Health Care Legislation Stalls as Brown Wins U.S. Senate Seat
Jan. 20, 2010 – Republican Scott Brown upset Democratic candidate and Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley to fill the U.S. Senate seat left vacant upon Ted Kennedy’s recent demise casts doubt on the ability of Congressional Democrats to pass hotly contested health care reform measures.
Brown’s clear victory over early favorite Coakley means Senate Democrats no longer have the 60 votes necessary to prevent a Republican filibuster. Democrats now have 57 seats in the U.S. Senate to 41 seats for Republicans. Two Senate seats are held by independents who have chosen to caucus with Democrats.
Both chambers of Congress have approved widely varying versions of national health care reform, but without a clear 60-seat majority in the Senate, getting a bill finalized for President Barack Obama to sign before delivering his Jan. 27 State of the Union Address has become doubtful. Some Congressional Democrats have suggested they simply would approve the Senate’s health care package without amending it, but several prominent Democrats have said that won’t happen.
“I know leadership has flowed with the idea over the weekend that let’s just take the Senate bill and just vote on it in the House floor. I bet it wouldn’t get a hundred votes,” Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Michigan) told the Fox Business Network today. Stupak heads a coalition of moderate House Democrats opposed to federal funding of abortions, which the Senate version would allow.
“Members are very upset about the Senate bill … especially when it looked like states were paid off for that 60th vote,” Stupak explained. “Have we relegated the legislative body to who can get the best deal? People should have been able to put their vote up based on policy, not on what did I get for my state. And that really soured the American people and House members. We’re not willing to take that Senate bill – that Nebraska’s guy’s special deal or Louisiana or Florida or whatever.”
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer earlier told reporters he hoped Coakley would win but suggested the best move if Brown won would be for House Democrats to simply approve the Senate version of health care reform. And CNN has reported the White House and Democrat strategists are trying to lay the groundwork for having the Senate measure passed without amendment.
Another option is for Democrats to employ a Parliamentary sleight-of-hand and craft a compromise measure requiring only a simple majority of 51 votes for approval in the Senate. But without 60 votes to stop a likely Republican filibuster, Senate Democrats would not be able to call for a vote to approve or disapprove a potential compromise measure.
But with strong internal opposition in addition to opposition from newly empowered Senate Republicans, several leading Democrats have said current efforts likely will be scrapped. Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts has said a victory by Brown would “kill” the health care bills. And Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) yesterday issued a statement saying: “I believe it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated.”
Coakley already has conceded the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts. Now it remains to be seen how President Obama and Congressional leaders react to the largest setback to their domestic agenda.
Comments
Leave a Reply