Reid: "Dems will use 50-vote tactic to finish healthcare in 60 days"

The Hill:

Democrats will finish their health reform efforts within the next two months by using a majority-vote maneuver in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said.

Reid said that congressional Democrats would likely opt for a procedural tactic in the Senate allowing the upper chamber to make final changes to its healthcare bill with only a simple majority of senators, instead of the 60 it takes to normally end a filibuster.

"I've had many conversations this week with the president, his chief of staff, and Speaker Pelosi," Reid said during an appearance Friday evening on "Face to Face with Jon Ralston" in Nevada. "And we're really trying to move forward on this."

The majority leader said that while Democrats have a number of options, they would likely use the budget reconciliation process to pass a series of fixes to the first healthcare bill passed by the Senate in November. These changes are needed to secure votes for passage of that original Senate bill in the House.

"We'll do a relatively small bill to take care of what we've already done," Reid said, affirming that Democrats would use the reconciliation process. "We're going to have that done in the next 60 days."

The move would allow Democrats to essentially go it alone on health reform, especially after losing their filibuter-proof majority in the Senate after Sen. Scott Brown's (R) special election victory in Massachusetts.

Republicans have protested the maneuver as a hyperpartisan tactic to ram through a health bill, and have said that plans to use the reconciliation process make moot a bipartisan summit at the White House this week, where both GOP and Democratic leaders are supposed to present their ideas on healthcare.

Reid said that the final Democratic bill is likely to be unveiled Monday night.

Van Hollen: "Senate Bill’s Brand May Be Irrevocably Tarnished, So We May Go Reconciliation Instead"

Greg Sargent:

In a candid assessment of the politics of health care, DCCC chief Chris Van Hollen said in an interview that the Senate bill’s brand may be irrevocably tarnished, particularly among independents — and confirmed that partly for this reason, Dem leaders may pass a new set of reforms via reconciliation, which could be repackaged free of the Senate bill’s taint.

Van Hollen also added that it would be a mistake for Dems to pretend the unpopularity of the Senate reform proposals wasn’t a factor in the Massachusetts loss.

Van Hollen’s comments provide perhaps the clearest glimpse yet into the thinking of Dem leaders and the options they’re considering, and illustrate why they may be reluctant for the House to pass the Senate bill, as some want.

“Because of provisions like the Nebraska deal, the Senate bill has been branded in a way that understandably makes it unacceptable in its current form to many voters, especially independents,” Van Hollen told me, adding that Senator Ben Nelson has acknowledged this provision is problematic and must be changed.

He said this was a lesson of Tuesday’s loss: “The Massachusetts election turned on lots of factors. One factor was health care reform,” he said, referring to the Senate bill.

Van Hollen stressed that all options remain on the table, including the House passing the Senate bill with significant legislative changes. But he said the Senate bill’s image problems had led Dem leaders to give serious consideration to assembling a new package and passing it through reconciliation.

“One option would be to pick up where we were in the House and Senate negotiations and work to incorporate those agreements into some legislative package,” Van Hollen said. “It would have to move through what we are calling the majority rule procedure in the Senate. The provisions that had been agreed to between the House and Senate would be able to survive that process.”

“We would focus on essential elements in the health care package that have wide public support,” he said. Among them: Creating more competition and more consumer choice; taking away special deals for the insurance industry, like the antitrust exemption; and “making sure that insurance companies couldn’t deny you coverage at the time you need it the most.”

These provisions “have gotten lost in the public discussion,” Van Hollen said, adding that repackaging the proposals would let Dems “make it clear that this is a different bill.”

Howie P.S.: The AP has their own timeline and history of the behind-the-scenes "discussions."

Howard Dean: "a better bill if it's through reconciliation" (with video)

Lindsay Beyerstein (Media Consortium) with video (02:40):

Last night Dr. Howard Dean, former chair of the DNC and 2004 presidential hopeful, appeared in conversation with journalist Joe Conason at the 92nd Street YMCA in New York. Dean discussed his new book, Howard Dean's Prescription for Real Health Care Reform.

Later on, I had a chance to ask Dean about the prospects for passing health care reform in the Senate through budget reconciliation, a parliamentary tactic that would allow the bill to pass by majority vote and thwart a filibuster. Many Democratic strategists consider reconciliation to be extremely politically risky, but Dean is unconvinced. He argues that passing a bill through budget reconciliation is not only doable, but also likely to result in a stronger bill.

"I'm not worried about doing this through reconciliation," he said, "I think we'll probably have a better bill if it's through reconciliation because the people who are involved in the passage of the bill will only be Democrats and a very high proportion of Democrats want a public option."

Howard Dean: "Majority Votes in Congress can pass the choice of a public option."

AmericaCantWait.com:

The foundation of American democracy rests on majority votes. The United States Congress is no exception. The House of Representatives needs at least 218 votes to pass a bill. The Senate needs 51 votes.

The Myth of 60 votes in the U.S. Senate

Often people claim it takes 60 votes to pass a bill in the U.S. Senate. This is true for most bills, because additional rules make it possible for any Senator to hold up the passing of most bills through a process called a filibuster. To stop a filibuster, the Senate needs 60 votes to end debate. However, this rule DOES NOT APPLY in a common process used to pass budget bills called Reconciliation.

Stan Collender, a contributing editor at the National Journal, managing director at Qorvis Communications in Washington, D.C., and contributing writer for Roll Call, is an expert and frequent speaker on the budget to audiences across the country and author of "The Guide to the Federal Budget." Writing for Roll Call and reprinted at Capital Gains and Games, Mr. Collender explains:

"Reconciliation, which was part of the Congressional Budget Act when it was adopted in 1974, wasn’t used until the start of the Reagan administration. Although it hasn’t been used every year since then, reconciliation has become such a regular part of the budget process that it’s now generally considered a staple. It has been used by Republican- and Democratic-controlled Congresses alike for both spending and revenues.

The most important and obviously controversial part is that reconciliation bills can’t be filibustered because the debate is limited by law."

“The House-passed version of the 2010 budget resolution allows health care reform to be included in a reconciliation bill and, therefore, adopted in the Senate with 51 votes…”

“First, contrary to what some have been saying, reconciliation has become such a standard part of the budget process that using it for health care would be neither surprising nor precedent-setting. When they were in the majority, Republicans insisted that reconciliation was allowed by Senate rules and used it in 2001, 2003 and 2005. Back then, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who has been one of the biggest opponents of using reconciliation this year, made what in retrospect is an almost infamous floor speech about the appropriateness and legality of using reconciliation.

Second, health care reform will have a substantial impact on federal finances and so can’t be said to be unrelated to the budget, which is one of the critical criteria for using reconciliation. In fact, given that at least two of the largest mandatory federal spending programs — Medicare and Medicaid — are health care programs, health care reform and reconciliation would seem to be a perfect fit.”

In short, it is possible for Congress to pass healthcare reform including a public option with majority votes in both the House and Senate. America can’t wait another year for Congress to get the job done.

Howie P.S.: Sign the petition: "Majority votes in Congress can pass a public option."