Democratic party leaders have a message for Republicans, who are crying foul over the news that they may get shut out of the health care debate: turnabout's fair play.
In a memo that was drafted and circulated on background in April, Senate Democrats made the case that using a budget reconciliation bill to pass health care reforms is perfectly within their rights, given the Republicans' promiscuous use of the same tactic when they were in power. Excerpts of the memo were published by various news outlets back in the spring, but the memo doesn't appear to have been previously published in its entirety until now. And now, with Democrats ramping up the threat that they'll invoke the process in the fall, they're rehashing those same arguments.
"[S]hould Republicans choose not to cooperate [on health care reform], the inclusion of reconciliation instructions [in the budget] provides a backup option which could be used to prevent a filibuster and approve legislation by a majority vote," the memo reads. "[T]here is nothing unprecedented or unusual about the use of reconciliation."
The memo goes on note that Congress has invoked the reconciliation 19 times since 1980, including in 2001 and 2003 when "the Republican Congress used reconciliation to pass enormous tax cuts."
"Republicans not only used reconciliation rules to push tax breaks for the wealthy, they also made no meaningful effort to assist the growing number of uninsured Americans," it reads.
Back in the heyday of the Republican majority, the GOP was bullish on the idea of using the process to circumvent the filibuster, and now Democrats are hoping to bring that inconvenient fact back to haunt them.
"The fact is, all this rule of the Senate does is allow a majority of the Senate to take a position and pass a piece of legislation, support that position," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), who now bemoans the idea, in 2005. "Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don't think so."
Back in the Spring, when Congress was debating the budget itself, House leaders made a very similar argument to support including reconciliation instructions in their resolution. But now that Democrats are coming to view the tactic less as a contingency than as a tool of necessity, they're resurrecting the pitch to lay the rhetorical groundwork for the political firestorm reconciliation will likely set off.
Republicans argue that the budget reconciliation process wasn't intended for this purpose. On Meet the Press yesterday, Sen. Orrin Hatch said the reconciliation process "has never been used for a substantive approach of one-sixth of the American economy or even a smaller substantive approach.
"That was set up -- reconciliation -- to solve increasing taxes or lowering taxes or cutting back on public spending or spending more," he said. But a major part of health care reform--subsidies, Medicaid expansions, surtaxes--involves exactly those sorts of fiscal measures.
If Democrats do turn to reconciliation, Republicans can't say they weren't warned. On April 27, Harry Reid sent a letter to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell warning him that Republicans had until the fall to be constructive partners on health care reform. And in a final warning call to Republicans, Democrats are saying get with the program or get rolled. "Democrats would strongly prefer to address health care on a bipartisan basis using the normal legislative process," says the memo. "Instead of debating Senate procedure, the GOP should focus on the problem at hand and work with Democrats in finding solutions."


Steve LaBonne
August 24, 2009 1:17 PM
Never mind the goddamn strongly worded letters, Harry. JUST DO IT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mad Dog Rackham
August 24, 2009 1:30 PM in reply to Steve LaBonne
The end result of this will be the Republicans agreeing to vote for a totally watered down bill which benefits only the insurers.
But Reid will claim a great victory because he got the Republicans to blink.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
August 24, 2009 1:47 PM in reply to Mad Dog Rackham
Bullshit! The Republicans are not going to vote for ANY healthcare reform bill. They have staked out a position to not give Obama a victory, even with a watered down bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ickyma
August 24, 2009 2:31 PM in reply to FreeRider
I agree completely.
The Repugs are not going to cooperate in any way. They've shown this quite clearly.
They've played their hand.
First they flatly opposed the Public Option but feigned interest in the Co-op idea... Then, when the WH signaled they'd be willing to drop the Public Option, the Repugs immediately started saying the Co-Op idea was dead!
In the meantime they offered NOTHING.
It's clear.
The Dems are now free to ram this through.
Will they?
