TPMDC

Elmendorf: Health Care Progress May Not Be Possible for Two Weeks

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

This is somewhat complicated, and I'll flesh it out and get you video just as soon as I can. But with Democrats anxious to pass a health care bill, and avoiding delays seen as a high political priority, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) indicated today that there may be major delays in the health care process going forward. During today's health care hearing, he told CBO chief Doug Elmendorf today that the Senate Finance Committee must be provided with a complete CBO score of the final package before the panel can hold a vote on it.

"With respect to the issue of when scoring might be available, because...it is critically important that we have scoring before a final vote is cast in the committee," Conrad said, "it is important for us to know, once there is a package, after the amendment process here, can you give us some rough estimate, in days to have a CBO score."

How long will that scoring take?

Elmendorf estimated that the full reporting could take two weeks:

"I think we can update our preliminary analysis...within a few days of the package actually being set. A formal cost estimate would require...two weeks of work by us, once the package is settled."

Conrad ultimately suggested that the committee could hold its vote on the basis of the preliminary analysis, but that two week window would presumably still apply to progress beyond the committee's vote. It would, after all, take a similar amount of time to complete a final cost estimate of the package that ultimately comes to the Senate floor.

Finance chairman Max Baucus, as you'll soon see, was startled by this news, and pushed back, saying the committee would have to figure out a way to move more quickly than that.

"The box we're in, we pass legislation, we've got to cool our heals for up to two to three weeks before we know the final [score]?" Baucus asked incredulously. "That's unacceptale, clearly...so you've got to help us get out of this box."

How they'll get out of the box remains unclear.

Late update: Here's the video.

Late, late update: This post has been modified for greater accuracy.

Join the Conversation!

22 comments

Recommend Recommend (1)

September 22, 2009 6:12 PM   

Jesus, Kent Conrad is a little turd, isn't he?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 6:14 PM   

Anything to do the work of insurance companies. We will remember. This will be the end of Conrad in the Senate.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 6:15 PM   

Conrad. Begins with a "C." An, by an amazing coincidence, so does a thirteen letter expletive I'm thinking of right now.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 6:17 PM   

Say goodbye to that Columbus Day break (seriously?), guys.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 6:19 PM   

This is what happens when Baucus limited negotiations on his committee to his 'Gang of Six'. So much precious time wasted over the summer. Instead of picking up good ideas from the rest of the Finance committee members like Wyden and Rockefeller, and thereby saving time in the process, Baucus foolishly thought he was negotiating in good faith with the likes of Grassley and Enzi, two hardcore partisan conservatives whose sole objective was to stall the bill, thereby considerably weakening it and more importantly making it a garbage bill that was bound to fail.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 7:53 PM    in reply to rosebowl

*ding* *ding* *ding*

That's what the delaying was all about.

John

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 6:24 PM   

Sure am glad Democrats are in power!!

Conservative Democrats, that is.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 6:44 PM   

Delay...delay...delay...

And hope something else comes up. I.e. that Colorado/New York terror cell.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 7:25 PM   

I actually think that is reasonable. The reason why I say that is that the Senators MUST be able to go to Americans and say that this bill will be paid for, will bend the cost curve, and is affordable.

If the CBO gives it a good score than this will be a MAJOR selling point to the rest of the Democratic Senators who are on the fence (Nelson, Landrieu, Lincoln, etc).

Always remember that even if a health care bill is passed it STILL needs to be continuously sold to the American people for awhile because if the American people do NOT feel that it is a good deal for them then they will take it out on the mid-term elections. However, if the American people feel that it is a good deal then the Democrats will reap the benefits.

I think it is BETTER to be safe than sorry on this one. It is just too important.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 8:49 PM    in reply to Maritza

I just have to say this one time ........ doesn't it cross your mind from time to time how very much you **wish** there had been all this intense scrutiny and consideration of costs before we launched into that damn second war? Sometimes I just want to scream "where were you with your magnifying glass and fine tooth comb before *that* vote was taken?"

Well, now we know why Bush & Co got no meaningful legislation enacted ..... it's hard work. Far easier to scare people, wrap yourself in a flag, grab up your saber and charge go off to war!! Gag.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 2:32 AM    in reply to Maritza

a) I'm sorry, but you honestly believe a CBO score is going to make the key political differrence in whether "the American people feel that it is a good deal"?

b) Conrad's asking for a complete, formal, "scoring" before even moving; it won't be different from an estimate or update, but it'll be slower, and that's what he wants.

c) This is not a score on the final bill we're talking about, we're talking about one committee product out of five; the other Senate one's been done for months now. The actual final bill will be substantially different (hopefully radically so). So this means jack q. shit for selling the American people on the final bill.

This isn't about prudence. This is about sucking on Aetna's teat a little longer.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 7:51 PM   

I'm rooting for Baucus when he's against Conrad? Strange bedfellows, eh?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 7:55 PM   

Delay = they need some more cash.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 22, 2009 8:08 PM   

Hmmm. Max Baucus didn't delay quite enough for Kent Conrad's masters, so Kent is jumping in and doing the job?

13 letter expletive, indeed!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 12:29 AM   

While I am very disappointed in the Democrats in Congress and the President's willingness to let them take the lead, I am heartened that thanks to the internet things are changing. These guys will soon find that the power of the web may just be powerful enough to see that many of them are not re-elected. We won't forget their corruption and betrayal. They may well shaft us this time, but they have lost the ability to do it unnoticed and without consequences.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 3:42 AM   

I'm convinced at this point that Baucus, Conrad, and Lincoln DO NOT want a vote on this legislation.

Oct 15th is the deadline under budget reconciliation rules to have have something passed in Congress. Here is an excerpt from the American Prospect:


The budget will include reconciliation instructions pegged to October 15th. That's the date by which Congress has to pass bipartisan health care reform. If they fail, then the relevant committees have to write reconciliation legislation that faces a simple up-or-down vote in the Senate.


So, I think these three, and perhaps others like Nelson, WANT the legislation to be thrown into reconciliation. Because it is there that they believe they have their best shot to

a. avoid a hard vote on the senate floor for themselves

b. kill parts of the bill (like the public option) their masters in the health insurance industry don't want

IMO, THAT is why some conserva-dems and the republicans have wanted more and more time.

Oct 15th is driving it. If they can't kill it in committee (and boy have they been trying), they'll at least try to kill the parts they don't like in reconciliation.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 9:08 AM    in reply to willia451

I'm not sure you can lump the motives of those four into one pile. It's becoming increasingly hard to find a benign explanation for anything Conrad does. Still, as far as where any of them will be on the final vote, it's always a good idea to keep in mind how Sen. Geary was there for Michael Corleone when the heat was on. Conrad, at least, is increasingly desparate to avoid a vote precisely because he knows that, if he can't avoid it and the spotlight is on him, he's going to have to screw his cash cows (repulsive metaphor intentionally chosen). Most of the public won't realize he's doing it, but the cow will certainly know.

Nelson and Landrieu are the harder votes because angry bamboozled white people may well constitute a majority of their electorate.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 8:58 AM   

While this doesn't quite rise to the GOPers talking point about the rush to a decision (Let's press the reset button, and start over on a truly bi-partisan health insurance bill.) With this two week window, the Republicans, I am sure, will put on those thinking caps and come up with some great ideas.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 9:16 AM   

And while these jerkweeks play their little games, another 196,000 people will lose their health insurance. Pathetic!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 9:18 AM   

You have to f'ng kidding me! Cut off ND's Federal Funding for everything - Conrad is an asshole not a Democrat.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 9:57 AM   

As if Conrad is going to vote for anything.To my mind, key players who actually might vote for something have something called "leverage". Assholes like Conrad who won't vote for jack, have none.

And every modifcation alters the CBO score, so if you had to wait weeks after every iteration, you'd never get anything done.

Time to put up or shut up. And since when did this CBO jackass get to call the shots on everything? I dodn't heatr abotu any goddamn CBO scores when Bush was talking about spending $1T on Iraq, or 1.3T on tax cuts.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

September 23, 2009 12:53 PM   

Yes, it is critically important for the Finance Committee to have a complete, rather than preliminary, CBO accounting -- and for all of us to wait two weeks for them to precisely score a bill that is never going to be adopted as law in that precise form.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

PollTracker

More polls »

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on