If Brown wins, what is the status of Kirk's vote on the healthcare bill?

[Franzl]

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.

[Franzl]

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

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless

[Franzl]

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

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless

Not that the house will ever pass the Senate bill anyway

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

[Franzl]

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

I'm sure Republicans will present that argument regardless

Not that the house will ever pass the Senate bill anyway

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.

[Franzl]

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.