Reconciliation schmeckinciliation

MSNBC

Republicans argue that reconciliation is a partisan tactic that would limit their ability to offer amendments and limit debate to 20 hours in what's considered "the world's most deliberative body." They also say it's inappropriate to use a fast-track budget process to craft health care policy.

But Democrats are quick to point out that the process has been used by both parties — more than 20 times since 1980 — on things like tax cuts, student loan programs, children's health insurance, and welfare reform.

"They should stop crying about reconciliation as if it's never been done before," Reid said last week. "It's done almost every Congress, and they're the ones that used it more than anyone else."

This is why Democrats suck: they don't frame issues well.

They're letting the GOP frame this issue as "Democrats going to extraordinary lengths to ram health care through". And the Democratic response is "well, you did it too".

While that is true, that's not the issue. The issue is that the GOP has turned the Senate from a body that operates on majority rule to a body that needs a supermajority of 60 votes to get anything done. That was NOT the intent of the Framers. The intention was that 1 vote more than half would pass legislation.

The filibuster is being used as a parliamentary tactic (superbly, I might add) to stop passage of anything that might reflect positively on this president. They're paralyzing the nation to score political hits.

Why the Democrats have not noted this - the fact that the Republicans are trying to change the rules of the Senate to require 60 votes for almost anything - is beyond me.

It used to be that to filibuster, one has to have continuous floor speeches until and unless cloture is invoked. Now, it's not necessary - which is ridiculous. If you're going to stop the business of the country, you should at least have to hold your pee for it. Here's the big unless...the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. That's always an option.

On the subject of reconciliation (and liars), Paul Krugman contributes this:

So, on the This Week panel today I didn’t get a chance to weigh in on the biggest whopper from Sen. Lamar Alexander, who told Elizabeth Vargas that reconciliation — I don’t have the exact transcript — had in the past been used for small things and “to reduce the deficit”.

In fact, reconciliation was used to pass the two major Bush tax cuts, which increased the deficit — by $1.8 trillion.

And there’s no penalty for this kind of deception.

Update: Brad DeLong has the transcript, including my final lament.

Here's Rachel Maddow taking on the latest lie regarding reconciliation. How do we allow these Republicans to lie and contradict their own statements and votes.



Then there's Jim Bunning, the retiring senator from Kentucky who used to pitch for the Phillies and is likely suffering from some form of dementia (I'm not joking). He decided to throw a hissy-fit and... let's let Jon explain. My only reaction is: if a Democrat did this, the outrage would be legendary. THIS is why Democrats suck. Bunning got a way with this and the very serious media was never forced to deal with it.

Krugman calls "bullshit"

Krugman

So, on the This Week panel today I didn’t get a chance to weigh in on the biggest whopper from Sen. Lamar Alexander, who told Elizabeth Vargas that reconciliation — I don’t have the exact transcript — had in the past been used for small things and "to reduce the deficit".
In fact, reconciliation was used to pass the two major Bush tax cuts, which increased the deficit — by $1.8 trillion.

And there’s no penalty for this kind of deception.

Why does the Very Serious Media continue to treat both sides as if they both have valid points? One side is obviously lying, Fox News is the mouthpiece for the right and no one will say a thing about it.

Cantor insists the only way an 18-vote majority can pass health care is to totally cave in

Rep. Eric Cantor's (R-VA) office has responded to President Obama's calls for a bi-partisan health care summit by issuing a statement that makes it clear that the only way it's going to get done is to scrap everything that's been done and follow the Republican plan.

After going it alone on health care reform for nearly a year, President Obama has decided he wants to bring Republicans into the conversation. Here’s the problem: unless the President and Speaker Pelosi are willing to scrap their government take over and hit the reset button, there’s not much to talk about.

Republicans believe the status quo is unacceptable, but so is any health reform package that spends money we don’t have or raises taxes on small businesses and working families in a recession. To that point, House Republicans have offered the only plan , that will lower health care costs, which is what the President said was the goal at the start of this debate.

THIS is why the Democratic party is in the dumps. They have a 59-41 majority - the largest in decades - and yet they can't find a way to pass basic legislation.

This is screwed. Really screwed. This is why the nuclear option changing the filibuster MUST happen. The minority is holding the majority hostage and blocking every attempt to go the business of the nation.

Q: Since when is an 18 vote majority a liability?
A: When Harry Reid and the Democrats are in charge.

Sorry....

Sorry about the 3 week absence. It's been a hell of a 3 weeks. Here's a recap:

The Republicans took Teddy Kennedy's seat with a former nude model who pledged to vote against the same health care bill that he supported when it passed in Massachusetts. Republicans rejoiced. Scott Brown then said he supported abortion rights. They've been kinda quiet about the whole thing ever since.

Obama was said to have lost his mojo. 8 days later, he found it again when he went after Republicans in the State of the Union address. And then he accepted an invitation to appear before the GOP House caucus - on camera - and went up and down the court on them for 90 minutes. This caused Fox to break away for the sake of the narrative.

The Supreme Court turned our political campaigns over to corporate America, paving the way for "Palin 2012, brought to you by Monstanto".

The Republicans are using the filibuster, of the threat thereof, as a blunt weapon.



Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) is holding as many as 70 of Obama's appointments hostage until he gets his pork projects (earmarks) passed in the Senate. To break his hold, the Senate needs - you guessed it - 60 votes. It's time to bring on the nuclear option and change the filibuster to a more reasonable procedure - one that doesn't cripple the business of the nation.

As Steve Pearlstein opines:

After all, if the only things the party in power can accomplish are those that the minority power can agree with, then what is the point of having an election? No matter which side won a majority, "common ground" -- the things they all agree on -- would still be the same.

And it appears that "Don't ask, don't tell" is going away, paving the way for gays to openly serve their country. For years, the GOP said they'd leave it up to the military high command. I guess they figured that generals and stuff would never let fags serve. Well, last week they did. Adm. Mike Mullen told Congress that gays should be allowed to serve openly in uniform, arguing that it is "the right thing to do." And many, many Republicans lost their shit. John McCain backtracked on his comments of 3 years ago and Ollie North told Sean Hannity that if we let gays serve, the next steps was NAMBLA members. That's the North American Man-Boy Love Association, the group that advocates legal sodomy with minors.

Right.