Give It Up Baucus and Join Your Caucus!!!
Sen. Baucus is still on his futile quest to gain the approval of Sen. Grassley and other Republicans on the Finance Committee for a health care reform deal. According to Roll Call, Sen. Baucus thinks the White House and the Senate Democratic Leadership will be forced to accept a compromise engineered by his committee if he can somehow obtain a deal that would theoretically ensure smooth passage on the Senate floor.
What Baucus is ignoring at his own peril is that other Senators like Sen. Sanders will not support a plan that taxes health benefits and lacks a public option. He’s also ignoring the possibility that the Republicans are stringing him along to run out the clock on health care in order to prevent a health care debate before the August recess.
Sen. Reid said he wants the bill passed out of his chamber by July 31st.
Sen. Baucus must be reeling from a remarkable fall from grace on the health care front as he fancied himself to be the gatekeeper of health care reform. Back in June, hubris took hold of Baucus when he “chuckled” and said that the House will abide by whatever the Senate – which he actually means his Committee’s version of health care reform – creates on the issue of health care reform.
In Mr. Baucus’s pursuit of a centrist compromise, he faces heat from liberals both in the Senate and out who share the more expansive government vision of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts. Asked which one of the two senators would make the final calls on health legislation, Mr. Baucus replied with a chuckle, “It’ll be a Senate decision.” House Democrats stand closer to Mr. Kennedy.
Time to swallow your pride Mr. Baucus and get in line with the prerogatives of the Democratic Caucus.
Senator Baucus isn’t showing hubris, he’s displaying sound political judgement. The Democrats have 60 votes, but 18 of those are membes of the Moderate Dems Working Group. Health care reform requires at least 11 of those to support the final package to reach 50 votes (VP Biden would then cast the decisive vote). Would Senator Sanders really vote against a bill that delivers (from his view) half-a-loaf? I would hope note. The legislation passed by Senate HELP and that will be passed by the House are anchoring the liberal position, but they are unlikely to foreshadow much of what is in the final health care reform legislation.
Alan,
I would cry tears of joy if all it takes to pass legislation in the Senate is a bare majority or 50 + a Vice President. Technically, a bare majority is all that’s needed to pass legislation. However, the filibuster power, which the Republicans are using at every opportunity and for the most part failing at sustaining filibusters, renders the real vote threshold to be 60 votes. A cloture vote, also requiring 60 votes, is needed to shut down a filibuster and allows the Senate to head for a final vote on a bill.
In case you’re wondering, health care reform needs 60 votes to pass. President Obama does have a reconciliation option and using the reconciliation option in the Senate allows budget bills to pass with a bare majority. Legislatively, the reconciliation option carries with it it’s own pitfalls, and you’re welcome to read a blog post about it here at The Senate Agenda Blog.
The Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Tri-Caucus has stated that they won’t vote for a bill without a public option. The HELP and unified House bills are already considered to be half a loaf because single payer health care/Medicare for All was seen as the full loaf.
True, there are limitations on the reconciliation process. But that hasn’t stopped White House staffers from threatening it.
I also agree that progressives have to look at what’s happening as, at best, half-a-loaf. The question will be whether they’re willing to accept any part of the loaf if that’s what it takes to get to 60 votes (conceding that reconciliation is problematic). In California, liberals helped defeat reforms that, while flawed, were far closer to the Democratic position than the GOP’s (in fact, the only Republican who supported it was the Governor).
The standard applied to what emerges from Congres should not be whether the legislation is perfect, but whether it’s better than the status quo. Whether purists can stick to that standard, or whether they require something more, will be critical. It would be ironic if the bill were to fail because the Progressive Caucus members couldn’t stomach insurance co-ops or some other alternative to a private plan.
Alan,
The reconciliation option is an insurance policy. It was created to guarantee that some form of health care reform will be enacted without worrying about Republican obstruction. Health care is that important to the agenda. However, the reconciliation option isn’t really reserved for the important stuff, but since health care has budgetary elements to it, the reconciliation option can be used for health care reform, or at least some parts of health care reform.
Also, in any debate, there must be lines in the sand, and the public option is one of them. Health care will not be truly reformed until there is a public option. Sen. Schumer said if no bipartisan compromise comes, the Finance Committee will report out a “Democratic bill.” We also know where the President stands because he stated in his Weekly Address today that a health care bill must have an insurance exchange and a public option to make health care affordable and keep insurance companies honest, something that is harder and harder for insurance companies to do these days.