Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-08-2009, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Central Maine
4,697 posts, read 6,423,541 times
Reputation: 5046

Advertisements

There may be some confusion over the terms Budget Reconciliation and Nuclear Option. They are not the same. I'll try to describe how they are different.

Budget Reconciliation


The legislative process known as Budget Reconciliation goes back to 1974. It is an optional process that Congress sometimes uses with legislation that includes policy changes with regard to the federal budget; specifically, funding of mandatory programs and/or revenue programs (anything dealing with taxes).

Many bills dealing with federal budget items are voted on without the use of the Budget Reconciliation process, but it has been used from time to time. From 1980 to 1998, Budget Reconciliation was used 13 times. More recently, this process was used four times during the Bush administration, including both the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts.

It is important to note that Budget Reconciliation is an established legislative process that Democrats and Republicans both have used in the past, and will no doubt use again in the future. A very good description can be found here:
THE BUDGET RECONCILIATION PROCESS (http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/bud_rec_proc.htm - broken link)

Nuclear Option


This phrase describes something that does not exist. The phrase is generally attributed to Republican Senator Trent Lott, and it refers to an effort by Republicans to change Senate rules regarding judicial nominations.

In a nutshell, it takes a two-thirds vote in the Senate (60 votes) to break a filibuster. In 2004/2005, although the 55 Democrats in the Senate had agreed to over 200 Bush judicial nominations, they used the filibuster process to block 10 appointments to the bench, and that caused Republicans to seek a way to change the rules.

There are very good articles giving the background of this available here:
The Political Scene: Blowing Up The Senate : The New Yorker

Everything you wanted to know about the "nuclear option" - Salon.com
The Nuclear Option was never approved, and therefore has never been used. The so-called Gang of 14 worked out a compromise.

So, with any current legislation, it's Budget Reconciliation, and not Nuclear Option.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-04-2010, 10:19 AM
 
2 posts, read 6,639 times
Reputation: 10
2/3rds isn't 60 votes. It does take a super majority, but a super majority is 60% not 66.6% or 67 votes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2010, 10:27 AM
 
2 posts, read 6,639 times
Reputation: 10
Also... the 109th congress had 55 REPUBLICANS not Democrats. There were 44 Democrats and one Socialist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2010, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,145,533 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanphilosopher View Post
Also... the 109th congress had 55 REPUBLICANS not Democrats. There were 44 Democrats and one Socialist.
And every one of those 44 Dems voted for the amnesty bill that McCain and Kennedy proposed in 2006. Of course, 33 Republicans voted that same way. The best part of that one was that the House was controlled by the Republicans and refused to even bring up that fool rule. Progressives and Democrats were all wanting to see that one passed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2010, 02:28 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,145,533 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
There may be some confusion over the terms Budget Reconciliation and Nuclear Option. They are not the same. I'll try to describe how they are different.

Budget Reconciliation


The legislative process known as Budget Reconciliation goes back to 1974. It is an optional process that Congress sometimes uses with legislation that includes policy changes with regard to the federal budget; specifically, funding of mandatory programs and/or revenue programs (anything dealing with taxes).

Many bills dealing with federal budget items are voted on without the use of the Budget Reconciliation process, but it has been used from time to time. From 1980 to 1998, Budget Reconciliation was used 13 times. More recently, this process was used four times during the Bush administration, including both the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts.

It is important to note that Budget Reconciliation is an established legislative process that Democrats and Republicans both have used in the past, and will no doubt use again in the future. A very good description can be found here:
THE BUDGET RECONCILIATION PROCESS (http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/bud_rec_proc.htm - broken link)

Nuclear Option


This phrase describes something that does not exist. The phrase is generally attributed to Republican Senator Trent Lott, and it refers to an effort by Republicans to change Senate rules regarding judicial nominations.

In a nutshell, it takes a two-thirds vote in the Senate (60 votes) to break a filibuster. In 2004/2005, although the 55 Democrats in the Senate had agreed to over 200 Bush judicial nominations, they used the filibuster process to block 10 appointments to the bench, and that caused Republicans to seek a way to change the rules.

There are very good articles giving the background of this available here:
The Political Scene: Blowing Up The Senate : The New Yorker

Everything you wanted to know about the "nuclear option" - Salon.com
The Nuclear Option was never approved, and therefore has never been used. The so-called Gang of 14 worked out a compromise.

So, with any current legislation, it's Budget Reconciliation, and not Nuclear Option.
Why did Obama and Reid talk against the nuclear option as well as the reconciliation crap so hard back then? I hear those sound bites of Obama talking about winning the Presidency by 51% and still not being able to run the government. He didn't win by much more than that, did he?

Do you really believe that the Democrats had 55 Senators in the Congress in 2004 - 2005? I don't remember it being that way, but . . . . . . . .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2010, 02:42 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,384,344 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
There may be some confusion over the terms Budget Reconciliation and Nuclear Option. They are not the same. I'll try to describe how they are different.
The confusion is deliberately being cultivated by right-wing disinformation morons such as Breitbart. His pathetc site has video of Democrats rightly laying into Frist and the Republcians over their nuclear option threats as if those had anything at all to do with reconciliation. Just another sign post along the road...Republicans just don't care what truth is. They'll lie like a rug for whatever they think might help their dooofus cause...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top