The Meat of Reconciliation and the Republican Advantage

 by Maggie Thornton

I struggle to understand how "reconciliation" can be used, or fail, especially once I understood that Vice President Joe Biden could override a decision to utilize the Bryd Rule. Two articles reveal the meat of reconciliation and a possible Republican advantage.

Indulge me readers: In the Health Care Schematic above - Courtesy Democrats, the following are a few of the departments included:

Departments of Civil Rights, Minority Health, CULTURAL AND LINGUISTIC COMPETENCE TRAINING, Nurse Education and Training, Language Demonstration Program,
Accountable Care Organization, Federal Mandates for Websites, Low Income Subsidy, Health Affordability Credits, MANDATE BUY INSURANCE

Marc Thiessen, writing in the Washington Post today, explains it all the way down to the bottom line.

In order to get a reconciliation bill with the fixes they demand to the Senate floor, Stupak and his pro-life colleagues must first vote to pass the original Senate health care bill -- including the abortion language they oppose. Only after this bill is passed in the House can the chamber then take up a reconciliation bill and send it to the Senate for its approval. 

That’s where the “Byrd rule” comes in. Designed to protect the rights of the minority, the Byrd rule allows any Senator to raise a point of order demanding that “extraneous” (non-budgetary) provisions be removed. According to former Senate parliamentarian Bob Dove, “If a ‘Byrd Rule’ point of order against a provision is sustained, the provision is stricken from the bill….Appealing the rule of the chair requires 3/5 vote of duly elected and sworn Senators (60 votes).” (This process is known colloquially in the Senate as a “Byrd bath” and the dropped provisions are known as “Byrd droppings.”)

Republicans intend to raise points of order against the reconciliation package. They believe it is virtually certain that the Senate parliamentarian would find any abortion deal Pelosi makes with pro-life House Democrats to be “extraneous” (there is no reasonable way to argue the provision is primarily budgetary). So any abortion deal with Stupak and his allies would be struck from the bill....

 From the Huffington Post: This is where Joe Biden comes in. As president of the Senate he can overrule the parliamentarian:

Ultimately it's the Vice President of the United States [who has the power over the reconciliation process]," Robert Dove, who served as Senate parliamentarian on and off from 1981-2001...

It is the decision of the Vice President whether or not to play a role here... And I have seen Vice Presidents play that role in other very important situations... The parliamentarian can only advise. It is the vice president who rules." 

 Biden can choose whether or not to accept the parliamentarian's decision or rule that more or fewer amendments can be passed through reconciliation. That ruling is subject to appeal -- but the appeal is decided by majority vote.

Back to Theissen:

Using the Byrd rule, Republicans will proceed to pick apart every element of these deals Pelosi makes, piece by piece. It is unclear which provisions would survive scrutiny under the Byrd rule. But each time a point of order is sustained, it requires 60 votes to overturn that ruling -- which means Senate Republicans have the votes necessary block key elements of the reconciliation package.

...If this happens, the amended reconciliation bill would go back to the House , where Stupak and others would then likely oppose it. Reconciliation would be dead. 

And now the bottom line from Robert Dove:

I said the VP COULD have the final say--but no VP since Hubert Humphrey has ruled in any instance against the advice of the Parliamentarian."

There is a next step, though, that might leave the Speaker a happy lady. Read it at the Washington Post. 

In the end, Thiessen says Stupak and other pro-life Democrats in the House have no leverage IF they choose to go along with Pelosi with reconciliation. The only way to ensure that abortion funding language is eliminated is to reject reconciliation and demand that the House and Senate start over.

Related:

Scheming Pelosi and House has new maneuver to pass health care: "Hold-Plus-Reconciliation"

Linked by ReaganiteRepublican - Thank you James!

Democrat Kent Conrad: Byrd Rule Disqualifies Reconciliation of Health Care

Refreshing. A rule actually matters to one Democrat. Senator Kent Conrad (ND) says he is the Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, and he understands how reconciliation works, and under the Byrd Rule, reconciliation cannot be used to pass the health care bill. See video below.

Kent Conrad was elected to the Senate in January, 1987. He became President of the Senate Budget Committee in January 4, 2007, replacing Republican Judd Gregg. Conrad was profiled by The American for his knowledge of economic issues. He is a member of the Gang of 10, which is now a Gang of 20 and advocates for more offshore drilling, and other energy measures. He endorsed Barack Obama in 2008, but is considered a somewhat conservative Democrat. He voted with Republicans against a health care bill that included a public option, and voted for the Stupak amendment which denies public-funded abortion. He has consistently voted against partial-birth abortion.

Senator Kent Conrad - No Reconciliation for Health Care Bill (video)

"The major package would not be done through reconciliation." 

Asked by CBS host Bob Schieffer to elaborate, given that the White House suggested earlier Sunday that they could pass the main bill with a simple majority of 51 votes, Conrad said that reconciliation was not, in fact, an option. 

"I am the chairman of the committee in the Senate, and I think I understand how reconciliation works and can't work," he said, arguing that the so-called Byrd Rule would prevent the use of reconciliation for the main health care bill. "The only possible role I can see for reconciliation would be to make modest changes in the major package."