# Explain to me what I'm missing re: health care reconciliation **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 11, 2010, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053 "2010-03-11T01:15:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2010, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/21 "2010-03-12T20:37:45Z")
There is plenty of motivation for centrist dems to vote against the HCR bill the Senate passed. The Senate can promise to fix the bill, but the Senate has already voted against the fixes and may again. If you were Stupack et al, would you trust Boxer and her ilk to vote against abortion funding? If the House member votes for the Senate bill and the fix does not happen they look like suckers. If they vote against senate HCR and it fails they can say they supported HCR but those bastards in the Senate screwed it up. Then they can say to the Independents, whose votes determine most elections, that they stood up to their party on behalf of the district and the democrats you should be mad at are those other guys. They get to try to have their cake and eat it too. That sounds pretty good to most moderates. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2010, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/22 "2010-03-12T20:50:20Z")
**Richard Parker** , your posts are reading to me like you are assuming that the Republicans will not filibuster provisions that they should theoretically agree with. This hasn’t been the case at all, and it’s very clear that the Republicans will filibuster any HCR bill, regardless of its content. If the Senate now wants to move on HCR in any fashion, they will have to use reconciliation to do so. > [@puddleglum](#): > > TIf you were Stupack et al, would you trust Boxer and her ilk to vote against abortion funding? Boxer and her ilk already did vote against abortion funding, since the Senate version of the bill clearly does not allow the government to fund abortions. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2010, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/23 "2010-03-12T21:08:16Z")
I’ll clarify that the Senate bill does allow government funding of abortion if the life of the mother is at stake or in the case of incest or rape. The House bill has similar provisions. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/24 "2010-03-13T17:58:54Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > **Richard Parker** , your posts are reading to me like you are assuming that the Republicans will not filibuster provisions that they should theoretically agree with. This hasn’t been the case at all, and it’s very clear that the Republicans will filibuster any HCR bill, regardless of its content. If the Senate now wants to move on HCR in any fashion, they will have to use reconciliation to do so. I suppose my assumption is more accurately this: either they will not filibuster them, or if they do, the issue will cease to be an effective campaign tool because the Dems can point out that they tried to cut out the kickbacks but the GOP specifically filibustered that fix. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/25 "2010-03-13T21:34:13Z")
But that’s not a campaign issue. If voters are not inclined to support the health care reform act, they aren’t going to the polls and say, “I’m very suspicious of Obamacare, but this incumbent Democrat voted to scrap one small part of the bill, so I guess I’ll vote for him!” Besides which, the Republican challengers to Democratic incumbents do not have the burden of defending a voting record, because they will not have voted on ANY of the bills. And if you think that Dems are going to be able to defeat Republican incumbents on the issue of health care, please pass the medical marijuana. It ain’t going to happen. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/26 "2010-03-13T21:44:58Z")
Republicans are specifically threatening to use the kickbacks as a campaign issue. Are you saying everyone understands that they’re just bluffing about this particular point? Maybe that’s the case. But if so, it is getting an awful lot of attention as a serious obstacle to passage. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/27 "2010-03-13T22:17:03Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Republicans are specifically threatening to use the kickbacks as a campaign issue. Are you saying everyone understands that they’re just bluffing about this particular point? > > Maybe that’s the case. But if so, it is getting an awful lot of attention as a serious obstacle to passage. Which is why the Republicans will attempt to derail any attempt by the Dems to remove the kickbacks. If the kickbacks stay, they have a campaign issue. If they go, that’s one less thing to attack the Dems with. And when they do try to derail the removal, they will pay no penalty, either at the polls or in the media. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/28 "2010-03-13T22:20:24Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > And when they do try to derail the removal, they will pay no penalty, either at the polls or in the media. I guess I’m just not convinced of this part. If kick-backs were the only issue in a bill introduced subsequent to House passage of reform, and Republicans filibustered it, the response to the GOP attack ads just writes itself. I get that the challengers won’t themselves have filibustered the bill, but I still think the attack gets pretty blunted when the reason for not deleting the kickbacks is very obviously GOP obstruction. