Much has been made lately of the proposal that Congress may use Reconciliation to pass the upcoming Health-Care Bill.  Some have even termed the phrase "Nuclear Option" and have made it seem that using this perfectly legal and useful law would somehow be "cheating" or "unfair".

The budget reconciliation process allows any legislation that has an impact on the deficit to come to a final vote after a maximum of 20 hours of debate. That means that the minority party cannot filibuster beyond those 20 hours, and that the legislation would need a simple majority of 51 votes to pass (not the 60 that it takes to break a filibuster). This is provided for in federal law approved by Congress and signed by President Richard Nixon. It has been used 21 times, by both Democratic and Republican Congress’, since its establishment in 1974. Clearly, there is nothing “nuclear” about using this process.

Simply put, this method does not somehow bypass voting or any laws, it simply puts a time limit on the filibuster.  It then immediately brings forth the Constitutional vote by majority to pass a bill.  Where it takes 60 votes to end a filibuster, the Constitution says that a simple majority (51 votes currently) is needed to pass the bill. The "Nuclear Option" is actually completely separate.  It would permanently change the rules of the Senate to allow the 51 vote pass, thereby completely eliminating the filibuster, for certain types of legislation. OpenCongress: Budget Reconciliation is NOT the Nuclear Option

Popularity: 1% [?]

Related posts:

• Why Nothing Gets Done in the Senate....
• Majority Didn't Want Healthcare?
• Changing Senate Rules
• Money and Politics: Illuminating the Connection
• We've Already Nuked Ourselves Over 2,000 Times