Democrats have a lot of worry about on health reform. They have to worry about the bill being unpopular. They have to worry about the American people not knowing what is in the bill. They have to worry about coming to a final agreement that will get enough votes for passage in both the House and the Senate (check out this post for a good rundown of the current state of votes the House).
What they do not have to worry about are Republican attacks over the use of the budget reconciliation process. This is because no one friggin' understands Senate procedure, and the use of any sort of that procedure is never going to result in any significant blowback from the American people.
Over the last month, mainly by citing polls, I have made quite a few arguments that the country does not understand, or really care about, Senate process. However, leaving polls aside for the moment, consider an exchange I had with former President Bill Clinton about this subject back in September. Even he didn't understand Senate process (more in the extended entry):
|
President Clinton, who is just about the most lucid and articulate politician I know, discussed a wide variety of topics during the meeting. As seems inevitable these days, the supposed need for sixty votes in the Senate arose on multiple topics. As examples, President Clinton talked about how his health care plan was defeated because it didn't have 60 votes, how the climate change bill that passed the House right now only had 54-55 votes and would not pass the Senate in its current form, and how 60 votes were needed to pass most, if not all, of health care reform in 2009.
Toward the end of the meeting, because the nuclear option and the artificial 60-vote requirement in the Senate has been on my mind, I asked President Clinton the following question:
President Clinton, I have a quick process question. Isn't it possible--not necessarily desirable, but at least possible--to break any filibuster in the Senate with only 51 votes through the use of the Nuclear Option?
Much to my surprise, in response President Clinton said both that he had read my piece on this (I came late to the meeting and didn't even introduce myself before the question, so he was telling the truth) and that he was not certain exactly what the nuclear option was. He indicated that he had recently talked to Hillary about this subject, since she had been in the Senate and it was more her area of expertise. Apparently, she said that reconciliation was the nuclear option (FWIW Emptywheel thinks he said the same thing).
Sheepishly, I told him that the nuclear option was different from reconciliation. I explained that it can be used to end any filibuster or other delaying procedural tactic with only 51 votes, with the most famous example being the Republican attempt to end the use of filibusters during judicial confirmations in 2005. He responded that he thought that question had never been resolved because the Gang of 14 pushed it off, but that he would look into it more.
For those of you who are worried this anecdote means that Republican charges of budget reconciliation being the nuclear option will stick, don't be. The real lesson here is not that President Clinton didn't know what the nuclear option was, but that even a recent President of the United States was unfamiliar with Senate process. As was, apparently, his wife who spent eight years in the Senate. And as are, apparently, some of the more prominent journalists in the entire country.
Republicans can say whatever they want about Democrats supposedly abusing Senate procedure. It isn't going to resonate with anyone, just as Democratic charges of Republicans abusing the filibuster haven't resonated with anyone (or, at least, with anyone who is actually an undecided voter). Almost no one understands this stuff, largely because almost no one cares about this stuff.
Democrats don't need to worry about Republican attacks on the use of reconciliation. In fact, they should welcome those attacks. The more Republicans babble on about Senate procedure, the whiner, weaker, and more abstract they sound to the country as a whole. Let them attack Democrats over the use of reconciliation. Counter it by completely ignoring those attacks, and instead focusing on what you think is good about the bill. The more Republicans talk about Senate procedure, the more they are giving Democrats a free pass to make whatever substantive messaging they want to the public as a whole. |
STATE BLOGS
