Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 03, 2014, 02:12:50 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  Constitution and Law (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  If Brown wins, what is the status of Kirk's vote on the healthcare bill?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: If Brown wins, what is the status of Kirk's vote on the healthcare bill?  (Read 2207 times)
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« on: January 18, 2010, 11:10:42 pm »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2010, 11:14:52 pm »
Ignore

It would put serious pressure on Pelosi to fess up and get her chamber to swallow it as is.
Logged

Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2010, 11:15:51 pm »
Ignore

It would put serious pressure on Pelosi to fess up and get her chamber to swallow it as is.

But is it legal? Legally, it is questionable if they can do that.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Dallasfan65
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5637


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: -9.91

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2010, 01:06:13 am »
Ignore

Kirk is actually ineligible to vote after the election, from what I've heard. (according to mass law, atleast)
Logged

J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32037
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2010, 01:11:54 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Yes, Kirk was a legitimate Senator at the time the vote was cast.  It obviously did exist, and the chair declared it adopted.  

That was only on cloture where his vote made a difference.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2010, 01:39:03 am »
Ignore

However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Yes and No.
Logged

Magic 8-Ball
mrk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3725
Czech Republic


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2010, 05:46:42 am »
Ignore

Considering Kirk was legally a senator when the vote was cast, it would be a little tricky to invalidate it, no?
Logged
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22037
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2010, 07:09:22 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.
Logged
CARLHAYDEN
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10660


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -0.51

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2010, 07:16:07 am »
Ignore

This is an interesting legal question,

However, I suspect at least one Democrat Senator would realize that such a tactic would so enrage the voters that they would decline to vote for the bill.
Logged

Registered in Arizona for Fantasy election purposes.
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2010, 09:00:36 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.

I've just read some things that made me doubt it, but I guess the answer is clear Smiley
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22037
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2010, 09:02:53 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.

I've just read some things that made me doubt it, but I guess the answer is clear Smiley

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless Wink
Logged
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2010, 09:04:41 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.

I've just read some things that made me doubt it, but I guess the answer is clear Smiley

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless Wink

Not that the house will ever pass the Senate bill anyway Wink
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22037
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2010, 09:13:20 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.

I've just read some things that made me doubt it, but I guess the answer is clear Smiley

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless Wink

Not that the house will ever pass the Senate bill anyway Wink

I still think they might with the promise to correct certain parts through the reconciliation process.
Logged
frenger
Bono
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11697
Portugal


Political Matrix
E: 8.65, S: -4.17

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2010, 11:19:37 am »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.

I've just read some things that made me doubt it, but I guess the answer is clear Smiley

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless Wink

Not that the house will ever pass the Senate bill anyway Wink

I still think they might with the promise to correct certain parts through the reconciliation process.

If there is a reconciliation process, the Senate would have to vote on the final product again, thus defeating the purpose of the house passing the Senate bill in the first place.
Logged

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence clamorous to be led to safety by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken



NO, I don't want to go back to Fantasy Elections.
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22037
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2010, 02:23:51 pm »
Ignore

If Brown wins, the Democrats would consider having the house approve the Senate bill as it is, thus sending it to the President. However, would that be legal? Would Kirk's vote be as if it didn't exist?

Of course.

Kirk was legally a United States Senator when that vote was held. It would also be legal for him to cast another vote for healthcare even after the election, as long as the vote in MA is still being certified (and there are no obvious delaying tactics.)

Saying Kirk's vote is illegitimate is nothing more than a talking point with nothing to back it up.

I've just read some things that made me doubt it, but I guess the answer is clear Smiley

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless Wink

Not that the house will ever pass the Senate bill anyway Wink

I still think they might with the promise to correct certain parts through the reconciliation process.

If there is a reconciliation process, the Senate would have to vote on the final product again, thus defeating the purpose of the house passing the Senate bill in the first place.

The thought being that the House passes the Senate bill as written....and certain other issues about taxation and what not are handled in addition by the reconciliation process.
Logged
CARLHAYDEN
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10660


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -0.51

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2010, 10:09:24 pm »
Ignore

This is an interesting legal question,

However, I suspect at least one Democrat Senator would realize that such a tactic would so enrage the voters that they would decline to vote for the bill.

Jim Webb: "it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated."

Logged

Registered in Arizona for Fantasy election purposes.
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22037
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2010, 02:46:31 am »
Ignore

This is an interesting legal question,

However, I suspect at least one Democrat Senator would realize that such a tactic would so enrage the voters that they would decline to vote for the bill.

Jim Webb: "it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated."



What does that have to do with legality? It just means Webb is interested in damage control.
Logged
CARLHAYDEN
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10660


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -0.51

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2010, 04:16:58 pm »
Ignore

This is an interesting legal question,

However, I suspect at least one Democrat Senator would realize that such a tactic would so enrage the voters that they would decline to vote for the bill.

Jim Webb: "it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated."



What does that have to do with legality? It just means Webb is interested in damage control.

Sorry, but, there would only be a legal "controversey" if the Senate were to seek to vote on the so-called Health Care Reform proposal after the election but before seating of Senator-elect Brown.

Therefor, no case or controversey.
Logged

Registered in Arizona for Fantasy election purposes.
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35637
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2010, 02:32:54 am »
Ignore

His vote was and still is perfectly legal and legitimate.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines