For example, if the big bill itself amends some Social Security statute, reconciliation could be written to do the same --with changes sought by the House. Then if reconciliation is passed and signed by President Barack Obama after he signs the larger bill, the changes made in reconciliation would prevail.Is the most transparent president in history really going to push through a bill that few understand and in such a manner that Joe the Plumber, or even Joe the mathematician, can't easily follow? One that a majority of Americans don't approve of, and one that the Speaker of the House admits must be passed so we can "find out what's in it"? Are they stark raving mad?
This jives with what Pulse sources were saying soon after the first wave of stories hit – in essence, don’t take the reported parliamentarian’s declaration to the bank.
House leaders are hoping to approve the Senate bill, but hold onto it until the package of fixes also passes both chambers. Otherwise, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will have to convince members to vote for a Senate bill that they strongly dislike without a guarantee that the fixes get approved as well. House Democrats are worried that if they pass the Senate bill – and it is signed into law – the Senate would not act on the package of fixes.
Frankly, the jury is still out..
Anyone who could watch Maddow's show and call her 'non-partisan' is either a too clever liar by half, or living in a bubble.
In Pelosi's interview she mentioned Republican intransigence once or twice and others have murmured that if health care goes down the GOP will be to blame despite the Dem super majority. If such a campaign takes full sail the natural reaction for Repubs will be to recoil on the defensive since they know the MSM will be helping Dems propagate the blame by calling into question their compassion, which is tried and true since it's always a loser for the right.
The better reaction would be to go on the offensive, calling the failure a mandate for the GOP's more measured, step-by-step approach to reforming HC and pointing over and over to the polls to say they listen to the peeps and the Dems overreached with their 'risky scheme'. Could work.
DEFENDING ANDREA MITCHELL 3/13/10
Newsbusters and others are making a big deal about her comment "you've got to get this for him" to Dem Congressman Elijah Cummings. She's right. Obama has everything riding on this vote, which is why I think Pelosi/Reid and company are going to jam this through somehow, some way. They have no other choice.