What’s Different This Time?
In Just a Thought, March 18th, 2010
What is the big deal with the Senate and reconciliation?
There has been a lot of heat generated about the Senate using a parliamentary tactic called reconciliation to pass healthcare to avoid the requirement for a 60 vote majority.
Proponents of this approach point out it has been used 22 times in the past (and mostly by Republicans) to resolve contentious issues without having to find the 60 votes needed to stop a filibuster. Reconciliation is designed to resolve differences between House and Senate versions of the same legislation, meaning that both chambers have passed similar measures.
So what’s the big deal this time? There is no “reconciled” bill to present to both chambers for a vote, and never before has reconciliation been used by the majority party to force its agenda through Congress when a significant majority of Americans have expressed their disdain for the program.
Universal healthcare does not have the “consent of the governed”
