Breaking: Lincoln will oppose reconciliation
posted at 2:42 pm on January 26, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
It appears that the lesson of Scott Brown’s surprise victory did not go completely unnoticed by Senate Democrats from red states. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) announced today that she will not go along with the rumored plan to use reconciliation to push ObamaCare through Congress, making the plan much more complicated for Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to succeed:
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) will oppose Dem efforts to move health care legislation through Congress using budget reconciliation, hurting Dems’ chances for using the controversial parliamentary maneuver to pass a reform bill.
“I am opposed to and will fight against any attempts to push through changes to the Senate health insurance reform legislation by using budget reconciliation tactics that would allow the Senate to pass a package of changes to our original bill with 51 votes,” Lincoln said in a statement on Tuesday. “I have successfully fought for transparency throughout Senate deliberations on health care, and I will continue to do so.”
“I will not accept any last-minute efforts to force changes to health insurance reform issues through budget reconciliation, and neither will Arkansans. We have worked too long and too hard on this reform effort – we need to get it right,” she said.
Translation: I hear footsteps. Lincoln no longer clears 45% in state polling against any of her likely Republican opponents for her re-election bid. She is in serious danger of losing her seat, thanks to her cave-in to Reid late last year in her vote for cloture — on a bill that won’t wind up being law anyway, even if reconciliation succeeds.
The question will be whether Reid needs 60 votes to get through reconciliation. If he truly strips the bill down to budgetary items, he won’t. But what Lincoln’s statement does is put pressure on the other red-state Democrats in the Senate, who also see their political ruin written in the results of losing a seat in bluer-than-blue Massachusetts. If Lincoln balks, so will Ben Nelson, almost certainly Evan Bayh, and perhaps even Snarlin’ Arlen Specter, whose prospects of victory look bleak in Pennsylvania.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Lincoln is just making sure she gets her “no” vote publicized in plenty of time to take political advantage now that it will only take 50 votes for a reconciliation based action. Two or three more “Dems on the Precipice” of being kicked to the curb in November can still defect and it won’t harm Harry’s 50 vote goal. And it’s 50 because – in the case of a tie – the Vice President would cast the deciding vote and – if Joltin’ Joe is sober – he’d probably vote with the Dems.
GoldenEagle4444 on January 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM
The Dems are toast if the House passes an amended Senate bill and Reid tries to cramdown with reconciliation. It will be a slow bleed that kills them for months, with challenges to every line of the bill, etc.
The only way the dems can get this through is if they get the House to pass the Senate version, Obama signs it, and then attempt to ram through a reconciliation sidecar bill in order to “fix” the healthcare bill.
Watch the House. This Lincoln development is encouraging, but Pelosi will have to make the first move.
Revenant on January 26, 2010 at 3:28 PM
OmahaConservative on January 26, 2010 at 3:21 PM
Oh yea I’m a border city and their airing! Throw the SOB out of some more public places.
This clown has the gall to tell us whats’ good for us.
dhunter on January 26, 2010 at 3:30 PM
Where the hell was all this No Guts No Glory gumption when this bill came to cloture? Isn’t it a lil late to be grandstanding, and pretending you’re listening now, to your constituents? Hmmmmmmm?
capejasmine on January 26, 2010 at 3:31 PM
Reid knows he’s toast and Nancy knows the odds of retaining her Speakership are slim, so this is the banzai charge but it will add more pubbie seats in 2010. If Obama signs it, any chance of retreat to the center is gone.
a capella on January 26, 2010 at 3:32 PM
I can’t wait to run into him. I am very pissed and vocal.
OmahaConservative on January 26, 2010 at 3:33 PM
If I were the Dems, I’d pass what I could through reconciliation, and then force the GOP to vote against two aspects that have significant public support: (i) elimination of the pre-existing condition requirements; and (ii) the establishment of insurance exchanges.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 3:33 PM
LOL: “Stand By Your Plan” (Video, Parody, Description: This is a prescription for success for the Democratic party. Assuming, of course, your definition of success is failure and loss of office. Sorry, no nudity, accidental hits to the crotch, animals talking, babies doing silly stuff, or other “America’s Funniest Videos” rejects. Well, not intentionally, anyway. You do get bad singing and very bad politics!
