I've been told that if the ACA is not overturned by Sept 30

[uppityperson]

it will be permanent, or rather they can overturn it. Is this correct? Thank you duers.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

1. They have until the 30th to do it by reconciliation with a simple majority

After that, they need 60 votes.

[Kablooie]

4. Can't they keep doing it under the 2018 fiscal year?

[Ninsianna]

8. Not by reconciliation, which requires a simple majority. They'd need 60.

[tblue37]

10. No, because they want to use the 2018 reconciliation for big tax cuts for their

wealthy donors. They only get to do one reconciliation procedure per fiscal year.

[uppityperson]

13. Thank you for that bit of info, it's helping make more sense

[uppityperson]

5. Thank you, that makes more sense

[Warren DeMontague]

22. Which means, they won't be able to do it.

[Eliot Rosewater]

27. Can they change or abolish the reconciliation rule and then do it the way

the filthy and disgusting pricks installed that motherfucker gorsuch?

Can they do that with a simple majority?

[Hoyt]

2. I believe they will need 60 votes after that. Of course they can and have

administratively hurt the ACA.

[W_HAMILTON]

3. No, but I'm not sure on the specifics myself.

I believe the fiscal year ends on September 30th, therefore, if they don't pass an Obamacare repeal through reconciliation by then, they have to "start over" <-- whatever that means. I think it just means they have to restart the procedural efforts again to initiate repeal through reconciliation in the new fiscal year. I'm not sure how long that takes, but I'm guessing it could be within a couple of months......

[tblue37]

11. See my post #10 above. nt

[unblock]

6. My understanding is that they would have to pass a budget for the new fiscal year first

Then they can try to repeal aca under reconciliation rules for the new year.

Nothing's permanent, they can try every year. But we get a breather because they have to pass a new budget before they can bring up reconciliation bills.

That gives us at least a few months anyway....


Hopefully, the politics shift and they won't feel compelled to try this crap every year....

[alfredo]

7. Can they attach elements of Trumpcare to the budget??

[unblock]

9. In theory yes, but that requires 60 votes.

So in practice, no.

[alfredo]

16. Can they do away with the filibuster?

[unblock]

17. yes, they could go nuclear at any point

then they would only need 50 votes (+ pence as tie-breaker) for any law and they wouldn't need to go through the whole reconciliation process.

i'd say they'd be willing to do this if they knew they had the votes, but seeing as they can't even muster 50, what use is that.

[alfredo]

18. Never use a weapon that can be used against you.

[unblock]

19. How long did a party representing a minority of the people rule over South Africa?

If they go nuclear, it's because they don't plan on losing the senate for a long, long time.

[alfredo]

20. A thousand year Reich

[unblock]

23. !

[alfredo]

28. I remember a Rep saying they will rule for a hundred years

It was someone like Newt.

[Volaris]

24. Na. They know if they go nuclear, Dems only need one good election to get enough decent

Work done for the American People that they'll be in power long enough to ungerrymander the National map, and then the GOP will be well and truly fucked.
With Trump about to be indicted or unelected in 2020, there's no fucking way theyll risk it.

[unblock]

26. I dunno, they're determined to hold on to power

They've still got the media and voter suppression and other dirty tricks.

I don't think they're planning on making sure they have a tiny amount of power when the hqv lost the White House and the house and have only 41-50 votes in the senate.

[tblue37]

12. And they want to use reconciliation for tax cuts during fiscal year 2018. nt

[ATL Ebony]

31. As things stand, if we don't take back the Senate . . .

and they lose only 3 seats in 2018 their majority is over (whew). I'd prefer Dems win more seats but at this rate I'll take a 3-seat win.

[unblock]

32. I think we have a better shot at the house

The senate "map" is terrible for us in 2018

[Rollo]

14. If Collins, Murkowski, and McCain voted as before, against the Wealthcare bill, then...

The Wealthcare bill will be dead for the rest of this year. The GOP can go through the same motions next year, and they probably will. Hopefully the Dems will win enough seats in Congress in the '18 elections to prevent further repeats.

Time will tell.

[Kablooie]

15. But how much longer will McCain be with us?

With his recent brain cancer diagnosis it may not be too long before Arizona will have a new senator and this one would be unlikely to vote to keep Obamacare.

[Rollo]

29. I wouldn't count McCain out yet...

Yes, his is an aggressive form of brain cancer. However biotech has made great strides in using advanced techniques (like DNA directed targeting etc. and stuff I no longer am current with) to combat various forms of cancer. No doubt he'll get the best treatment available.

[R B Garr]

21. Wealthcare is such an appropriate name for it. nt

[Hortensis]

25. They can still rip it apart piece by piece, federally and by state.

They hold congress, the presidency and a majority of states.

[Autumn]

30. If the repeal doesn't pass they will use other methods to kill it. I think a rapid repeal would be

better for the Dems in the long run. Letting it collapse over a period of time allows the GOP skate on the anger of their constituents past 2018.

[Warpy]

33. After Sept 30, it will no longer be a budgetary matter

and that means they'll need 60 votes to overturn it, something they know they won't have. This is the last attempt for a while, unless they can come up with something that farts flowers at all of us.

The Koch boys have closed their wallets for the duration. That's why this damned thing won't curl up and die and why they're attempting overt bribes to Alaska and Maine.

[winetourdriver01]

34. Deadline

After sep. 30 it will take two thirds of the Senate to repeal the ACA. Not gonna happen.