Division Bills

Posted on 08/20/2009 at 7:02 am by Bob Cesca

Now that I’ve been able to access the full article at the WSJ, here’s how the bills could potentially be split:

Healthcare Reform Bill #1
Expensive budget-related provisions and potentially the public option. Reconciliation would be used here.

Healthcare Reform Bill #2
Various regulations against health insurance companies. Normal vote procedure, possibly with more Republican support.

In theory this seems like it could work. Though as Oliver Willis points out, Harry Reid would be involved with how things divide and what gets preserved in a messy reconciliation vote. Harry Reid is about as reliable as a paper condom.

This entry was posted in Healthcare and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    I still don’t think this would get us any more Republican support. And if the Republican start to talk about supporting this idea, that’s when I’ll definitely know it’s not a good one.Here’s my worry– We’ve just had to endure weeks and weeks of Baucus and his Gang of Six stalling this thing. Would we have to go through all of this again only to have the same result, just divided into two different bills?

  • Eric

    And is this possibly a way to circumvent the strong bloc of progressives in the House who have vowed to vote ‘no’ on any bill that doesn’t have the public option?

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Eric asked:

    And is this possibly a way to circumvent the strong bloc of progressives in the House who have vowed to vote ‘no’ on any bill that doesn’t have the public option?

    I honestly don’t know how this would function with regards to the House bill. Would the House split its bill as well? How does the conference work, then? I suspect we’ll learn the answers to these things soon.

  • Eric

    *wonk!*(that was the sound of me slapping my forehead…)(thanks, Bob.)

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    I still don’t see how we’d end up with necessarily a better bill this way, especially since the sticking point for Baucus is the public option. And he and his committee have exerted so much control over the first bill so how would we keep them out of this one? You mentioned they have jurisdiction over Medicare so that’s why they’re so important (or at least convinced of their own importance). Could the bills be structured to keep that committee clear of the public option debate and effectively neuter them?

  • fork-in-it

    Bob wrote:

    Harry Reid is about as reliable as a paper condom.

    This is absolutely the best and most hilarious line I have read in a long time. Kudos, bravo, tip o’ the hat to you Bob!