May Tammy Wynette forgive me. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank and AIG surely never will… )
Mark Boabaca on January 26, 2010 at 3:37 PM
Barry: Blanche, don’t worry about November. You have me.
KeepOhioRed on January 26, 2010 at 3:41 PM
Those should be easy fights for the GOP (the way they are constituted by the dems).
1) Just getting rid of the pre-existing conditions clause is like telling life insurance companies that they aren’t allowed to check people out, or even ask their age, before they are forced to sell them policies. Everyone understands how stupid this would be and how it would kill life insurance for everyone.
2) Interstate insurance exchanges are great, but the dems want to make the regulations and restrictions on them so onerous that, again, the private industry will be crippled and everyone will suffer. Remember, it was through the exchanges that the idiot dems wanted to place all those restrictions on who could buy what insurance and who could open up a new policy …
If the dems pass anything through reconciliation, that will be the last thing they pass. And this nation will explode.
neurosculptor on January 26, 2010 at 3:42 PM
Lincoln is just the first rat. Clairsey-poo has stepped back big time.
Chewy the Lab on January 26, 2010 at 3:42 PM
It is my understanding that when they force something thru on reconciliation, each item is voted on seperately. So it’s something that could garner republican support, if items they like are put in, and it wouldn’t hurt them.
capejasmine on January 26, 2010 at 3:43 PM
Blanche Lincoln comes from a family of doctors and health care professionals and it could be they are on her case.
Dhuka on January 26, 2010 at 3:45 PM
If he didn’t do so, Pence should have waited until the last possible minute to back out of running for the Senate. He was a nice sword of Damocles to hang over Bayh’s head. Bayh may not be too worried about other challengers, but the prospect of Pence’s running probably scared him and national Dems to death.
BuckeyeSam on January 26, 2010 at 3:45 PM
Alright. What’s her price?
Pablo Snooze on January 26, 2010 at 3:45 PM
Snarlin’ Arlen Specter,
Now that’s funny…
SHARPTOOTH on January 26, 2010 at 3:46 PM
It’s beyond me how anybody, right or left, can still willingly carry water for this Obamacare FUBAR.
Edouard on January 26, 2010 at 3:46 PM
–Recent polls have public approval of these two aspects at about 70%, even though the ObamaCare bill itself is at about 40%. Even when you tell people that their premium costs will go up, the elimination of pre-existing conditions gets approved.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 3:47 PM
I wonder whether Obama plans to remake the Sonny and Cher tune into “You’ve Got Me, Babe.”
BuckeyeSam on January 26, 2010 at 3:47 PM
51 to pass, 51 to overturn in 2011.
angryed on January 26, 2010 at 3:47 PM
Most people understand that elimination of pre-existing conditions requirements without requiring purchase mandates will raise premiums. By now, everyone understands this bill doesn’t contain free lunches. Donks just can’t get that through their heads.
a capella on January 26, 2010 at 3:48 PM
–It’s my understanding that reconciliation only deals with budget items, not the other things, and so these other things can’t be taken through that process. If you understand differently, please let us know.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 3:48 PM
So the question is,
How do we get fifty-one?
I don’t think we can…
Haiku Guy on January 26, 2010 at 3:48 PM
no pre-existing conditions would be great. I would get rid of my insurance policy. Then when I get sick, I call up and get it re-instated again. Get treatment. Cancel policy. Rinse, repeat.
angryed on January 26, 2010 at 3:50 PM
Why don’t they just scrap the whole thing and start over with proposals that make sense like Tort reform, health savings accounts and competition across state lines?
Juno77 on January 26, 2010 at 3:52 PM
–I wouldn’t be so sure about that. I think most people don’t understand how costs and coverage/risk pools are interlinked.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 3:56 PM
Tort reform is a non-starter for Democrat lawmakers. They love them some trial lawyers, don’t you know.
HSAs, the Dems don’t view as real health reform either. Managing a personal HSA takes way too many brains for the ordinary American, Democrats apparently surmise.
You see, Democrats want to absolutely own the substantial part of the American citizenry who don’t have the first idea of what to properly do with any money that comes their way.
Edouard on January 26, 2010 at 3:58 PM
–You need to do more than that. So what if policies can be sold across state lines—the insurance commissioner of your state still needs to approve them and it doesn’t mean that the premiums in your state will be identical to those in other states. And most states already have tort reform.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM
No, but one thing that Congress could also do would be to eliminate the plethora of state mandates. Eliminate state mandates and open up interstate insurance competition, and there would be a near-immediate decline in the cost of health insurance.
