No Reconciliation Mr.President!?

The American people have let the president know in no uncertain terms that we don't want this monstrosity of a health care bill! It isn't going to fix the problem. We can't afford it and it's not a good idea to take 500 billion from Medicare when the baby boomers are approaching retirement. We are all going to pay dearly if this bill is passed!

1) Imagine if everything were majority rule. It isn't for a reason.

2) Congress is majority rule, the Senate is not. The Senate requires that both parties work together.

3) Reconciliation is for budget items.

4) Poll after poll show that Americans like some of the items in the bill (coverage for pre-existing conditions for example), but don't want the entire thing.

5) If it's passed via reconciliation, it won't be good for the country or Dems. Dems will be voted out en masse, and I can't imagine that Republicans wouldn't use reconciliation to pass all sorts of legislation... including legislation to repeal this bill. It would be a free for all in the future. NOT what our country needs right now.

6) There are videos all over the web that show Dem leadership flat out saying that reconciliation shouldn't be used for anything but budget items. Look back at 2005, they were going nuts about Republicans threatening to use it.... Dems are probably just threatening anyway. Just can't imagine they'd actually do it.

The House passed a bill. The Senate passed a bill. Reconciliation is about making the House and the Senate bills match. If you like COBRA, or if you like welfare reform, it was passed using reconciliation. Reconciliation can be used to remove the back room deals like the Corn-husker Kickback and keep the rest of the bill. The White House Proposal already signals that move. Both bills reduce the deficit.

Yes to reconciliation. Full speed ahead, Mr. President.

No, I don't agree. If a majority vote through reconciliation will get health care reform finally passed, then absolutely that is what the Democrats should do.

I hope they do it. I'm looking forward to 2012 when you'll be able to stand on top of the Washington Monument on a clear afternoon and not be able to find a Democrat.

Or maybe when Republicans decide they'll just pass whatever they want on a 51/49 vote and call it "reconsiliation" and use this insurance debacle as justification. Oh, like when they want to repeal this insurance debacle! 51 votes in, 51 votes out.

If reconciliation could work, they would have done it by now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5VLeBhzE3Y

Hitler Finds Out the Massachusetts Senate Seat Was Won by a Republican

The Democrats can do this is they want to commit political suicide.

Reconciliation is for budget items that do not create deficits more than ten years hence (which is why the Bush tax cuts expire). Senator Byrd, for whom this provision is named, successfully argued in 1993 that health care was not appropriate for reconciliation.

Alan Frumin, who is the parliamentarian of the Senate, will decide on this point. Only Joe Biden, President of the Senate, can overrule him. This could be an interesting point of law.

No I do not agree.

Reconciliation is a viable legislative tool that, despite Republican claims, has been used 22 times since 1980 (most often by Republicans).

The liberals like majority rule only when they are the majority. In every case I have seen that they are not the majority and they are not getting their way, they scream out, "mob affect" at the tops of their lungs and seek asylum in the representative or judicial process. Classic examples are in voting in all states of the gay marriage agendas where they claim activist judges are "protecting the rights of the minority" by essentially writing law and avoiding letting the issue be decided on by vote. These judges may even attempt to prevent a vote on the issue after *they* decided-as with prop 8 in California.

What? I don't understand the question.

I think reconciliation is political suicide for every Democrat in congress. If they really thought the people wanted this bill then they wouldn't need to be "brave", as Nancy Pelosi put it, because their people would just re-elect them. They know that they aren't properly representing their constituents, but they don't care.