Procedural question: When the Senate and the House bills are reconciled...

[LostInAnomie]

... will the vote for the final bill require only a simple majority, or will it be susceptible to the filibuster as well?

[Cant trust em]

1. I don't have a solid answer for you, but I suspect that it will be susceptible to filibuster

Since it's not the same bill that passed out of the senate, it would be to easy to have radical changes from the house and then require less scrutiny.

[zaj]

2. Requires 60 votes again.

I had the same question, but it has been answered for me over the last 6 months or so.

[lapfog_1]

3. Already discussed by Senator Nelson.

There will be a filibuster (not properly called a Cloture because there will be no debate and amendments cannot be offered).

He has stated that if the bill does not have his language in it for abortions, he will join with Republicans and filibuster after it comes back from conference. He and Lieberman have also stated that the bill coming back from conference cannot have the Public Option placed back in or they both will join with Republicans in the filibuster.

After the filibuster fails, there will be a final vote to adopt the joint resolution. That vote will require only 50 Senators (and Joe Biden if needed).

[Egnever]

4. Gonna be interesting to see who blinks on that one.

[lapfog_1]

5. I think the deal is done. The bill coming out of conference will

be the Reid bill, as currently amended by the manager's amendment.

There may be some slight tweaks here and there, but all the major aspects will remain unchanged.

[Egnever]

9. I dont know I heard pelosi stomping her feet the other day

I think theres some restlessness on the house side.

[lapfog_1]

12. we'll see. maybe before Jan 1.

If it changes Nelson's abortion language OR offers any Public Option or expansion of Medicare... well, you can kiss Health Care Reform goodbye.

She might get some other things changed. How the claim denied appeal process works. Maybe add more money to the student loan program for Doctors and Physicians Assistants (PAs). Maybe other "edge" stuff.

But the mandates will still be there. The subsidies will not be increased. The abortion atrocity will still be there, no Public Option, no expansion of Medicare, no cap on insurance company profits, probably no changes to premium charge multipliers for pre-existing conditions and/or age. And probably another half dozen core aspects of the legislation will not change.

Not if they want this to pass.

[pnwmom]

6. If there is no debate I'm still confused about what the filibuster is.

If it's not to prevent cloture, that is, to end debate, then what is it about?

[lapfog_1]

8. The rules of the Senate are, at best, arcane.

but I believe that there will be a motion to place the conference bill "on the desk". And that motion is one that can be filibustered.

After that filibuster is broken (not sustained), the bill can be voted on.

Cloture is the process by which debate on a bill which is open for discussion (already submitted and on the desk) is ended.

Bills coming back from conference between the Senate and House cannot be debated or amended (by rule). But they must be placed on the desk before they can be voted on (up or down).

That's my (limited) understanding of the process. If someone here has a better explanation, please feel free to correct me on this.

[pnwmom]

13. But filibustering, as I understand it, means taking the floor and speaking (on and on)

and the only way we have to stop that, under the rules, is to vote to end the debate, that is, vote for cloture.

But when there is no debate, then there would be no speech to end, right? So what is happening then?

[lapfog_1]

17. Only in Hollywood.

Not in our Senate.

Our Senate has a rule that should someone, anyone (and only one) indicate that they are filibustering a motion, then it requires 60 votes to end the filibuster. Nobody has to read the phone books or list of ingredients or War and Peace.

[pnwmom]

18. But I thought that it was still possible to call for them to do it

the old way.

[lapfog_1]

19. Only by changing the rules of the Senate.

Which, at the beginning of each Session (once every two years) they can do with a simple majority vote, however once the session is underway, rule changes require a super-majority (67 votes).

Which is why Harry backed off when this was brought up before.

[pnwmom]

20. This is what I was referring to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster#cite_note-crs-10

Procedural filibuster
In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses.<11>

[lapfog_1]

21. But, by agreement between the majority leader and the minority

leader, going back some 5 or 6 congressional sessions now, they have agreed to not invoke that provision of the rules, out of deference to older members (like Robert Byrd). The requirement for someone to do a West Wing "Stackhouse Filibuster" was seen as unfair to elderly Senate members. And the Senate is all about "comity" (and, sadly, sick comedy too).

Anyway, there has been agreement to not invoke that rule even when the Repukes were in charge, and Harry hasn't seen fit to break it.

[clear eye]

7. A savvy DUer said on another thread

that there will be a conference committee, not reconciliation. (They are 2 very different things.) After the bill comes out of the committee, an up or down vote happens in each house w/o debate or possibility of filibuster. Only if the bill loses in the Senate in that first vote, does debate, amendments, and the possibility of filibuster start all over again. There are never filibusters in the House due to its rules. The Senate is tired. They will vote for whatever comes out of committee due to fear their colleagues will lynch them if they make it drag out further.

Since committe negotiations are behind closed doors and the public can't see who to blame, things usually move in the direction of the big corporate interests. For that reason, I expect the final bill to be more like the Senate's than the House's.

[lapfog_1]

10. Then that "savvy" DUer is wrong.

They are correct in saying that conference has nothing to do with reconciliation (a formal budget process, entirely within the Senate, involving a person called the Parliamentarian). Conference bills (bills passed by both the House and Senate simultaneously, which then have to be "melded" - the term is actually reconciled, but has nothing to do with "reconciliation") are sent back to each chamber for final approval. By rule, there is no debate on such bills, nor can any amendment be offered. However, there is a process needed to place the bill "on the table" for an up or down vote. That process CAN BE filibustered, and it will be. There will be a vote (60 needed again) to end the filibuster. After that, another vote to pass the conference bill will be taken (50 votes needed) and then, if both chambers pass it, it is sent to the President for signing into law.

You are likely correct that the bill coming from conference will be the Senate bill as presently amended. This is because the final bill must pass the 60 vote threshold one more time, and both Lieberman and Nelson have stated that they will join the Republican filibuster should the bill be "substantially different" than the Senate bill.

[clear eye]

11. Thanks for the details.

Even though you dashed all hope for an improved bill.

[Toots]

15. Actually if the Bill is allowed on the table for a vote it takes 51 votes to pass not 50.

Although if 50 votes are received the VP can cast the tie breaking vote to give the Democrats 51.

[lapfog_1]

16. I assumed everyone knew that already.

50 votes Aye and the bill passes (Biden is the tie breaker)

[jeanpalmer]

14. Hard to believe Nelson

would be mistaken about his ability to filibuster it. Seems like he would have researched it thoroughly before committing to vote for the current bill.