So, it looks like the House is saying they are ready to go if the Senate will do reconciliation. But meanwhile the Senate doesn't look so interested in touching the bill again. Doesn't it seem like the House has no leverage here? Is it possible for the House to gather up some other leverage instead?
Here's the thing. The Senate is scared about the general public. They think the general public hates the health care bill and that it will make them less popular. Even though it's wrong in a fact-based way, the Senate might be thinking that politically speaking, the status quo is better than passing the health care bill.
So, the House has no leverage. The Senate just gets to ignore it, and the House bill stays in purgatory. The House holding the Senate bill "hostage", asking for a sidecar bill, just makes no sense.
But what if the House went about it in a different way? Here's a theoretical idea:
- The House passes the current Senate bill as-is. I know, I know - bear with me, though.
- The House then declares that they will not be passing another bill that the Senate needs, until they get their reconciliation "sidecar" bill.
- Fun ensues.
Here's the thinking. If the House passes the bill, then it is law, period. It's done, and the Senate has to deal with it. If the general public believes it to be a bad bill, then it's on the Senate to deal with it and improve it. Whereas now the Senate's survival instincts lead them to do nothing, then the Senate's survival instinct will spur them to act.
In the meantime, the House gets to look like the tough good guys - they'll have leverage. They're standing up for the little guy, they're being populist by holding a different bill hostage. I mean, they're already holding a bill hostage, but by swapping it for a different bill, they wouldn't be toothless anymore.
I know, at this point, all these schemes are kind of daffy, but it's fun to think about. It just strikes me at this point that the Senate probably doesn't even want the House to pass the bill as-is.