“Poison pills,” errors could derail reconciliation process
posted at 3:35 pm on March 23, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
After having lost on the attempt to stop ObamaCare from becoming law, Senate Republicans have to settle for the next-best thing — keeping the health-care debate alive. In order to do that, they have to find ways to amend the bill that purports to “fix” ObamaCare that the House passed on Sunday night. If that bill changes in the Senate, then the House has to reconsider the bill yet again, creating the potential for another several weeks of focus on a bill that is deeply unpopular with the public. And thanks to errors in the House bill, that may not be avoidable:
After the White House signing ceremony Tuesday, the Senate plans to launch into the debate over the reconciliation bill, which would institute a series of “fixes” that House Democrats demanded as a condition for clearing the Senate version of the bill. Even if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) succeeds in keeping his team largely united to beat back GOP amendments, Senate parliamentarian Alan Frumin could throw a wrench in the process.
Frumin is considering a series of GOP challenges contending that provisions in the reconciliation bill violate the Byrd rule — named after its author, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) — which prohibits the inclusion of measures that lack a budgetary impact. If Frumin agrees with the GOP and the Senate’s presiding officer does not overrule him, Democrats would almost certainly lack the 60 votes needed to override Frumin’s decision.
That would require that Democrats either dump the reconciliation bill or pass a modified version that would be sent back to the House for further modification or final approval. To be clear, the House does not want to touch health care again this year, which is why Democratic leaders need to reject every GOP amendment.
“The thing that concerns me is the unknown,” a Senate Democratic aide said Monday.
Democratic leaders have for weeks been meeting privately with Frumin for guidance on what could withstand challenges under the budget process, and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota said Monday that he is confident their bill could remain unscathed.
Still, GOP aides said Monday that they see several drafting errors that could cause portions of the reconciliation bill to be stricken. For example, they argue that a $1 billion appropriation in the bill for the Health and Human Services Department to implement the new law does not fall within the purview of either the Finance Committee or the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.
The reconciliation process allows for an unlimited number of amendments to be offered by Republicans, at least in theory. They plan to offer a large number of them that would change the nature of the House bill both technically and substantively. The most impactful would be a rescue of the Medicare Advantage program, which would eliminate a major funding source for ObamaCare.
Democrats have the votes to defeat all of the amendments, but some of them may be difficult to openly oppose. The Medicare Advantage restoration could be a big problem for Democrats who need seniors to support them in upcoming votes, for example. The amendment process puts each issue on the floor individually, making it much more difficult for Senators to vote one way and proclaim themselves another in the future.
Drafting errors would present a more technical problem. If the bill changes in any way, the other chamber has to pass it again. The one mentioned here in Politico sounds like an arguable technical defect, one that an adverse ruling by the parliamentarian could override. They already have suffered one defeat in that venue already, and it wouldn’t surprise me if the parliamentarian decided to give the majority the benefit of the doubt in most of these cases.









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
This so called parliamentarian needs to be told be very fair or when the GOB takes back the Sen.look for another job.
thmcbb on March 23, 2010 at 4:29 PM
Actually it would. I haven’t found a link, but I am pretty sure the Senate can advance a bill that failed in committee, as long as the Majority Leader puts it on the schedule. Also, I don’t think there were enough Republicans in the Senate committee to give it a negative vote, anyway.
mwdiver on March 23, 2010 at 4:30 PM
‘k, gotcha.
OmahaConservative on March 23, 2010 at 4:32 PM
Didn’t work for Stupak and it won’t work for Schumer, Reid and others up for re-election. Ahh. It’s a GREAT time for ANY conservatives to run for office!
TN Mom on March 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM
Same here, considering they’re up against the demon party from hell. McConnell did a good job of herding the usual suspects. Although it’s hard to imagine a more depressing outcome than what we’ve got, it would be a lot worse if we had some Republican “bipartisan” cheerleaders running around supporting this monstrosity.
The fact that McCain’s running for re-election, and has a primary opponent, also helped.
Nichevo on March 23, 2010 at 4:38 PM
Actually, the final count was 63-33, so Hutchison and the Maine twins didn’t put the Dems over. They waited until the Dems had their 60. However, Boxer “loudly proclaimed “well played!”” and it was certainly treason.
Just another reason to hope Hutchison makes good on her retirement announcement and the Maine twins have great primary challengers.
obladioblada on March 23, 2010 at 4:38 PM
“The Senate’s presiding officer (Biden) can overrule the parliamentarian”
That would seem to guarantee that the reconciliation bill will pass. The Dems have shown that they are not shy about pushing the edge of the envelope when it comes to rules interpretations.
Old Fritz on March 23, 2010 at 4:38 PM
Yep
gophergirl on March 23, 2010 at 4:40 PM
crr6 and SquishyShark are law students. At least so they claim.
MarkTheGreat on March 23, 2010 at 4:43 PM
MarkTheGreat on March 23, 2010 at 4:43 PM
That’s why I’m doubting that Jimbo is a corporate lawyer. His arguments aren’t that good.
kingsjester on March 23, 2010 at 4:46 PM
Hey, give him the benefit of the doubt. He just may not be very bright. After all, Obama is supposedly a lawyer, too.
TXMomof3 on March 23, 2010 at 4:49 PM
America was founded on self reliance and personal responsibility. Obama wants government dependence and welfare addiction.
saiga on March 23, 2010 at 4:55 PM
3rd string, at best. Maybe a paralegal. On the other hand, I\’ve had some dumber-than-a-pound-of-bacon, hammer-head lawyers, one of which Jimbo could possibly be.
mr.blacksheep on March 23, 2010 at 4:56 PM
Forget it, it`s over.
This battle is lost, start fighting the next one because the Democrats will now be marching on all fronts.
albill on March 23, 2010 at 5:26 PM
Must continue to support ALL efforts to derail/slow down, defund, repeal this nonsense!!!
huskerdiva on March 23, 2010 at 6:01 PM
No, hit back on their exposed flank. Harry them so they can’t regroup. There’s momentum on our side that we must keep up.
karl9000 on March 23, 2010 at 7:15 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2