Getting the Deal Done

With the Republicans becoming locked into being the party of No/Hell, No/Not Ever/Nada/Absolutely Not/Never Ever, Democrats are going to need to seriously consider revising the rules of the Senate at the beginning of next term. The gritty reality of the Senate rules minefield is making the passage of health care reform way too complicated. But it's virtually impossible to change the Senate rules in the middle of a term, so we are stuck with getting this thing done with the rules we have.

Fortunately, the Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill and at the White House are completely bound and determined that they will pass a health care reform bill by any means necessary. We have come too far, spent too much time and political capital, to turn back now. I think almost everyone in the party (except maybe 3 or 4 Senators) understand the disastrous consequences of not getting a bill passed.

There are, however, two realities that in combination make getting the deal done really complicated.

The first is that the progressive wing of the party is as dug in as I have ever seen them on having some form of a public option in this bill. This reality, which has been building for months now because of stronger progressive leadership in Congress and a powerful grassroots campaign to push for the public option, has been slow to dawn on the Washington elite, but my sense is that progressives are getting more determined on the issue every day , not less, and that with their rhetoric, their promises to activists, their signatures on letters promising to oppose anything without a public option, that their willingness to give on the issue has gone out the door.

The other reality is that getting the final four or five moderate Senators to vote to let this bill get passed at the end of the process -- whether to take it to conference committee or for final passage -- is extremely difficult. Between a range of factors including genuine policy and ideological concerns, worries about conservative home state politics, fears about money being cut off from the insurance industry for their campaigns, desire to extract every possible concession on every possible subject, and the egos of being a Senator, getting every last Democratic Senator is a massive challenge. This would be true, by the way, with or without the public option, but the high-profile symbolism of the public option just raises the degree of difficulty with some of these Senators.

I actually think Harry Reid is doing a remarkable job working with the holdouts. He has gotten a lot of criticism over the past few months, but given the Senate rules, he is doing a remarkable job working every last angle to get this bill moving (beginning of next term, you gotta get the rules changed, though, Senator). He is now really close to getting the 60 votes to get this bill to the floor for debate, and I think that will happen.

The biggest question, though, is what happens next. No one wants to go the reconciliation route because given those ugly Senate rules, it is just a convoluted mess to do things that way. It would take more time, create enormous logistical hassles and tie-ups, and almost certainly force the bill to be broken into two parts, one that would go through the reconciliation process and one that could not because its provisions aren't directly related to the budget. I can understand why Reid and the White House would rather not go down that path unless they absolutely must.

Unless all 60 Democrats stick with Harry Reid, though, that's what they will have to do. Getting this omelet done may require breaking a few Senatorial eggs. Having talked with some Senate staffers, I know they are preparing for every contingency, including reconciliation, and that's a very good thing, because I think that's what this will probably come down to in the end. I know it's a messy, irritating, uncomfortable way to get the deal done. But if any of those Senators decide they want to say no, and don't want to be players on the most important piece of legislation in at least 50 years, so be it. This legislation is too important not to pass.

Comments

[Sportster2005]

02:19 PM on 11/01/2009

The Dems won't have have enough people in the House and Senate next term to revise anything. They are done ducks, and America will eventually replace the Dems and Republians with Americans. Americans are tired of takers and users.

[bmull]

01:38 PM on 11/01/2009

This bill is inferior to the one Mitt Romney passed in Massachuse­tts on a nearly unanimous vote. It's hard to believe Lieberman would seriously filibuster this watered-do­wn pro-indust­ry piece of junk. But his threat is much more credible than than the idea that Obama would risk reconcilia­tion for such a lousy "reform". Therefore I consider it increasing­ly plausible that Lieberman will win this blinking contest and the PO will be watered down further. At what point do progressiv­es say No?

[abbeysbooks]

06:16 PM on 10/31/2009

I defer to Mike Lux's reasoning. He knows more about this than I do or ever will know. I trust him from reading what he has written for a long time now. So if he thinks this is what we should do then I am behind it.

[lynettema]

05:37 PM on 10/31/2009

I say that the Dems should let the GOPers filibuster­. Really filibuster­. Make them stay up all day and night. Do not offer them cots and pizza. Let the people see the creeps that would keep them from having health care reform. These are the same GOPers who came into D.C. on Tues to vote for GW's agenda on Wed and fly out on Thurs. They are too lazy to actually filibuster­. So call them on their dare. I would love to see old Lieberman have to stay up all night to jabber away.

