Reconciliation: The Not So Nuclear Option & The Reconciliation Record

Reconciliation, the nuclear option, to understand it better let’s get a view of what the procedure of reconciliation actually means. For a loose definition we’ll turn to wiki - Reconcilation


“Reconciliation is a legislative process in the United States Senate intended to allow consideration of a contentious budget bill without the threat of filibuster. Introduced in 1974, reconciliation limits debate and amendment, and therefore favors the majority party.


A reconciliation instruction (Budget Reconciliation) is a provision in a budget resolution directing one or more committees to submit legislation changing existing law in order to bring spending, revenues, or the debt-limit into conformity with the budget resolution. The instructions specify the committees to which they apply, indicate the appropriate dollar changes to be achieved, and usually provide a deadline by which the legislation is to be reported or submitted."

In other words reconciliation is a means to take a budget issue that is already largely agreed upon and work out the differences without fear of a filibuster making a call to vote require 2/3 of a majority. In a few small words it’s a way to pass a budget item without fear of filibuster and with only 51 votes.

Now that we know what reconciliation is let’s examine why the Republican Party has begun grandstanding with terms like “the nuclear option” when referencing reconciliation and the healthcare bill and why their actions are, at best, extremely confusing, and ,at worst, down right hypocritical.

Let’s look at a few quotes from prominent republicans on reconciliation.

Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO) – “In this post-partisan time of Barack Obama, we’re seeing a little Chicago politics. They steamroller those who disagree with them, then, I guess in Chicago, they coat them in cement and drop them in the river?

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) – Gregg said use of reconciliation to pass the healthcare bill would be “regarded as an act of violence”

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) – Called reconciliation, “a purely partisan exercise”

Sen. Mitch McConnel (R-KY) – “"it appears as if the administration has already made up their mind to go forward with a beefed up Senate version and to try to jam it through under a seldom-used process that we commonly refer to around here as reconciliation."

In the past (3/26/2009) Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) once said:
“I fully recognize that Republicans have in the past engaged in using reconciliation to further the party’s agenda. I wish it had not been done then, and I hope it will not be done now that the groundwork has been laid.”

Unfortunately when asked his opinion on an “obscure senate rule” (reconciliation) he had the following to say, “I am unalterably opposed to that. It would be a drastic change in the way that the United States Senate does business, and I hope that if you see something like that coming, you would not allow that to happen.”

So which is it; Obscure, nuclear, business changing, drastic, seldom used, violent?

So what is the record on reconciliation usage?

Again simply put out of the 21 times it’s been used since 1981, 16 have been when republicans have held the majority, only 5 being done under democratic majorities.

So there you have it, reconciliation of the healthcare bill with a little perspective and insight into how it’s been used and who’s been using it.