GBP: Health Care Reform

As I mentioned in the announcement right before this post, there’ll be many changes coming in the next several days.  I hope to make the process as seamless as possible, but I also like getting down and dirty with the code and also somehow doing things the hard way.  Anyway, this is most likely the last post on The New Age of Politics version 1.  You’ll still come back to the same place for my new posts, lovingly crafted at odd hours of the day for you, but things will look much different around here starting later today.  In fact, you might be looking at the change in motion right now!

Who knows?  Anyway, oh yes, tonight is a continuation of my new series, “The Good, the Bad, and the Presidential”, in which I highlight one of President Obama’s achievements and analyze it with the gift of hindsight!  Tonight, the random achievement picker happened to come up with one that I’ve already written more than enough about.  Aside from reading the title of this post, which one do you think it is?

What You Should Know About Missouri’s Proposition C (And Others Like It)

Well here we go: as Congress goes to its month-long August recess, we have a full slate of primaries and other developments in the midterm election races to keep us engaged in politics.  This Tuesday, the August primaries began in earnest with three states choosing their general election matches.  Now, I could just give you another long and detailed roundup of the results as I have for, well, just about every other primary this year, but Missouri gives us the first challenge to the health care law at the ballot box, so I thought I’d look at that instead.  Not to mention the fact that I go to college in Missouri, meaning I care about the results of this contest a bit more than just political curiosity.  Of course, because I know just how much you guys love to find out who won what, here’s what happened in Missouri, in a nutshell.

Health Care Reform Passes

Well here we are folks, the moment we have all been waiting for (or dreading) has happened.  The House of Representatives passed the Senate health care bill by a vote of 219-212 tonight following a full day of debate, the last six hours of which I caught.  Following passage of the Senate bill, the Republicans mounted their last-ditch effort to derail everything by introducing a “motion to recommit”.  Had this motion succeeded, it would have sent the reconciliation package back to committee, presumably to restore the Stupak Amendment.  Fortunately, it failed by a vote of 199-232, due to the fact that Rep. Stupak and his bloc of anti-abortion Democrats had already been courted by the prospective Executive Order reaffirming the existing language prohibiting Federal funding of abortions.  While the votes did not have as razor-thin a margin as they could have, it was a fitting and dramatic climax to the debate that has consumed the attention of Congress and much of the American public for over a year.

Now what?  By and large, health care reform is a done deal.  President Obama is expected to sign the Senate bill by Tuesday, and the reconciliation package that was passed by a vote of 220-211 is on its way to the Senate, where Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has repeatedly assured everyone that he has the votes to pass it.  There are still the inevitable legal challenges, which are pretty much a given in this toxic political climate; even if we were in more cordial times, some suits would be expected due to the historic nature of the bill.  I would be a fool at best and self-discrediting at worst if I were to try to divine how the courts would rule, but fortunately we know now that one of the primary things that would have been challenged has been closed off.

Should They Slaughter the ‘Slaughter Rule’?

If there were ever an unfortunate name to have in politics, it would be the situation that Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) currently faces.  As head of the House Rules Committee, she is being given the dubious honor of having a dubious idea to pass health care reform in the House of Representatives known as “deem and pass”.  As if reconciliation itself wasn’t controversial enough, many conservatives are howling that using the tactic, formally known as an “execution rule”, to pass health care reform without actually voting on it.  Of course, a Washington Post article yesterday to that effect does not help matters.  The jury is still out in the media as to whether it actually is that way, but regardless of that debate, it is the most controversial idea I have seen.  Those of you who have been following the health care debate as much as I have been since the latest push began last year have seen some pretty controversial things emerge.

Unlike reconciliation, the “deem and pass” rule is fairly straightforward in application.  According to the Huffington Post, assuming the rule is adopted by the House, legislators would be able to skip the vote on the main Senate bill and vote directly on the reconciliation package that would amend the Senate bill.  If the reconciliation amendments pass in a normal up-or-down vote in the House, the rule would deem the Senate bill to have passed as well.  Seems logical to me, since you shouldn’t be able to pass a package of amendments to a bill that hasn’t also passed.  In addition, by essentially voting on both at the same time the proposed rule would dodge the thorny question that has been raised over reconciliation thus far: does President Obama have to sign the Senate bill into law before reconciliation can be applied?

