How Kent Conrad torpedoed use of reconciliation for health care ... link

[Alhena]

I don't think enough attention is being given to the five year sunset provision that has been inserted into this year's budget by Kent Conrad. It means that even if a health care bill is passed as part of reconciliation process, we will have to fight these battles again in 2014. And the coverage won't even kick in until 2013. That means health care reform gets a one-year audition before it comes up for vote again in 2014. It will hopefully make a good first impression, but we all know that all programs have growing pains.

And oh yeah, guess which chairman will be overseeing the use of reconciliation in the Senate, if it comes to it? That's right- Kent Conrad.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/21/budget-buster-kent-conrad_n_264123.html

Conrad has repeatedly rejected deadlines with the mantra that "we'll be ready when we're ready." He fought against the Democratic leadership's attempt to include language in the budget that would allow health care reform to be achieved using the reconciliation process, which only requires a simple majority rather than 60 votes. He lost that fight, but was able to make it much harder to pull off the legislative maneuver by insisting on a five year window rather than ten -- meaning any changes achieved through reconciliation will lapse in five years and need to be renewed.

[Bonhomme Richard]

1. "by insisting on a five year window " Fine. Let them put a .........

five year window on it, pass a good bill and let's see what the people want after five years of having a public option. My guess is that they will want to keep it.

[Alhena]

4. The problem is that we might have fewer Senate votes by then

the Republicans might be able to score political points by scaring voters about what is going to happen when the program starts in 2013. We'll see what happens and reconciliation may be the only option, but, if it passes in reconciliation, it will be in effect a trial program.

[rox63]

6. Then it needs to start sooner than 2013

Give the people a couple of years of access to quality health care, and congress-critters will have a very hard time trying to take it away.

[Alhena]

7. There's the rub, the sooner coverage starts, the more expensive it becomes

and the more trouble it runs into in the reconciliation process, which has budget-neutral requirements. I gather the reason the drafters set a 2013 start date is so they can raise revenue right away and build up a "war chest" to pay for it, thus driving down the 10-year cost estimates.

The reconciliation process is kind of like participating in a foot race while hopping on one leg and with spectators (Republicans) throwing pies at you. They Repukes can raise all kind of procedural objections which drag the process out and which have to be resolved by the Senate Parlimentarian, who is non-partisan. If he agrees with the Repukes, we need 60 votes to override him.

[Bonhomme Richard]

10. Forgot about that. That's right. It needs to start right away. n/t

[Turbineguy]

2. If it passes, repubs

will do whatever it takes to make it fail.

[notadmblnd]

3. How in the hell are republicans still in charge?

Not a one of the should have the first seat on any committee. they all should be in the back row as spectators only.

[Alhena]

5. Conrad is a Democrat, at least in name

not sure if you were being sarcastic.

[notadmblnd]

8. In a way I was.

I long thought that republicans have infiltrated the democratic party just to obstruct and foil anything good that might come out of congress.

[damntexdem]

9. Get it now by reconciliation if necessary.

Refight the fight in five years, after reform has become very popular.