Reid, Durbin Open To Majority Vote To Beat Health Care Filibuster

As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid works to cobble together the 60 votes he needs to overcome an expected Republican attempt to block a floor vote on health care, there is still one powerful parliamentary weapon he could draw from his back pocket.

The process known as budget reconciliation only requires a simple majority -- and can not be filibustered -- meaning Reid (D-Nev.) would need only 50 Democrats plus a tie-breaking vote from Vice President Joe Biden to declare victory.

Is he still considering going that way?

"Sure, it's always an option," Reid said after leaving his press conference Monday, when he announced that he'd be pushing forward with a public health insurance option with an opt-out provision that would give states the right not to participate.

Reconciliation gained new relevance on Tuesday, when Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said that unless the public option is stripped out, he's prepared to join a GOP filibuster of the health care reform package. Without Lieberman, Democrats would only have 59 votes to end a filibuster -- one short.

Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who is in charge of corralling and counting votes, also said that reconciliation is still being considered. "The failsafe on this is reconciliation," Durbin said. "I hope we don't reach it because you can only do a limited amount of things on reconciliation."

Durbin was referring to the Senate parliamentarian's ability to strip out parts of any bill going through the reconciliation process that don't have a direct impact on the budget. (More on reconciliation here.)

But reconciliation is also a club that Reid can swing at conservative Democrats and Lieberman.

Story continues below

advertisement

If only 50 votes are needed, Lieberman becomes irrelevant, the most damning sentence that can be handed down to a Senator.

For evidence, just witness this week's fuming from Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who was moved from the center of the debate to the periphery by Reid's decision to move ahead without her. (What would Reid have to change in the bill to win her back? "The whole thing," she snapped.)

Lieberman said he hopes that it won't come to reconciliation, but told reporters that the threat wouldn't change his vote.

"I hope not," he said, when asked if he thought Reid might go the simple-majority route. "But that possibility, which I think would be a mistake, is not enough to lead me to vote for something I think would be bad for the country and bad for the 180 or 200 million Americans who currently have health insurance."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[rtlr1004]

Open to the idea is NOT what I want to hear. Reid and Durbin MUST insist on reconciliation. The majority of Americans WANT a truly ROBUST option. Reid: Stop playing around. Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor, Joe Lieberman, and a few other Democratic Senators are going to vote no. The Democrats because they are fearful of re-election or they are taking huge donations from the insurance lobby; Lieberman might as well be a Republican. It sickens me to think I thought Lieberman was a wonderful politican and person when he was Gore's Vice-Presidential choice. He has been nothing but an obstructionist. Reid/Durbin: Put your money where your mouth is and go with reconciliation. You will not get 60 votes by relying on all of these turncoats. They won't be around very long anyway because they are going to pay dearly at the polls for their terrible choices. When do WE matter???? When do you finally do what we elected you to do. Didn't you get the message when we elected Obama???? We are done with this kind of politics. I want someone to represent the best interests of Americans. You should never vote against something because you fear you will not be re-elected. You may not be, but at least you would have done the right thing. RECONCILIATION!

[super]

Why not the "nuclear option" of repealing the filibuster? Or is that option just reserved for the use of republicans to blackmail democrats?

[johnny69]

Your are SPOT ON! By any means necessary. Get the job done!!!!!!!

[spardicus]

better to do it with a simple majority if the repubs push it to that point than to become the simple minority in 2010.

Despite the news coverage of the professional noise-makers, screamers, and criers, the majority of Americans still support a public option.

[jclaireburke]

Simple majority. Do it.

[angelrubes]

The last statement from Senator Lieberman is very telling regarding the Bill, "it would be bad for the 180 or 200 million Americans that already have insurance." DUH?????? The most important portion of the Bill is to give access to health care to people who do not have health insurance. The people who have health insurance, now listen carefully Senator Lieberman, DO NOT NEED HEALTH INSURANCE!!!!! GEEZUS!

[wdw505]

i don't want my standard of care going down with the crowding of indigent patient suddenly wanting care from my doctors

[Rhiana]

Does your mother know you talk like that?

[jadeba]

Pretty heartless comment from another one who has swallowed the "we have the best health care, blah, blah"... It's all about me! (that's the official gop anthem).

[DarcieRN]

If all fails and the bill coming to vote doesn't have a strong public option and strong regulation, what I'd like to see is that the bill is not passed. Then in budgeting/­reconcilia­tion, regulate the privateers like utilities are regulated, or more. Cost/price controls, exec earning caps, well-defined plans (what will be covered, no preexisting condition clauses allowed,), etc......The insurance cartel terrorists want to threaten every American, and think that's just Ok? They need to be nationalized.

