The Fat Lady Has Not Yet Sung

Now that the posturing, negotiating, double dealing, and compromising about the ill-considered health care reform bill is all but over, let's examine its prospects in becoming law.

The basics of this bill, (particularly the Senate version of it) was masterfully summed up by senator Mitch McConnell just before the first cloture vote in the dead of night early Monday morning. It is contained in congressional record page S13643. Click here for the first page which begins in the rightmost column then close the pdf and click on "next page" of the screen that appears
His impassioned plea didn't move a single vote. Each player in this game gained something for his constituency or his ego while the wider public lost a great deal.

So where do we go from here? If this bill passes the Senate, it still needs to be reconciled with the House version and this is done by means of a conference committee. The committee is appointed by the leadership of each house, respectively and usually consists of the chairmen and ranking members of the permanent committees that worked on the bill. There does not need to be an equal number of members from both houses.

The work of this committee (most of which is done behind closed doors) consists of hashing out a compromise between one version and another. So, for instance, if a bill from the House sets aside a million dollars for something and the Senate version two million dollars, the conferees decide on one and a half million. The purpose is to get one version hashed out. When that is done, the bill is then sent back to both houses to vote on it as is. A simple majority is required in each house.

I can't see how this bill can be reconciled. Although the Senate is on the way to a straight party line vote which will mean the Democrats have 60 votes to the Republican's 40, the House bill had only a 5 vote difference which means that if three congressmen had changed their vote from yea to nay, the bill would have been defeated.

One of the unknowns in this game is whether or not the conference report (bill) can be fillibustered. There is quite a difference of opinion on that. If it can be fillibustered, then the Senate leadership will still need 60 votes to pass this and that would mean that all the compromises made to accommodate each individual senator would have to be kept pretty much intact. If it can't be fillibustered, then the Democrats only need 50 votes to pass it and they certainly would have enough votes even if some senators desert the caucus.

The House is a different story. In order for it to pass, they need every vote they originally got. It's inconceivable to me that when the conference bill finally emerges that it won't contain something that at least 3 representatives who originally voted for the bill wouldn't take umbrage to and vote against. The main candidates for this would be abortion, the public option, and financing (taxes). Some liberals, whose dream of having the government increase its stranglehold on people's lives seems within their grasp will vote for the bill with or without the public option since it does contain the requirement that every citizen buy health insurance. Others, anti-capitalists among them, may object that the insurance companies get a windfall without the public option and vote against it. If the conference bill weakens the Stupak ammendment on abortion, some of the blue dog democrats might desert the party and vote against the bill.

On top of all this, the polls increasingly show that the public is against the bill and this could influence some representatives to rethink their commitment to it, especially after the holiday visit back home where they will certainly hear from their constituents in person.

Bottom line: It's not a done deal by a far shot.