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/29 "2010-03-13T22:39:56Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I guess I’m just not convinced of this part. If kick-backs were the only issue in a bill introduced subsequent to House passage of reform, and Republicans filibustered it, the response to the GOP attack ads just writes itself. I get that the challengers won’t themselves have filibustered the bill, but I still think the attack gets pretty blunted when the reason for not deleting the kickbacks is very obviously GOP obstruction. Well, we’ll have to see if Dems can pull it off. All I know is that Republicans (such as Virginia Fox) constantly say outrageous things on the floor without a peep from the media. But when a Democrat such as Alan Grayson criticizes the Republicans, Wolf Blitzer and the gang at CNN reach for the smelling salts like a character in some Tennessee Williams play. Of course, there is Glen Greenwald’s “roving villain theory” which postulates that the Dems may not actually be that interested in passing health care reform at all, and some Dem or another will keep throwing a new issue until the whole thing is finally derailed. So, the Republicans may be able to avoid filibustering altogether. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2010, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/30 "2010-03-14T13:54:03Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I guess I’m just not convinced of this part. If kick-backs were the only issue in a bill introduced subsequent to House passage of reform, and Republicans filibustered it, the response to the GOP attack ads just writes itself. I get that the challengers won’t themselves have filibustered the bill, but I still think the attack gets pretty blunted when the reason for not deleting the kickbacks is very obviously GOP obstruction. Nobody will remember the filibuster. Or, the Pubs can say that they were willing to filibuster anything to make sure that HCR did not pass. House constituents WILL remember that their representative, who is up for election this November, voted for a bill that included the kickbacks and loosened the abortion language. I think the main thing is what people will remember and when representatives, as opposed to senators, are up for reelection ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2010, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/31 "2010-03-14T13:58:30Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > Nobody will remember the filibuster. Or, the Pubs can say that they were willing to filibuster anything to make sure that HCR did not pass. > House constituents WILL remember that their representative, who is up for election this November, voted for a bill that included the kickbacks and loosened the abortion language. I think the main thing is what people will remember and when representatives, as opposed to senators, are up for reelection You don’t have to convince me to have little faith in the political knowledge of voters. But I just don’t have such little faith in them that when the GOP attacks House Dems for voting for a bill with kickbacks, the voters won’t understand the response that they tried to delete the kick-backs but the GOP opposed _that_ _specific_ _fix_. Indeed, in the scenario in question, the House Dems will have voted to delete the kickbacks, it just will have failed to pass the Senate. If your opinion of the voters is so low that they won’t understand even that argument, then I think the whole discussion is sort of moot, because either side can say whatever they want, facts be damned. That might be true, I guess, but I’m not quite there yet. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2010, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/32 "2010-03-15T03:12:01Z")
I think where the failure of your argument lies is you believe the dems would even try to explain their case. If history repeats itself the republicans can spread as much misinformation as they want and the dems and the press will fail to fight it. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2010, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/33 "2010-03-15T05:57:13Z")
The House Dems want a number of changes, which is going to require a reconciliation bill. There’s no reason to break the kick-backs out into a separate bill and pass that by itself. It just complicates things. I imagine that if the Senate Dems can’t, for whatever reason, pass the reconciliation bill they might try to pass the more popular parts of it on their own and dare the Republicans to oppose them. The House Dems don’t want to see _just_ the repeal of the kick-backs, they want the whole package of changes. If the Senate Dems can guarantee that they’ve got the votes to pass that through reconciliation, there’s no reason to divide things into more than one bill. I think the House Dems are a bit suspicious of the Senate’s ability to actually pass _any_ bills, so they’re not exactly likely to be comforted by a strategy that involves just trusting that popular bills will pass because they’re popular. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2010, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/34 "2010-03-15T11:34:48Z")
waterj2, I’m not saying it’s a good idea on its own terms to break apart the bill. I am saying that House Dems need not fear that repeal of the kickbacks won’t be passed, because if push came to shove, such a breakout is possible. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2010, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/35 "2010-03-15T13:42:54Z")
