[This is a quick draft, but after listening to Harry Reid's spiteful blabbering I feel compelled to get the word out.]
YES, reconciliation has been used 20+ times before, as follows:
- Reagan = 8 times for a net effect on the deficit of -$428B.
- GHW Bush = 2 times for a net effect on the deficit of -$275B
- Clinton = 4 times for a net effect on the deficit of -$586B
- GW Bush = 5 times for a net effect on the deficit of +$925B
(just one of the reasons conservatives are so angry)
Harry Reid just said in this meeting “our bill cuts the deficit by $132 billion dollars.” He is referring to the most recent CBO report. But you have to remember that the CBO can only analyze and report on what is the proposal and cannot factor in actual legislative changes in the future. One of the claims in the current legislation is that the Senate will actually cut $330 billion from Medicare. Any one with a realistic perspective on the topic knows with almost 100% confidence that that cut will never, never, never happen. If this is true, Reid’s claim of $132B in budget savings now becomes a budget increase of $198B. That’s a little different, and there are billions if not trillions of dollars that are still not included in current legislation.
So Harry, while reconciliation has been used many times before, history has shown that it’s use was on issues having nothing close to the impact of the government takeover of health care. Millions will still remain uncovered, costs will skyrocket, and not having insurance will become a criminal offense. This bill is a pig, and in my humble opinion I think that doing the wrong thing quickly is far more damaging than starting over and getting it right. Tort reform. Purchasing insurance across state lines. Tax incentives for insurance companies to provide low-cost insurance for the needy.
Harry Reid is a stubborn old man, unwilling to listen to opinions other than his own. I hope this meeting serves as just another wake up call to the people of Nevada.
