The Reconciliation Shell Game

In the continuing debate over the health care reform legislation in Congress, the President and the media keep focusing on the reconciliation process in the Senate. The only reason that reconciliation became relevant to this process was because Republican Scott Brown won the open Senate seat from Massachusetts once held by the late Ted Kennedy. Since now Senator Brown said that he would be the 41st Senate vote against health care, if he won, the Democrats knew that they could not pass a final bill in the Senate with a filibuster-proof 60 votes after conferencing with House leaders to resolve differences between the bills passed by each house of Congress before Christmas.

Finding a way to pass a bill in the Senate with 51 votes then became the focus of Democratic strategists. The reconciliation process allows that, if any changes to the previously passed Senate bill are only budgetary amendments within the jurisdiction of the Senate Finance Committee.

In order to sell this procedural sleight of hand to defeat the clear message sent by the voters of Massachusetts, the President began saying that health care has been debated long enough, and it is now time for an "up or down" vote. The reference to an "up or down" vote is apparently his way of saying only a majority (51 votes) should be needed in the Senate to pass the bill.

In other words, the new Republican Senator from Massachusetts, just as all other Republicans in Congress, are not to be considered as part of the process. According to the Democrats in Washington, this legislation is too historic to let Republicans do anything to block it, let alone have any influence over the bill's contents.

So the President, Democratic Congressional leaders and the mainstream media have been focused on Republican efforts to find ways to slow or block the Senate's use of the reconciliation process. This way, they all keep the discussion of the prospects for passage of the health care legislation directed on the "obstructionists" in the Republican Party who are trying to stop the bill.

This approach to the press coverage of the Congressional action underway keeps the unknowing members of the public focused on the Senate shell in their little shell game. However, the real reason that the bill might be derailed is that, in order to use the reconciliation process in the Senate, the House must first pass the exact bill already passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve.

That Senate bill includes the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, the union deal to delay new taxes on "Cadillac" health plans and other backroom deals that Harry Reid had to use to get 60 votes in the Senate at the end of last year. Even the President has agreed that these "stray cats and dogs" that got into the Senate bill are unsavory and should be eliminated.

In addition, many pro-life Democratic members of the House do not like the abortion language incorporated into the Senate bill. This means that the House is going to be asked to pass a Senate bill that even many Democrats agree is not very good legislation... before any amendments to eliminate the unsavory "cats and dogs" and to resolve differences between the two bills passed in each house of Congress last year can be offered for a vote.

Now here's the real rub: the Parliamentarian in Congress has ruled that as soon as the House passes the previously passed unsavory Senate bill, it must be taken to the White House for the President's signature before any amendments can be considered.

But once the President signs the bill, it becomes LAW! Historic health care reform will be accomplished! So what incentive will Congress have to adopt amendments that everyone, even most Democrats, agree are needed to resolve a multitude of problems in the Senate bill?

All of the above scenario can be achieved without any Republican votes. If the House fails to pass the previously passed Senate bill as the first step in the process, it will be because Nancy Pelosi is not able to get enough Democratic members to vote for it. If that happens, health care legislation will probably be dead. But not at the hands of Republicans. It will be Democrats who kill it.

So why is the media buying into the President's shell game of watching the Republicans? Sphere: Related Content