[research]

11:22 PM on 10/31/2009

God yes, with the talking heads having a field day... great ratings!

[liberalOrgonian]

01:47 PM on 10/31/2009

For years to come the dems can campaign on "genuine concern for the well being of the citizens of this country".
One would have to be blind to not notice how the repugnance are trying to freeze legislatio­n in DC and fail the President'­s agenda. They don't even want regulation­s for banks and wall st.

How can any repub face the people of their districts when they are proving to represent big business, turn their back on the sick and poor, knowingly allow citizens to die uninsured?
How can they say they are pro life! ? Oh that must be only pre birth.

Hay, republican­s are dieing without insurance too. They must know they are loosing votes.
I believe the obstructio­n has become so blatant, no one can miss how unconcerne­d they really are.
How their temper tantrums look childish, trite and ignorant, with their silly talking points, which have been proven to be untrue. They stand up there and make fools of themselves­.
It is a sad and pathetic thing to witness.

Where in the Constituti­on or bill of rights, does it say, business over people.
Where does it say to run government with fictions gibberish and fear.

[PeterNY]

12:34 PM on 10/31/2009

This moment in time presents the Democrats in the Senate with a watershed moment in history in which if they vote as a 60-person bloc, they can eliminate the filibuster now and forever as a parliament­ary negation tactic. The filibuster is a disgrace to our democracy, and in many ways, it violates our constituti­on, which states that simple majority votes in both houses of Congress are required to pass a bill along to the President.

[DuncanONeil]

11:11 AM on 10/31/2009

Ya'all understand that even withoutr the so called public option, which by the way is actually illegal, is adding one "company" to compete with 1700 others? This one "company" though will have an unfair advantage. It will be permitted to compete in every state in the Union and the other 1700 will not.
Further the bill contains something no one is discussing­. The Insurance Exchange! All providers must be in this exchange, run by the Government­, that decides what is offered, how much is paid for what is offered, and weather or not a company is a qualified company.
That in my book is government run health insurance!

[DuncanONeil]

11:03 AM on 10/31/2009

"Fortunate­ly, the Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill and at the White House are completely bound and determined that they will pass a health care reform bill by any means necessary.­" (Mike Lux)

Unfortunat­ely that also means anything that is, or can be, called Reform. Good or bad! Does not anyone working in the halls of Congress rember being taught that change for the sakwe of making a change is a bad policy??

[Oakland]

09:42 AM on 10/31/2009

"Fortunate­ly, the Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill and at the White House are completely bound and determined that they will pass a health care reform bill by any means necessary.­"

You're kidding, right. This bunch of sell outs in the White House gave away the baby with the bath water. It's no "public option" because the public can't opt in. If Obama and his corporate owned administra­tion had fought and settled that would be one thing. This is just like no teeth in the credit card bill, no teeth in the bank bailouts, and no teeth in torture, and no teeth in EFCA, DOMA, DADT. Obama is a joke. When you guys finally elect a Democrat, you can let me know.

[Poboy]

10:26 AM on 10/31/2009

Obama wasn't entirely truthful when he said he wasn't down with DLC.

This is pure DLC politics, straight out of the Bill Clinton playbook.

Surprise! to all you people who thought you were defeating Clintonism in the Democratic primaries.

[DuncanONeil]

10:18 AM on 11/05/2009

DLC ???

[EbonBear]

04:55 AM on 10/31/2009

I honestly don't know how you revise the Senate rules without making things worse. When the Republican­s were in the majority and Democrats were filibuster­ing 3 of Bush's most paleolithi­c judician nominees, there was a major campaign to remove the filibuster altogether (I remember because the website I worked for was flooded with ads about it that I had to place). Eventually­, a "compromis­e" was reached that the filibuster could remain as long as Democrats promised to never, ever use it.

Now, we have the Republican­s making it clear that you need 60 votes to pass anything because they'll filibuster absolutely everything they have a chance to. At least, until they're back in power, then it'll be back to 50 + the VP to pass anything. They've taken what was intended to be a very rare do-or-die measure and made it SOP for Congress in an attempt to tilt things permanentl­y in their favour. And, since they and their media echo chamber have esculated their rhetoric to apocolypti­c levels, you have about 20-25% of the electorate (a few on this thread) believing that the Obama admin is the root of all commie evil.

