Can Brown Turn Blue To Red?
January 18, 2010 by Kevin Phillips
It’s Monday, January 18 at noon. In about 36 hours, this post will either be obsolete or will be a roadmap to outline the options before Democrats in Congress as they revamp their plans to pass healthcare reform.
Who would have thought that Massachusetts, the bluest of the blue states, which is holding a special election to replace the late Senator Ted Kennedy for a seat held in the Kennedy family since 1953, would be on the verge of electing a Republican?
Republican State Senator Scott Brown has come out of nowhere in recent weeks to pull slightly ahead of Democrat state Attorney General Martha Coakley in the latest polls – as voters head to cast their ballots tomorrow (admittedly, it’s difficult to poll a special election where turnout can vary so widely from a regular general election).
It’s not news that voters in Massachusetts are overwhelmingly registered Democrats. So, why is Brown ahead? Is this a referendum on the Obama Administration? No, not really. But, it is most certainly a referendum on healthcare reform. Voters clearly know that a vote for Brown is a vote against reform. A Brown win will give the Republicans 41 Senate votes, enough to filibuster and block final passage of the current version of the healthcare reform bill. Again, it’s not news that polls show that voters who dislike Obama will vote for Brown. What is news is that polls indicate that a majority of voters who do like Obama are also voting for Brown.
If Coakley pulls out a win, then healthcare reform pushes on. If Brown wins, then what? If you scan the news reports and listen to the Beltway chatter, a few options rise to the top.
A likely path is to attempt to convince House Democrats to accept the Senate version of the bill passed last month as is. This, despite loud objections to the Senate version by House leadership and liberals. When the House passed its version, which its members knew many Senate Democrats disliked, House members believed – and told their constituents – that both bills would be melded together in conference and sent back to both chambers for approval.
A Brown win in Massachusetts on Tuesday likely kills that plan, because Republicans could block Senate action on the reconciled bill, even if the House does accept an amended version.
If the House accepts the Senate version as is, House leaders may later insist that the Senate make some changes under a complex plan called budget reconciliation. It requires only a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate, but even that move isn’t guaranteed to occur.
Preparing for a possible Coakley loss, there are some other options being bandied about in Washington among the Hill and the White House, such as:
- Massachusetts election officials could be slow to certify the final tally in the election, thus allowing action on healthcare before Brown takes office. Congressional Democrats would have to act quickly to reach agreement on the two versions of the bill and force a vote. Democrats may believe it’s worth the massive criticism that will come their way in order to get healthcare reform through. Democrats from conservative districts might as well start boxing up their offices if this occurs.
- Pressure a Republican Senator such as Olympia Snowe from Maine to side with the Democrats. That has the slimmest of slim chances.
- Scrap the current versions, start over and pass Healthcare Reform Lite without the current budget implications so that only a simple majority is needed. Not much enthusiasm for that one.
The Democrats on the forefront of reform may have already been in trouble for the midterm elections and beyond, but a Brown win tomorrow puts them in a losing situation just about any way you look at it. Not passing reform means they couldn’t get anything done while controlling the White House, House and Senate – allowing voters to question their leadership ability. Using procedural methods to pass a healthcare bill that factions from all sectors of the political spectrum dislike places regulation around their necks to hang them with later when their own elections occur in the 49 states that are less liberal than Massachusetts.
