« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

DCCC Chair VanHollen: We Might Pass Health Care With Reconciliation

Preparing for a Coakley Loss?

Is this another bone being tossed to the liberals, or is VanHollen signaling a potential change in strategy?

Even if Democrats lose the special election to pick a new Massachusetts senator Tuesday, Congress may still pass health-care overhaul through a process called reconciliation, a top House Democrat said.

That procedure requires 51 votes rather than the 60 needed to prevent Republicans from blocking votes on President Barack Obama’s top legislative priorities. That supermajority is at risk as the Massachusetts race has tightened.

“Even before Massachusetts and that race was on the radar screen, we prepared for the process of using reconciliation,” Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said.

“Getting health-care reform passed is important,” Van Hollen said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. “Reconciliation is an option.”

Should Democrats take that route, the legislation would have to be scaled back because of Senate rules.

Congressional Democrats are bragging today about how close they are to a deal on the president’s health care rationing bill. Commentators seems to agree that the hope is to get this done quickly, so swing-seat Democrats can focus on jobs. They also want to ensure it gets done before the president bleeds so much clout that it becomes impossible to pass. If they’re really so close to a deal, why is VanHollen suggesting they might go back almost to square one and use reconciliation?

Opting for reconciliation would cause a partisan war in the Senate, and render it nearly impossible to tackle any other major legislation this year. But then again, what else were Senate Democrats going to do, anyway? It would certainly sour independent voters. But they’re more or less gone anyway. It also might cost Democrats the seats of Harry Reid, Blanche Lincoln, and the moderate House Democrats – who are more or less toast already, too. Plus, if Democrats only need 51 votes, a victory by Scott Brown might not hurt their cause.

Could VanHollen be serious?

COMMENTS

  • http://vbushmills.blogtownhall.com/ vassar

    Don’t get your hopes down

    Cheers

  • Swamp_Yankee

    The only thing more damaging to them then the consequences of reconciliation, is spending eight months on a bill and wasting all their political capital on a bill that implodes. Damned if they do, damned if they dont. If they are going down, they might as push their pet legislation through in the process.

  • bs

    And don’t believe anyone who says “Oh, they’d NEVER use that”. They would. They are desperate to show that the GOP can’t beat them. This has nothing to do with passing healthcare reform/rationing/socialism. This has become all about winning. They don’t give a **** what they win. The O has to have a victory, and he/they will get it at any cost.

    It’s hari-kari, I tell you.

  • izoneguy

    It will make it that much easier to repeal ObamaCare using the same
    procedure…..or at least make it so that ObamaCare never gets off the ground.

    Can’t wait until we can repeal Social Security, get rid of welfare, scale back the IRS, EPA, Dept. of Energy & Education…..

    • IJB

      Of course, the best thing for us is if they just drop it.

      I suspect if Brown wins in MA, they’ll just drop it.

      But, failing that, Reconciliation is the next best thing that could happen for our side, both politically and tactically/legislatively – it will have a built in time-limit that way, and would be *much* easier to repeal as well.

  • redpens

    We’ll repeal that monster you call hell-th care. And then we’ll cut ALL funding to the EPA, IRS, Dept of Energy, Education, and any and all government agencies that we deem need to be de-funded. Be afraid Chrissy boy, be very afraid.

  • Oz

    It either IS something that has to do with passing the budget or it isn’t something that has to do with passing the budget.

    It can be one in one congress and the other in the other congress.

    If they pass it, you stop it by filing lawsuits so that it won’t go in effect until after 2010 elections.

    Then you nationalize the election and win back the Senate on the simple promise of overturning the health care monstrosity.

    • Third Street

      Because the very next time Republicans have the Senate back, and retake the White House — 2012, to be exact — repealing ObamaCare will be much more realistic than it appears now.

      Getting 60 votes is tough. The Democrats have found out for themselves just how tough it is. But if the Dems pass this via the reconciliation process, the rules are out the window. All we’ll need is 50 senators and a Republican VP, and this sucker’s gone.

      Now, I can already hear the groans of “yes, but… and I know that’s it’s going to take a serious transfusion of testicular fortitude on the part of the GOP leadership. But this can be done. It’s much easier to replace the leadership than it is to get to a 60-seat majority.

      I don’t want the filibuster to be destroyed; it will make the legislative process much more volatile and the Democrats much more dangerous when they have power. But if this is the road they want to go down, if they’re prepared to set this precedent, then we should be fully prepared to fight future congressional battles on these terms and not only kill ObamaCare with a little reconciliation of our own, but use the process to pass some real reforms.

      You want war, you leftist pigs, we’ll give you a war.

      • benko

        “Now, I can already hear the groans of ?yes, but? and I know that?s it?s going to take a serious transfusion of testicular fortitude on the part of the GOP leadership. But this can be done.”

        It would be nice, but I don’t think there are enough DeMints and Browns i.e. enough republicans with “testicular fortitute”.

        • Third Street

          It takes TWO DeMints/Browns/whoever. One as Majority Leader and one as Majority Whip. Get the right people in those positions and we can go from there.

          • louisiana

            I will do my best to invent, manufacture, & distribute a kevlar cod cup for any
            man who feels he needs protection &”support”. (hope I don’t get banned for this remark).

      • Mayhem

        From day one, reconciliation has meant one thing: the death of the filibuster. For 200 years we’ve been under super-majority rule. If the Dems want to nuke the Senate, they may get what they want, but they won’t be able to escape the fallout. Don’t think for a second that the Republicans won’t operate the Senate under majority-rule the day they get power back.

        It may be a victory, but it will be short lived.

  • AceInTX

    They go down this road…it’s time to start objecting to unanimous consent requests and doing every other stalling tactic Republicans can think of…

    We have the people on our sides…and the longer the Dems focus on this to the exclusion of jobs…the better for us in November!

    Some Dems are getting impatient now…and if we can delay…they’ll end up doing our work in defeating this FOR us!

    • AceInTX
      • bs

        at least as discussed by the GOP before, is/was the elimination of the filibuster for judicial nominees.

        • AceInTX
  • http://keydesignsllc.com bkeyser

    Notice how the recent noise has been from Hoyer (D-MD) saying how close a deal is, and VanHollen (D-MD): this thing is such a crap sandwich, we’ll probably have to nuclear to pass it?

    As a life-long Maryland resident, I can tell you NEVER believe what you hear from Maryland Democrats. Pathological fibbery is a genetic trait, as is stealing gift cards for the poor, apparently.

    • joayn

      and his supporters. This is just a big psyche-out to subvert the energy behind Brown’s race, plain and simple. It’s the only thing transparent about these dinks.

      Plus, they used the typical Friday Bomb. This is meant to sit and ferment through the weekend, then Dr. Utopia swoops in on Sunday, and voila, mission accomplished.

      I’m phone banking for Brown this weekend – how about you? We can’t lose this race now!

  • WarEagle01

    They would need to gut the current legislation so it only includes budget items and anything they do pass will sunset in five years.

  • erod
    • izoneguy

      It’s just politics – maybe these wankers should have listened to the people instead of Pelosi, Reid & Obama.

      • fightnright

        It’s pretty obvious that the Dems are aware they are now down to depending on the elites, the media, academia and their 20-something % left-wing/Obama inner city base to provide cover for their rockstar, empty suit spokesmodel and his Grecian columned stage show.

        All they want now is to ram enough of the government takeover of the private sector (or what is left of it) and their dependency nurturing, dumbing down legislation that will permanently affect and afflict the US citizenry, and the 60′s radicals have taken their last shot. They know full well that the little man behind the curtain is about to be exposed, and the machinations of the next few months on Capital Hill are like the last gasps and flopping of a dying organism.

        • fightnright

          see, theyv dummed me dowen awreddy….. :/

      • erod

        They see their power slipping away and while I wouldn’t put it past them to do this ? my gut tells me that the comments are empty threats and saber rattling.

        What happens if Brown wins or draws close? What’s to stop some of these Congressmen from telling these guys to go take a hike and fall on their own sword. I’m not saying all of them will do this, but there is fear setting in. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd have both hinted that the bill is in trouble with a Brown win. What I’m trying to say is that they are scared and this is just a way of dispiriting us.

        Besides 51 votes are hard to get and I know they have had that amount before, but what happens if a Dem losses in MA? They can pretty much lose anywhere can’t they? It changes the whole dynamic.

