Lieberman will not filibuster the Senate bill

There's been talk in the media that the Senate will not pass a health care bill because Lieberman has vowed to filibuster any bill with a public option.  But the Senate bill does not have to include a public option for President Obama to sign a bill including the public option into law.

It's my understanding that the Senate can vote on its version of the bill without including a public option (so that Lieberman won't filibuster).  After it passes and the House and Senate versions are combined in committee, the public option can be included before the bill goes to President Obama for signing.

That's my understanding of how it works, so the Lieberman threat seems inconsequential.

Tags: Health care, Public Option (all tags)

Comments

10 Comments

Missed a step

After it passes and the House and Senate versions are combined in committee, the public option can be included before the bill goes to President Obama for signing.

which then has to be voted on again by the House and Senate, which Lieberman can and has said he would filibuster.

by ND22 2009-11-09 07:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Missed a step

Can Reid at that point ... once the bills are combined ... then go the budget reconciliation route and pass the final version that way?

by RichardFlatts 2009-11-09 08:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Missed a step

No.

But he could always pass a separate bill using reconciliation containing just the PO. The House would have to vote on that too.

So you would have two bills.

by vecky 2009-11-09 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Missed a step

Thank you for answering my question.

by RichardFlatts 2009-11-09 01:43PM | 0 recs
Not necessarily, no......

Reid would have to get a ruling from the non-partisan parliamentarian that a public option is not out of order per what is allowed to be done through reconciliation.  It's highly debatable whether the parliamentarian would go our way on that ruling.

That's among the reasons why the Senate Democrats want to avoid reconciliation except as a last resort.  It's a potential disaster where we get no more than we'd get through the normal legislative process.

by DCCyclone 2009-11-09 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Not necessarily, no......

Pass a weak public option with the health care reform bill now, and then use reconciliation to modify and strengthen it later.  That would probably fly.

by RichardFlatts 2009-11-10 03:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Not necessarily, no......

Anyone who thinks the public option cannot be passed through reconciliation doesn't understand reconciliation.

There are many parts of the bill that may not be eligible for reconciliation.  But the public option is certainly not one of them.  In fact, the public option may be the one no-brainer in the whole mix!

by Steve M 2009-11-10 06:10AM | 0 recs
You're half right

Lieberman won't filibuster the health reform bill because he's lying about being against it, as far as I can tell.  He's just trying to wrangle concessions out of Reid so that he can avoid a strong Democratic challenger in 2012, as far as I can tell.

It's up to Reid to decide if he wants to call Holy Joe's bluff or not.

by Dracomicron 2009-11-09 09:15AM | 0 recs
Re: You're half right

How can Reid control a CT primary?

Regardless of what Liarman does, few dems will be willing to support him in 2012, when Obama is up for re-election. Not now... that bridge has been burned.

by vecky 2009-11-09 11:19AM | 0 recs
Simple

Reid has influence with the DNC.  The DNC decides how much money is given to various candidates.  Reid could also instruct other senators to not support whatever candidate emerges from the CT primary.

by Dracomicron 2009-11-09 12:35PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads