Kill the Bill?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

First of all, all of this talk hasn't generated at least one stupid and sophomoric Quentin Tarantino reference.

I'm really disappointed in you people, frankly.

Second, and I need a Junior High Civics lesson on this subject, would passing any type of garbage Senate Bill set up a situation where the final legislation must be reconciled with the House version? I'm not a fan of the current Senate Bill, and even though I'm of the "Don't Let Perfect be the Enemy of Good" school of thought, I'm having real reservations about this.

But is killing the bill the best strategy? Doesn't reconciliation give us at least one more bite at the apple -- as opposed to starting over from scratch during the off-year elections?

Hold your flames. I'm just asking the question. If what I THINK is true isn't the case, if reconciliation doesn't provide the Senate another opportunity to get it right, then you may as well kill what's on the table and start over. But if we can still salvage something from this train wreck, wouldn't it make sense to do that?

[MNDemNY]

1. It must die. Kill it start over.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

2. Not really an answer to the question...

Does reconciliation give the Senate a mulligan? Can they put the Public Option or Medicare Buy-in back in the final legislation?

And who in the hell unrecommends a question?

[uponit7771]

3. Yes, pass regulations via the bill and cost controls via reconciliation. ReThugs want the bill kille

....too.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

4. What I'm wondering....

If we can make the final version better, the odds are that Holy Joe and the Republicans will kill it.

Fine. Let them.

And let them pay for it come November.

But maybe we can make it incrementally better (I know that's dirty word for some people around here) and can keep expanding and improving on the final legislation in future sessions.

I say this because it took us sixteen years to start over from the 1993 HCR battle. How long will it take this time?

[On the Road]

5. It Is Possible That Reconciliation Offers a Second Bite

But if the bill stays fundamentally the same, it becomes law. Period.

And it is not bloody likely that the same group that bargained away some of the central provisions of the bill will go out on a limb to put them back in reconciliation.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

6. I hear you...

And I'm puzzled and frustrated at how Senate Democrats could through away such a politically valuable issue. Passing substantive health care reform would put the Republicans in the minority for the next forty years. It would be Social Security for this generation of Democratic legislators. Why they're balking at this is simply beyond me.

[Clio the Leo]

7. Shouldn't the question be....

.... why didn't we go that route to begin with if it was the golden way?

The contention for NOT going that way is that there'd be no insurance regulations.

And every Senator I've heard address the matter in the last few days who wants the bill passed has said that reconciliation now allow the various projects they've been able to include (universal coverage for children for example.)