        I just don’t buy this bull about the reconciliation deal. The news has been all over the place on this bill since this morning. “Oh we’ll pass this by Tuesday, no wait we’ll do reconciliation, but it might not happen because the bill will die if we lose this race, yada, yada, yada.”

        Don’t buy into it, let’s keep are heads up and help Brown get the win. These people are petty punks and I refuse to be intimidated by them. And after Brown wins, this bill will die and Obama will look like a buffoon courtesy of “We the People.”

  • E Pluribus Unum

    If I understand correctly, if any Senator objects to the seating of the conference committee, reconciliation does not happen.

    True? Not true? Does the rooster crow at midnight?

    • Swamp_Yankee
      • joayn

        … won’t this “expenditure” expire in five years?

        • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

          ..

        • Swamp_Yankee

          … but I’m not an authority on the subject.

          • joayn

            According to the senate’s dateline.

            But there’s 2012 a commin’ … it’s really a lose lose for them. This ain’t gonna happen.

  • Menlo

    It’s already a done deal. Even if Brown were to win, that thing will get through WAY before Brown has a chance to get in the Senate, most likely in the next week or two. The bill is mostly complete now, and more than enough previous opponents in the House have pledged their support.

    The only thing left will be for us to defy it, to refuse to buy insurance, and to refuse to pay the penalty. Hopefully, the provision will remain that prohibits the government from putting someone in jail or taking away his property for nonpayment of penalties.

    • joayn
      • jccbin

        what the heck is an eeyore???????

        • http://erickbrockway.wordpress.com/ Erick Brockway

          …and

          Oh no, probably just looose anyway

          • joayn
          • http://erickbrockway.wordpress.com/ Erick Brockway

            Eeyore is kewlies.

          • Third Street

            And you know why? Because, just when everything looked hopeless, instead of glooming and giving up Eeyore took control of his situation and figured out that he could put that popped balloon inside that empty honey jar.

            Do you hear me, Mitch McConnell?

        • Return to Revolution

          http://images.paraorkut.com/img/funnypics/images/e/eeyore_emo-12684.jpg

      • Aaron Gardner

        Natural skepticism is not abnormal. Menlo is on our side.

        Ok?

        • joayn

          Here ya go, Menlo.

          http://hillbuzz.org/2010/01/10/

          • Aaron Gardner

            Do that first. If they have a track record of being a stick in the mud, fire away. If not, keep it more encouraging.

            Deal?

          • joayn

            But for you, I will make an exception.

            And, yes, I will try to be a better grasshopper.

          • Aaron Gardner

            ;)

          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            very easy to affix labels, isn’t it???! Hopefully the point won’t be lost, but since Aaron’s already engaged you, perhaps you try getting to “persuading” why someone should change their tune rather than demeaning, or the Blamstick may come your way real soon.

            I do agree, negativity all the time isn’t good. However, all sunshine and lollipops despite HONEST ANALYSIS OF REALITY that someone sees isn’t productive either. Cautious Optimism over (Will/Would) Over-Confidence and/or the Sky Is Falling other direction is best. IMO.

      • Menlo

        I’ve just seen enough in the past six months to know how this scenario plays out. I see it not as pessimism but as reality.

        • http://erickbrockway.wordpress.com/ Erick Brockway

          But next time the Dems lose, it’ll be a HUGE loss.
          That’s why we need as many real conservatives in potential positions of leadership in the party as possible.
          I’m counting on next time to be next Tuesday.

        • joayn

          However, consider these facts. The first, and most important, is the Massachusetts race. Van Hollen is one of the biggest party hacks on God’s beautiful green earth, and he’s hoping this will deflate Brown supporters. Van Hollen’s probably said all kinds of b.s. in the past to manipulate elections. Past elections. And I have a feeling 2010 will be nothing like past elections.

          Plus, the Borgs just got through brokering another illicit deal with the unions, so that shifts costs somewhere, and I seriously doubt if they’ve figured that out yet. They claim to be close to a deal, but Democrats are superb masters of manipulation as well as swell whistlers – as in past the graveyard.

          Also, they just lost another Democrat today. Right after their superfantabulous retreat. Despite the superfantabulous speach/pep talk by their master.

