Dems Intend to Bypass GOP on Health Compromise

[steven johnson]

Source: Associated Press

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: January 4, 2010
Filed at 8:19 p.m. ET

Skip to next paragraph Blog

The Caucus
The latest on President Obama, his administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.

More Politics News
WASHINGTON (AP) -- House and Senate Democrats intend to bypass traditional procedures when they negotiate a final compromise on health care legislation, officials said Monday, a move that will exclude Republican lawmakers and reduce their ability to delay or force politically troubling votes in both houses.

The unofficial timetable calls for final passage of the measure to remake the nation's health care system by the time President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address, probably in early February.

Democratic aides said the final compromise talks would essentially be a three-way negotiation involving top Democrats in the House and Senate and the White House, a structure that gives unusual latitude to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.

These officials said there are no plans to appoint a formal House-Senate conference committee, the method Congress most often uses to reconcile differing bills. Under that customary format, a committee chairman is appointed to preside, and other senior lawmakers from both parties and houses participate in typically perfunctory public meetings while the meaningful negotiations occur behind closed doors.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/04/us/politics/AP-US-Health-Care-Overhaul.html?_r=1

---

Looks like the skids are getting greased.

[dkf]

1. And they said Expanding medicare through reconciliation would blow up the

Senate? Yet they use all other kinds of bypass procedures. Its a crock.

[FreakinDJ]

2. How many votes will the Senate need........ 50 or 60

[Jackpine Radical]

3. I think 50 at this point.

[lapfog_1]

7. nope, even with this procedure (ping pong)

they need 60 to "place the bill on the table". The republicans will filibuster that vote.

After that vote takes place, then they need 50 + Veep Biden to pass the final bill.

[liberal N proud]

12. Along with Joe LIEberman

[Jackpine Radical]

15. So in other words, it ain't goin' nowhere.

[lapfog_1]

16. No, so long as it doesn't deviate too far from the Senate bill

and the "bought" politicians are honest ones (the definition of an honest politician is one who STAYS bought once you've paid them), they have the 60 votes. What remains to be seen is whether the slightly modified Senate bill (with no public option) passes in the House, where the progressive caucus has said that they won't vote for the bill without a public option.

My guess is that there will be no public option, but there will be both state and national exchanges, and every state can opt in to the national exchange, set up their own exchange, or possibly have no exchange.

[Jackpine Radical]

17. What I meant, and was unclear in communicating, is that efforts to

revise the bill with PO, state SP options, etc. aren't going anywhere. I take for granted that the bill itself will pass. All I see coming from that is things getting worse for providers and consumers and better for insurance companies.

[mzmolly]

23. Interesting as MSNBC didn't seem clear on this.

Do you have a link or ??? with more info on that?

Thanks :hi:

[Faryn Balyncd]

4. Will Pelosi send Louise Slaughter, Kucinich & US Marines to play ping pong with Reid, or softball...

....players?

I guess we'll see if Pelosi is serious, or if we're being played for fools.

[IsItJustMe]

5. I guess I won't loose any sleep about it, whatever happens. They lost me a long time ago with this

corporate give away.

[veganlush]

6. according to the NYTimes piece cited....

...they would still need 60 votes in the senate, so I guess it's all a waste of time, Lieberman's bill...

[Rosa Luxemburg]

8. So we should get a public option right?

[marshall]

9. No reason why not

No roadblocks ahead--they can take whatever course they truly want to take. It's remarkable and doesn't happen too often.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. yes public option here we come

[mvd]

19. Wouldn't the public option have to be added later..

since the bill needs 60 votes again in the Senate? Progressives say they are committed to improving the bill; I just hope President Obama and the House/Senate leaders are as committed.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

22. people have to keep pushing their congressmen (and women)

[Zoeisright]

10. And they didn't do this all along, exactly, WHY???

Sheesh.

[Abq_Sarah]

21. Uh.. because

It kind of flies in the face of the stated goal of transparency.

It's better to provide yourself a little political cover than to blaze away with a crappy bill no one seems to like. Now, we'll have a crappy bill and no one to blame.

[pundaint]

11. I would love to be pleasantly surprised. But, based on experience, every opportunity

for the Democrats to let down the People of America has been fully exploited so far. I am expecting an additional nickels worth of benefits at the price of a dollar.

[Jamastiene]

14. I won't get my hopes up too high.

I'm sure the "secret ingredient" will be insurance companies. They'll be there in some way, shape or form...most likely in the wallets and pocketbooks of our government leaders. :(

[Javaman]

18. Something is getting greased...

but I don't think it's the skids.

I'm still skeptical.

[Zorra]

20. Perfect. Dems can get a lot done if they just simply ignore republicans.

This should be the MO of Congress and the WH from this point on. Republicans have shown that they have no productive ideas, and that their only real interest is in halting all constructive, beneficial progress.
:applause: