Health Care Rules Switch May Be a Game Changer

By Jeralyn, Section Legislation
Posted on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 07:18:00 AM EST
Tags: health care legislation (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

So here's the new plan. It's seems very convoluted -- and like something you do in the dark of night hoping nobody figures it out.

The House will say it doesn't have to vote on the Senate bill because it's already been passed by one house. They will present a little "sidecar" of a reconciliation bill, and it all goes right Obama for signature and the obvious proud statement he'll make: he's passed the most important legislation of the last three decades.

What do we get? No public option, for one thing. [More...]

Here's a bit as to how it goes down:

The tactic -- known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass" -- has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

As to the sidecar, which seems to be the reconciliation portion,

Under reconciliation rules, it is protected from filibusters and could pass the Senate with only 50 votes, but can include only provisions that would affect the budget.

McClatchy raises some constitutional issues with this kind of passage. Here's an opposition memo that at least is in plain English.

< Monday Night TV and Open Thread | Social Networking and E-Mail: Is Privacy Dead? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Health Care Rules Switch May Be a Game Changer | 49 comments (49 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

No accountability, Again (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by BDB on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 06:59:55 AM EST

So basically everyone in the House knows that the Senate bill stinks and voting for it would put them in danger in November so to prevent voters from holding them accountable, they'll just "deem" it as having passed. Personally, I doubt the GOP or the voters will be fooled (although since most of the provisions don't take effect for years - a sign it sucks if ever there was one - people might not care much about it in November except to the extent they're repeatedly told the Dems fixed healthcare when they clearly haven't even really tried).

Gosh, using "rules" to prevent (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by observed on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 07:42:29 AM EST

an actual vote from occurring. Where have I seen that before, on the Dem side?
Looks like the child really is the father of the man here.

: Where Have You Seen This Before?? (none / 0) (#47)
by norris morris on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 07:32:58 PM EST

Russia, and previously the Soviets.
Show trial voting.
As a lifelong Democrat I'm mortified.

I just do not believe (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by kenosharick on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 09:35:39 AM EST

that the vast majority of voters care about process. Most of those upset about the Dems using tactics long employed by repubs witout a whisper of protest would never vote Democratic anyway.

"Deem and pass" (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by andgarden on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 09:36:48 AM EST

is perfectly constitutional . Each house of Congress determines its own rules.

Terrible politics though. Why make (none / 0) (#18)
by observed on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 09:45:41 AM EST

a big deal about chasing votes and then turn around to say "Oh, we don't need to vote".


Terrible politics? Nobody gives a $h*t. (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by andgarden on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 09:47:19 AM EST

Right, like no one cared if (none / 0) (#21)
by observed on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 09:55:33 AM EST

Kerry voted for and against the same bill, cleverly. Nobody cared, but now the Democrats have made it an issue.


I guarantee you nobody will remember this (none / 0) (#23)
by andgarden on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 10:13:21 AM EST

Nobody.


I'm sure they will be reminded before (none / 0) (#26)
by observed on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 11:01:17 AM EST

November. It's great fodder for campaign ads. Whether they will be effective probably depends more on whether the bill is popular.


I maintain that it is not (none / 0) (#27)
by andgarden on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 11:10:36 AM EST

Process arguments are too complicated for anyone to understand.


You don't have to explain (none / 0) (#29)
by itscookin on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 11:40:30 AM EST

the process. You just say that because the Democrats hid the votes, your congressman could evade being held accountable to you for his vote. He didn't speak out against hiding the votes so he obviously didn't want you to know how he voted. It would be the Democrat who would get all wound up in explaining that taking the votes this way is a standard procedure - not the challenger.


: Nah (none / 0) (#30)
by andgarden on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 11:44:16 AM EST

You'd just say: here's what we actually passed.

Attack ad (none / 0) (#32)
by waldenpond on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 12:12:53 PM EST

What.... maybe 30 minutes to explain the evilness of reconciliation and deem and pass? Jeez.


: heh (none / 0) (#34)
by andgarden on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 12:19:54 PM EST

exactly. TV time is expensive, and when you're explaining, you're losing.

Gee, let's just go to the (none / 0) (#22)
by BTAL on Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 10:11:40 AM EST

secret ballot concept for Congress. Then they all get a pass. Just submit the size needed for our sheep outfit with our tax returns.


: Waaah, waaah, waaah (none / 0) (#24