's not Hillary."

That's the motto of many Republican voters.

Yeah. The hate for Hillary is still very strong. Republicans have shown they excel in one thing, turning American voters against something or someone, in this case Clinton.

But what can you do? Democrats need to run somebody that the Republicans haven't had years to shit on in their brainwashing (say what you want, lie and you won't be held accountable) right media.
 

lush

Member
Sep 30, 2010
5,131
0
0
Knoxville, TN
Nothing but party line votes is totes how the founding fathers intended our government to function. Can't wait for Dems to nuke the filibuster when they regain power.
 

cwmartin

Member
Jan 2, 2008
4,191
1
0
Never gonna happen, Trump. Republicans know that eventually the tides will give Democrats majority, and if the GOP decides to break the filibusterer, the Democrats will push whatever laws and budgets they want through congress without resistance and, well...

...actually pass some legislation that would help it's citizens? Progress the country socially? The horror.
 

BronsonLee

Member
Oct 30, 2011
50,961
2
0
If Trump had any juice, Mitch would've killed the filibuster a long time ago

Give Turtle credit, he knows what happens if he does that
 

Carpe Carnim

Member
Aug 3, 2016
1,607
0
0
Floriduh
Preibus on CNN said they could still try again before reconciliation is over. The house said the same. So who's right?

Sorta both. Reconciliation allows one vote on Revenues, Spending and Debt. They've burned the easy vehicle with this abortion of a bill: Spending

They can bring two more bills, bit they have to be relevant to revenue and debt. You can add a bunch of smaller things to hobble the ACA, but it's less effective towards that goal, and you're more likely to run afoul of the Senate Parliamentarian's rules on what's germane.

If McConnell is intent on killing the filibuster, I think it's going to happen this session, or not at all.
 

Journeywalker

Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,155
24
0
Sorta both. Reconciliation allows one vote on Revenues, Spending and Debt. They've burned the easy vehicle with this abortion of a bill: Spending

They can bring two more bills, bit they have to be relevant to revenue and debt. You can add a bunch of smaller things to hobble the ACA, but it's less effective towards that goal, and you're more likely to run afoul of the Senate Parliamentarian's rules on what's germane.

If McConnell is intent on killing the filibuster, I think it's going to happen this session, or not at all.

That's inconsistent with what potatoman and pigeon are stating above. It's not one VOTE, it's one successful BILL.
 

Carpe Carnim

Member
Aug 3, 2016
1,607
0
0
Floriduh
That's inconsistent with what potatoman and pigeon are stating above. It's not one VOTE, it's one successful BILL.

Here is the info I'm working from. YMMV

Under Senate interpretations of the Congressional Budget Act, the Senate can consider the three basic subjects of reconciliation — spending, revenues, and debt limit — in a single bill or multiple bills, but it can consider each of these three in only one bill per year (unless Congress passes a second budget resolution). Consequently, in the Senate there can be a maximum of three reconciliation bills in a year, one for each of the basic subjects of reconciliation.

This rule is most significant if the first reconciliation bill that the Senate takes up affects both spending and revenues. Even if that bill is overwhelmingly devoted to only one of those subjects, no subsequent reconciliation bill can affect either revenues or spending because the first bill already addressed them.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/introduction-to-budget-reconciliation
 

Carpe Carnim

Member
Aug 3, 2016
1,607
0
0
Floriduh
Unfortunately (and probably by design), each of these major changes is being packaged as an ammendment to the same bill.

They're further limited by the Congressional calendar. They need to push taxes before the end of the fiscal year, deal with the debt ceiling, and still situate themselves for the 2018 midterms. They can't jerk themselves off while the infrastructure of government melts down around them.

What I do see happening is the GOP trying to extort repeal of the mandate for consideration of the debt ceiling increase. They're that fucking stoopid
 

PumpkinSpice

Banned
Aug 27, 2013
6,334
1
0
So I've been thinking about what the path forward for Repubicans will be when it comes to health (if they keep going) and I think I have it.

It would have to be sending the money spent on Obamacare to the states to spend on their own plans. These could then be whatever the states want to implement. If a state is happy with insurance markets, they can stick with that. If a more liberal state wants to do single payer, they can. If a state wants a more conservative option (whatver that is exactly) they can do that too.

That way they can say they repealed Obamacare, claim "states rights" for conservative cred, and not look too much like hyprocrits if their own states end up just keeping a rough approximation of Obamacare since "it should have been at the state level anyway."

The more savvy Republicans could point out that this is literally what Canada does to try to woo over moderates, and for the most part it is (we also have a lot of strings attached and we insist on single payer).
 

greepoman

Member
Nov 15, 2007
2,629
24
1,135
The more savvy Republicans could point out that this is literally what Canada does to try to woo over moderates, and for the most part it is (we also have a lot of strings attached and we insist on single payer).

Let's be more like Canada isn't going fly with Republicans lol.
 

RPGCrazied

Member
Oct 14, 2007
39,340
657
1,345
I see he is up. Its always at 5-6 am when he spews out bile.

Mitch will never nuke the legislative filibuster, sorry Donny.
 

Journeywalker

Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,155
24
0
If McCain really wanted to screw with McConnell, he would have voted for the ammendment and then voted against the complete bill.

What I do see happening is the GOP trying to extort repeal of the mandate for consideration of the debt ceiling increase. They're that fucking stoopid

It's worked for them in the past, so it's more Machiavellian than stupid. Independents haven't punished them where it counts: the ballot box.
 

RPGCrazied

Member
Oct 14, 2007
39,340
657
1,345
Robert Costa‏Verified account @costareports 2h2 hours ago

Robert Costa Retweeted
A McConnell ally pings me and says the Maj. Leader *can't stand* this kind of process advice from down the street.

Talking about nuking the legislative filibuster.

Oh gee, here is a thought. Say that to him personally? What a wimp.
 

theWB27

Member
Feb 6, 2014
9,147
1
400
If McCain really wanted to screw with McConnell, he would have voted for the ammendment and then voted against the complete bill.



It's worked for them in the past, so it's more Machiavellian than stupid. Independents haven't punished them where it counts: the ballot box.

Im sure the reason mccain did this is because there was a good chance Paul Ryan would've made the skinny repeal law.
 

Carpe Carnim

Member
Aug 3, 2016
1,607
0
0
Floriduh
If McCain really wanted to screw with McConnell, he would have voted for the ammendment and then voted against the complete bill.



It's worked for them in the past, so it's more Machiavellian than stupid. Independents haven't punished them where it counts: the ballot box.

True, never overestimate the attention span of the average American voter, but there are 24 votes in the House and three in the Senate that need to get reelected in districts Clinton won.
 

GoldenEye 007

Member
Jul 28, 2006
23,805
0
0
The Big D
Isn't there a final vote on the Senate Bill before it gets sent down to the House?
If there were no changes and the House just rubber stamped it, no. Would have went to Trump's desk because the Senate would have already approved that version of the bill.

Senators were willing to take themselves out of the process and trust Ryan not to do that. McCain, Collins, and Murkowsky thankfully didn't fall for that.
 

Journeywalker

Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,155
24
0
True, never overestimate the attention span of the average American voter, but there are 24 votes in the House and three in the Senate that need to get reelected in districts Clinton won.

They only need to hold the House and get a net gain of 1 Senator in 2018, assuming McCain wasn't covering for any Republicans that didn't want to be on the record voting against the ammendment.