In theory, House Democrats would absolutely love to vote on both at the same time.  Due to traditional mistrust between the two legislative bodies, House lawmakers want to ensure that the reform push does not stop with the Senate bill.  Under standard legislative processes, the House would have to go back and apply the reconciliation fixes later; many lawmakers are afraid that if reconciliation breaks down, they are stuck with having voted for the special deals that everyone hates in the Senate bill.  Even if the talks do not fail and reconciliation ultimately passes, many believe that their records will have already been tainted by the special deals.  The Slaughter Rule has also been used before, according to the above-linked Huffington Post article.  While this is certainly the most monumental use of the idea, it has been used at various times throughout history.  It may have precedent, but is it even legal?

Healthcare Reform’s Days Are Numbered

By now, I am sure most of you are aware of the bipartisan summit President Obama hosted recently. This week, we saw the President finally outline his plan for the next steps in healthcare reform. It is pretty much obvious now: passing healthcare reform through the process known as reconciliation is inevitable. For those of you who are unaware, reconciliation is the process where legislation can be passed in the Senate with only 51 votes instead of the 60-vote supermajority that has become almost a requirement today. While it is reserved for items dealing specifically with the budget or spending, apparently part of the healthcare bill is eligible. Of course, even doing that is easier said than done.

According to the New York Times, the plan is to have the House pass the Senate’s bill, Cornhusker Kickback and all, and then approve the package of amendments that President Obama and Congressional leaders have been working on through reconciliation to avoid the mess of the filibuster in the Senate. While that plan will work, and indeed most of the additions to the nation’s healthcare system such as the COBRA benefits and the Children’s Health Insurance Program have been passed this way, many people do not like the Senate’s version, both in and out of Congress. Did I mention the Cornhusker Kickback? That is in fact the least of the concerns with the Senate bill.

“We’re Not Campaigning Anymore…”

You have to hand it to them: these protesters can be pretty clever at times.  Obviously, this refers to the attempt to inject some bipartisanship into the nasty healthcare debate Congress has been having for the better part of a year now in today’s summit at Blair House.  Coming a few short weeks after President Obama’s successful question-and-answer session at the Republican Party’s retreat in Baltimore, there were high expectations for the summit on healthcare reform.  Personally, I thought they were a bit too high going into the summit, and looking back on it, those expectations were certainly revealed to be too much for the work that took place during the seven-hour summit.  In fact, I laugh a little now looking back at the headline of this article, published only yesterday by the Wall Street Journal: “Summit Dream: Washington Sets Aside Politics, Solves Health Woes”.  As it turns out, it was only a dream after all.  That being said, there was no clear winner today; in fact, I would even go so far as to say that there was no real progress today.

However, there are several signs that point to the GOP actually gaining a slight advantage from the summit.  According to Politico, a boring summit was exactly what the Republicans needed- and got.  Even for me, if I were asked to describe today’s summit in one word, I might use the word “boring”, and remember, I’m the kind of person who willingly stayed in on a Saturday night to watch C-SPAN coverage of a certain important House vote.  Think back to your most boring lecture class ever; that is seriously how bad the summit’s coverage at some times was for several of my friends I convinced to watch parts of the summit with me.  Of course, I still found the great majority of the summit to be interesting, at least, the parts that I could watch outside of class.  Now that is an interesting downside to the wishes for more transparency; the people asked for cameras showing everything during the summit, and that is what they got.  Having everything on camera is good, but let’s face it, these policy events are not exciting every single minute.

But, I digress; as many of us know from watching Law and Order, it is the prosecution’s duty to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.  The most apt metaphor I can find for the dynamic behind today’s summit is a court case: Politico notes that the Democrats came into today’s summit with the need to convince the American people that reconciliation is the only viable option and that Republicans do not want to contribute to governing this country.  Thus, while it would have looked nice for the Republicans to have a change of heart during the summit, all they had to do was act civil and calmly present their proposals. 