Well, turns out the sweeteners may be needed after all to assure passage of the health care bill. > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON – Still seeking votes for his proposed health care overhaul, President Barack Obama appears ready to reverse his position and allow unpopular deal-sweetening measures in the hopes of finding Democratic support for legislation whose future will be decided in coming days. [Link.](http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/2102915,obama-heads-to-ohio-health-care-031510.article) ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2010, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/36 "2010-03-15T16:51:35Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > You don’t have to convince me to have little faith in the political knowledge of voters. But I just don’t have such little faith in them that when the GOP attacks House Dems for voting for a bill with kickbacks, the voters won’t understand the response that they tried to delete the kick-backs but the GOP opposed _that_ _specific_ _fix_. > > Indeed, in the scenario in question, the House Dems will have voted to delete the kickbacks, it just will have failed to pass the Senate. > > If your opinion of the voters is so low that they won’t understand even that argument, then I think the whole discussion is sort of moot, because either side can say whatever they want, facts be damned. That might be true, I guess, but I’m not quite there yet. My opinion of the voters is not low. Most people do not have time to keep up with all of the strategy of both parties with respect to passing legislation. People will remember that the Dems voted for a bill with the kickbacks and weak abortion language. Period. And, if they then say that they ALSO voted for a bill to remove the kickbacks after the fact, then they appear to be flip-flopping. I think it may be much more believable for a Pub to say “Hey, we voted against ANYTHING having to do with this bill in an attempt to kill it.” That resonates more with voters than saying “Well, I voted for the bill with the kickbacks but our understanding was that the Senate was going to pass a bill via reconcilliation to fix the problems. Unfortunately the Senate was not able to get that bill passed.” People remember big events and, to most people, this whole reconcilliation thing just doesn’t register. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2010, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/37 "2010-03-16T21:09:07Z")
Which is why you don’t phrase it that way. Instead, you say something like “We voted for the best health care bill the Republicans would let us get away with, and then we tried to make it even better, but the obstructionist Republicans stopped us”. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2010, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/38 "2010-03-16T21:48:19Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Which is why you don’t phrase it that way. Instead, you say something like “We voted for the best health care bill the Republicans would let us get away with, and then we tried to make it even better, but the obstructionist Republicans stopped us”. I wasn’t implying that the phrasing would be as I suggested…but that is how it will be received by the public. Even saying you voted for a bad bill and then tried to make it better sounds as though you were perfectly fine with the bad bill being passed as opposed to starting over. I just don’t think the Dems have any good ways of spinning this. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2010, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/39 "2010-03-16T22:05:11Z")
> [@yorick73](#): > > I just don’t think the Dems have any good ways of spinning this. Maybe not if they did it that way but seems they are not going to do it that way. > [@](#): > > Here’s what’s going on. The House is stuck having to basically pass the Senate health care bill, because the bill cannot be reconciled in conference committee. Why? Because it will be filibustered. However, House members are averse to doing anything that looks like they approve of the various side-deals that were made in the Senate – like the so-called “Cornhusker Kickback.” The House intends to remove those unpopular features in budget reconciliation, but if they pursue budget reconciliation on a standard legislative timeline – where they pass the Senate bill outright first and then go back to pass a reconciliation package of fixes – they’d still appear to be endorsing the sketchy side deals, and then the GOP would jump up and down on their heads. > > Enter “deem and pass.” Under this process, the House will simply skip to approving the reconciliation fixes, and “deem” the Senate bill to be passed. By doing it this way, the Democrats get the Senate bill passed while simultaneously coming out against the unpopular features of the same. > > YES. All of this is basically motivated by concerns over perceptions and other such cosmetic bullshit. This is all about the House Democrats being scared out of their minds that they’ll have to spend even an hour explaining, “No, we do not approve of the Cornhusker Kickback.” But that’s America, circa 2010. It makes the Democrats look timid, but it doesn’t make them wrong. > > SOURCE: [Health Care Opponents Demonize 'Deem And Pass' As The Media Gets It Wrong [UPDATE] | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/16/health-care-opponents-dem_n_501353.html) ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2010, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053/40 "2010-03-17T00:32:52Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Maybe not if they did it that way but seems they are not going to do it that way. Yeah…I’m aware of that. I think that would be an even BIGGER mistake. Their constituents will still consider a vote on the rule to be a vote for Obamacare and it will appear that they did something underhanded and unconstitutional to get this bill passed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-to-me-what-im-missing-re-health-care-reconciliation/532053.md?page=3)