Normally, by this point in the year, Congress would have already began the process of marking up the 2011 budget resolution. The process got pushed back due to the work on the new health care law, but that means Congress will begin working on it soon after they get back from recess next week. Potentially the most important part of the new budget resolution is what if any budget reconciliation instructions Democrats choose to add. If you want to pass a reconciliation bill in the Senate that can’t be filibustered, to overcome Republican obstructionism, you first need to have reconciliation instructions included in a budget. What reconciliation instructions are included in the budget are critical to passing laws over potentially Republican and conservative Democratic obstructionism, and serves as a clear indication of where the Democratic leadership’s true priorities lay.
I, obviously, care deeply about health care reform, and the new law needs massive improvements made to it. That is why I strongly hope the new budget resolution contains reconciliation instructions dealing with health care. If health care reconciliation instructions are included, that at least gives Democrats the option to deal later in the year with several problems currently in their new law.
Below is a list of additions and improvements to health care reform that I believe can potentially be made using reconciliation (note: some might possibly violate the Byrd rule):
- National public option
- Medicare buy-in
- Direct Medicare drug price negotiations
- Force/encourage the adoption of a single provider reimbursement negotiator (an all-payer system) for all insurers in the state, or at least for all policies sold on the new exchanges
- Remove the cruel five-year Medicaid waiting period for legal immigrants
- Increase minimum medical loss ratio to 92%
- Create a national exchange (to get around the Byrd rule, if need be, possibly improve the new OPM exchange and provide financial incentives to states not to start their own exchanges)
- Reduce annual out-of-pocket caps
- Strengthen risk adjustment mechanisms and/or add rewards for quality payments on the exchange
- Improve the state opt-out provision (would potentially allow for state single payer)
- Allow for extended COBRA coverage until 2014
- Replace convoluted free rider provision with a real employer mandate
- Tax direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising
I would hope that any money saved by these ideas would be redirected as block grants to be used by states willing to start most reforms before 2014. Even if Democrats don’t want to pursue the reforms I’ve outlined above, there are some serious issues they need to deal with. The money for the new high risk pools is insufficient and will run out well before 2014. Also, states are seriously struggling with budget problems, and providing some added short-term funding for Medicaid would be a smart potential use of health reconciliation instructions.
Other uses of reconciliation
While I care about health reform, there are many other potential uses of reconciliation that Democrats might be more willing to pick up this year. Basically, anything that deals with the budget should survive the Byrd rule and could potentially be dealt with using a reconciliation bill. Ideas include but are not limited to:
- Cap and trade and/or a new greenhouse gas tax
- Public financing of federal elections to deal with some fallout from the Citizens United ruling
- Some form of banking regulation to deal with “too big to fail” (new taxes/fees on over-leveraging, firms over a set size, certain transactions, firms with commercial and “shadow” banking, etc., could make it unprofitable/impractical for banks to get too big to fail)
- Reforms to corporate welfare farm subsidy programs
- General tax reform to deal with egregious loopholes and corporate welfare programs
Reconciliation instructions are our best hope for progressive legislation
I would be very disappointed if we were denied the possibility of a real vote on the public option, as Harry Reid implied he would allow, because they did not include budget reconciliation instructions that could be used for health care. Although I know there is probably a strong desire to deal with other issues besides health care right now in Congress.
On the other hand, I would consider it an act of legislative malpractice–and a direct assault on everyone who votes for Democrats based on the policy promises–if the new budget resolution does not contain any reconciliation instructions at all. It would be unilateral disarmament against Republicans who have promised to obstruct at every turn. Reconciliation is currently the Democrats’ best tool to deliver on aspects of their party platform, and, if they throw that away, it would be a bold declaration that they have zero desire to govern or deliver for their supporters. Including reconciliation instructions for anything, regardless of what for, is the bare minimum that should be expected from Congressional Democrats to show they will not let the Republican political strategy of pure obstructionism shut down the legislative process.
I will be waiting to see exactly what reconciliation instructions are included in the upcoming budget and what they could be used for. It is something the entire progressive community should be focused on intensely because it will be a good indication of whether Congressional Democrats feel any obligation to fulfill their policy promises.




24 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Oooh! Good catch.