I'll believe it when I see it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eztempo
August 24, 2009 7:06 PM in reply to Ickyma
Harry Reid growing a spine in a confrontation with McConnell? Yeah, I'll believe THAT when I see it, too. It's never happened before, so there's little reason to believe it will now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LegalCat
August 24, 2009 2:58 PM in reply to FreeRider
I agree completely too. The Dems will use whatever parliamentary tricks they can come up with to unilaterally push through a totally watered-down bill that basically just rearranges the deck chairs on the insurance industry. Then they'll strut around taking credit for clobbering the big bad Republicans, and the Republicans will strut around taking credit for preventing the Government Takeover of Everything, and the insurance companies will continue cherry-picking the healthy people and charging them huge premiums, only now they'll call it "coops" or something. I have zero faith in the concept that the Dems will use their majority status to do anything that will take one penny away from the insurance industry.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
August 24, 2009 3:59 PM in reply to Mad Dog Rackham
And you have a crystal ball?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnBTipton
August 25, 2009 12:20 PM in reply to lousgirl84
I didn't know that one was required in order to comment here.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 3:44 PM in reply to Steve LaBonne
He's going out of his way to and offering them more rope. And they may just take out a few more yards. I suspect come September when the reconciliation process is in full swing all the elevator music in the Capitol will be playing the theme song from Hang'em High.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dearest
August 24, 2009 1:35 PM
Yep, Just do it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
August 24, 2009 1:38 PM
Now, we just have to train our congress critters to say nothing but "uppadown" for the next two months and we're set.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DrToast
August 24, 2009 1:48 PM in reply to Stroszek
Exactly! Instead of this crap about trying to justify reconciliation, why aren't we reminding everyone that you only need a majority vote to pass legislation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
yellowdogD
August 24, 2009 1:49 PM
Rethugs always use as an argument that the government will control 1/6 of US economy.
First, all health spending equals about 1/6 of US economy, and
proposed legislation affects only a part of that.
Second, if things were right in this country, health spending
would amount to 10% of economy, tops.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thomas1
August 24, 2009 2:23 PM in reply to yellowdogD
the gvt controls may control much more that 1/6th of the economy when you toss in defence spending
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cool Blue Reason
August 24, 2009 2:40 PM in reply to thomas1
Indeed, Dems should respond by welcoming the GOP's apparent interest in tackling defense spending in order to reduce the outsized role of gubmint in the economy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 3:49 PM in reply to yellowdogD
I wonder why no Democrats has counter attacked them by pointing out the bailout of Wall Street by Congress implicitly means the US Government OWNS the business community now. And we're not talking a measly 6%!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TylerRose
August 24, 2009 1:53 PM
March for PUBLIC OPTION on September 13, 2009 in Washington D.C..
If you cannot go to Washington D.C., click on events to sign up to attend an event in your state. I signed up for the event in Austin, TX on that date from 12:00P.M. to 3:00PM.
http://www.marchforhealthcare.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 24, 2009 5:39 PM in reply to TylerRose
I would like to go to Washington for the march, but what I was reading on Kos just now was not very encouraging. There's very little time to get organized for this march, and that would seem to mean that either it is going to have just a handful of people show up in Washington, which would be a PR disaster, or there will be a tremendous number of people with no facilities for them (port-a-potties, buses, schedules of events, etc.), and which would also be a PR disaster.
It's not clear they can even get the necessary permits that fast.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lyleleander
August 24, 2009 1:56 PM
I like this tactic, and it's way overdue. The insurance and pharma industries are paranoid before they're anything else, and just the whiff of looking down the barrel of a progressive reform bill with no Repub say is enough to get their pants smoldering.
These crooks have been comfortable for way too long. Start throwing stuff at them like this, and force them to duck and weave.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
August 24, 2009 2:06 PM
Fair is fair, if Obama wants to enact a tax increase, I say we should let him do it. Anything else though is subject to filibuster as per Senate rules.
Unless of course, Dems want to do a "Kennedy" and change the law to suit one guy. Heh.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
August 24, 2009 2:44 PM in reply to shooter242
You mean like the Scheivo debacle, or the non-president setting SCOTUS decision of 2000. It seems that the Pubes prefer one-off laws.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Acewrap
August 24, 2009 2:48 PM in reply to CranialRectalLoopback
"the non-president setting SCOTUS decision of 2000."
Actually, that decision DID set a president, if not a precedent. ;)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
August 24, 2009 3:27 PM in reply to shooter242
given the hard christian bent of the republican party, i can't help but wonder, in the words of the famous bumper sticker philosophy: What Would Jesus Do?
where would he come down on the question whether everyone, even the lowliest among us, should receive medical care.
where would he come down on the question whether those with the most should sacrifice some of that wealth so that their poor neighbors might eat, receive medical care, and have a roof over their heads.
i'm no religious scholar, but i'm pretty sure he would be disappointed in the positions that the republican party has taken on these issues.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
August 24, 2009 3:28 PM in reply to nova voter
didn't mean to reply to your post ... accidentally clicked "reply" rather than just submitting at the bottom of the page. oops.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 4:00 PM in reply to nova voter
If you pay attention to that rabble, you'll recognize they're in it for the money. God meant for them to be wealthy. If you're poor, then you're being punished by God.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnBTipton
August 25, 2009 12:28 PM in reply to shooter242
Though it's wrong, imho I think Kennedy has more people in mind than just himself. Given his record, I think that health care for everyone is on his mind.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tmdf
August 24, 2009 2:06 PM
...and this is why the Dems will be forever be the Charlie Brown Party. No cohernet plan for anything. I had high hopes, but once again they just
blow it. Say hello to the Republicans in 2010.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
zjemi
August 24, 2009 2:15 PM
That claim that a non-bipartisan bill will reflect badly on the Dems is bogus. In fact the Republicans who do NOT vote for a health reform bill are the ones likely to be in trouble when they are up for re-election.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jet
August 24, 2009 2:22 PM
Careful Progressives.
Don't get too excited about Reconciliation.
Kent Conrad is the Chairman of the Budget Committee who would oversee any use of Reconciliation. Conrad is opposed to any Public Option and apparently real reform.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thomas1
August 24, 2009 2:26 PM in reply to jet
cut the wheat subsidies then. it's hardball time
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MAX TARDCORE
August 25, 2009 12:02 AM in reply to thomas1
& prepare the wood chipper!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
August 24, 2009 2:32 PM in reply to jet
It's not entirely clear what Conrad is for. He significantly walked back his statement that he is unequivocally opposed to the PO.
In any case it's a safe bet Reid is canny enough to have his ducks in a row, including knowing exactly where Conrad stands on this, before crossing the Reconciliation Rubicon.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Acewrap
August 24, 2009 2:49 PM in reply to agio
"In any case it's a safe bet Reid is canny enough to have his ducks in a row,"
LOL!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
August 24, 2009 4:35 PM in reply to Acewrap
Laugh if you like. But if Reid has any doubt that reconciliation won't work, he won't go there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 4:05 PM in reply to jet
Then I guess we'll finally get to see if Reid has any balls. Does the Chairman of the Budget Committee out rank the Senate majority Leader? There's gonna be some fireworks going on in the Senate Chambers if Conrad thinks he out ranks Reid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
August 24, 2009 2:26 PM
"And in a final warning call to Republicans, Democrats are saying get with the program or get rolled. "
Get on the train or get run over by it.
The GOP is going to look totally irrelevent and impotent if they just sit on their asses while the Dems solve our biggest problems. They literally have nothing to contribute except lies and sneers. And they prove every day that they care only about their party, not their country. "Country first", eh?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
August 24, 2009 2:43 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
Hell yeah they are always "Party First" because the basic republican mindset is that of a sociopath who just cannot imagine the needs of other people actually matter. They are all ready to use reconciliation to give a trillion dollars of tax cuts to themselves and their billionaire friends, but giving healthcare to average people is just not anything they care about. I distinctly remember thinking the McCain slogan of Country First was such a complete and total lie from the candidate from the party of personal greed. I will be so proud when the Democrats start using their power to do some good in this world.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 4:08 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
Interesting isn't it?, that the repuglicans live in a completely different world with a completely different set of rules than the rest of us?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
August 24, 2009 2:30 PM
Yeah, I heard hatch the fool on meet the press lying through his teeth about the use of reconciliation. He said they didn't pass those huge tax breaks based on reconciliation. Lie. So it's ok to give the wealthy tax breaks but not help the american people.
I still think they shouldn't use reconciliation. Heard the dem cats not on board and read them the riot act. They will get steamrolled and shut out if they don't get on board. Pass it with 60 votes or make them not agree to block the legislation. Which party are they in? Where were the blue dogs when the freaking king elected to waste trillions on nation building and war as opposed to helping out the country. Why weren't they cost conscious then?
Screw the repukes. Marginalize them and let them scream. Ram the stuff through. If we only have two years to get stuff done finally, so be it. If the people like what they see and are on board, which I submit the majority clearly are, then they will expand their majorities and further marginalize the repukes.
