Hannity whopper: Budget reconciliation process would deprive Republicans of vote
SUMMARY: On his Fox News program, Sean Hannity falsely claimed that "a parliamentary procedure called reconciliation" would allow the Obama administration to pass legislation "without any Republicans even having an opportunity to vote." In fact, according to the House Rules Committee's description of the budget reconciliation process, the version of reconciliation legislation agreed to during the conference process is then "brought back to the full House and Senate for a vote on final passage. Approval of the conference agreement on the reconciliation legislation must be by a majority vote of both Houses."
During the March 20 edition of Fox News' Hannity, host Sean Hannity falsely claimed that "a parliamentary procedure called reconciliation" would allow the Obama administration to pass legislation "without any Republicans even having an opportunity to vote." Guest and fellow Fox News host Mike Huckabee replied that this is "horribly dangerous because it really does bypass the entire system of the American government, where we're supposed to have an honest debate." In fact, the budget reconciliation process does not deny Republicans or any member of Congress "an opportunity to vote." According to the House Rules Committee's description of the budget reconciliation process, the version of reconciliation legislation agreed to during the conference process is then "brought back to the full House and Senate for a vote on final passage. Approval of the conference agreement on the reconciliation legislation must be by a majority vote of both Houses."
From the House Rules Committee document:
Conference Process: Once a reconciliation bill is passed in the House and Senate, members of each body meet to work out their differences. A majority of the conferees on each panel must agree on a single version of the bill before it can be brought back to the full House and Senate for a vote on final passage. Approval of the conference agreement on the reconciliation legislation must be by a majority vote of both Houses. In the House, the conference report is usually given a special rule from the Rules Committee to govern floor consideration. In the Senate, the floor debate is governed by Senate rules and specific provisions of the Budget Act. In contrast to the concurrent budget resolution, a reconciliation bill is sent to the President for approval or disapproval.
From the March 20 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: And there's something even more frightening. Because I think -- if people like the Chicago way, if they like Chicago politics, then they're gonna love the Obama administration. There was one very scary piece of news that came out, with all the [Treasury Secretary Timothy] Geithner news, a lot of people didn't pay attention to, besides the vote that I just mentioned. And that is that the Congress now along with the White House is looking now to use a parliamentary procedure called reconciliation as a means of passing their health-care reform, their tax increases, their extreme cap and trade, their energy policies. Now, that would mean that they pass all of these things without any Republicans even having an opportunity to vote. How dangerous do you think that is?
HUCKABEE: It's horribly dangerous because it really does bypass the entire system of the American government, where we're supposed to have an honest debate. It also breaks a very important promise that Barack Obama made to the American people. He promised transparency, he promised bipartisanship, he promised a new way of doing things in Washington. This is a violation of all of those promises, and I think he's gonna have an increased credibility problem, along with his Treasury secretary and the Senate Banking Committee chairman, if he continues to have campaigned on one platform and govern on --
HANNITY: Yeah.
HUCKABEE: -- a completely different one.
We need the US Supream Court to take the status of individual a way from corperations and then limit their speach so they can not spread outright lies
Careful there, PR. As sensible as your idea is to sane people, that there should be consequences for deliberate dishonesty by the media and their corporate managers, you can bet at leat one wingnut is going to respond with outraged claims of "censorship" and "first amendment violations".
I know, it makes as much sense as complaining that laws against robbery restrict a robber's right to property, but you need to understand the pickle the far right has got themselves into.An entire movement built on propaganda and misinformation feels pretty threatened when they think lying may be taken away from them as a primary strategy.
Here's an old article giving some history of why corporations are getting treated as if they are persons: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/FirstAmend_Follies.html
It was the 1880's in the United States that for the first time that corperations were considered individuals not businesses. This has been what has gone against history of corpertations starting in the age of exploration. The reason for this was to get rid of time limits that a corperation can exist. Further rulings making corperations have the same rights as people is why campaign finance reform is next to imposible.
On the positive side, however, the internet has now made it much easier and more convenient for INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE to raise money. Corporate political contributions were fairly evenly split between Obama and NcCain. Obama had a huge advantage, on the other hand, in money contributed by individuals, and was able to far outspend his opponent. This had the effect of greatly eroding the traditional Republican advantage in fund raising, and well may be the template for future political campaigns.