[mummblemouth]

Draconian regulation is the only other viable alternative besides single-payer. The public option could be useful, but ultimately will prove either a bandaid or a stepping stone to single-payer, depending on the strength of it.

[jadeba]

Once the door is opened, it's open. You can't stuff the genie back in the bottle. That's why ins companies and their minions (all the gop ers, Lieberman, Bayh, et al) are fighting so hard to kill any reform. I'm for single payer, think profit needs to be removed from health care, and this bill is far from what I want. The fact that the industry is fighting so hard tells me that it's a real threat - even watered down. Any form of competition or regulation is the enemy. Our next big battle should be to remove their anti trust exemption. Major League Baseball can keep it - just take it away from insurance companies.

[kdp59]

yep......in fact strong price controls ,gutting the anti trust exception and allowing all US Citizens to join Medicare might be BETTER than what they seem to be cobbling togther right now!!

[DarcieRN]

What kind of public option? One that everyone choose to buy, so there is a choice? (Or the one they are talking about, where only uninsured can get it?) One without opt-in or opt-out so the pool is big enough for the program to succeed? Will they regulate the h*11 out of the privateers until they are practically nationalized? That's what I want.
I WANT A PUBLIC OPTION
Tune: John Brown's Body/Battle Hymn of the Republic

I want a public option that's available to all
Affordable for everyone, with incomes great or small
Some real competition so the prices they will fall
A public option now!

REFRAIN:
Health care is a human right!
We won't cave without a fight!
Every vote against us is a vote for status quo!
A public option now!

I want a public option with no opt-in or opt-out
I vote and I need health care, don't I have a little clout?
All lawmakers against it have been paid for, have no doubt
A public option now!
Repeat REFRAIN

I want the cartel broken up and regulated too
We need to stop the suffering they put so many through
When rape's a pre-existing, what are we supposed to do?
A public option now!
Repeat REFRAIN

With GOP and Lieberman delaying votes and lying
Thousands of Americans are suffering and dying
The fifty million uninsured ask, "Congress, are you trying?!"
A public option now!
Repeat REFRAIN

[wdw505]

no thanks

[jadeba]

Agree. Everyone should have the option to join up. I think eventually it will be so. Let's get something on the books with a caveat - no public option, no mandate.

[dart79]

This is a no brainer.

[H321]

Now THIS is interesting:

...."irrelevant, the most damning sentence that can be handed down to a Senator.

For evidence, just witness this week's fuming from Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who was moved from the center of the debate to the periphery by Reid's decision to move ahead without her. (What would Reid have to change in the bill to win her back? "The whole thing," she snapped.)".......

Senator Snowe.... I actually expected better from you. Looks like she is no better than Lieberman and his brood. Just looking for more time in the national spotlight?
Pathetic.
Celebrity culture has creeped into the Hill ever since TMZ now has a Washington bureau and Barack Obama became the biggest celebrity in the world. Other politicians are looking for their own time in the sun. Screw the people.

[jordan327]

You mean 60 % of the people. All the people represented by the conservatives have no say on anything concerning health care. By the way, has the cbo scored reid's NEW bill yet?

[H321]

Go look at their constituents. Ignore ignore ignore.

People will be crying for health care reform when their premiums go up 30% in 10 years.

[greenkathy]

Pelosi is the best thing we have got going for us. And Harry Reid has done a really good thing because even if he can't get the 60, the Dems who are on the take from insurance companies (e.g., Lieberman, Bayh, etc.) will be exposed. The wives of both those men have big jobs that involve the insurance industry, and Bayh apparently owns tons of Wellpoint stock.

Unfortunately, the biggest coward of all may be sitting in the White House. The good thing about it is, if there is a silver lining at all, that the Congress will get some spine because they won't be able to look to the White House for leadership.

I believe that Reid and Durbin will go for reconciliation and if they let Obama talk them out of it, they are nuts.

[code blue]

There we go. And to think 24 hours ago everyone was hand wringing and self flagellating over how the public option was dead. Reid has two tools at his disposal: reconciliation and recrimination. And as we see, he's not going to hold back on either.

[teepeeyoyo]

Nor should he.

[dwillisno1]

People need to understand that reconciliation and filibuster are only legitimate parliamentary tools when used by the Republicans. Otherwise they are wrong. Republicans have Parliamentary Alzheimer's Disease.

[donbsea]

I FOUND THIS A FEW MINS AGO:
"Congress used reconciliation to enact President Bill Clinton's 1993 (fiscal year 1994) budget. (See Pub.L. 103-66, 107 Stat. 312.) President Clinton wanted to use reconciliation to pass his 1993 health care plan, but Senator Robert Byrd (D-WVa) insisted that the health care plan was out of bounds for a process that is theoretically about budgets. However, on August 25, 2009, Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), one of the members of the Senate Finance Committee's "Gang of Six" bipartisan group to work on a health insurance reform bill in the Senate, has said that reconciliation may be used, is an acceptable option, and that he can support it."