This is really absurd. Let's get with the program dems.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 2:30 PM
I'm biting my tongue and waiting for the Administration to announce the period of bipartisanship is over and from now on, the Democrats will work in unison to forge legislation to right the wrongs of the last 8 years. Repuglicans points will be honestly heard, but if they want to be part of the legislative process, they'll have to adopt the Democrat party line.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
IndyEllen
August 24, 2009 2:40 PM in reply to Beetlejuice
I'm biting my tongue, too, Beetle. But then again, I've also been waiting for hell to freeze over.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 4:12 PM in reply to IndyEllen
But you know if Hell did freeze over, the repuglicans would be working as hard as they could by offering the public property rights in a new winter wonderland.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joy Sayler
August 24, 2009 2:56 PM
Clearly, reconciliation was used by the Bush administration to ensure that the general public could be overlooked in the equation and issues of serious nature voted on by simply the party in power--the ones who now want to just say NO.
We must do what we have to do to provide for the citizens in their best interests without regard to the interests of multi-billionaire ceos. Important to put power back in hands of people and ensure that the public is represented in the government.
What ever it takes, we must do to promote healthcare for everyone as a constitutional right.
We need to take the profit motive out of healthcare and determine what laws may have been broken by the executives of these companies who have inflicted such pain and suffering (and, yes, even death)to the very "customers" that they are supposed to provide service.
Current healthcare is only available to healthy--so if you're healthy, you are paying money out for no benefits--why would you do that? As soon as you become ill, you'll see, you'll be dropped or your benefits substantially reduced while you payments significantly increase. Then you'll see what you've been paying for--not much!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beetlejuice
August 24, 2009 4:25 PM in reply to Joy Sayler
John dean's book, Broken Government covers the repuglican's use of the reconciliation process. Specifically, if a Democrat assigned to a committee showed up, the meeting would be adjourned. The Democrats were bluntly told their inputs weren't necessary and would not be taken under consideration. And the Majority leaders and whips kept everyone in the Party in line to make sure they had the necessary 51% to pass any bill they created.
As for current health insurance, I'd say 90% of those covered don't realize that once they or a loved one is involved is a serious accident or has a life threatening illness, the coverage they think they had is really vaporware. The It's not going to happen to me mentality is driving the opposition to any constructive discussions.
The real sad fact is the health insurance industry is protected by the The McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1011, which is a United States federal law that allows state law to regulate the business of insurance without federal government interference. That means they can price fix, create monopolies and gouge their customers without ever having to worry about the heavy hand of the Federal government. The state governments are already in their pockets.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
atticus1104
August 24, 2009 3:57 PM
Dems are not going to be able to negotiate with people who are determined to poison the waters of legitimate debate. The latest GOP distortion tactic is...Death Books for Veterans. No joke.
Read this short article about the new GOP myth.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2652
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richardxx
August 24, 2009 5:37 PM
The Dems need to go the reconciliation route if any Dem Senator doesn't go with the majority.
Then, any Senator who breaks ranks and is up for reelection in 2010 should be targeted in the primary, as should the rest of those who don't get with the program when they come up for reelection.
I'm sure there are other effective ways to make the displeasure of the party known to the ones who don't get with the program. There are a lot of things a Senator wants to get done that require the cooperation of the rest of the members of the party caucus.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr.E.
August 24, 2009 5:51 PM
What I REALLY want to see is the Democrats changing the rules involving the selection and retention of committee chairmen, allowing open caucus elections to appoint chairmen by merit and no confidence votes to remove them if they are thwarting the will of the caucus. Then say goodbye to Baucus, Conrad, Lieberman and anybody else who is more interested in helping out their Republican friends and donors than advancing the causes of good government.
Defense, energy, the environment, health care and taxes are national issues and should be controlled by members acting in the national interest.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Docb
August 24, 2009 6:24 PM
It is about time...Weak kneed knuckle draggers-- Conrad and Baucus---Reid not much better...Call and tell Reid thank you for remembering that he, and all in Congress, were elected to do the work of the people..Ignore the Repubs...the did not hesitate a minute to use ever legal trick in the book to put their legislation through...
83% of the American people want reform...Co-ops are a give away to the insurance cos, HMO's, and big Pharma.... The senate bill is LOWERING THE PAYOUTS TO 65% from 80%---which means we pay 35% ourselves!!! Additionally, no drug negotiation, no cost controls, no competition...The Corps are dancing in the streets!
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-healthcare-insurers24-2009aug24,0,2392720.story
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?