The health-care bill passed the Senate in December with 60 votes under the normal process. The only thing that would pass under a simple majority vote would be a series of amendments that fit comfortably under the "reconciliation" rules established to deal with money issues.
That is a key distinction. A significant majority of the country and of our Senators want to fix the health care system, but even after 60% of the Senate voted to do something about it, Republicans in the Senate think improvements to the bill should require 60 votes, and think they can use that to block the entire thing.
And Republicans are exhibiting hypocrisy in their complaints about using legal parliamentary tactics to improve on health care reform, since they used it several times during the Bush administration.
Hatch said that reconciliation should not be used for "substantive legislation" unless the legislation has "significant bipartisan support." But surely the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which were passed under reconciliation and increased the deficit by $1.7 trillion during his presidency, were "substantive legislation." The 2003 dividends tax cut could muster only 50 votes. Vice President Dick Cheney had to break the tie. Talk about "ramming through."
Read the entire article here.