The Return of Healthcare Reform

Lately, it seems like healthcare reform is like a zombie: it just keeps coming back to life when everyone thinks it is dead.  Today Yesterday (dang clocks and my workload!) President Obama finally put his own two cents into the debate.  The President had to come up with something to revive his signature policy goal, and to an extent, it has worked; people are talking about healthcare reform again, to be sure.  Whether this would have happened on its own without Presidential involvement, we will never know.  The President also faced a time crunch: he had promised the American public that there would be a bill a few days before the bipartisan healthcare summit taking place this Thursday.  Nobody in Congress has indicated that they particularly like the latest healthcare proposal, but aside from the expected Republican howling, nobody has really come out against it either; even the Republican criticism is somewhat limited at this point.  Granted, it is still very early; the bill was only released yesterday after all, but no reaction, or a limited reaction, in these circumstances may be just what the doctor ordered.

However, it is surprising that many Senators, especially on the left, have not come out in support of the newest proposal.  Though it is possibly out of institutional loyalty, many of the Democratic Senators have little reason to not support the President’s health bill as it is very similar to the one that the Senate itself passed just before Christmas.  According to CNN, President Obama’s bill appears to take the Senate’s version and improve on it, while trying to incorporate some of the more moderate provisions of the House’s bill.  Naturally, this means that many House Democrats don’t like the bill, as it excludes many of their favorite proposals.  Another point of contention: at approximately $950 billion it is more expensive than the Senate’s bill, though not by much and still less expensive than the House proposal.  However, that number has not been verified by the Congressional Budget Office yet, so it could very well change.  Just as I have done with the other healthcare proposals, here are the most interesting parts of it, with commentary of course:

Merry Christmas: The Senate Passes Healthcare

Whether referring to the Senate’s vote this morning as a Christmas present to the American people is taken with an ounce of sarcasm or not is up to you.  The fact is, we are at the point that only one step remains in the process for healthcare reform.  Personally, I think Congress should go home and enjoy the holiday break.  However, some in Congress, especially the House, are already looking toward the conference committee that will happen as soon as members of Congress return from the break.  In fact, some want to have final legislation on President Obama’s desk by the time he gives the State of the Union speech.  Well there’s a rushed schedule for you;  not only do they want to have finished negotiations between the Senate and the House, they want to have each chamber approve the changes and send the final bill to the President by the State of the Union address, which is typically in late January or early February.  Mind you, Congress does not reconvene until January 12th, and they also have to wait for the all-powerful CBO cost estimates.

Ah, but we are getting a little ahead of ourselves.  Today, the Senate did, finally, pass the bill after all.  According to the New York Times, there were a couple of interesting moments during the vote this morning.  Naturally, Senator Byrd invoked the memory of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy when he cast his vote in favor of reform.  Actually, I am somewhat surprised that his memory hasn’t been brought up more thus far, especially since healthcare reform was his dream.  Of course, it is better that it did not come up until now; to invoke his memory in the fierce partisan debate that has characterized the reform push would come close to disrespect for the dead.

Far more interesting, was the blunder that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made during the vote.  By virtue of his position, Senator Reid has been one of the primary proponents of healthcare reform; he has arguably been fighting the hardest for it given the partisanship.  Therefore, it was extremely surprising when, during the roll call vote, Senator Reid initially voted no.  Such a vote wouldn’t have affected the outcome since the final vote only needed 51 to pass, but it would have provided a bit of humor, and possibly fuel to the argument that Senator Reid should not be majority leader.  Of course, it wouldn’t have helped his re-election bid at all.

Moving Forward

Of course, now all eyes turn to the conference committee.  Naturally, the Senate’s negotiators have a great deal of leverage over the negotiations, especially given the narrow margin of passage.  While both houses passed their versions narrowly, the Senate’s was more narrow, since they had exactly the number of votes necessary to break the filibuster.  At least the House had some breathing room on the matter, though three votes is not much breathing room.  The provisions on abortion and the public option are nearly a foregone conclusion as going in favor of the Senate’s proposal.  Thus, the main points of contention are the cost-cutting measures and the expected start date.  I think it is silly to wait until 2014 to start the reforms, especially since many people may forget about the until they take effect, which would of course deny the impact of the legislation on the elections in 2010 and possibly the one in 2012.  One thing is certain though, over these few days, we can all relax and enjoy the holiday.