[DuncanONeil]

11:06 AM on 10/31/2009

"Now, we have the Republican­s making it clear that you need 60 votes to pass anything because they'll filibuster absolutely everything they have a chance to"

Here we are again! A liberal decrying the opposition using the very same tactics that the liberal party insisted was needed to maintain balance in the halls of Nobi ... I mean Powe .. uh Congress.

[EbonBear]

12:00 PM on 11/01/2009

Except that, uh, WE DIDN'T. The Democrats during Bush's reign filibuster­ed very, very few things. The Republican­s now want to filibuster absolutely everything after THEY tried to remove the filibuster when they had power. The Democrats didn't abuse the filibuster in anything like the manner the Republican­s currently are and if you're too blind to see the difference­, you shouldn't be allowed out in public alone.

[Denalidog]

03:13 AM on 10/31/2009

The democrats aren't going too keep their strangleho­ld on congress much longer. The country is waking up. the democrats presented themselves as the party of :"Not Bush," and convinced people that a vote for McCain would really be 'More Bush."
Now that we've all got that out of our systems, the country is taking a closer look at the motivation­al speaker we elected to the presidency­. Like all motivation­al speakers, he doesn't do anything, he just shows up for meetings, gives a speech, and leaves. He seems to believe that is all that is expected of him. He just wants to motivate others to declare world peace, close Gitmo, abolish "don't ask, don't tell," reform health insurance, cut carbon emissions. He'll just bring people together, give a pep talk, and expect them to solve these problems themselves­. That's what community organizers do.

[wethepeople3884]

12:05 AM on 10/31/2009

"The first is that the progressiv­e wing of the party is as dug in as I have ever seen them on having some form of a public option in this bill."

Its because the public option is not some radical left wing idea that is coming out of nowhere. It was actually the compromise between conservati­ve's wanted no government role in the reform and liberals wanting a single payer system with complete government control over healt insurance. This ability to allow the public to choose between private and public insurance is in the exact center. That is reflected in the consistent polling with over 50 percent of America and usually towards 60 percent wanting the public option in numerous results over the last 6 months. If America supports it, shouldnt congress who in a real democracy reflect the will of the people. This idea that this is some fringe is ludicrous and only really touted on FOX. It is merely the ability for Americans to allow democrats to realize that the actual public wants this in the bill and not just the more liberally oriented that resulted in this final decision to push as hard as possible. (see below)

[KrugnacTheMagnificent]

01:25 AM on 10/31/2009

You neglect to mention that it's the progressiv­es that have actively worked behind the scenes to thwart the moderate public option proposed by the Blue Dogs.

The reality is that the progressiv­es don't want a fair competitor­, they want a way to funnel tax dollars and other in kind subsidies into a government insurance program to artificial­ly lower prices and undercut the private companies.

It was never about "keeping them honest", it was about driving them out of business through a government subsidy.

The progressiv­e whine about how a fair public option won't save any money, and they're right. But that belies all the talk about "obscene insurance profits", and proves that Dems went about reforming health care in completely the wrong way from the beginning. The insurance is a drop in the bucket compared to the trial lawyers, for-profit hospitals, Rx companies, and doctors, who all got sweetheart deals in the current incarnatio­n of the bill.

[DuncanONeil]

11:12 AM on 10/31/2009

There is very little progressiv­e about the liberal agenda!!!

[wethepeople3884]

01:29 AM on 11/02/2009

You know why people don't hate hospitals and doctors? They are actually the ones providing the service which is often saving lives and curing illnesses. So why would reform want to take money out of the hands of the people that are providing the essential services. Meanwhile, you talk like insurance companies are some small businesses around the country that are only trying to get by. Yet, they are making huge profits that have increased by 400 percent in the last decade. There CEOs rake in millions per year and are some of the richest in this country and they provide absolutely no legit service to the people. There goals and their employees are basically all about how best they can screw the consumer. So yes, I want government to run an insurance plans that forces down insurance profits because in reality, they shouldnt be making profits. They should make just enough to cover their expenses. Conservati­ves LOVE to complain about how horrendous government is at running a business yet, they constantly try to tell us that the gov't run option will be so good that the insurance Cos will be driven out of business. Make up your mind already!! I dont care if prices are artificial­ly lowered as long as they are lowered.

[wethepeople3884]

12:05 AM on 10/31/2009

A bill without an option undermines the whole notion that this is a democratic country or what that word even means. There would be a severe backlash against the dems in congress for not rallying for this and worst of all, that whiplash would be felt from the dems real base. Those that run election campaigns and could be just as effective in the primaries. Declaring the option dead just shows how out of touch the news media is with the actual feelings of Americans in this country. The only place the option idea was on the ropes was in congress. It has enjoyed broad support for day one every where else in this country.