Maybe a worthwhile project would be getting rid of the Byrd Rule, which Senators have begun to treat as if it is in the Constitution.
Kill the byrd rule and you might as well kill the filibuster, now there is an idea.
Any idea that the budget reconciliation bill will contain anything involving amendments or adjustments or reform of the just-passed psuedo-HCR is just delusional. The quickest way to become a pariah in D.C. is to mention health care within earshot of any member of the House or Senate, or any WH staffer.
Our country would’ve been made a much better & more equitable place to live if JUST ONE Democratic Senator shared your passion for HCR!
Don’t they actually treat it better than the Constitution? After all, so many of them have gone along with the gutting of the constitution by Bush II and Obama while the Byrd Rule seem to be as gospel from on high
I do not believe that the Democrats are going to try to add any actual health care reform to the “health care reform” law that they just passed in the budget itself. For one thing, if the Democrats had actually in broad majority wanted any real and serious reform, they had over a year to do it and the tools to do it with Republican opposition, and they didn’t do anything at all. Second off, the political fight was hugely damaging to both parties and neither party wants more health care fighting.
Finally, the officeholders and figures around them who would drive getting real reform into the budget bill in the form of reconciliation probably don’t really actually care on a personal level about the broad public well-being in truth. These are rich people we’re talking about who hang out with even richer people. They are not considered about the plight of the general public.
How about just abolishing the House of Lords er sorry Senate? The “minority” they are supposed to protect (the rich minority) is already over-represented and over-powered in the money-driven USG, anyway. The “minority” doesn’t need its own chamber of Congress, too.
I have seen unicameral legislatures in action. Doesn’t really seem like a problem. Let’s ask Ben Nelson his state choose not to have a senate.
Senate Rules for the next Congress could change.
Limiting debate (ending filibusters) is something that could happen.
It’s great to see that we’re still agitating for complete health insurance reform. They thought we’d just go away? NO WAY!
We’ll be around after Nov. It will be a discomforting but appropriate justice that many of the Dems who foist “ObamaCare” upon us will not be.
The Senate would never allow itself to be abolished. Any attempts would produce 100 simultaneous and breath taking petulant frenzies. That might be worth seeing.
We could do without the Senate. It’s just a bunch of mostly old, privileged white men who have the keys to the country and don’t care about anything else. What a joke the Senate is.
I really hope they do, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for Obama and the Dims to do the right thing
Excellent post!
question: what happens when the Republicans take over both Houses (at some point, it will happen — these things are cyclical) and they use the process to subvert the traditional fillibuster rules to push forward extremely conservative, nonprogressive agenda items?
President Obama signed an Executive Order further reducing woman’s reproductive rights. The health care bill provides $250 million in abstinence-education funds (a program which has already shown not to be the solution). This is reform??
If our ONLY problem was the filibuster. I’d prefer they set up [Edited by Moderator] outside on the Senate steps to solve the problem once and for all. I can’t think of more useless bunch of shit bags then the human feces that occupies that building.
That is one big reason why not much will get done through reconciliation. First, I believe you have to pass a budge before you can do any reconciliation. (I could be wrong) Historically, that is always late–meaning after Sept. 30. Sometimes, real late.
After Nov., there will be no Dem majority in both houses to even do anything by reconciliation anyway. Should the predicted tsunami happen, I doubt the lame duck people will vote on anything significant.
In the mean time, since Democrats have not seen any “good vibes” from the HCR turkey passing, I really don’t think they have any appetite for such a reconciliation adventure again anytime soon.
Had the pubic sentiment turned around–as Obama and Pelosi predicted–after HCR passage, maybe. But now, no way.
I know Obama is living in a dream world since HCR passed, but almost no one else is. Nothing of any weight is going to get done the rest of this year.
And next year, there won’t be the majorities to make anything happen either–even with reconciliation.
With Feingold, Boxer and others beginning to be in trouble, it might be great to have the Dem’s push through some filibuster elimination this year so the GOP can use it next year.
Even if you lose the election you stay in office until the first of the next year.
How do you know Dems won’t use reconciliation to pass something really noxious, like cuts to social security? To me that seems at least as likely as anything good coming out of it.
Byrd rule does not allow social security to be cut.