Image 01

Posts Tagged ‘United States Senate’

Obama Proposes Passing Partisan Health Care Plan Via Reconciliation Despite Bipartisan Opposition

Monday, February 22nd, 2010

Democratic President Barack Obama, and Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid, signaled this morning the pathway for the final Democratic push for the passage of Obamacare: the reconciliation process

Three days before the highly publicized health care summit, billed by President Obama and Democrats as an opportunity for bipartisan negotiations regarding the provisions of a potential health care overhaul, the White House signaled its intent to move forward with a $950 billion dollar Democrats-only bill that can garner, at most, a bare 51 vote majority in the United States Senate. Indeed, eight Democratic Senators (including Lieberman) have already gone on record opposing the use of reconciliation to ram through the Obamacare package.   Despite Obama’s prior pledges of bipartisan negotiations with the GOP and this morning’s bipartisan rhetoric from the White House, the fact is that the only bipartisanship associated with health care reform is the bipartisan opposition in the House to Obamacare (39 Democratic “no” votes) and the bipartisan opposition to the use of reconciliation to pass Obamacare through the Senate.

The substantive content of this morning’s latest White House version of Obamacare is essentially the same plan negotiated between the President, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the days leading up to Republican Scott Brown’s January 2010 election to the Senate from liberal Massachusetts and the White House roadmap contemplates the use of the reconciliation process in the Senate so as to avoid the need for a 60 vote majority:

“This is our take on the best way to merge the House and Senate bills,” a senior White House official told ABC News. The official said the proposal was “informed by our conversations from negotiations” before Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., was elected, thus depriving Democrats of their 60-vote supermajority, as well as from subsequent discussions.

“We thought it would be a more productive meeting if we brought one consolidated plan to use as jumping-off point,” the official said. “We hope the Republicans do the same.”

By posting their proposals in such a form, White House officials are providing a roadmap for how they think they can best pass health care reform in the new post-Massachusetts Senate race reality: have the House pass the Senate bill, then use reconciliation rules requiring only a majority Senate vote to pass the “fix” to make the bill more palatable.

In the conference call with reporters this morning accompanying the disclosure of the latest iteration of Obamacare, White House officials explicitly stated they intend to use reconciliation to pass Obamacare without any GOP Senate votes:

In the course of unveiling Obama’s new health reform proposal on a conference call with reporters this morning, White House advisers made it clearer than ever before: If the GOP filibusters health reform, Dems will move forward on their own and pass it via reconciliation.

The assertion, which is likely to spark an angry response from GOP leaders, ups the stakes in advance of the summit by essentially daring Republicans to try to block reform.

“The President expects and believes the American people deserve an up or down vote on health reform,” White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said on the call.

Accordingly, it appears that the Obama Administration has settled on pursing the use of the Senate reconciliation process, instead of normal order which would require a 60 vote majority, to pass the most far-reaching reform of the health care system in our nation’s history. Indeed, the “package is designed to help us [use reconciliation] if the Republican party decides to filibuster health care reform,” stated White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer.

The new Obamacare policy summary
and the conference call with reporters strongly indicate that little, if any, substantive discussions will occur at Thursday’s health care summit as the Democrats have now settled on the use of reconciliation as the pathway to final passage of Obamacare. The GOP’s incremental ideas such as allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines, significant tort reform and the use of risk pools for uninsurable Americans with preexisting conditions are nowhere to be found in this morning’s announcement nor in the present Democratic bills in the Senate and House and are essentially inconsistent with the comprehensive, government-centered, Democratic health care reform plans. Furthermore, in a move apparently designed to paint the GOP as pro-insurance, Obama also proposed substantial new federal price controls over the cost of health insurance as part of this morning’s summary.

The above-described White House posture this morning stands in stark contrast to their posture just two weeks ago when the idea of a health care summit was first pitched by President Obama. At that time, Obama promised to engage in substantive negotiations with the GOP on all parts of health care reform plan during the summit:

“I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans and Democrats, to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward” Mr. Obama said in the interview from the White House Library.

The 2/8/2010 NYT piece quoted above notes that it “remained an open question whether the meeting could lead to real consensus on health care, or whether it would serve only to allow Democrats to frame a political argument against the Republicans going into the midterm campaign.” Considering this morning’s developments, and the clearly stated intent to move forward with reconciliation passage of the intra-Democrat negotiated Obamacare, there no longer remains a “open question” and instead Obama intends the coming summit to “serve only to allow Democrats to frame a political argument against the Republicans going into the midterm campaign.”

For the ideological left, this morning’s White House summary and the coming health care summit represent “the last, best shot” to pass a comprehensive, government-centered health care reform plan. To a majority of Americans, including almost all conservatives, a strong majority of independents and even some liberals, the Obama Administration’s continued relentless focus on forcing a strongly partisan Obamacare package through Congress is an unfavorable development, as shown by public polling of Obama’s job approval and the approval of the Democratic health care reform packages in Congress.

At least eight Democratic Senators have already announced their opposition to the use of reconciliation to pass Obamacare, and those Democratic Senators will almost certainly be joined by the 41 GOP Senators in opposition to the President’s reconciliation plan as announced this morning. It appears from early GOP responses that the GOP intends to attempt to garner 10 Democratic Senator votes to block the use of reconciliation (with 10 Democratic votes, the GOP would have the 51 votes needed to block reconciliation).