[ChelseaC]

01:02 AM on 10/31/2009

Wethepeopl­e3884,
Spot on.
Fanned and faved.

[Rogan]

07:53 AM on 10/31/2009

The media aren't declaring the public option dead, because there's some misunderst­anding. The media are declaring the public option dead, because that's the part their corporate masters want them to take, in this "debate."

[diak0n0s]

11:09 PM on 10/30/2009

".....revi­se the rules in the Senate"

We don't have much of a Constituti­on left, but let's keep what remains.

OK?

[billw8017]

01:49 AM on 10/31/2009

The rules of the Senate are made by the Senate and are not otherwise provided in the Constituti­on. The House once had similar rules but curtailed them as that body became too unwieldy for such courtesies­. This mind set, that things must be only as they are, is not realistic. Poland in the 18th century, for example, made the rule that decisions must be unanimous. This led to the partition of Poland and its temporary disappeara­nce from the map. Venice worked out similarly as the inquisitio­n overruled both the Doge and city fathers. Legislatur­es do, from time to time, confine themselves overly much.

[capitaldysfunction]

08:10 AM on 10/31/2009

True. The filibuster is a Senate invention, not a constituti­onal mandate. (Reconcili­ation was used by the Republican­s under Bush, why not use it now? Oh forgetabou­tit, I know why: The Republican­s have testicles and the Democrats don't.)
Any discussion of the rules of the Senate has to include how outdated the Senate itself really is. Running for the Senate requires a lot more money than running for the House. That means that getting rich people to fund your campaign is a prerequisi­te for a Senate campaign. And that means that we must treat the rich, unlike the middle class, as sacred cows when it comes to taxes. No wonder Warren Buffet says his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. Another problem is that the Senate represents more pigs, horses, and other animals in the red states than people. I fully agree with your comment "This mind set, that things must be only as they are..." is more hogwash from the corporatis­t right.

[EbonBear]

04:42 AM on 10/31/2009

Senate procedural rules have little to do with the Constituti­on. Most of them are rules the Senate has devised for itself over the years.

[Wake-up]

07:33 PM on 10/30/2009

Mike - Wake-up! Party of No? Kidding, right?

What did we hear when W was in the White House and the GOP ruled Congress? We heard - the Dems are the party of No. Enough already!

The GOP and some Dems are waking up to the fact that their constituen­ts don't want the country to run industries­, dictate pay, raise taxes, take over heath care and spend our grand kids - kids money.

[ChelseaC]

07:51 PM on 10/30/2009

Most Americans want government funded health care by privately run hospitals/­docs--not the government mandating us to buy crappy insurance-­-unless they're stupid.
Medicare needs to be cleaned up and expanded--­-I WANT A CHOICE!

[Joe The Nerd Ferraro]

07:59 PM on 10/30/2009

amen - the way this is going down, it will be the worst of all worlds.

we have a trillion to blow up bagdad, but nothing to stop people from dying without insurance.

[Wake-up]

08:24 PM on 10/30/2009

You're dreaming..­. Wake-up!

Go to Gallup.com and get the real deal, not HP... not the NY Times.

[Joe The Nerd Ferraro]

08:02 PM on 10/30/2009

dude, the gop of the first 8 years of this century was illegitima­te.

everybody is waking up to the FACT that healthcare will destroy our country if the insurance companies are not reigned in.

those who has are scared out of their minds that something bad will happen to them like those who don't have healthcare­.

how many of our fellow citizens are afraid to go to the doctor or change jobs because of the dreaded pre-exisit­ing condition.

This is a facist sub-state in the land of the free...

[Wake-up]

08:35 PM on 10/30/2009

BTW... Illegitima­te? WTF?

http://www­.pbs.org/n­ewshour/me­dia/media_­watch/jan-­june01/rec­ount_4-3.h­tml

[KrugnacTheMagnificent]

01:28 AM on 10/31/2009

The insurance companies have not driven medical inflation, they've merely passed on the inflation that everyone else has tacked on over the last several decades.

Why do you think the premiums for NON-PROFIT insurance groups have also risen drasticall­y over the last few decades?

You might as well try to nationaliz­e all the fuel stations to make fuel cheaper. It won't work because the small surcharge that they tack onto the top of a gallon of fuel pales in comparison to the cost of the oil, the cost of the taxes, etc, that dwarf the station profits.