AND, "Until 1996, reconciliation was limited to deficit reduction, but in 1996 the Senate's Republican majority adopted a precedent to apply reconciliation to any legislation affecting the budget, even legislation that would increase the deficit.

Under the administration of President George W. Bush Congress used reconciliation to enact three major tax cuts. These tax cuts were set to lapse after 10 years to satisfy the Byrd Rule. Efforts to use reconciliation to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling failed however."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_%28United_States_Congress%29

[TeeLolly]

If Reid has to resort to budget reconciliation, I hope he follows up by stripping Lieberman of his committee chairmanships ...

[jadeba]

That should be done, anyway.

[mummblemouth]

Push Medicare for all through reconciliation and begin it immediately. Then, if the republicans really want to take away everyone's health insurance the next time they are in a position of power (should that nightmare ever come to pass) go for it.

[TeeLolly]

Works for me ...

[itys]

Sorry, but things don't work that fast in Washington. And there in lies America's saving grace. Because if this health care gets pushed through and WHEN the republicans gain back control in 2010 and 2012, the NEW Republican president can rescind the health care law. Goodbye obamacare for good.

[mummblemouth]

LOL... When republicans get control. Not going to happen. The republicans are not going to fare any better than democrats in upcoming elections. The disenfranchised are going to go for third parties. As for grace, it's too bad republicans have none.

[SShaw490]

You have it exactly backward. A bill that opens up Medicare as an option for all Americans is rescission-proof because Americans will see how great that is. The only way anything could get rescinded would be if nothing had gone into effect and Americans still had no better access to health care insurance than they've had up to then. And, of course, you're dreaming if you think Republicans will take back control in 2012. By 2012, the Republican party will have split into two equally irrelevant minor parties.

[code blue]

LOL @ "when the Republicans gain control"

[tavote08]

He!! already froze over...
Repugs can't even gain credibility and tea baggers can't elect you a national President, oh yeah there is always succession to fulfill your drreams!!!

[jordan327]

Don' worry about republican­s....it'll go bankrupt on it's own.

[Chromehawk]

Reconciliation is not a nuclear option for declaring war on the Republicans.
It is a declaration of nuclear war against the Moderate wing of the Democratic Party.

It is a statement of "Thanks for helping us get a majority, now vote as your told or we will make you irrelevant."

Of course, the moderate middle SHOULD make two statements.
1. "What is passed via budget reconciliation can and WILL be canceled via budget reconciliation. You better declare war on the voters to make sure they do not vote the other party into power in 2012 ... you know like in a 2004 moment? And you DO realize that none of the benefits, only the TAXES part start before 2012?"
2. "Hmmm. We are irrelevant huh? Well before we start this reconciliation vote ... maybe we should FIRST handle this other vote. The no-confidence vote. We hereby move for a vote to decide whether Harry Reid deserves to stay Senator pro Temp ... oh my ... we need a new Senator Pro Temp? gee how about maybe Sen. Evan Bayh ... ohh the progressives do not want him? Well it appears that the Republicans prefer him over Reid and gee with the Republicans ... woops we now have him. Oh dear, Sen Bayh YOU do not want a reconciliation vote ... awesome! Now let's start this thing from scratch ... well scratch AFTER the house Blue Dogs also remove Pelosi."

[ClareP]

Actually, the bills have been undergoing revision to start many benefits on 2010.

And you are entirely neglecting the fact that the Dems with Reid have a majority- they only lack enough to push a floor vote without Lieberman & the moderates. Which means it is ridiculous to suppose there could be any kind of successful attack on his leadership.

Blue dogs are in a minority. And they know it.

[Chromehawk]

There are 17 Blue Dogs or independents. Though I would expect Sanders to stand by Reid.

And again, the results of war against the Blue Dogs has already been shown in 1980. You THINK you may only lose THEIR seats. But the Blue Dogs in Calif will punish Boxer for the progressives punishing Senators and Congressmen they like.

And the results, like 1980, will be the same.
You do not lose only those marginal seats you can't count on ... you lose ALL the seats.

The amazing thing of the 1980 election was NOT that a cowboy actor became President.
The amazing thing was the republicans SWEPT the Senate ... SWEPT. ALL the seats.

This was due to the Liberal wing ( read progressives ) declaring war on the moderates figuring they had enough of a margin to lose a few to send a message to the rest.

[PopeRatzo]

Joe Lieberman, the senator from AIPAC, needs to lose his committee chairmanship immediately.

He's held the country hostage enough times