Democrats have been mocking Republican sloppiness for forcing a House re-vote on the tax bill after minor provisions did not comply with Senate procedure, but the same thing happened when Democrats raced to pass Obamacare in March 2010.

"Unsurprisingly, the #GOPTaxScam is so badly written the @HouseGOP will have to take *another* vote to pass it tomorrow morning," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tweeted. "The seams of this Frankenstein’s monster are already showing."

Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., tweeted, "Right now the #GOPTaxScam is just a bill stuck on Capitol Hill—and has to be voted on again because Republicans jammed it through the Congress & aspects of the bill failed to comply with Senate rules."

Democrats hammered home this line of attack during the morning debate on the House floor.

"Less than 24 hours after it passed, and already we have to come back to vote on fixes to the Republican tax scam," said Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif. "This bill was so needlessly rushed, there wasn't even time to proofread, and I can only wonder what other mistakes we'll discover in the coming days, weeks and months."

"We're here this morning solely because of a mistake," said Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas. "This is the blunder rule, and this is not the first big blunder in this rule."

The issue was that the Senate parliamentarian advised that three aspects of the tax bill were inconsistent with Senate rules for passage by a simple majority through reconciliation, and Republicans did not have the votes to overturn Democratic objections. So, now the House is scheduled to vote again on the final bill that will be sent to President Trump's desk.

But it's worth remembering that as Democrats raced to pass Obamacare, something similar happened to them.

The parliamentarian at the time advised that two minor provisions related to Pell Grants were out of order under Senate rules, forcing the House to re-vote.

It's common, due to the complexity of the reconciliation process, for some provisions to be considered out of order. But it only matters if they are major provisions that change the bill dramatically enough to lose votes. That is not expected in this case, where minor changes involved a provision that would have allowed parents to use 529s toward homeschooling expenses, one that applied to taxing of college endowments, and another involved changing the title of the bill to something longer.