On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Michael Smith wrote:
> As I understand it, the Dems don't actually need a filibuster-proof
> majority at all -- there's an arcane maneuver called, I believe,
> "reconciliation", which the Republicans repeatedly used during their
> majorities.
Unfortunately if you use that maneuver it limits what you can put in the bill -- and the one thing that would be most clearly forbidden is a public plan. Even the "health care exchanges" would probably be forbidden.
To make a long story short, the reconciliation maneuver allows you to expand (or contract) programs that already exist, but not create new ones. So you could massively expand the reach of medicare. But you couldn't create it.
FWIW, this is precisely the reasoning behind liberals who say that a thin public option would contain more possibilities than it seems -- because once you got the thin outline past the 60-vote barrier, then theoretically no one could stop you from expanding it hugely later using this 50-vote maneuver.
Michael