I've just read the actual text of the reconciliation letter Harry Reid sent to Mitch McConnell. Here is just one part that jumped out at me:
[M]any Republicans have spent the past year mischaracterizing the health reform bill and misleading the public. Though we have tried to engage in a serious discussion, our efforts have been met by repeatedly debunked myths and outright lies. [Emphasis added]
Nice use of Senatorial language, isn't it?
He goes on:
After watching these tactics for nearly a year, there is only one conclusion an objective observer could make: these Republican maneuvers are rooted less in substantive policy concerns and more in a partisan desire to discredit Democrats, bolster Republicans, and protect the status quo on behalf of the insurance industry.
Sounds like Reid's been taking lessons from Anthony "GOP Is 'Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of The Insurance Industry'"Weiner.
And...
While Republicans were distorting the facts in the health care debate and inflicting delay after needless delay, millions of Americans have continued to suffer as they struggle to afford to stay healthy, stay out of bankruptcy and stay in their homes. Thousands of Americans lose their health care every day, and tens of thousands of the uninsured have lost their lives since this debate began. Meanwhile, rising health costs have contributed to a rising federal budget deficit.
Reid then - finally - responds to GOP charges that reconciliation is uncalled for or has never been used for anything this big:
There is nothing unusual or extraordinary about the use of reconciliation. As one of the most senior Senators in your caucus, Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, said in explaining the use of this very same option, "Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don't think so." ....
[R]econciliation would be used to make a modest number of changes to the original legislation, all of which would be budget-related.
(An argument many of us had wished Reid had made during the White House health care summit.)
Reid also calls them out for being the Party of NO:
As has been well documented, your caucus conspicuously shattered the record for obstruction last Congress by demanding gratuitous procedural votes on even the most non-controversial matters, and by stalling the work of the Senate despite the urgency of the serious problems facing our country.
Nonetheless...
Keep in mind that reconciliation will not exclude Republicans from the legislative process. You will continue to have an opportunity to offer amendments and change the shape of the legislation. In addition, at the end of the process, the bill can pass only if it wins a democratic, up-or-down majority vote. If Republicans want to vote against a bill that reduces health care costs, fills the prescription drug "donut hole" for seniors and reduces the deficit, you will have every right to do so.
IOW, if you want to vote to be a loser, we will be glad to accommodate you.
So far, I have found no reply from McConnell. I suppose it is difficult to do so when you're foaming at the mouth. Or wondering where Harry Reid suddenly found his nerve.
I will not, under the circumstances, use the usual metaphor. It would be inappropriate. But I will take this opportunity to offer prayers and best wishes for his wife and daughter, and a speedy and complete recovery.
(Title changed slightly. Reid wasn't singling out McConnell as a liar, but Republicans in general.)
Update [2010-3-12 11:40:12 by DanK Is Back]: Several commentators have pointed out that I missed a lovely smackdown towards the end of Reid's letter. So here it is:
As you know, the vast majority of bills developed through reconciliation were passed by Republican Congresses and signed into law by Republican Presidents - including President Bush's massive, budget-busting tax breaks for multi-millionaires. Given this history, one might conclude that Republicans believe a majority vote is sufficient to increase the deficit and benefit the super-rich, but not to reduce the deficit and benefit the middle class. Alternatively, perhaps Republicans believe a majority vote is appropriate only when Republicans are in the majority. Either way, we disagree. [Emphasis added]
Update [2010-3-13 1:4:19 by DanK Is Back]: On the rec list for over 24 hours?? Not a record, I think, but nice.