Via the NYT: Democrats Seem Set to Go It Alone on a Health Care Bill
The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier. The party must still reconcile the views of moderate and conservative Democrats worried about the cost and scope of the legislation with those of more liberal lawmakers determined to win a government-run insurance option to compete with private insurers.On the other hand, such a change could alter the dynamic of talks surrounding health care legislation, and even change the substance of a final bill. With no need to negotiate with Republicans, Democrats might be better able to move more quickly, relying on their large majorities in both houses.
As a matter of practical politics, this seems like the appropriate choice for the Democrats to make, as they have the votes necessary to craft a plan that can make through both chambers and limiting negotiations to their own members simplifies the process (although it certainly doesn’t make it simple). As it stands, it isn’t as if the Republican leadership or even a substantial portion of the party is really in the mood for negotiations in any event. Assuming a plan makes it through the process the Democratic Party will be responsible for it and the voters can decide in 2024 whether to punish or reward the party at the polls.
Of course, an explicit go-it-alone approach will likely translate into an even louder and more raucous rhetorical response from the opposition (both the elected one and nonelected versions). However, the fundamental fact remains that the Democrats have significant majorities in both chambers of the Congress and majorities are, by definition, empowered to pass legislation. Really, if the Republicans are opposed to the basic ideas in the bills, why shouldn’t they act in opposition and if the Democrats want reform, and they have the votes, why should they worry about the patina of bipartisanship?
Sphere: Related Content
August 19th, 2024 at 7:57 am
[...] York Times: Democrats Seem Set to Go Alone on a Health Bill PoliBlog: Democrats to “Got It Alone”? Scared Monkeys: Democrats Ready to Go It Alone on Obamacare and Ram it Through … Don Surber: [...]
August 19th, 2024 at 7:58 am
If the Dems decide to go it alone, they may well find themselves in a position where they have to use reconciliation in the Senate to get any bill to a floor vote. That will likely draw some serious fire as an abuse of that process, since it was established for budget bills and not for other legislative efforts. It may also create some problems for the Dems, since it could well pit an influential senior Senator (Byrd) against the party. He argued against using reconciliation in the ’90s when Clinton was trying to pass health care reform.
The “patina of bipartisanship” has more to due with November 2024 than anything else.
August 19th, 2024 at 8:26 am
In regards to the Senate, I am not so sure. They at least theoretically have the votes needed to invoke cloture, so while there would be some heated debate (for those who don’t know, even after cloture in invoked, there is still time for debate), if they can construct a bill that is palatable to their caucus, they could pass it and avoid a filibuster. Granted, the GOP could try any number of delaying tactics, but their ability to actually block a bill if the Dems are unified, doesn’t appear to exist.
I am not sure, by the way, that having token bipartisanship helps the Dems, writ large, in 2024.
August 19th, 2024 at 11:01 am
This made my morning. I see it as overdue, being as public statements by Chuck Grassley et al made it readily apparent they weren’t interested in compromise. People have been bending over backwards to support Baucus (with some grumbling) and they’ve only gotten more adamantly opposed as the process went on.
The question is will the Democratic senators who oppose the public option also oppose cloture? That’s the only thing that will stop it, if they join the Republicans in a filibuster. I don’t know if they will or not, but I do think they’ll be much more amenable to voting for cloture and against the final bill than Republicans would be. Clearing 50 after that shouldn’t be a problem.
One question I’d like answered is how Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd fit into this. Both have medical issues keeping them from the senate. I’ve seen people point this out to say that the Democrats don’t really have 60 votes, but I’ve also heard of them voting by proxy. Which is it?
August 19th, 2024 at 12:07 pm
I can’t believe I didn’t see this one coming. If indeed the president is using a “give em rope” strategy, it’s a brilliant political move. Considering the number of times he has done it in the past, I don’t know why I’m so shocked. John Kyle has given the Dems a gift which nullified any opposition on the part of the GOP with his statement, as now the Dems can argue that the GOP is only opposing because they have no interest in supporting any form of reform.
The biggest argument that the Blue Dogs had was that they wanted a bipartisan piece of legislation. The president has just given them enough rope to show that that scenario isn’t going to be possible. So now, the Blue Dogs have a choice… They can either accept paper-thin concessions or they can side with Republicans and bring their party loyalty into public question.
While bucking the party is usually a good thing, this has been set up in such a way as to make it very difficult for them. It can now very easily be crafted to say, “Senator X is siding with Republicans who have admitted that they have no interest in improving health care for millions of Americans.” That doesn’t look good on a campaign ad, and neither does the inevitable link to Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.
Oversimplified, I know, but that does appear to be exactly what’s happening.
August 20th, 2024 at 10:13 am
Theoretically they may have the votes to invoke cloture, but in reality there’s not 60 votes to be had.
Senator Kennedy’s health has deteriorated such that I seriously doubt he’ll ever be back on the senate floor. Senator Byrd is in nearly as bad a shape. There’s a huge irony that Kennedy will probably in reality be a vote against cloture in passing the biggest expansion of government into healthcare in history. At best I’m seeing 58 Democrats able to vote for cloture.
But beyond health issues, I’m guessing there’s not 50 democrats who have the stomach for such a fight. Trial balloons such as this can be floated anonymously, but reverting to simple majority for something this big isn’t something to be taken lightly. It means all future expansions and contractions of government can be done with a simple majority. I don’t see Southern / Midwestern democrats willing to go this far for something this unpopular back home.
August 20th, 2024 at 10:52 am
Alabama Moderate (above):
I’m from Arizona and am quite curious about John Kyl’s statement since I seem to have missed it. Please email me.
In your words, “John Kyle has given the Dems a gift which nullified any opposition on the part of the GOP with his statement, as now the Dems can argue that the GOP is only opposing because they have no interest in supporting any form of reform.”
Thanks,
K
August 20th, 2024 at 11:01 am
Buckland,
I did use the word “theoretically” rather deliberately.
In re: Kennedy and Byrd. My guess on both is that if they can be wheeled in for a vote on health care, they will be present.
It may well be the case that the enough Dems don’t want a fight. Of course, if that is the case, the process is DOA.
August 20th, 2024 at 12:22 pm
I’m afraid I don’t have your email address, but here’s a link that mentions a portion of his quote:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/kyl-even-a-deficit-neutral-health-care-bill-without-a-public-option-wont-get-republican-support.html
August 21st, 2024 at 10:37 am
Thank you, Moderate