Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) has revised and extended his remarks on
whether health care reform should be part of the reconciliation
process. Like the Weekly Standard's
John McCormack, I read Conrad's comments as a softening of
his opposition though TPM Cafe's Brian Beutler
remains concerned from a liberal perspective. Here are the
most relevant Conrad comments:
I've been as clear as I can be publicly and privately, that I
don't think reconciliation is the right way to write
fundamental reform legislation. It wasn't designed for that
purpose. It was designed for deficit reduction...
And so I would strongly prefer not to do it that way. One of
the things I've said to colleagues is, "look the Budget Act
contemplates a second budget resolution--only 10 hours in
duration on the floor." And so one could go through this
year--at least most of this year--on this budget resolution
without reconciliation instructions. And then if it proved
absolutely essential--if there were no Republican co-operation
on writing major health care reform--you could run a second
budget resolution. It would only take a day on the floor and
you could put reconciliation instructions there.
If health care reform legislation were advanced through the
reconciliation proces, it will not be subject to filibuster --
and therefore much more likely to pass in whatever form the
Democratic leadership wants. Robert Byrd's decision to oppose
using reconciliation in this fashion was considered a major
turning point in the health care reform debate in 1993-94. Conrad
was the leading Democrat seen as most likely to reprise Byrd's
role in this debate. Republicans would still be able to invoke
the Byrd Rule, named after the West Virginia senator, which
requires a filibuster-like 60-vote majority to waive. But unlike
a filibuster, it would be subject to a ruling by the
parliamentarian.
Obviously, liberals can't be pleased even with Conrad's reworked
position since it would give moderate Democrats and liberal
Republicans a lot of influence in writing reform legislation. But
conservatives shouldn't be thrilled by a choice between a health
bill written by Arlen Specter or one rammed through the Senate
via reconciliation.
Alan Brooks| 3.31.09 @ 3:05PM
I'm outta here.
goodbye Ruth.
trolls have clogged AS too many times.
It's not worth coming back often to check all blogs for spam from an imposter using my name.