The Onus Is On The Senate

by Turkana

As reconciliation becomes the operative word, for the health insurance bill, much of the emphasis has fallen on recent reports that the onus is now on the House to pass the bill before the Senate fixes it. Of course, many have used the Charlie Brown metaphor, wondering why the House would expect Lucy actually to let them kick the ball, this time. But a lot of people aren't paying attention to the Senate's responsibility, in this equation.

As reported by Salon's Alex Koppelman:

Harkin also reportedly told Politico that the House will have the first move as this unfolds, passing the Senate bill -- after it's clear that Reid has the votes to make fixes to that legislation through reconciliation. The order in which the two chambers acted had been a point of contention in recent negotiations.

A lot of people are seeing this:

Harkin also reportedly told Politico that the House will have the first move as this unfolds, passing the Senate bill -- after it's clear that Reid has the votes to make fixes to that legislation through reconciliation. The order in which the two chambers acted had been a point of contention in recent negotiations.

But the true order is this:

Harkin also reportedly told Politico that the House will have the first move as this unfolds, passing the Senate bill -- after it's clear that Reid has the votes to make fixes to that legislation through reconciliation. The order in which the two chambers acted had been a point of contention in recent negotiations.

The Politico article itself also quotes Senator Dick Durbin:

He then put the onus on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to signal whether she can provide enough votes to pass the Senate bill, followed by a package of fixes through reconciliation.

"The first step is with Speaker Pelosi and so I will let her decide what it takes in the House," Durbin said.

So, the Speaker has to decide what the Senate must do to prove itself, and then the Senate has to follow through. The Politico article says it remains unclear what that proof must be. And then it again quotes Durbin:

"I don't know what the gesture will be but it will be a convincing gesture," he said.

The onus is not on the Speaker. The onus is on the Senate to prove itself. She may have to tell them what works, but they have to act on it.

Meanwhile, Senators Maria Cantwell and Ted Kaufman have declared support for the letter urging a vote on a public option through reconciliation. In just a couple weeks, the list has grown from four names to 35. A majority of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate wants a vote. It would be nice to have an up-or-down vote on what remains both the best and most popular option. It would be nice if the majority ruled its own caucus.

Charlie Cook now thinks we will lose the House, this year. He also wrote this:

What could change the current trajectory, preventing the Republicans from gaining more than the 40 seats they need to take control of the House and from winning more than six or seven seats in the Senate? Some observers argue that if the Democrats pass some kind of health care reform bill, scaled down or not, they would appear less ineffectual and would change the current thinking that they have wasted the better part of the past year and come up empty-handed. That sounds plausible, but only if the public's perception of the Democrats' health care plan changes significantly. Democrats have not exactly been winning many perception battles lately. And in the end, would they really help themselves by enacting something that most voters say they don't like and don't want?

In other words, Speaker Pelosi has good reason to demand real proof of real fixes from the Senate. Unless we want to be looking at a Speaker Boehner, next year. A vote on the public option would be a good gesture.