Yesterday the Emporers of the Senate, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, and Evan Bayh, declared their opposition to passing comprehensive healthcare reform and their support for the Cornhusker Kickback. They won't vote for reconciliation, at least not this time.
Here's a particularly dim proclamation from Evan Bayh, as Jon Cohn notes.
Here's Evan Bayh's explanation, via Politico:
Just ramming through a bill on a purely party-line vote on a strictly partisan basis will not do much to generate the kind of progress around here on other issues that we need. We need to focus on things where we have a consensus.
Perhaps Bayh has forgotten, but the Senate already passed health care reform on a strictly partisan basis. It happened in December, when all Republicans voting against the Senate's version of reform and all Democrats (plus two independents) voting for it.
Details, details. Evan Bayh doesn't have time for actual facts. He's got too many Republicans to have lunch with. You know, building consensus with those people whose sole purpose in political life for the past year has been to kill comprehensive healthcare reform.
Then there's Ben Nelson:
While Nelson rules reconciliation out of the question for health care, he was singing a different tune in the past. The Nebraska senator has voted in favor of four of the five bills passed through reconciliation since he came to office in 2001, including Bush’s tax cuts for the super-wealthy:
– Nelson voted to use reconciliation to pass Bush’s 2001 tax cuts for the wealthy. The senator was one of twelve Democrats who voted for the $1.3 trillion in tax cuts contained in the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, which included billions of dollars of tax cuts for the super-wealthy. [5/26/2001]
– Nelson voted to use reconciliation to pass Bush’s follow-up tax cuts for the wealthy in 2003. The senator was one of only two Democrats who voted for the The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, which contained an additional $330 billion in tax cuts. The tax cuts would not have passed without Nelson’s vote. [5/23/2003]
– Nelson voted to use reconciliation to pass an extension of the reduced tax rates on capital gains. The senator was one of three Democrats to vote to shield wealthy investors from an increase in their capital gains tax with a vote in the affirmative for the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 . [5/11/2006]
– Nelson voted to use reconciliation to pass a bill helping students afford college tuition. The senator joined the rest of the Democratic caucus to vote for the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 [9/7/2007]
Given the fact that three out of four of the reconciliation bills Nelson has supported mostly benefited the wealthiest Americans, the logical question to ask is why the reconciliation process he has supported in the past is apparently appropriate for siphoning wealth to the richest Americans but not to get health care for tens of millions of Americans who lack it.
By the way, Blanche Lincoln also voted for the 2001 tax cuts for the wealthy, again, a reconciliation bill. So when they talk in lofty terms about the principles of bipartisanship and consensus and Senate tradition, it's only so much bull hockey. It's only their self-interest they're looking out for.
The good news is that we don't need them, which is the point of using the reconciliation plan, which has become the consensus option for passing real reform.