I haven’t done any homework on this, but wasn’t state funding (not the communist understanding of the word State, but the American, as in “the several states”) required to keep this thing in bounds for the method of passage chosen? All sorts of accounting tricks were used to keep it “budget neutral”, so that it didn’t require a supermajority somewhere at a critical juncture.
The abuses of this mechanism were legion in the passage of this bill, and part of why I consider the whole thing null on its face. Screw em. They can force me to comply for now, but they cannot force me to agree. Ah, screw it.
Y’all know what I mean, and not one mind will be changed. But didn’t that matter at some point, up until we collectively agreed to let tortured legalistic definitions impress us right out of our rights? Was this one of the things in the bucket of “if the Fed has to pay, it busts budget neutrality”?
It very well could have been…Sounds a bit too thought out for that crowd, though.
What one can count upon from DC is that the rules for passage are totally unrelated to the rules for implementation. Just look at the EPA.