WhatFinger


And here, apparently, is why it has to work that way

Pence tells unhappy Republicans: ObamaCare replacement bill is the first of a three-part process



The conservative world has been blowing up with discontent for the last couple of days, as the ObamaCare replacement bill released by House Republicans underwhelmed to say the least. On this site, Rob was decidedly thumbs down, while I was disappointed in some aspects but overall saw it as an improvement - not only on ObamaCare but by a slight margin over the pre-ObamaCare status quo as well. The boss was more positive than either of us, but no one is claiming that this is the health care bill of conservatives' dreams. But you're not hearing massive celebrations among conservatives, because even though the bill gets rid of the worst elements of ObamaCare, it still operates within much of the same logical framework that gave us ObamaCare in the first place.
On Capitol Hill yesterday, Mike Pence tried to persuade unenthusiastic conservatives by vowing a willingness to tweak it, but also explaining that this is only the first of three steps in getting rid of ObamaCare. The Washington Examiner explains:
Moving across the Capitol, Pence and Price worked Tuesday to sell the proposal to House lawmakers — arguing to reluctant Republicans that the repeal-and-replace measure was one of a three-part plan to reform health care. The second phase involves Price, the former House Budget Committee chairman who as HHS secretary has the power to repeal hundreds of Obamacare regulations as well as the ability to reshape or replace them with a patient-centered and market-driven outcome Republicans are seeking. The third phase will involve taking up additional health care legislation that would improve the insurance market, including a measure allowing consumers to purchase plans across state lines.
So Rob and I had a very long discussion about this yesterday, and he was especially irate about the idea that certain elements - like allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines - is not in the bill. From what I knew yesterday, I couldn't disagree. If they're going to do that (and they should), then do it. Why wait?

Support Canada Free Press


Here, apparently, is why: ObamaCare was passed on a reconciliation bill that couldn't be filibustered. According to Senate rules, you can use reconciliation for budget and tax matters, and Harry Reid engaged in a real abuse of that rule in order to pass it on a reconciliation vote after Ted Kennedy's death left the Democrats one vote-short of 60 in 2010. Because it was passed as a reconcilation bill, it can be repealed as a reconciliation bill - and certain aspects of the replacement law can also be passed via reconciliation. But not everything they want to do can be categorized as a budget or tax item. The ObamaCare taxes can be repealed via reconciliation, for example, so they will be. But passing a bill that allows insurance to be sold across state lines is not, it would appear, reconciliation-eligible. So that that will have to wait for phase three, and it also will either require some Democrats votes to get past the filibuster, or it will require the Senate to finally blow up the filibuster, which I've been arguing they should do. But I don't think Mitch McConnell agrees with me, so that is probably not how phase three is going to get passed. The real heavy lifting that would improve the insurance market and make it more of a free-market proposition apparently has to come in phase three, which is going to be the hardest phase in which to succeed because you either have to get some Democrat support or face hard truths about the Senate and its longstanding traditions. This scenario is not inconsistent with what we've heard in recent weeks - that the reality of the legislative process would require this to be done in phases. But if that's what's going on, the House GOP made a huge mistake yesterday by releasing phase one, and only phase one, and trying to sell it to us as the whole enchilada. Sending Mike Pence scurrying to Capitol Hill to explain it only after the uproar had begun was not very strategic thinking.

If you have to do it in three phases, then why not tell us right at the outset why that has to be, and explain what all three phases will consist of? By doing it the way they did it, they've got conservatives running around calling this "ObamaCare Lite" and "ObamaCare 2.0," and casting doubt on whether it's going to be possible to repeal ObamaCare at all. That was all quite unnecessary, but what's done is done. They'd better fix it fast. My issues with this, aside from the clunky rollout that left people confused and disappointed, are with the unwillingness to nuke the filibuster, as well as the unwillingness to bend the reconciliation rules like Reid did. I'm not saying it's a good thing to behave like Harry Reid, who is one of the most vile human beings on the face of the Earth. But Republicans are never really going to win if they insist on always taking the high road while Democrats do exactly the opposite. If they're afraid of what the press will say, see "Trump, Donald," for how you win at politics when the press hate your guts. But first, get this ObamaCare replacement right. Immediately.


View Comments

Dan Calabrese -- Bio and Archives

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored