THE SITUATION ROOM Transcript aired March 1,2010
Two days from today, President Obama will likely walk the American public through a road map for passing health care reform. That's what the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, is telling CNN.
Might that roadblock include a political land mine over the process known as reconciliation?
It's a word being heard a lot. We've asked Lisa to come in and explain our viewers what this word in Washington-speak means.
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: OK. So reconciliation, you may not have heard of it before, but it's actually been used 22 times sine 1974.
SYLVESTER: Democrats see reconciliation as one way to get health care reform through consequence without GOP support.
CHRIS FRATES, POLITICO HEALTH REPORTER: That would use the Senate bill as the primary vehicle and introduce a smaller reconciliation bill designed to change the provisions of the Senate bill that the house is not crazy about. That separate reconciliation bill would have to pass the house, it would then go to the Senate.
SYLVESTER: Confused? Okay. Here's what it all means. Reconciliation is a Congressional procedure that prevents a bill from being filibustered. One caveat -- it has to be a bill that would impact the nation's budget. In the Senate, reconciliation eliminates the need for a super-majority of 60 votes to bring a bill up for a final vote, therefore making it easier to get passed. But --
THOMAS MANN, BROOKINGS INSTITUTE: The party on the other side of the majority's use of reconciliation always cries foul. The Democrats did it when Republicans used it under Ronald Reagan, under George Bush; Republicans have opposed it when used oftentimes by Bill Clinton. This is a political battle, not a question of fairness of what's right or what's wrong.
SYLVESTER: So now on health care reform, Republicans are arguing it's not right to use reconciliation to bypass their party on such monumental legislation, but back in 2005, when the shoe was on the other foot, then the Republicans had the majority and Nancy Pelosi at the time the house minority leader ardently argued against using reconciliation, saying the Republican majority was trying to, quote, ram legislation through in such a secretive and unfair manner. Senator Judd Gregg, a Republican, defended using reconciliation then to pass the bill, allowing drilling in the arctic wild life refuge.
SEN. JUDD GREGG (R): All this rule of the Senate does is allow a majority of the Senate to take a position and pass a piece of legislation. Support that position. Now, is there something wrong with majority rules? I don't think so.
SYLVESTER: Of course, today on health care, both sides are arguing the exact opposite position. The Senate parliamentarian has a say on whether or not reconciliation can be used, and for what provisions. Another thing to keep in mind is that reconciliation is only supposed to apply to provisions that are germane to the budget. Now, both parties as we mentioned have used the procedure to pass nail-biters. Republicans have used it more frequently, by a 2 to 1 margin, Republicans use reconciliation to pass president bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, as well as extend the cuts in 2005 and reduce Medicare and Medicaid spending in 2005. Democrats used the procedure in 1990 to pass pay as you go rules, and in 1993 to raise taxes on corporations and some social security benefits. And while reconciliation is generally considered to be a procedural tactic only used as a last option, actually some controversial and major legislation have passed used -- take a look at this. The 1996 overhaul of the welfare system, the children's health insurance program, Medicare advantage insurance policies, and the cobra insurance program. Wolf?
BLITZER: It's got a long history. Republicans, as you say, have used it more than Democrats.
SYLVESTER: It's amazing, when you take a look, you can go back in time and see the debate. These two sides are in the exact opposite position where you had Republicans actually being pushing for reconciliation.
BLITZER: It depends on who is the majority and who is the minority. I think the Republicans have use it 16 times, the Democrats have use it 6 times, and this could be the 7th time right now.
Let's assess what we've just heard. Let's bring in David Gergen, our senior political analyst. He is joining us from Cambridge, and Gloria Borger, our other senior political analyst. Before we get to some of the specifics David, do you have any doubt in your mind whether this process known as reconciliation will be used by the Democrats this time?
DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: None. I think it's the only course the Democrats now see to pass it. They make a strong art, just as you said, that the Republicans have used this frequently in the past, more frequently than the Democrats have. At the same time, Wolf, Republicans have a strong argument that reconciliation has never been used for anything this massive, covering reorganizing 17% of the American economy. The American people are going to have to judge whether this is appropriate or not.
BLITZER: Listen to Lamar Alexander, Gloria, on ABC yesterday. He makes that point.
LAMAR ALEXANDER: It would turn the Senate December it would really be the end of the United States Senate as a protector of minority rights, as a place where you have to get consensus than just a partisan majority. It would be a political kamikaze mission for the party if they jam this through.
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It could turn out to be a victory for the Democrats if the American public believe they are jamming it through. They've seen the debate, they don't like the health care bill particularly, so they may not like this process. I think the larger question, which David really alluded to, is, should you pass something that affects one sixth of the American economy with just a majority vote? You look back at social security, passed the Senate 77-6. Look back at Medicare, passed the Senate 70-24. Those were clearly different times, different sensibilities, but with this large a piece of legislation, it's good for both political parties to have a little skin in the game here, or else, guess what? If something goes wrong, the Democrats are going to be to blame.
BLITZER: David, at this point it's a little late in the game. The Democrats will argue that the Senate did pass this health care reform legislation with 60 votes in its initial passage. Now they're just going to tinker a bit and that's why 51 votes is enough.
GERGEN: We all know it's not just a little tinkering. It's a second bill. It's part of the legislative process, when you have to reconcile the two bills and use reconciliation in a different way. But I do want to point out one other thing, as we learn more about this process, it is a very messy process. The rules are extremely arcane. They do permit a lot of amendments that you can argue over endlessly. One parliamentarian pointed out that Bob Dole once introduced the entire code and the process bogged down. When reconciliation has been used in the past, on average it's taken about five months from the time that reconciliation is introduced until the final passage. That gets deeply into the season just before elections.
BORGER: And then Republicans have a decision to make, because they do have unlimited amendments on this, which you don't normally have on the Senate floor. They then have a decision to make about how far they want to go in opposing this, or is it their own political interest to let the Democrats --
BLITZER: And we're told that the president on Wednesday will announce the process he wants to use in going forward. So we'll all anticipate what he has to say. Gloria and David Gergen, thanks very much.