Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carolyn who wrote (77719)	1/20/2010 2:29:11 AM
From: Hope Praytochange	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224858

January 20, 2010, 12:27 am House Democrats Back Off Plan to Pass Senate Bill By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN House Democratic leaders appear to be backing away from a plan to ask their rank-and-file to approve the Senate version of major health care legislation and send the measure directly to President Obama for his signature. House leaders gathered at the Capitol late on Tuesday to chart their strategy in the wake of the Republican victory in the Massachusetts special election. And Representative Chris Van Hollen, a member of the House Democratic leadership who participated in the talks, told Carl Hulse of The New York Times that the health care issue clearly played a role in the election outcome. “Health care was also part of the debate, and the people of Massachusetts were right to be upset about provisions in the Senate bill like the Nebraska purchase and other special deals,” Mr. Van Hollen said in the interview. The so-called Nebraska purchase, a k a the Cornhusker Kickback, is a provision that Senate leaders added to the legislation to help secure the vote of Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska. The provision calls for the federal government to pay Nebraska’s entire cost of a proposed expansion of Medicaid, even though other states will eventually share some of the cost of broadening Medicaid eligibility. Mr. Nelson himself has urged that House and Senate leaders remove the provision and figure out a way to treat all states equally as they negotiate a final version of the health care bill. He has requested that states be allowed to opt out of the Medicaid expansion. But Mr. Van Hollen’s pointed reference to the Nebraska provision suggested that House leaders were focusing on some of the most politically problematic aspects of the Senate bill, and facing a growing realization that rank-and-file House Democrats could not approve it as-is. House Democrats have already voiced numerous problems with the Senate bill, and the White House and Congressional leaders have been working hard to resolve those differences. But with the fate of the legislation now in doubt as a result of the Massachusetts election results, the efforts to reconcile the bills may be a moot point. Some Democrats have suggested that a better approach going forward would be to use a procedural tactic known as budget reconciliation to advance the health care legislation without the need for the 60-vote supermajority in the Senate to overcome Republican filibusters. But budget reconciliation is complicated and could force Democrats to substantially rethink the health care measure. Such a move would also draw the ire of Republicans, who see budget reconciliation as a hardball tactic aimed at short-circuiting the normal legislative process. Asking House Democrats to approve the Senate bill held enormous appeal, because it would require just one additional vote before the bill could be sent to the White House. But the health care issue is perilous enough without adding to the mix an array of provisions inserted by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, to help win the votes of individual lawmakers.