- Joined
- Mar 7, 2011
- Messages
- 44,814
- Reaction score
- 20,221
- Location
- A very blue state
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
As to rubber stamps, I don't think the Senate should be a rubber stamp either. And I've never suggested the President is required to sign any bill regardless. However, there is a process and procedure outlined in the Constitution that seems to be ignored.
The message being sent to the House is that they must send a bill containing what the Senate and the Executive Branch wants, or they won't consider it. That's not how it works.
That's not how it should ever work, even if the shoe were on the other foot.
OK, so they should be required to vote on it. They did, and rejected the amendment pertaining to Obamacare. That's not "not considering it" that's how the system is supposed to work. I believe that at least twice the Senate stripped the bill of the Obamacare amendment and both times the House didn't pass the Senate's version. So the message being sent from the House was just as defiant as that being sent to the House.
Had the Senate voted on it with the amendment, it probably would have failed. If by some miracle it did pass, Obama would have vetoed it and we'd be in the same boat we are now.