Dem Leaders: Bill Must Be Made Law Before Fix
Since yesterday, there’s been some confusion over the claim that the Senate bill has to be signed into law before it can be fixed via reconciliation — which, if true, poses a bit of a hurdle for Dems.
GOP leaders have insisted that the parliamentarian informed them this is the case. But Politico’s David Rogers, who’s been on the Hill longer than the grass, suggested otherwise.
Now, however, House Dem leaders appear to have adopted the former view. At her presser today, in a reference to the president, Nancy Pelosi said:
“People would rather he waited until the Senate acted, but the Senate Parliamentarian said in order for them to do a reconciliation based on the Senate bill, it must be signed by the President.”
Separately, on the House floor today, Eric Cantor pressed Steny Hoyer on the issue, asking Hoyer whether it’s his position that the Senate bill “must be signed into law before the Senate can even take up the reconciliation package.”
“I think the gentleman correctly states the Senate parliamentarian’s position,” Hoyer replied.
That seems, at first glance, to be an endorsement of the GOP position from the House Dem leadership. But this stuff is very murky, and the only certainty right now is that it’s pretty foolish to feel certain about anything. I’m seeking clarification and will keep you posted.
**********************************
Update: Here’s video of the Cantor-Hoyer exchange. Hoyer seems pretty ticked off:
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Be it as it may, though it goes without saying that Dems call contrarian parliamentarians ‘gentleman’ while Republicans fire ‘em.
Why fire the parliamentarian when you can use him as a handy scapegoat to blame for HCR failure?
Well that course has always had the advantage of being the smartest thing they could do politically — both strategically, with regard to undercutting the Republicans’s smear campaign on reconciliation, and in terms of public perception fairness which will figure heavily in how well the the bill is accepted in the long term. And Pelosi was making noises earlier in the week like she thought she could pull that off.
As I was saying:
This is a dirty game the Dems have been playing re: the PO. It appears that there have been some promises made that under no circumstances would a PO be part of HCR. There is simply no other explanation for why the Dems are bending themselves into pretzels to ensure that there isn’t even a vote on the PO. Know what? I hope Bernie Sanders tells them to jump in a lake and offers the amendment himself. Maybe we need more socialists in Congress. Or at least Dems who respect the people who support them and don’t treat like them like the cheap-seat audience at a kabuki show. Frankly, I am disgusted all over again.
Venting does feel good.
I was talking about signing the senate bill into law before taking up a bill to amend it, BTW, not about firing the parliamentarian.
It seems very strange that a common bill has to be signed by the President into law before the reconciliation process can start? Did this really happen in previous reconciliation situations? Did President Bush sign tax-cut bills into law before there was a reconciliation vote? Or does this only apply to reconciliation bills between the chambers?
Greg, please explain this further, thanks.
workin’ on it, jakob. it’s not easy.
and wbgonne, agreed, there’s some too cute by half stuff going on here.
“there’s some too cute by half stuff going on here”
Greg: This is kind of stuff that cost the Dems Ted Kennedy’s seat and they still haven’t learned anything. The Dems seem incapable of treating their base with respect. And they will pay a very high price for that.
Is it really this complicated, or are they stalling while they tell us it’s sooo complicated they can’t figure it out?
Oh good. I was beginning to worry that the Dems would run out of excuses to wet themselves.
wbgonne, for the life of me, I cannot understand why the PO or even single payer was taken off the table BEFORE the debate even began. Even if the Dems scuttled them in negotiations, to simply abandon your biggest cudgels going into the fight makes no sense at all AND it signals the GOP that the Dems are weak.
Obama does not look like a very decisive leader in all of this. He may yet redeem himself, but if it fails, he owns it.
I don’t think Democrats need to tell the Republicans their plans for procedure on the reconciliation until they are ready to take it to the floor.
all, I just added video of Cantor/hoyer exchange. Hoyer seems pretty ticked off. funny.
I think Pelosi realizes the safest thing to do is pass the Senate bill first. Then the Republican opposition runs out of steam and is left arguing over a minuscule matter, the funding for certain parts of the bill.
I hadn’t seen or heard from Cantor in days.
It reminds me how much I loathe him.
Our Congress every day more and more resembles, say, the Italian Parliament. Should be slap fights on the floor before the year is over.
who’s been on the Hill longer than the grass
ZING!
It would be kind of funny if Democrats just went ahead and pass the Senate bill–And Obama signs it–Republicans won’t have anything left to say.
