Patient Power

Sneaking health bill through “reconciliation”

From the New York Times:

Seeking to avert the collapse of major health care legislation, the White House and Democratic leaders in Congress face a crucial decision about whether to use a procedural maneuver that would allow them to advance the bill despite the loss of their 60-vote majority in the Senate.

The maneuver, known as budget reconciliation, could allow President Obama and his party to muscle the legislation through Congress with a simple majority vote in the Senate. But it carries numerous risks, including the possibility of a political backlash against what Republicans would be sure to cast as parliamentary trickery.

The procedure is also subject to complex rules that could make it difficult for Democrats to include all the provisions needed to win approval of the bill, especially among rank-and-file House Democrats. For instance, it might be difficult to include provisions related to insurance coverage for abortions.

Brian Williams describes it this way (summarizing Dick Morris):

1. The House would agree to pass the Senate version of ObamaCare and send it to the President’s desk for signature.
2. The House and Senate would agree to subsequently approve some of the House’s amendments to the package — using the reconciliation process (which does not require 60 votes because it is not subject to filibuster).

• Michael Bennet’s lame support for “public option” via reconciliation
• Obama vs. reconciliation & an update
• House may pass the Senate health bill as is
• AP on health bills: “meaningful negotiations occur behind closed doors”
• Will House pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it?