Revenant on January 26, 2010 at 4:05 PM
I understand, but those polls have disembodied labels serving as the “policies” they are polling. The Tea Party/Town Hall people know better and, like the more general health care bill, can make their case about it to America if the GOP doesn’t. People lost their enthusiasm for the dems’ exchnages when they learned that it entailed them losing access to the coverage they now have – as those exchanges put regulations and restrictions in place that would disallow many plans that people are now on and wouldn’t allow for new members to sign onto those …
And the GOP just counters the insane Dem ideas about their strangling exchanges with a counter-proposal for true interstate competition (which requires no exchanges or anything, as everyone knows from other insurance products).
neurosculptor on January 26, 2010 at 4:06 PM
Okay, but so what? That approach would be far better than one that destroys the existing system.
Juno77 on January 26, 2010 at 4:06 PM
Can someone help me out with how to defend this scenario?
Here’s what I see happening:
1) Dem’s use Reconciliation to pass a bill.
2) The bill that they pass will intentionally contain provisions that go beyond the “budgetary” definition.
3) They want this to be challenged and decided by the Courts, where they can re-spin the whole package.
4) If the courts strike it down, then the GOP gets branded as the party of “No”, and public opiion sways back to the left to give them the power they need to do it again.
I’ve convinced myself that this is their game plan. And I’m having a hard time coming up with a defense. Need some help here.
No fair saying that my assumptions 1-4 are not true – I want to figure out how to stop them assuming my assumptions are correct.
connertown on January 26, 2010 at 4:20 PM
I don’t believe her for one second. This woman is void of principles and will sell her vote to the devil.
Wade on January 26, 2010 at 4:42 PM
The defense is that the US would not survive such actions. This nation would erupt and break apart.
This is the danger of the dems and the suicide bomber from Indonesia. The useful idiots on the Hill are playing scorched earth while The Precedent is just looking to scorch the earth, as his ends.
The dems are now in the position that Saddam Hussein was in gulf war I, when he decided to intentionally dump 40,000,000 barrels of oil into the gulf and lit just about every oil well in Kuwait on fire (which none of the libs or greens were bothered by, interestingly) while we were allowing him to retreat in one of the most humiliating defeats in all of recorded history. They are looking to pull a Saddam, following their own Hussein, and just trying to figure out the best path to destruction.
In sum, we cannot defend ourselves against those who were voted in by Americans who voted for national suicide on Nov 4th, 2008. We will react, but the fate of this nation was set when America had a psychotic break during the credit crisis and chose to kill our nation.
neurosculptor on January 26, 2010 at 4:46 PM
–The US Congress passed a bill sixty years ago that gave regulation of insurance to the states. They’d need to repeal that. And almost all employer-provided insurance is exempt from state regulation under ERISA–most people still get insurance from their employer. I’m not sure that you’d get as much of a bang as you think.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 4:50 PM
The will use up a Lot of political capital in doing so – may be they Think that they can afford it and gain it back by November, but..
Same as One – it will enrage people even more.
They can try, but it would also drag on and on, closer to November – a reminder of Dems keep on trying to do.
This is the same thing they’ve been doing of months – after awhile it just becomes noise. Maybe with enough repetion of the same talking points, it will stick, but maybe it won’t. The Dems will be betting the farm that it will.
Juno77 on January 26, 2010 at 4:51 PM
chickasaw42 on January 26, 2010 at 4:51 PM
Blanched blanched. Good enough. Next vote her out of office you good people of Arkansas!
Sherman1864 on January 26, 2010 at 4:52 PM
–Oh, come now, drama queen. Give me a freaking break, here. A health insurance bill without the individual mandate requirement and a few other things that can’t be done through reconciliation is not going to cause 100 million US citizens to kill everyone in the streets.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 4:52 PM
Blanche blanched, that is. Apologies.
