I don't know the process, but what are the chances the Bill gets stronger after the merge??

[KansasVoter]

Isn't it a better than 50% chance the Bill will weaken after they merge the House and Senate versions?

Also, if it gets stronger will that just give Lieberman another reason to vote against it and the Blue Dogs more reason to not support it?

I can't imagine a merged bill will make a better Bill.

I hope I am wrong. Any insight would be great. Thanks!

[MNDemNY]

1. Slim, at best, Nil, most likely.

If we are really lucky they might just get to keep some of the House language..........Pitts-Stupak !!

[Better Believe It]

2. The only bill that will pass must have the blessing of the insurance industry and Big Pharma and

Catholic bishops!

[babylonsister]

3. I don't know that Lieberman gets another vote after this one...

not all members go to conference, which at this point sounds like a good thing. I don't know how the committee is selected though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conference_committee

A conference committee is an ad hoc joint committee of a bicameral legislature, which is appointed by, and consists of, members of both chambers to resolve disagreements on a particular bill. While such committees are common in the United States Congress and other U.S. legislatures, they are no longer in use in the Parliament of the United Kingdom or most other bicameral Westminster system parliaments. In the U.S. Congress, the conference committee is usually composed of the senior members of the standing committees of each House that originally considered the legislation. A Conference Committee is a temporary panel of House and Senate negotiators. A conference committee is created to resolve differences between versions of similar House and Senate bills.

[earthside]

4. 'Filibuster'

According to the Wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_conference_committee

"Conference reports are privileged. And in the Senate, a motion to proceed to a conference report is not debatable, although Senators can generally filibuster the conference report itself. The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 limits debate on conference reports on budget resolutions and budget reconciliation bills to 10 hours in the Senate, so Senators cannot filibuster those conference reports."

So, the chances of the bill getting better simply do not exist because Lieberman still has the veto pen in the Senate.

This is why the filibuster seems unconstitutional to me, too. The filibuster as the rule is presently configured makes the House of Representatives irrelevant, it gives the Senate an unbalanced power over legislation. So, the Senate Democratic leadership need to take the House bill that was sent to them, bring it up for a vote, let Lieberman filibuster, and then the 'nuclear option' should be invoked -- killing the filibuster for now and for the immediate future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option

Sadly, we know this won't happen.

And, if this Senate version somehow gets signed into law, it will mean a bigger bloodbath for the Democrats in 2010 than if they pull the plug on this travesty. Just think how the Republicans and Teabaggers are going to fearmonger a federal government enforced mandate that everyone buy insurance from a private health insurance company or be fined ... it will be ugly for Democratic candidates ... ugly.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

5. But...

I see poll numbers sliding for BOTH Obama and the Congressional Democrats. Don't you think the ineptitude on HCR is a reason for that?

What if...

They use the reconciliation process to force the Republican to filibuster a Public Option. Make then kill it outright. Make sure that voters know whose fingerprints are on the knife in the back of their getting health care reform.

Even if they can't pass a bill, wouldn't it be politically expedient to make the Republicans pay the price for that?