The time apparently has come when individuals can simply outspend the corporate bastards.
there is a way to chasten reporters who lie....its called slander lawsuits.
He means they don't get to frivolously obstruct the budget without it first getting an up or down vote. Big difference. But no difference if you are a whiny chowderhead on Fox.
Randy
This moron is bought and paid for by FAUX NEWS and the REPUBLICAN PARTY. This should be kept uppermost in peoples minds when listening to him. He is anything BUT, "FAIR AND BALANCED''.
Hannity, I understand- he's a liar and pretty dumb. Huckabee, though, was running for PRESIDENT!! He is showing himself to be too stupid or too dishonest to hold ANY office.
Ahhh... he already did that last year. ;0)
We don't need any republican votes to pass legislation so why have another vote?
It's interesting. If you Google the phrase "Hannity falsely claimed" with the quotation marks, you come up with 5,200 entries.
I know, you can Google all sorts of strange phrases and still come up with a lot of hits, but those seem pretty well documented on the whole.
Hannity, in his usual dingbat way, does manage to bring up a point worth considering...
Why should conservatives and Rupublicans be allowed to vote on anything? The American people don't want them voting on anything, that's why they voted these whacks out of office resoundingly in the last 2 elections.
Why not pass a resolution whereby conservatives are allowed to vote, say, a "sense of the senate," but their actual votes do not count. It would be sort of a ceremonial but nonbinding procedure.
I think the American people would overwhelmingly support this.
In other words, give 'em a dose of their own. Works for me. Clearly, the gops have no intention of being bipartisan and they have nothing to offer but more of the same dumb slop that got us in this fix in the first place.
To hell with 'em. Obama tried, they'd rather obstruct and pray that the Country goes to hell so they can say I told ya so and try to weasel their way back into power. Clinton and the Dems got rid of the first Bush Deficit without any gop votes. We'll just have to do it again.
Doesn't Hannity realize that the Bush Tax Cuts he's so in love with were pushed through with the reconciliation process?
Obama won't use this system to push through healthcare and such because it has expiration dates, which would be pointless.
Huckabee and Hannity, now that is two brain trusts!!
Do you mean brain rust? Brain bust? Brain dust? Brain putz?
Nutz lust gnutz in must futz Stutz, whatz?
Let's be honest here, what Hannity is REALLY talking about is Obama bypassing the minority's ability to filibuster. Normaly, this would be a underhanded way of doing things but the GOP,by abusing the filibuster, has forced Obama to do things this way. The filibuster needs to go now that it has become a tool of obstruction and nothing more. Thanks Reps for destroying yet ANOTHER of our traditions!
I expect Hannity to lie, or not know what he's talking about, but Huck certainly knows better. The man is as dishonest as the day is long. To think he wants to be president. Additionally, I don't recall Hannity bemoaning reconciliation, which takes away the Senate filibuster, when Republicans used it to wreck the budget with Bush's tax cuts for the uber-wealthy. What a tool.
The real cure for this s h i t is an educated voting public who would know when they're being lied to, and changes to the rules that allow media monopolies by right wingers like Murdoch.
The FAR RIGHT WINGERS acting like adults? You have got to be kidding. These clowns are INCAPABLE of such actions.
Hannity is not smart enough to make these lies up. He is that ignorant of the facts. Huckabee, oye. As long as Fox News, Hannity and the rest have an audience, they will continue. Truth and facts don't matter to Ailes and Murdoch. I can't watch the show. It's the dough. When the bread runs low, as is with the show, then they'll have to go, don't ya' know.
I keep saying I LOVE these right wingnuts. Let them keep talking and talking and talking. I have a Home Depot store three minutes from my house and I'll gladly buy them all the rope they need ... and plant the Oak Tree as well. The more drivel they throw out the better since those of us who really care about this country and its REAL problems can get on with the real "man's" job that needs to be done to solve the problems created in the last eight years (20 if you count Reagan & Bush the first). Let 'em drivel.
After the Hell that the Repubs unleashed on this country I actually wouldn't have any issues with them being deprived of the vote. What they have done to this country is treasonous. They should just stay out of the way so Obama can clean up the dungpiles they left behind.
What a thankless job...
A double rabbits foot on this one. Too bad for the Repubs