Sherman1864 on January 26, 2010 at 4:52 PM
Who said anything about killing everyone in the streets, or anything close – even as hyperbole? When I said “erupt” I meant in terms of the Tea Parties times 1000. And this nation will break. It doesn’t matter what parts they pass. It is the fact that the federal government is continuing its attack on America – and people realize it – after it has been made painfully clear to them that people know what they are doing.
neurosculptor on January 26, 2010 at 4:55 PM
Pre-existing conditions will have to be done in a pool with gov. subsidy. Can you imagine wrecking your car and then buying insurance to cover the crash? It will kill the insurance business unless it is done with a pool and some gov. help. As far as Lincoln is concerned she knows that reconciliation only requires 51 votes so she is staking out one of the 8 no votes available. It won’t help honey.
inspectorudy on January 26, 2010 at 4:55 PM
This is too little too late for the gentle lady from Arkansas.
She has already made HC legislation possible.
She alone could have blocked it and she voted for it.
If it passes, she can’t extricate herself from its electoral consequences, no matter how artfully she now tries.
molonlabe28 on January 26, 2010 at 5:48 PM
–So how is this nation going to break apart if this passes? I still think that’s way too much drama.
Jimbo3 on January 26, 2010 at 6:12 PM
This nation is probably going to break apart, anyway – or just disintegrate – due to monetary considerations. To continue to shove any part of this bill through will just hasten it. Without the monetary angle, I’m unsure about the specific events that would bring the break about, but I look back to Sept 2008 to see how violently (in the figurative sense) this nation can move when confidence in major institutions suffers a major blow. The Precedent and the Washington junta are attacking the fundamental confidence in our federal government (in addition to their suicidal, and unpopular, monetary and economic policies) in the most irresponsible and dangerous ways possible. He’s doing it intentionally and the useful idiots on the Hill are doing it as part of their scorched-earth defense strategy (if they can’t have the US, no one can) and their general stupidity and emotional handicaps.
neurosculptor on January 26, 2010 at 6:41 PM
Sucessfully? Wow I guess I missed that success. Has anyone announced against her? I don’t follow AR politics generally. Hey how about Huck! That’d be a great place for him. Off the TV.
petunia on January 26, 2010 at 7:20 PM
I think the country will survive but Democrats will be out of power for a long long long long long long time.
They are proving everyday they can’t be trusted with power! They are willing to force down the throats of the American people this bill. It could well end the party.
Subverting the will of the people is not a wise move. I can not imagine why they think they would gain anything by doing it.
This could be the most beneficial bill ever thought of… but if the people don’t want it, it is wrong to force it. It is an abuse of power and Americans won’t stand for it.
It doesn’t matter what’s even in the stupid bill now. It is a question of whether we condone totalitarian behavior over democratic principles.
Democrats just don’t get it. It is no longer about the bill. It’s about abusing the power people trusted you with.
There will be consequences for betraying the people’s trust.
petunia on January 26, 2010 at 7:27 PM
It won’t save her.
One Angry Christian on January 26, 2010 at 8:15 PM
To hell with the Senate, this bill first has to get out of the House before the Senate can even think about reconciliation and there’s no way Nancy can get 218 votes, especially after Brown’s election. I’ll state right here, there won’t be any House or Senate vote on ObamaCare the rest of this year.
PatMac on January 26, 2010 at 8:54 PM
Lots of people here are saying that Blanche Lincoln’s stance against reconciliation is inconsequential, because Reid only needs 50 votes (plus Biden) for reconciliation and can afford to lose up to 9 Democrats.
But my understanding (correct me if I’m wrong) is that reconciliation bills need to first go through the Senate Finance Committee. The Democrats have a 13 to 10 majority on that committee, including Lincoln. If she says no, they’re down to a single-vote margin. Should any of the other 12 Democrats on that committee then flip, reconciliation will never get out of committee and it’s dead.
So Reid’s problem just become significantly more complicated.
dpwiener on January 26, 2010 at 10:15 PM
So much political theater. We knew months ago if it came to this she would vote no on reconciliation. Her sudden attack of conscience will not change the outcome if it comes to reconciliation, because Reid doesn’t need her vote anyway.
This is all for the benefit of Arkansas voters, and sorry to tell ya, Blanche, we’re not that stupid. You screwed the pooch when you voted for cloture the first time. Feigning outrage now over the possibility of reconciliation will not get you re-elected. Thanks for playing, though.
NoLeftTurn on January 26, 2010 at 11:50 PM
I am confident you will be polite and civil…
but won’t hold it against you if you can’t.
SKYFOX on January 27, 2010 at 8:39 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2