Well, nothing sane, at any rate.
chill out everyone. it’s going to pass. even without the public option. Picture this – you were told a year and a half ago – say October 2008 – that if you trade the public option you’ll get a healthcare reform bill that extends coverage to 31 million people (not, as people blithely say all new insurance customers but half of whom will be covered by expanding medicaid and children’s insurance), that cuts the deficit in the long run, puts regulations on the insurance companies so that no-one can be cut off from insurance or denied insurance – I bet the first reaction for many in October 2008 would be ‘what’s a public option’. the next reaction would be hell yes but that’s never going to happen even if Obama wins.
now picture where we are now on the cusp of passing something pretty substantial in terms of moving forward. the public option is a sideshow – I don’t believe there was some master plan but if there was – i think it was a pretty darn good one, so far.
getting on a plane now so peace out to all – hopefully when I get back, all will have calmed down.
Greg, for the roundup, from TPM:
“House Minority Leader John Boehner has picked Reps. Dave Camp (R-MI), Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) to sit on President Obama’s 18-member deficit-reduction panel.
That’s right — Paul Ryan of the entitlement-slashing GOP shadow budget. And Jeb Hensarling, the Republican who suggested on Hardball last month that we should privatize Social Security.”
I assume their role will be to make the debt larger, and get less for doing it.
“…or are they stalling while they tell us it’s sooo complicated they can’t figure it out?”
Yes, and it’s been so since this dog and pony show was started last year. When this legislation has finally passed or finally failed: get ready for the other shoe to drop.
They’ve been stalling because they are afraid almost anything could break this economy so the best tactic is to do nothing at all. Of course, they can’t do that so– they decided to try HCR and then stall for a year or more until the economy has “worked itself out”. Whether HCR passes or not is rather moot. Especially where we are headed.
homerhk: I disagree with almost every assertion in your comment. That aside, it still doesn’t near explaining WHY the Dems appear intent on antagonizing their base all over again. While you think the PO is trivial many people don’t. And now that the PO seems within reach, the Leadership Dems, nearly all of whom claim to support the PO, appear to sabotaging it. b Can you explain why? For the life of me I can’t understand this especially since the PO is and has always been the MOST popular feature of HCR. It’s as if the Dems are trying to make their base angry.
Hey, everybody! Two circuses next week for the price of one!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/11/tea-party-anti-health-car_n_495518.html
josephcast – that’s the most interesting comment I’ve read on HCR since the start of the whole thing.
That makes more sense to me than anything anyone else has posted, said, written – whatever.
Here is a Day In The Life of Eric Cantor, Republican, Liar:
Instead of spending his time trying to help his constituents, he is busy trying to pollute the final procedural steps of an historic bill with irrelevant lies.
homerhk,
The problem is that this version of HCR is a mighty thin broth and needlessly so. Obama and the Dems just kept adding water in the hopes that the GOP would pronounce it “delicious!” What did the American people get for all of this one sided “compromise?” At some point that kind of “compromise” and fealty become indistinguishable.
The only reason that I see to support this lame excuse for HCR is that it gets the ball moving in the right direction and that it denies the GOP a win for their campaign of fear mongering and lies.
I also think that the truly liberal members of the Senate and House have been energized in this process and will be unwilling to accept HCR that ultimately does not truly and fully protect the American public. I look for the progressives to work toward a meaningful PO or even single payer in the long run.
totally and completely OT, betcha nobody cares but me:
Santo Domingo just changed their name back to their original Native name: Kewa.
That’s the 2d one – San Juan went back to Ohkay Ohwinge a number of years ago.
Just means I have to redo the alphabetized list of of the 19 Rio Grande pueblos I memorized.
Good for Kewa!
All, I think Steve Benen has the chronology right here:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_03/022832.php
BG, that is not good news, I’m beginning to loathe Ryan almost as much as Cantor. I didn’t want the damn panel in the first place.
homerhk, have a safe flight and maybe when you get back it will be a fait accompli.
wbgonne, at this point I think we’re stuck with what we’ll get via reconciliation and that’s it. I disagree with every way the PO was handled by leadership and the WH but we’re stuck now and they need to pass the darn thing so we can work on something for next year re medicare buy-in or whatever. This race is over AFAIC. Just whip the votes and pass it.
safe travels, homerhk.
I just call them like I see them….
Greg, are we going to have a House vote party at the Plum Line? I’ll bring the beer.
