A string of electoral defeats and the great unpopularity of ObamaCare can't stop Democrats from their self-appointed rendezvous with liberal destiny—ramming a bill through Congress on a narrow partisan vote. What we are about to witness is an extraordinary abuse of traditional Senate rules to pass a bill merely because they think it's good for the rest of us, and because they fear their chance to build a European welfare state may never come again.
***
The vehicle is "reconciliation," a parliamentary process that fast-tracks budget measures and was created in 1974 as a deficit-reduction tool. Limited to 20 hours of debate, reconciliation bills need a mere 50 votes in the Senate, with the Vice President as tie-breaker, thus circumventing the filibuster. Both Democrats and Republicans have frequently used reconciliation on budget bills, so Democrats are now claiming that using it to pass ObamaCare is no big deal.
Yet this shortcut has never been used for anything approaching the enormity of a national health-care entitlement. Democrats are only resorting to it now because their plan is in so much political trouble—within their own party, and even more among the general public—and because they've failed to make their case through persuasion.
Their goal is to permanently expand the American entitlement state with a vast apparatus of subsidies and regulations while the political window is still (barely) open, regardless of the consequences or the overwhelming popular condemnation. As Mr. Obama fatalistically said after his health summit, if voters don't like it, "then that's what elections are for."
In other words, he's volunteering Democrats in Congress to march into the fixed bayonets so he can claim an LBJ-level legacy like the Great Society that will be nearly impossible to repeal. This would be an unprecedented act of partisan arrogance that would further mark Democrats as the party of liberal extremism. If they think political passions are bitter now, wait until they pass ObamaCare.
More on this from the Wall Street Journal
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
8 comments:
When you say "narrow vote", do you mean "majority vote"? Because that's what's required, and what they'll get on the bill. Just like the Republicans did on Medicare Advantage and Welfare Reform, both of which cost more than this bill. Why are you guys against a majority vote in Congress?
The only consolation I see is that it will be amusing to see how a "health care" bill will "kill" their careers! It is a shame the bill can't be "rammed" down their collective throats instead of through Congress!
I'm with 9:21am, who cares what America wants...let them vote any way they can doesn't matter that reconciliation was meant only for budgets...why not turn the world upside down. The individual mandate is unconstitutional, why debate that? 9:21am-This is called sarcasm.
Takes alot of arrogance to totally ignore the majority of US citizens that have made it VERY clear they dont want THIS bill, only to state the majority vote is how its supposed to be. Dont you wonder what could possibly be so important to them that they're will to lose their careers over....it certainly isnt because they care about how much you have to pay out in healthcare or TAXES.....
If they have the votes, then fine, let them use reconciliation. It's funny that on the one hand, you guys want leadership that doesn't sway back and forth according to the polls. Now you condemn people for voting according to what they think is best. They were voted in because you believed in their vision. And you put your faith in them for their term length. So at the end vote them out if you don't like it.
This will tell who represents the people they were elected to SERVE and those who are partisant and do not represent the people. I hate to see their personal budget since they cannot be fisical responsible with Tax Dollars.
This bill makes us pay immediately for services not scheduled to happen until 2014--WE WILL BE TAXED for 10 years for 6 years of programs. Anyone else see a problem with that?
Also never mind the fact that welfare and medicare reform passed with higher margins and bipartisan support while this bill passed on a party line. Nice try though. Gotta love the fact that the cost for the bills first ten years is being hidden from us as well. It is a 1 trillion dollar bill over ten years right? Wait...hold on...the costs are only incurred over 6 years? Guess that isn't 1 trillion over ten, its over six. This bill costs twice what Obama says it does. Gotta love his "voters can tell us what the think of it in november" bs. Basically he wants a bunch of politicians to sacrifice their political careers so he can get his takeover bill. Will of the people be damned. Also, love the people arguing that a simple majority is what this country wants because it is democracy in action. Newflash, this is a representative republic or did none of these people take a history class? The senate rules exist for a reason.
Post a Comment