The Senate Makes Progress, but Did They Sacrifice Their Integrity?

Well, early this morning the Senate made critical progress on the healthcare bill.  At 1 AM Monday morning, the Senate held a vote for cloture on the package of amendments that will be crucial for the bill’s ultimate passage.  In case you do not remember, cloture is the term for breaking those pesky filibusters, and seem to be necessary for every last piece of legislation the Senate takes on this session.  Admittedly, many of these amendments contribute to the reform effort in one way or another, but there are a few notable ones that serve no purpose other than to effectively secure an extra vote or two.  These are otherwise known as earmarks, and while they may be politically necessary, they are one of the things I hate the most about Washington.  Now, I know Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was desperate to get the requisite 60 votes, but with our new focus on reducing the deficit and the national debt you would think there would be less incentive to add expensive earmarks to the bill.

As noted in the New York Times, there are some earmarks so specific that you just have to wonder: did Senator Reid use these to buy votes?  Among the more egregious ones:

• Expand Medicare to cover victims of environmental hazards; this sounds innocuous right?  Well, not really.  The provision goes on to say: “individuals exposed to environmental health hazards recognized in a declaration by the Federal government on June 17th.”  Well, that narrows it a bit.  So much, in fact that it only applies to people in one town in Montana, Senator Baucus’ state.  Remember him?  he was one of the architects of the only Senate health plan to receive a Republican vote, and thus had a hand in the combination effort that led to the current package.
• It gets better.  Senator Nelson was the critical 60th vote for health care reform.  His support only came Saturday afternoon, after negotiations with Senator Reid.  Well, he gets a good deal for Nebraska: in addition to the restrictions on funding for abortion coverage using federal money, he brought back a bunch of Medicare money that, once again, seem to narrowly apply to a few states including Nebraska.
• And then, we have Senator Joe Lieberman.  He essentially killed the public option in the Senate in return for his support.  Honestly, I didn’t think he would keep his word; I wonder what else Connecticut got from the bill.

Questions of Integrity?

Of course, this list is not exhaustive.  In fact, even Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma comes right out and calls it corruption.  We appreciate your candidness, but what ever happened to decorum?  Given the current climate on Capitol Hill, I am not surprised we are not seeing as much decorum as we probably should, but at this point it is getting a bit ridiculous.  In fact, various Senators continued verbally attacking each other even after the vote had finished.  As Senators were arriving at the Capitol for the vote, the Huffington Post reports that that same Senator, Tom Coburn, asked on the Senate floor for a prayer that a Senator would be unable to make the vote.  Now wait just a minute.  I am not alone in thinking that this goes way too far.

Oddly enough, I have yet to see a member of the Republican Party leadership come out and denounce this.  I may not be very religious, but I ask you, my readers, to join with me in praying that I just happened to miss it when I was gathering sources for this post.  If the nation’s leading Republicans do not condemn this ASAP, then I have a little game we should play; it is called vote them out of office.

Of course, scheduling votes at 1 AM is a questionable thing in itself; after all, some people our age do not even stay up that late.  Expecting 92-year-old Senator Robert Byrd to do so comes perilously close to crossing a line that should not be crossed.  The fact of the matter is, Senate Democratic leaders believe that healthcare reform will die if it is left over the Christmas break.  No matter how much I write about them needing to take a breath and slow down, that will not change, however I am going to do it anyway, because we learned in the last election that grassroots organizing is a very powerful force.  The Senate does need to slow down the pace a little bit since the healthcare reform effort seems to be getting railroaded through the Senate.  I agree with Republicans who say that there should be time to debate, but they will only use the delay to cause more obstructions than necessary.  Next time it looks like something is going to be jammed through the legislative process in this manner, speak up.  Write a letter to your Senator or your Representative, or anyone whose job it is to represent your interests in government.  I agree that healthcare reform has been a long road, but let’s face it, if you wouldn’t want to have a vote that potentially alters the fate of millions late at night, with allusions of secrecy and back-room deals, let the people in power know.

