Ezra Klein: What Reconciliation Is For

[flpoljunkie]

(Emphasis mine.)

What reconciliation is for

One of the weirder ideas out there is that it would somehow be unorthodox to use the budget reconciliation process to smooth out the difference between two health-care reform bills that have already been passed. But as Henry Aaron points out (pdf), this is literally what the reconciliation process was created to do:

The idea of using reconciliation has raised concern among some supporters of health care reform. They fear that reform opponents would consider the use of reconciliation high-handed. But in fact Congress created reconciliation procedures to deal with precisely this sort of situation -- its failure to implement provisions of the previous budget resolution. The 2009 budget resolution instructed both houses of Congress to enact health care reform. The House and the Senate have passed similar but not identical bills. Since both houses have acted but some work remains to be done to align the two bills, using reconciliation to implement the instructions in the budget resolution follows established congressional procedure.

Furthermore, coming from Republicans, objections to the use of reconciliation on procedural grounds seem more than a little insincere. A Republican president and a Republican Congress used reconciliation procedures in 2001 to enact tax cuts that were supported by fewer than 60 senators. The then-majority Republicans could use reconciliation only because they misrepresented the tax cuts as temporary although everyone understood they were intended to be permanent -- but permanent cuts would have required the support of 60 senators, which they did not have.

At this point, Democrats have passed health-care reform bills through the two legislative chambers charged with considering them. The president stands ready to sign the legislation. The roadblock is that 41 Republicans have sworn to use a parliamentary maneuver to obstruct any effort to smooth out differences between the bills. It's pretty clear who's stepping outside the traditional workings of the process here. Yet Democrats have allowed the other side to make it look like they're the ones who are bending the rules! It's completely astonishing.

By Ezra Klein
February 12, 2010; 10:17 AM ET

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/what_reconciliation_is_for.html

[Gman2]

1. We need to act, and ACT HARD. Governing will be forgiven us, eventually.

[Clio the Leo]

2. Patience.

We need to build some political capitol first.

[Old Codger]

3. They don't

Neither side wants the health bill to go through, they are running a scam, a con game they choose to call bi-partisanship, a joke and three card mote game on the American people, they decry the teabaggers as fools and then encourage the rhetoric that makes the cause seem more and more plausible, The call it a jobs bill then cut it to the core and delete the parts that will help the long termed unemployed the most, many many long term unemployed will run out of benefits soon and they drop the extension from the only bill running right now that had one in it, so piss on them all... I am soo tired of this political crap from our so called representatives....the games they play with the lives of their countrymen ...Harry reid should be tarred and feathered along with baucus and any of the rest that continually condone this type of activity either by openly encouraging it or by head in the sand ignoring it .

[quiet.american]

4. Dem Congressional leadership has always been lousy at setting the "frame."

Years go by, and they're always TEN paces behind the GOP in setting the narrative for their actions.