The GOP, ObamaCare, and the nuclear option

posted at 10:44 am on October 18, 2011 by
[ Healthcare ]   

Turnabout may be fair play, but a plan being entertained by prospective GOP presidential candidates gives me pause. National Review Online’s James Capretta writes:

At last Tuesday’s debate among the Republican presidential candidates, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former U.S. senator Rick Santorum both mentioned that repeal of Obamacare could be accomplished through the special budgetary procedure known as ‘reconciliation.’

Here is the relevant exchange from the debate:

SANTORUM: We need to repeal [the health care reform law] by doing it through a reconciliation process. And since I have experience and know how to do that, we’ll take care of it…

[…]

ROMNEY: Rick, you’re absolutely right. On day one, granting a waiver for all 50 states doesn’t stop in its tracks entirely ObamaCare. That’s why I also say we have to repeal ObamaCare, and I will do that on day two, with the reconciliation bill, because as you know, it was passed by reconciliation, 51 votes.

In his article, Capretta walks the reader through the process of reconciliation, though anyone who has been paying attention hardly needs a refresher. This legislative process, which allows a bill to pass in the Senate with a simple majority, usually 51 votes, was used by Senate Democrats in 2010 to pass the health care reform law.

The invidiousness of their actions was underscored by the fact that the Democrats at the time had a 60-vote supermajority but couldn’t cobble together enough support from their own party to win passage. So they resorted to what was essentially a parliamentary trick.

The process of reconciliation arose out ofthe Congressional Budget Act of 1974. It was intended to give Congress a means to fast-tracking an essential budget bill by limiting debate to twenty hours under prevailing Senate rules. By its nature, the procedure precluded filibustering.

The procedure was never meant to be exploited in the shameless fashion of the 111th Congress in March of 2010. Nor was it intended to be used in the manner currently under consideration by Messrs. Santorum and Romney.

Capretta looks for legitimacy in the move if it were to be acted on (which would require a Republican supermajority in 2012) by observing:

Obamacare is in law—with all of its trillion-dollar spending and taxes now part of CBO’s “baseline” budget projections. Reconciliation was created for the express purpose of giving Congress an expedited process for making changes to just this kind of spending and tax policy. Obamacare is thus a very ripe target for budget cutting, and that means reconciliation.

That’s the letter of the law—but it’s not the spirit. The unvarnished truth is that in so acting, Republicans would be resorting to the same dirty trick as their colleagues across the aisle. It would be gamesmanship, not statesmanship.

Don’t get me wrong. I share the widely held opinion that ObamaCare is a socialist’s dream and just about everyone else’s worst nightmare. A third of small business owners view the law as the biggest hurdle they face to hiring new workers. Americans of all stripes hate it. A September Rasmussen poll found that 56% of those surveyed favor repeal.

An expedited vote on the individual mandate by the U.S. Supreme Court may render this discussion moot. So would Republicans’ failure to win a supermajority in the Senate in the event the high court upholds the law. But if it comes down to quashing the law by using reconciliation, I urge the GOP to think twice. Otherwise, where does it all end?

Related Articles

Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.

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

Live by the sword, die by the sword. The (expletive deleted)’s in power opened this can of worms. They can choke on it in return.

Vancomycin on October 18, 2011 at 11:04 AM

The socialists enacted Obamacare via the reconciliation process, violating the “spirit” of the law. Obamacare should be repealed via the reconciliation process for that very reason, to serve as an object lesson that slimy moves draw slimy retaliation.

Democrats do not respond to chivalry. They respect power. Crush them first, then be polite.

OhioCoastie on October 18, 2011 at 11:25 AM

So, when will it be used to fast track an actual budget?

Kissmygrits on October 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM

I don’t care how they get rid of it. Just get rid of it! You can bet the Democrats wouldn’t hesitate a second, and I don’t want to be stuck with fifth-rate health care (to be generous) in my old age, which is approaching faster than I care to think. I also don’t want my children or my grandchildren (eight, so far, plus two step grandkids) to be saddled with it.

hachiban on October 18, 2011 at 11:46 AM

But if it comes down to quashing the law by using reconciliation, I urge the GOP to think twice. Otherwise, where does it all end?

If the GOP hesitates to quash the law by whatever means necessary, then it all ends with an American single payer health care system. In Canada and the UK, that has meant rationing and denying care. People who need hip or knee replacements are living in agony, waiting months to see a doctor and even longer to get the surgery, and when Grandma gets inconvenient she is placed on the Liverpool Care Pathway which is used by the NHS to kill even patients who are not in immediate danger of dying.

So on balance, when I consider that there are quite literally millions of lives at stake just when you figure the over 70 million baby boomers who will be needing more care as they age yet will not get it under socialized medicine, I’d say using a procedural trick to quash Obamacare isn’t such a bad thing.

Laura Curtis on October 18, 2011 at 11:51 AM

The underlying principle of this country is at stake here. If removing Obamacare from the books requires a distasteful option, in order to preserve the underlying principles of this country, then do it. President Cain/Perry/Romney will sign it and Speaker Boehner will bash former Speaker Pelosi with her oversized gavel.

either orr on October 18, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Speaker Boehner will bash former Speaker Pelosi with her oversized gavel.

either orr on October 18, 2011 at 12:58 PM

How I wish we lived on a planet where that might conceivably happen.

Cylor on October 18, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Vancomycin on October 18, 2011 at 11:04 AM

this

nuff said

cmsinaz on October 18, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Agreed. On first attempt, it needs to be repealed by a super-majority which includes bi-partisan support to drive a stake thru its heart. If that doesn’t happen, then step it down to the next level. Simple-majority should be the last resort only, because as sure as the sun rises, it’ll come back via simple majority. Also get rid of the “Congressional Budget Act of 1974″. All budgets need to go thru the full rigmarole of debate. We should never allow Congress any tool to expedite budgets and revenue raising.

AH_C on October 18, 2011 at 4:01 PM

This is bring a knife to a gunfight. Democrats have crossed the line re: The Healthcare bill, confirmation of presidential cabinet members, Supreme Court appointments. They have the moral flexibility to allow unabashed crooks into positions of power within their party, while decrying lesser offenses of their opponents.

Needed is term limits, requirement that laws passed have funding built in, and enforced sunset provisions. Using power, (once conservative/libertarians are in the majority), should be in the most brutal, heartless fashion possible. The minority Demo’s should be allowed only to participate in unbreakable reforms that would block future majority tyranny.

Refusing to temporarily lower ourselves to Democrat standards when we have the ball, will condemn us to defeat. I say “Cry Havoc”.

trl on October 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM

This would last until one judge in the leftist’s proverbial pocket shouted stop and the GOP would cower, afraid to exercize their constitutional prerogatives as seperate branches of government -never mind pull an Obama and doe stuff like ignore judges’rulings and openly and vocally speak of circumventing congress.(perhaps because he has a ready paid for by SOros civilian army he also desired without a simple gasp from the GOP -the worst opposition in history.

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 5:37 PM