While the White House has been floating
the idea of using reconciliation to pass health care
legislation with a simple majority of 51 votes, it should be seen
as an empty threat. Let's even set aside the fact that it would
be a declaration of war that would shut down the Senate, that it
would remove any pretense that Obama is a post-partisan
president, and that ramming an unpopular bill down the throats of
the public is not a politically astute move. Even if Democrats
wanted to risk all of that for the greater goal of passing health
care legislation, they couldn't do it.
The budget reconciliation procedure has to be used for tax and
spending matters, meaning that if the White House wanted to pass
a bill in this matter, they'd have to drop provisions that are
central to Democratic proposals. So, for instance, Democrats
wouldn't be able to create health insurance exchanges, to force
insurers to cover those with pre-existing conditions, create a
new government-run plan, pass the health, wellness and prevention
provisions, and so forth. Nobody remotely serious thinks that
you'd be able to pass comprehensive legislation in this manner.
Democratic Sen. Kent Contrad has
said, "The Senate parliamentarian said to us that if you try
to write substantive health reform in reconciliation, you'll end
up with Swiss cheese." Even liberal bloggers Kevin
Drum and
Ezra Klein have poured cold water on the idea. While Klein
says that Democrats may still be able to move the ball down the
field with reconciliation by passing some watered down
legislation, I don't think that makes any sense. For one, I don't
see how it would be worth Democrats risking all of the political
blowback they'd suffer by using reconciliation just to end up
with a swiss cheese bill. And beyond that, if Democrats are going
to pass a bill without a government plan anyway, then liberals
may as well drop their objections and vote for a compromise
measure that they can pass the clean way.
So, with that said, I wouldn't get too excited by this talk of
reconciliation. It's just an act of chest-pounding from a
desperate White House that is watching its top legislative goal
get ripped apart by infighting within its own party. I call
bluff.
This post did remind me of the old "one loud voice can start an
avalanche" proposition.
But.
These guys have an awful lot of cash and effort in this thing;
whew...one of those "battle of Midway" moments in our history.
Andy| 12.13.09 @ 10:32PM
Do they have enough votes within their own party to pass
healthcare? I know they have 60 seats but can they get 51
votes?--Health questions
answered
ObamaCare can be killed dead in its tracks:
http://tinyurl.com/lnkr9v.
Nobody is talking about Senator Jim Demint's amendments that
would require a 60-vote majority to pass any health care reform
under certain conditions described in the link provided. Senator
Kent Conrad of the Finance Committee just decided to drop the 60
vote requirements.
One amendment was passed unanimously and the other by a margin of
79-14.
This is the tactic that can kill ObamaCare. The Social Security
Institute (www.socialsecurityinstitute.org) and the National
Tax-Limitation Committee (www.limittaxes.org) are desperately
trying to bring this to national attention.
After reading http://tinyurl.com/lnkr9v, please call Senator
Demint's office at 202-224-6121. I was told he would most likely
bring it up after the recess. Most likely does not cut it. While
I greatly appreciate the work done to date by Senator Demint and
he is working tirelessly for our rights, these amendments are his
babies and he should be hopping mad and screaming this from the
national rooftops.
Bob| 8.19.09 @ 1:39PM
Mr. Kiein,
I suspect their problem is even more elemental than described
above. Do they have enough votes within their own party to pass
healthcare? I know they have 60 seats but can they get 51 votes?
Given the infighting we have seen I suspect that it would be by a
razor thin margin.
There are a number of Democrats who have been only too happy to
hide behind GOP opposition.
1-bean@sbcglobal.net| 8.19.09 @ 1:08PM
Mr. Klein, thank you.
This post did remind me of the old "one loud voice can start an avalanche" proposition.
But.
These guys have an awful lot of cash and effort in this thing; whew...one of those "battle of Midway" moments in our history.
Andy| 12.13.09 @ 10:32PM
Do they have enough votes within their own party to pass healthcare? I know they have 60 seats but can they get 51 votes?--Health questions answered
gjmerits| 8.19.09 @ 1:33PM
Rules for thee but not for me.
ObamaCare can be killed dead in its tracks: http://tinyurl.com/lnkr9v.
Nobody is talking about Senator Jim Demint's amendments that would require a 60-vote majority to pass any health care reform under certain conditions described in the link provided. Senator Kent Conrad of the Finance Committee just decided to drop the 60 vote requirements.
One amendment was passed unanimously and the other by a margin of 79-14.
This is the tactic that can kill ObamaCare. The Social Security Institute (www.socialsecurityinstitute.org) and the National Tax-Limitation Committee (www.limittaxes.org) are desperately trying to bring this to national attention.
After reading http://tinyurl.com/lnkr9v, please call Senator Demint's office at 202-224-6121. I was told he would most likely bring it up after the recess. Most likely does not cut it. While I greatly appreciate the work done to date by Senator Demint and he is working tirelessly for our rights, these amendments are his babies and he should be hopping mad and screaming this from the national rooftops.
Bob| 8.19.09 @ 1:39PM
Mr. Kiein,
I suspect their problem is even more elemental than described above. Do they have enough votes within their own party to pass healthcare? I know they have 60 seats but can they get 51 votes? Given the infighting we have seen I suspect that it would be by a razor thin margin.
There are a number of Democrats who have been only too happy to hide behind GOP opposition.
The original Bob
ACLS Classes San Francisco| 3.13.10 @ 4:06AM
X Ray Tech Courses
Radiology Classes