OK Senate, House is on board with Plan B: "House to Senate: We're Ready On Health Care If You Are"

[Pirate Smile]

House to Senate: We're Ready On Health Care If You Are

Leading Democrats in the House still insist that "all options are on the table" to move ahead on health care. But for the first time since last Tuesday's special election in Massachusetts, it's clear that they're coalescing around the most widely discussed option: moving ahead with the Senate bill once it's clear that it will be changed through the filibuster-proof reconciliation process. Before they can move ahead, they need the Senate to make some real headway on their end of the bargain--and they're not getting the signs they need.

"I thought we could get the votes in the House to pass the bill if fixes to the Senate bill can be done," House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) told reporters today.

"That would be a good option as far as I'm concerned," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), leader of the House progressives' health care task force. "I could support it. Reconciliation. Majority rule."

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA)--one of the key architect's of the House health care bill--gives it the high sign. "I think reconciliation's an appropriate way to proceed on reconciling the budget requirements," he said. "It's available to us. That was very specifically handled that way when we passed the budget."

The hang up, they now say, is not on their end, but that they first need a high sign from the Senate that the two chambers can work in lockstep.

"We have to wait to see what they think they can pass," said Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY). "The sense they give us is that Reid doesn't know from issue to issue what they can get votes for."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/house-to-senate-were-ready-on-health-care-if-you-are.php?ref=fpblg

OK Senate, get your sh#$ together and promise the House that you have 50 votes to pass the Reconciliation you both agree on, then do it soon.

Plus, the Senate can lose 9 "Dems" so get the best policy through that you can with 50 votes. No need to buy off the ConservaDems.

[sharesunited]

1. Obviously, the Senate cannot be trusted based on what they have already sent over.

[Pirate Smile]

2. Have they sent anything over? I know the House wants something but I've yet to hear that they

actually got anything.

A letter promising to pass it - listing what they promise to include - signed by 50 Dems would work but the last I saw the Senators didn't want to do it.

[ibegurpard]

3. He's talking about the senate bill itself

good reason not to trust the senate

[Pirate Smile]

6. Ah, yes. But now we only need 50. The weak-kneed and perpetual cowards can

jump ship - as long as we get 50. If we would have only needed 50 before we would have gotten a very different Bill out of the Senate, I am sure. But we needed 60 for the regulations and things that can not be passed through Reconcilliation.

But really, isn't it truly pathetic that a Senator would vote against insuring 30 million uninsured because of the "Senate process" required to reach that goal. It's beyond pathetic.

[dflprincess]

4. The House is making a mistake if they trust the Senate

You'd think after all the times the House has drawn a line in the sand, only to erase it and draw another, they'd understand that neither they nor Senate can be trusted to keep its word.

I suppose they're in denial.

[Atticus]

5. Harry---want to demonstrate good faith and signal that a new page is being turned?

Show Joe the door!

[Pirate Smile]

7. kick

[applegrove]

8. Go House Go House Go House!!!