Indeed, the irony of the health care reform debate and Obama’s continuous public pledges to engage in bipartisan negotiations with the GOP is the fact that the only bipartisanship associated with health care reform is the bipartisan opposition in the House and Senate to Obamacare, and the next few weeks will probably determine if the GOP is able to garner enough bipartisan support to block the passage of Obamacare through the 51-vote (50 votes plus VP Biden tiebreaker) reconciliation process.  Finally, should Obama succeed in finding 217 House votes and 50 Senate votes for Obamacare, the response of the electorate towards those Democrats in November 2010 may be an historic wave of GOP victories rivaling or even surpassing the 1994 GOP wave.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

UPDATED – Evan Bayh Will Not Seek Reelection – Dems Face Tomorrow Deadline for New Candidate

Monday, February 15th, 2010

Indiana Democratic Senator Evan Bayh to announce retirement plans today

In a shock announcement set for later today, moderate Indiana Democratic Senator Evan Bayh will disclose that he will not seek reelection to the United States Senate in November 2010. Bayh’s retirement plans follow close on the heels of the announcement by House member Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) that he also will not seek reelection.

The Washington Post broke the story minutes ago:

Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh will not seek re-election this year, a decision that hands Republicans a prime pickup opportunity in the middle of the country.

“After all these years, my passion for service to my fellow citizens is undiminished, but my desire to do so by serving in Congress has waned,” Bayh will say.

Bayh will announce the decision at a press conference later today. He was first elected to the Senate in 1998 and was re-elected easily in 2004. National Republicans had recruited former Sen. Dan Coats to challenge Bayh in 2010 although polling suggested Bayh began the race with a 20-point edge. He also had $13 million in the bank at the end of the year.

Prior to being in the Senate, Bayh served two terms as governor of the Hoosier State.

Bayh points to his “waned” “desire” for “service to my fellow citizens” via service in Congress. The Scott Brown election to the Massactuetts Senate seat formerly held by Teddy Kennedy last month may have played a role in Bayh’s thinking. Considering the bankroll Bayh’s reelection campaign is carrying ($13 million) and his lead now in the polls, Bayh’s surprise announcement will surely be scrutinized by the political world for Bayh’s true rationale and the effects on politicians planning to remain in DC.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey from Hotair.com (thanks for the link!) points out that the Democrats literally have only 29 hours from noon today to find a new candidate to file paperwork by tomorrow’s deadline for Indiana Senate candidates. Top candidates from a “reasonable bench” of Indiana Democrats:

Dems have a reasonable bench in the Hoosier State, and any of the 3 Dems who beat GOPers in ’06 — Reps. Joe Donnelly (D), Brad Ellsworth (D) and Baron Hill (D) — would fit the mold as centrists in a center-right state. Hill has said he is likely to run for GOV in ’12. Dems may also turn to ex-Gov. Joe Kernan (D) or ex-DNC chair Joe Andrew.

The Bayh news will surely lead the political news cycle for at least the next two days as the shock of Bayh’s sudden “waned” “desire” for “service to my fellow citizens” via service in Congress impacts the Democratic establishment in DC and the mainstream media while the drama of the impending 29-hour deadline for a new candidate plays out.

UPDATE #2: Speculation as to Bayh’s motives has turned to possible Bayh 2012 aspirations to challenge President Barack Obama in the Democratic Presidential primaries from the center-left. Bayh had been moving to distance himself from the Democratic health care reform initiative in the weeks after Scott Brown’s election in Massachusetts, going so far as to post on his official Senate website a call to avoid the use of reconciliation to pass health care reform:

Washington– Two centrist senators Tuesday threw up a roadblock to salvaging President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul, as Democrats agonized over whether to push forward or shift to idle until political resistance subsides.

Sens. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., both facing re-election this year in Republican-leaning states, said they would oppose the strategy Democratic leaders are considering to reconcile the House and Senate bills and put comprehensive legislation on Obama’s desk.

That approach involves reconciliation, a special budget-related procedure that requires only 51 votes to advance. The strategy to get around Republican opponents in the Senate would be a calculated risk sure to inflame critics on the political right.

“My concern is that if reconciliation is used, that will really destroy any prospects for bipartisan cooperation on anything else for the remainder of this year,” Bayh said. “That would be a regrettable state of affairs, something I think the American public would not react well to.”

Indeed, the day after the Scott Brown election shocker Evan Bayh plainly split with Obama by stating that whenever “you have just the furthest left elements of the Dem party attempting to impose their will on the rest of the country — that’s not going to work too well.” However, also about three weeks ago, Bayh specifically debunked rumors of a 2012 run:

Bayh said he wouldn’t challenge President Barack Obama for reelection in 2012 as an independent or Democratic candidate when asked by Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto.

“I’m not running for president, I’m trying to do what’s right for my state and our country,” Bayh said. “And I’m willing to work with the president, Republicans — anybody — to get that job done.”

It would be unusual though not unprecedented for a sitting senator to challenge a president of his own party. It would raise eyebrows for Bayh, especially, to do so, given the number of meetings he’s had with the president over the past year.

“I don’t know what to think of that, except the people who wrote that have too much time on their hands,” the Indiana centrist said. “I’m focused on one thing and one thing only: trying to do a good job of representing the people of my state.”

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,