          The polls are ever changing in Brown’s favor and they’re completely flummoxed. Nothing, but nothing, is going their way. Until the election and until Brown’s seated (he will win), we can expect more of the same from these guys. This was a stupid, stupid statement by Van Hollen. With Obama going to MA on Sunday? Van Hollen just helped Miss Martha lose this race, me thinks.

          • Menlo

            I agree Brown could well win this race. The problem I see is that the bill is going to be voted on before he has a chance to be seated. The Democrats will delay it as much as they can, and that is a very long time.

            The house Democratic leaders have announced they are going to have a bill by next week, and their record on this bill leads me to believe they will. There is no reason it could not get voted on within at least one or two weeks, well before the Massachusetts senator is seated.

  • crosley

    First of all, I’m not sure you could pass many components of this bill with reconciliation, but assuming you can, it would be incredibly easy to repeal and it would also have a 10 year limit, in which case ObamaCare would only be in place for about 4 years with the number games they’re playing.

    This process would also look incredibly illegitimate to many swing voters, and I’m guessing Republicans like Coburn and DeMint would gum up the Senate until the midterm elections (over the wishes of spineless Senators like Graham).

  • malbis

    then they will hand the Senate as well as the House to Republicans this Fall.

    Now, if I just had strong hopes that GOP control of both houses of Congress would result in something conservative, sensible and different than what happened the last time.

    If this is the way things are going to go–reconcilliation, nuclear option, bulling ahead come heck or high water–then it becomes critical for conservatives to get control at the precinct level.

    • joayn

      I have a slight suspicion that we will let the GOP know what we expect.

  • walter_hanson

    Okay if rules don’t matter than I guess the President can put in place his cabinent appointments without senate advice. After all the uncountable czars didn’t have to be confirmed.

    It’s amazing though the Demnocrats actually held hearings to find out what a couple of US Attorneys were fired even though the rules were crystal clear the President had the right to fire them so why hold the hearings.

    What we got is the Democrats are always changing the rules so they can try to win. When the Republicans are trying to change the rules we’re cheating.

    The public has it figured out who is cheating.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • bonkey

    The Byrd rule says that you can’t use reconciliation for anything that involves medicare. I know they have shown a willingness to violate senate rules already so, who knows.

    • bonkey
  • vamoose

    Here’s the situation: the is no wiggle room amongst Dems in the House and in the Senate. What Van Hollen is trying to do is create enough wiggle room in the senate–by lowering the threshhold to 51 votes–to allow the house version of the healthcare jam down to pass the senate. Why? Because he and Hoyer and Pelosi can’t get the votes in the house to pass the senate version. Van Hollen’s DCCC has also injected itself into the MA senate race for the same reason: they can’t cobble together enough votes in the house based upon any compromise with the senate.

    We are seeing a form of self-destructive madness coming out of the Democratic Party like a Vegas gambler trying to win it all back. We can only hope that they destroy their party before they destroy the country.

  • joayn

    Everybody posting here needs to phone bank or donate. I think Brown is going to win. We must ramp up our support, show Scott Brown we’re not giving in to the the evil Borg in Washington, and help him cross that finish line.

    THESE PEOPLE WANT US TO GIVE UP AND BECOME EEYORES!!

    And I say hell no to that!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

    In the House, the Democrats only have 3 votes to spare. Would the backlash from the reconciliation process frighten off enough House members?

    • SteveLA

      Senate Republicans will filibuster, and I’m betting Nelson and maybe a few others will not vote to end the filibuster with a new Senator Brown in a holding pattern.

      The fear put into the club known as the Senate by a Brown victory will be real and strange things will be happening.

      • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

        That’s okay, though. The class of 2010 is made of Joe the Plumbers who are taking back the Republican party and returning it to Reagan’s vision. We’re glad to have Scott Brown on board.

  • WIBadger

    …this is just a trial balloon. I wouldn’t put it past them to take this approach but the blow back would be like NOTHING they have ever seen before.

    I dare them to try it !

  • itrytobenice

    we take both the Senate and the House in 2010.

    They would be screwed and tattooed.

  • Mayhem

    The same problems that plagued this route to death last fall still exist today. Reconciliation is a nice idea on paper, but when you put it through Senate procedure, things get way too messy. The Republicans could tie up the Senate with points of order on the germaneness of items in the bill to the budget (since thats what reconciliation is about). By the end of the process, the bill could be butchered and totally worthless, not to mention the fact that the House would have to pass it again, as modified by the senate.

