HCR is not dead

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

This may have seemed premature when first posted by since we are going to be at 59 it is the time to talk about it.

A few facts to internalize in order to understand the situation: The Senate bill was never going to be improved much. The Nelson abortion language was never going to be removed. Those were realities last week and remain realities today. What is described here would not produce a great bill but would produce an overall result comparable to whatever would have happened if Coakley had won. Lieberman, Nelson, et al would have veto power over any conference bill so the idea that we were going to see dramatic improvements was always folly. What is described below would not be worse than what was already baked in the cake.

The HCR plan isn't great but Coaley's loss doesn't nessecarily make it any less great.


Scenario: House passes Senate bill in a deal with House liberals that certain provisions in the Senate bill will be changed later under reconciliation--notably restoring the union 'cadillac tax' deal. (or, if it looks like the votes are there, substituting the House bill wealth-tax funding method for the policy-surtax.)

It is said that this would be a leap of faith for House liberals because the WH or Senate could sell them out... the fix would never happen.

But once Pelosi keeps her promise to put the "fix" before the House everything else falls into place. (Assuming we have 50 actual Dems in the Senate, which seems to be the case.)

Here is how it would go down:

1) House passes Senate bill. (Senate cannot act on the bill again.) President signs it.

2) Pelosi puts new "fix" bill before the House in form that qualifies for Senate budget reconciliation rules.

3) Budgetary "fix" passes the House, goes to Senate.

4) Fix cannot be blocked; can only be filibustered for 32 or 48 hours. (I forget the exact number, but it's only a couple of days.) It only take 41 votes to uphold a ruling by the chair that the bill qualifies as budgetary. Fix passes Senate with 50+1.

5) President signs it:

At no point does the WH have to do anything except not veto the fix. The Senate blue dogs play no part in the process because reconciliation rules apply... their votes are never needed. All Reid has to do is have a real Dem in the chair to rule (correctly) on the propriety of reconciliation.

And it is irrelevant whether we have 60 or 59 in the Senate... it's not a factor at any point.

The strategy results in a slightly stronger bill than what we would get through conference.

So why, you ask, why didn't we do this in the first place? Because we couldn't have gotten 60 votes in the senate for the non-budgetary stuff if the blue-dogs thought the budgetary stuff would be changed later without their agreement. They accepted a negotiated package based on inclusion of things like the cadillac-plan tax. So we would be betraying the betrayers.

This might even help blue-dogs in tough elections because they get a free vote against the plan. (We don't need their votes so they can go full wing-nut if it makes folks in Nebraska or Arkansas happy.)

Important note: Unfortunately this would leave the Nelson abortion language in place, but that will happen in every scenario. This is important to recognize: In normal order Ben Nelson is the 60th vote and has absolute veto power over any change to his abortion language. And the House cannot threaten him much because he would probably be happy to see the bill go down. (His polls are not looking good.) So this method doesn't change the Nelson language situation but it does not make it any worse than it already is.

Obvious caveat: If there are not enough votes in the House to pass the fix, or if it cannot reach 51 in the senate, those are different issues. Pelosi can promise to get something on the floor but she cannot promise that it will pass... obviously the fix has to be designed to be something that can get 50%+1 in House and Senate. We cannot reasonably hope for measures that cannot even get 50 votes in the Senate.

[NightWatcher]

1. so today they are going to get a spine?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. Fortunately, not much spine needed

If Pelosi can get the House to pass the Senate bill and puts the fix provisions before the House the whole thing rolls along by itself without anyone else showing much spine.

Are there 50 Dem senators who would cast a pro-union vote? I think so. There probably are not 54, but I think there are 50.

If Pelosi can craft procedurally proper reconciliation eligible tweaks that can get 50 votes in the Senate then the thing encounters no major obstacles.

(If people are so freaked out that we cannot get 50 votes in the senate then that's what it is.)

[Clio the Leo]

2. far from it. NT

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. I figured HCR scenarios would be a big topic today, but folks are too mad

[ShortnFiery]

3. Gee I hope it's dead ... Like the Wicked Old Witch of The West ---->

Absolutely, POSITIVELY DEAD.

First, do no harm: Medicare for all!

If not, BANK on the Democratic Party losing 2010 and losing it BIG! :(