• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • The Democrats' Tangled Web

    In 2009, Democrats chose to proceed with a health-care bill under the regular order – that is, they sought to pass the legislation under normal House and Senate rules. They did not put together a budget reconciliation bill with health care in it, something that could have passed the Senate with a simple majority vote. They conceded that such an approach would likely produce a flawed product, as many non-budgetary provisions in a health-care plan would not survive the reconciliation process. And so they decided to try and pass a bill without resorting to reconciliation, even though they knew they would need sixty votes in the Senate to succeed. It worked. They passed a bill in the House in November, and a somewhat different version in the Senate in December.

    Then came Scott Brown. His stunning election to the Senate on January 19 upended the Democrats’ end-game. They were going to work out the differences between the House and Senate-passed bills in January and proceed to pass an agreed-upon version in both chambers as expeditiously as possible. But that plan was contingent on getting sixty votes again in the Senate. With Brown’s election, Senate Republicans increased their numbers from forty to forty-one, thus forcing Democrats to find at least one Republican Senator to support their final bill.

    For the past two months, the White House and Democrats in Congress have been weaving ever-more complicated legislative webs all with the express intent of avoiding at all costs any need to negotiate with the now slightly enlarged Senate minority. In effect, what Democratic leaders want to do is – at the very end of the legislative process – switch from regular order to a reconciliation process in order to avoid having to deal seriously with any elected Republicans.

    But it’s become increasingly clear that the Democratic scheming and maneuvering necessary to pull off such a high-wire act has created a web of entanglements that could very well doom passage of the entire effort.

    In particular, there now appear to be two huge hurdles standing directly in the way of a plan to jam a bill through in the coming days.

    First, there is the matter of the liberal abortion provisions in the Senate bill. As the Catholic Bishops conference has noted the Senate-passed bill includes several provisions that would allow taxpayer funding of elective abortions. Consequently, the Bishops opposed passage of that bill when it was considered in the Senate, and now oppose its passage by the House. The problem for House Democrats is that every version of the end-game they are now considering is predicated on having the House take up the Senate bill and pass it unchanged for presidential signature.

    That is entirely unacceptable to the Catholic Bishops. They oppose House passage of the Senate’s pro-abortion health bill. Period. And their opposition hasn’t come with procedural loopholes that would let members off the hook if they promised to pass a fix separately. That would be fool’s bargain, and the Bishops know it. So pro-life House Democrats, led by Congressman Bart Stupak, really have no choice here. They can’t support the Senate bill unless they want to be known for supporting the most pro-abortion bill ever considered in Congress. Their only real option is to force House leaders to amend the Senate bill before passing it to include strong restrictions on funding of abortion. Yes, that would mean the bill would have to go back through the Senate again before going to the president, but so be it. That’s not the Bishops’ problem. It would mean the president and the Democrats would have to really negotiate to get some Republican support, which is of course the norm for sweeping and important legislation.

    This post originally appeared at National Review Online.

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to The Democrats' Tangled Web

    1. Billie says:

      For one, the cost doesn't make cents. For two, insurance is a privilege. For three, it is nothing needed in this country.Why should 30 million people, that have no will to pay their own way, get the benefits everyone else works for? If it is as urgent as disgustingly implied, why isn't it implemented sooner then four more years?

      As people control their own behavior, where are the costs of consequences of personal behavior being put on taxpayers? If it is so good for the people, why are the health benefits better for government? Why is it a force to comply?

      Why didn't the government do it's job to see the problems of the insurance companies until now? They're failures! Every one of America's problems is government induced and now, forced upon the people.

    2. Billie says:

      correction: 1st line, second paragraph- why are the costs of consequences of personal behavior…

    3. Christle, Texas says:

      We the Patients have been excluded from the negotiations on health care. I sent an Open Letter to Congress, to the Majority and Minority Leaders in both houses. I since have drafted what I am calling the People’s Health Care Bill and sent this to congress. You can find the letter to congress and the People’s Health Care Bill on the facebook fan page if you’d like to learn more: http://www.facebook.com/pages/We-The-Patients-Peoples-Health-Care-Bill/358436167949?v=wall&ref=mf

      We are as grass roots as we can get but we’re growing and we need someone to champion this for us. Please read the following open letter to congress and if you agree, come to our fan page on facebook and become a fan. Thanks for reading:

    4. Gary Marchinke says:

      The democrats may get their bill, but they will get their butts kicked in November. Their leaders are just like the people who vote for them; a bunch of losers!!

    5. Bernard Chrusniak says:

      I wish the Pres. would leave on his trip and consider staying gone for maybe the next three years. He could also take Peloise and Reid with him.

    6. Frank Telese says:

      I cannot , for the life of me understand why we cannot stop Obama. All his abuses of the Constitution, done by a "regular joe" would approach treason. Am I wrong??

      I call for impeachment proceedings to commence immediatel;y.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.