Do any liberals or Democrats here disapprove of the use of the Slaughter rule to avoid an up or down vote on the Senate bill, or disapprove of inserting sweeteners into the House reconciliation fix (behind closed doors) and then not posting said fix for at least 72 hours so that anyone really knows what’s in it?
Greg?
Hey Tena, LTNS! I finally has a blog, come by and visit sometime!
Someone should ask the Parliamentarian what the rationale was for gutting Medicare Advantage for everyone except for people in Florida. Was it the standard “some animals are more equal than others”?
Very tough new ad from the DNC ripping the GOP as the party of Ensign and Vitter:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/democratic-national-committee/new-dnc-ad-hits-gop-as-party-of-vitter-and-ensign/
Ooo Jenn – thanks for the dropping the link!
Go Hoyer! I wish that Steny Hoyer had been present during this entire debate. If the GOP was handed that kind of plate load of whoopass each and every time they spouted their fear mongering and lies, I suspect that they would alter their tactics.
Lengthy money quote from Hoyer:
“First let me say that no matter how often the gentleman and his colleagues want to say so, ‘we’re going ram through something,’ no matter how many times the press and public may be mislead by that assertion, we’re not ramming through anything I tell my friend. We are following the rules of the House and are following the rules of the Senate that have been decades in existence, which have been used, when they’ve been used, 72% of the time they’ve been used, 72% of the time they’ve been used I tell my friend, your party used them.
They are the rules and we’re going to follow the rules.
Both bills that are pending before the Congress of the United States have been passed with over a majority and in fact, the Senate bill was passed by a 60% majority, I tell my friend. Not rammed through. After a full year of debate and discussion, scores of hearings, hundreds of witnesses, thousands of hours of consideration….
I tell my friend that you can say we’re ramming something through as much as you want and it will not make it true. No matter how often it is said by your side of the aisle, who in my opinion want simply to stop the legislation in its tracks.”
As many times as Hoyer referred to Cantor as his friend, somehow I don’t imagine that they spend too much time socializing with one another.
Hoyer schooled that little wussy Cantor
Gas, I’m surprised Hoyer didn’t add “I’d like to ram this microphone up your narrow assss” under his breath.
BGinCHI,
Cantor does not really strike me as the macho type. My money would be on Hoyer in that contest. It would be a veritable involuntary microphonic high colonic.
Hoyer really did little to hide the contempt that he seems to feel for Cantor, especially in the quote above.
I don’t think that Cantor and his cohorts particularly like being humiliated. I still say that more disdain from the Dems equals less idiocy from the GOP.
Agreed, gas. Bring the heat to them. They seem terrified of Grayson.
Probably also no love lost between a Marylander and a Virginian.
I love it, the Dems are finally showing some spine and speaking back to those story twisting meat heads.
@ Tena | March 12th, 2010 at 01:54 pm:
“Is it really this complicated, or are they stalling while they tell us it’s sooo complicated they can’t figure it out?”
It’s really a pretty simple thing in concep. Budget reconciliation was originally intended for making mid-course corrections in the federal budget during a fiscal year. There are really strict rules associated with what you can and can’t do with it and it was never intended for making new law or as an all-purpose end run around the filibuster rule.
I know it’s been used pretty creatively a few times and I’m certainly no expert on all the ins and outs of it, but even based on my limited understanding I’ve always been pretty sure that if you wanted to amend a law using budget reconciliation, you first need a law to amend — and even then all you’re really supposed to be able to do with it is change the amount of money being spent on something you’ve already decided to spend money on. What’s really been confusing the issue is just the number of folks running around insisting on believing that budget reconciliation is a magic pony that could bring them the sun, the moon and the stars if grown-ups weren’t so mean.
This post seems to be fantastic and I would achieve some thing or the other from this post. That’s for sure. Thank you for the post and looking more from you.
hi i am agree with this comment….Hey, everybody! Two circuses next week for the price of one!
Next week promises to be an exciting time on the streets of Washington, DC. In case you haven’t heard, March 16 will be the day of the Tea Party’s “Surge Against Obamacare!”
(snip)
What the Tea Party folks maybe don’t realize is that their rally is on a collision course with another circus that’s coming to town on the same day, namely, the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey one. And while health care reform’s naught-nauts are fanning out across Independence Avenue, the actual circus will be straight-up strolling down Washington Avenue, past the Bartholdi Fountain, with a mess of clowns and elephants!
Great post! I really enjoyed this topic and can’t wait to read more!