« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Key Dem Senators Balk at Reconciliation Cram-Down for Health Reform

Reconciliation strategy for health care reform faces opposition from key Democratic Senators.

The great New York Times health care legislative strategy takes a lethal blow — again.

As Bloomberg reports:

Resorting to a budget procedure called reconciliation would infuriate Republicans and force Democrats to settle for more limited changes, said Jennifer Duffy, senior editor at the nonpartisan Cook Political Report in Washington.

“Both procedurally and politically, this may be a no- win,” Duffy said.

It seems pretty clear that Charlie Cook is doing everything he can to warn the Democrats not to do anything, uh “no-win.”

Bloomberg reveals the extent of what is known about where key Democratic Senator’s stand on using the Reconciliation process to do the health care cram-down:

[Senator] Conrad has repeatedly said the result would be “Swiss cheese” for legislation. “It does not work very well,” the North Dakota Democrat said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Aug. 23.

Conrad and Byrd warned against the procedure in April, before the Senate on a 53-43 vote passed a budget with nonbinding rules allowing for reconciliation.

“Using reconciliation to ram through complicated, far- reaching legislation is an abuse,” Byrd said in an April 29 statement.

Besides Byrd and Indiana Senator Evan Bayh, one of the four Democrats who voted against the budget was Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter, who said he disagreed with the provision allowing reconciliation for health care. The fourth, Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson, “opposes using reconciliation,” though he hasn’t ruled out voting for it, said spokesman Jake Thompson.

‘Real Mistake’

Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, told CNN on Aug. 23 the process would be a “real mistake.” Leaders may not be able to count on votes from Bayh and Democrat Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas, who prefer bipartisan legislation.

“There are a number of moderate Democrats who are going to feel uncomfortable voting for a bill that no Republicans support,” said Andrew Laperriere, managing director of the International Strategy and Investment Group in Washington.

Most aren’t tipping their hands. Aides to Bayh and Lincoln said the senators are focused on bipartisan solutions. Officials in Pryor’s and Landrieu’s offices weren’t available for comment.

The strategy also risks alienating Republicans, who could retaliate by slowing work on other legislation or blame Democrats for any future problems with their plan.

“They’ll be sorry if they do it in a partisan way,” said Senator Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican who’s working on a compromise, in an Aug. 26 interview.

Without Reconciliation, passing health care reform presents political calculus problem that is virtually unsolvable. Last I checked, math is not a strong suit of Members of Congress.

COMMENTS

  • billyd

    How are the Dems possibly going to try reconciliation without removing the Paygo and Byrd rule?

    In addition, the Byrd rule bars any entitlement increases or tax cuts that cost money beyond the five (or more) years covered by the reconciliation directive, unless these ?out-year? costs are fully offset by other provisions in the bill. This is one reason that Congress made the 2001 tax cuts expire after ten years, rather than making them permanent.

    Or perhaps, they can have the President invite the Director of the CBO over again and get him to fudge the numbers to show that in 10 years, Health Care would surely be Entitlement spending, and every single analysis says it will cost Billions as far as 10+ years from inception. Unless they plan on govt healthcare expiring in 10 years????

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=155

    • BlueLandRed

      They just keep firing the Senate parliamentarian and the head of the CBO until they get the answers they want.

      And I really don’t think they plan on worrying about anything past five years as I’m sure they’re convinced that once Americans have some sort of “Public Option”, they’ll love it so much that it will be considered political suicide to try and end it. Kinda like Medicare and Social Security. Sadly, the Dems might be right (or right enough) … entitlement programs do seem rather hard to terminate these days.

  • Dan Perrin

    he bends to their political needs and will.

    It is like getting the referee to change the rules, mid-game.

    If the Dems try it, it will get ugly quickly.

  • GT350

    Senator Bingamon (D-NM) supports using reconciliation to ram the healthcare bill through. I told his assistant, to try that maneuver and “you’ll have a tax revolution just like ’94″.

    I’m surprised, because he’s been cautious on this healthcare issue generally. Bingamon is part of the Finance committee as well as the HELP (health, education, labor, pension) committee.

    Please call his office and encourage him to rethink this position.
    (202) 224-5521
    (505) 988-6647

  • student

    The Democrats will do everything they can to pass a bill with a Trojan Horse provision that allows eventual nationalization of the healthcare system. Nationalizing the system allows them to make 15% of the workforce subject to the same dependence on government and electoral servitude that teachers and postal workers are already familiar with. Look for the “public option” to be renamed into a slightly different Trojan Horse with the same intended outcome. They cannot hold themselves back. When coupled with defenseless borders followed by an eventual Amnesty program and a census manned by Acorn-type activists and now centered under Rahm, this is their chance to remove that pesky democracy that keeps putting them out of control of government whenever they try to do their leftist thing.

  • MojoMan

    Isn’t a vote required to invoke the actual reconciliation procedure for this? If so, the Dems need to win a majority vote to win the allowance of reconciliation, and then need to win another majority vote for those portions of the bill that would be passed using reconciliation. No?

    If this is right, you could have all of the Senators who have mentioned being against the idea of reconciliation being used vote against that procedure, without them having to vote against a particular healthcare bill.

    Do the Dems currently have the votes to approve the usage of reconciliation for passing portions of the healthcare bill?

  • sermonfromthemount

    There is no question that Obumma and Pelosi are ignorant enough to try to force the Obamacare Disaster and the Cap & Trade idiocy through by any means possible!

    AND, if the Blue Dogs chicken out or are bought off, they may get one or both passed!

    However, it is beginning to appear certain that if they do, the 2010 election will destroy the Democrat’s ability to exert any influence for a long period thereafter. The voters reaction will be so strong that most, if not all, of the damage done by Obummer will be repealed and the foul stench now enveloping our government will begin to dissipate!!