CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
June 14, 2009 – 12:53 a.m.
Are Both Parties Negotiating On a Health Bill? Depends Who You Ask
By Drew Armstrong, CQ Staff
For a taste of how hard it’s going to be for Democrats to craft a national health care bill that can win at least a few Republican votes, consider how far apart the two sides are as this process begins.
Republicans on the Senate committee that’s writing the bill don’t agree among themselves about what label they should put on the talks that have happened so far.
Max Baucus , D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, gives every impression that he’s writing a bipartisan bill in concert with the committee’s top Republican. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa.
“This has been a bipartisan process from the moment it started,” said Baucus spokesman Scott Mulhauser. “Sen. Baucus is in frequent negotiations with Sen. Grassley as they work together to produce bipartisan mark.”
The two have been working closely together so far, producing bipartisan “options” papers for members, and holding joint meetings with other senators.
“Sen. Grassley is working with Chairman Baucus to try to produce a bipartisan bill,” said a Grassley spokeswoman, adding, however, “there isn’t a bill yet.”
Now comes another committee member, Jon Kyl of Arizona, who also is the Senate Republican whip, an elected leadership job.
On Sunday’s edition of C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers” program, Kyl says that Grassley “has said that while his staff has talked to Sen. Baucus’ staff, he is not negotiating with Max Baucus .”
“Sen. Grassley has been given no authority to negotiate anything by all of us Republicans on that committee,” Kyl said. “The bill that [Baucus] comes up with . . . will not be a bipartisan product.” Kyl said.
The way the Senate works, the only way for a majority party to easily get its way is by putting together a supermajority of 60 votes. At the moment, the Democrats in charge can’t get to 60 without the help of a few Republicans, so bipartisanship isn’t just a goal for a health care bill — it’s a necessity.
Comments
Don't need Republican votes. After Oct 15, need only 50 votes plus VP Biden!!!!
Since the democrats have threatened to invoke administrative rules that don't require a supermajority of 60, in order to pass health reform, I'm not sure that they really care for this to be bipartisan.
The way the Senate works, the only way for a majority party to easily get its way is by putting together a supermajority of 60 votes. At the moment, the Democrats in charge can't get to 60 without the help of a few Republicans, so bipartisanship isn't just a goal for a health care bill -- it's a necessity. I challenge the veracity of this statement. Bipartisanship is not the goal; health care reform is. And for health care reform to happen, 60 votes may not be required, it can happen through reconciliation. Providing reconciliation instructions to the relevant authorizing committees empowers the Budget Committee in each chamber to package together the various changes made by the authorizing committees into one bill if they wish – often called a "reconciliation package" or "reconciliation bill." Second, and most important, the reconciliation bill may not be filibustered on the Senate floor. In other words, only 51 votes are needed to pass the legislation instead of what has become the normal 60 votes. In this way, the majority party may move an important agenda item without having to appeal to the minority party. Since the Democrats aren't getting sufficient buy-in from the Republicans, it looks very likely that health care reform will be achieve through reconciliation.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: