[Twelearly]

Way to jinx it...

[Cigarsstoreonline]

I thought it stopped being his seat when he dropped dead.

[womberte]

No, zombie Senator Kennedy is now casting votes.

[gIWnXYkw]

Good man.

[ChuttyAmult]

Oh I think if this is even close, it knocks a few of the wobbly Senators and Reps up for reelection for a loop given the fact he seems to be running an anti-Obamacare campaign.

[yasmin]

He's going to win.

[gusecrync]

As I understand it, the bill could be considered as a budget reconciliation bill and therefore the House would not be required to pass the Senate bill unchanged.

[Agitoligflise]

DaShi is wrong, as usual. There's no way a Republican is going to win Ted Kennedy's seat.

I've never been wrong. And I say that he will win.

[choollaBard]

How do you train someone who has you on ignore?

[JimmyHas]

How do you train someone who has you on ignore?

[WGRocky]

Yes, if you're going to mess with the rules then you might as well go all the way but we all know they won't do that. If Brown wins then the most likely result would be even Harry Reid will grow a pair of balls and go for reconciliation without consulting the various committee heads (which would require several 60 vote procedural votes). If they used the Republican tactic of skipping the committee heads and just have the two leaders come up with the reconciliation bill then only 51 votes are needed. That's dirty but technically legal; perversely it would probably result in a better bill since they'd only need 50 votes plus the VP's vote instead of the full 60 votes.

[iodigmaFemZem]

You might have to change some Senate rules, yes.

If you're willing to risk changing Senate rules in spite of all the controversy and blowback that might entail, why not just invoke the nuclear option and pass the entire healthcare reform bill with 50 votes?
Honest question:

Why is passing legislation with a majority considered a nuclear option?

[DoctoNilsonDen]

I think its still more probable that Coakley will win than Brown, but I would not be surprised if Brown won at this point. If Coakley wins, i think perversely the reason will be all the attention given to the race now. Brown's supporters are fired up, and in a special election at an odd time of year, with what would likely be terrible turnout, he would win with a fired up base- now that the Democratic party in Mass. has woken up, all the GOTV operations will be running on overtime due to panic, and perhaps the bulk of Dems. in Mass. who assumed they didn't need to vote cause the outcome was a done deal will actually go vote. If anything, all the publicity will remind a lot of people that there is an election on Tuesday, which would benefit Coakley more than Brown.

[BoomBully]

It'll all come down to turnout. Low turnout means the Brown, high turnout means Coakley.

[outsitWrord]

Why is passing legislation with a majority considered a nuclear option?

The "nuclear option" refers to circumventing the Senate rules that allow for 41 Senators to filibuster.
Ta.

Do majorities ever stare down a fillibuster? Say they dare the Republicans to shut down the Senate for other business and see who blinks first?

[Thigmaswams]

They should but almost never do. The brave answer to the Republican attempts to gum up 90% of the legislation over the last year would have been to dare them to do it and then let the American people see just how obstructionist the Republicans really are.

But since Reid is a weak little weinnie he just tables bills and doesn't challenge much of anything.

WRT Mass, the polls that come out in the next two days will give a good indication if Obama's campaign appearance and the media blitz has started to shift things towards Coakley at all.

[SteantyjetMaw]

Actually true. Reid should hold the cloture vote and make them go on record for being obstructionists but instead Reid likes to take an informal poll and quietly table things.

[illiderob]

That's dirty but technically legal; perversely it would probably result in a better bill since they'd only need 50 votes plus the VP's vote instead of the full 60 votes. Suppose the Republicans did this? Would there be much gnashing of teeth about the dictator Bush? Then I don't see why Democrats would go down with the sinking ship. If it were a good bill then it would pass easily. That it hasn't passed despite a democrat supermajority, is evidence that the bill is a giant turd.

When you have to bribe democrats for their support that says everything you need to know about the bill.

[DJElizardo]

I suspect a lot of the necessary modifications could be passed through reconciliation. So they pass the Senate bill through the House with the promise that the relevant provisions won't actually stand.


This is indeed a possibility. We'll never find out how exactly it would work in practice, however, as Coakley is going to win.

[maysubers]

They should but almost never do. The brave answer to the Republican attempts to gum up 90% of the legislation over the last year would have been to dare them to do it and then let the American people see just how obstructionist the Republicans really are.

The party in power is at fault. Maybe not in reality, but in public perception.

After all, think about how many people in this country have no idea how Congress works. Then think about convincing them that the reason the party in power failed to deliver is that the minority abused a procedural rule, and imagine how quickly those eyes glaze over.

Most people will blame the Democrats and Reid was smart enough to realize that.