This rant is almost over, and I apologize for stretching longer than usual with this.  As an Eagle Scout, issues of integrity and honor are very near to me, and I just had to include it in this post.  I am not 100% certain if Senators can be recalled the same way California’s governor was before Arnold Schwarzenegger became Governor, but if this is the way GOP Senators are going to behave, they should be recalled or disgraced in formal Senate proceedings.  We, the American public, deserve better than this.

Can the Senate Pass Healthcare On Time?

Recently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced his determination to have a final vote on healthcare reform by Christmas.  Even for a bill that enjoys wide bipartisan support, that is an ambitious deadline for the Senate, who only started debating healthcare on the Senate floor early this month.  However, it appears that more obstacles appear every hour that debate goes on in the Senate.  Oh, and in addition to healthcare, the Senate has a bunch of other unsavory business on its hands that must pass before the new year begins.  It is looking less-likely that they will be able to meet their self-imposed deadline.

First, some of the obstacles.  Currently, the Senate is considering the final spending bill for the 2010 fiscal year, which began in October.  This bill is arguably the most important one to Republicans, since it funds the Department of Defense as well as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  However, according to the Washington Post, a group of ten GOP Senators is trying their hardest to block this bill.  Yes, you read it right; Republican Senators are trying to filibuster a Defense spending bill.  This is just one more example of how strange the political world has become in the last year, since increased Defense spending is typically the only spending modern Republicans approve of.  You are going to love their rationale though; they want to block the Defense bill long enough that the Senate has to go on break before it can finish healthcare.  Now, I know they are hopeful for a repeat of the noisy August town halls that had a negative effect on the percentage of people favoring the Democrats’ plan, but come on, have we really sunk this low?

In addition to the continuing issues with the Republicans, Sen. Reid is having a hard time holding together his own party.  With news of Sen. Al Franken shutting down Sen. Joe Lieberman on the Senate floor today, even Senator John McCain thinks we have indeed gone this low.  What Sen. Franken did was completely accepted under Senate rules, but it was also not quite up to the standard of decorum more-experienced Senators expected.  Personally, I think Sen. Franken was smart to do what he did, as the Senate is working on deadline; not to mention the exasperation that the majority Democrats have with the Senator from Connecticut in recent days.

Senator Lieberman has proven himself in recent days to be quite a thorn in Senator Reid’s side.  Last week, Senator Lieberman claimed to be in favor of the compromise version of healthcare reform that a group of Senators was working on.  However, last Sunday Lieberman publicly announced that he cannot support the compromise, which naturally sent the Democrats into a scramble.  Nobody would really care if the Democrats controlled even one or two more seats in the Senate, but with the nature of their majority, to attain the 60 votes necessary to break the inevitable Republican filibuster the Democrats need Senator Lieberman.

However, he is not the only holdout.  As nobody less than President Obama himself has been working with Senator Lieberman to bring him on board, the focus has turned to Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska.  Apparently, his main concern is the language on abortion.  Wonderful…it just had to be the one issue that is sure to drive apart the fragile coalition Reid has already built up.  Well, unless Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine can be persuaded to come on board.  Otherwise, Senator Nelson is just as important as Lieberman.  At least with Senator Nelson, the Democrats know where he stands, and thus how to appease him;  with Lieberman, God only knows what he’ll do next.

Despite the sinking realization that healthcare will probably not be done in time for Christmas, that is not necessarily the bad thing that certain elected officials make it seem to be.  While I tend to like it when the government doesn’t drag its feet on legislation, it does seem as if the Senate is moving a little fast on healthcare reform.  For instance, Senator Reid is trying to count up how many votes he has and making apocalyptic forecasts about the fate of the bill before the Congressional Budget Office has even finished scoring the compromise proposal from last week.  That score is indeed due out soon, however what was that saying… Senator Reid shouldn’t be counting his chickens before they hatch?  Something like that I am sure…