  • Third Street

    Reconciliation may or may not be a bluff. I can certainly see this crowd of kamikazes employing it. On the other hand, if reconciliation truly was their end strategy, I don’t think the behind-closed-doors Democrats would be telling us about it like this.

    What Van Hollen’s statement was really meant to do was depress us from working for and electing Scott Brown on Tuesday. You really needn’t bother, Republicans; we’ve got the fix in anyway. Why knock yourselves out on Brown? Why fight it? We’ll screw you anyway. Go on, enjoy your weekend. Stand down. Take a break. Stop worrying so much about this little election in Massachusetts.

    This is SOP for the Democrats. Don’t fall for it. Don’t let them depress you. Don’t let them wear you down. Don’t let them get you believing that Tuesday’s election doesn’t matter or that enough of their number aren’t scared to death and ready to snap like twigs over this bill.

    • mschmitt

      This is more likely about keeping their loony toon base satiated… Pushing this bill with reconciliation would be a fool’s gambit, at best.

      • joayn

        what Third Street said re: psychological warfare. Right on, bros. For the base and the race.

    • 6eorge Jetson

      Someone quoted the number of Charlie Cook’s “competitive” and “potentially competitive” Democratic House seats at 40 and 50?, respectively.

      Almost surely, the Massachusettes Senate race wasn’t classified by Cook as in either of those categories a few weeks ago.

      The House bill passed 220-215 with 39 Dems voting no. While some of those 39 were likely given a free pass by Nancy Pelosi to vote no, if Brown wins, the ~90 or so Democratic Representatives in competitive or potentially competitive races have to realize that the voters won’t be giving free passes for “yes” votes in November.

      • Third Street

        And that wouldn’t surprise me.

        • 6eorge Jetson

          With the public option (uggh!) & Stupak .

  • chbroussard

    Mr. Van Hollen is in the House of Representatives. So now he’s telling us what the Senate is going to do? Has somebody put duct tape on Harry Reid’s mouth and appointed Mr. Van Hollen their mouthpiece? This is the biggest bunch of losers assembled in one location in the history of this country.

  • The_Gadfly

    as things stand right now, Americans are generally willing to run the upcoming revolt through the ballot box the way we’ve done with pretty much every issue except slavery since the 1776 era. Go via reconciliation and I’m not sure that continues to hold. Armed insurrection is never a pretty site. They may have the unions thugs, but I rather suspect that a military already suspicious of The Big 0 but following his legally issued orders isn’t likely to act as a single organized unit firing on citizens. In fact, if it were to act a single organized unit, I’d be wagering the aim goes the other way. Any rational person can see there are all kinds of bad precedents down this pathway, and a Senate as volatile as the House may be the least bad of them. The problem is, it isn’t clear The Big 0 and his team have remembered Scarface’s first rule of dealing drugs: never snort from your own stash. They may have been hitting it so hard they actually believe the rubbish they’ve been feeding their minions.

  • renny

    If you want to cause confusion for Coakley go to Organizing for America Chaos (OFA Chaos). It is a social networking web site to thwart its use to organize call banks, canvassing events and any event to get out the vote for Democrat Martha Coakley (OFA) running against Scott Brown for Senator in Massachusetts. This operation runs 1/15/10 ? 1/19/10. Spread this around. The more that people participate, the better the results will be.

    And as to reconciliation, wouldn’t it gut all those agencies and commissions that are supposed to decide who gets treatment and who gets to die? They aren’t general budget items?

    If all that command and control is taken out of the bill, isn’t its purpose defeated?

    Medicare is not in the general budget, so all the wanking about Medicare would fall aside.

    The fees and penalties and taxes that aren’t taxes would also be gutted because they wouldn’t be in a general appropriations budget.

    Ergo, I will doubt the Dems. want reconciliation, even if they could pass it. They would not have the idiot bill they have spent so much time and energy cobbling together like parts of Frankenstein.

    And a 101.5 FM radio NJ broadcast this am says a poll gives Scott Brown 11 pts. It Brown wins by 10 pts. in MA, Pelosi and Reid will swallow their tongues and go into seizure (as will maybe old-style Reps.).