RNC Women

The health care bill now being pushed by the White House would fundamentally rewrite a full sixth of the economy of the United States.  It would grant the government unprecedented control over how our health care is paid for, which doctors we are allowed to see and what treatment options we are able to consider. 

A fundamental change to such a significant sector of our economy SHOULD require sixty votes in the United States Senate for passage into law.  Yet today the White House is threatening to use the reconciliation process to force a simple majority vote and silence the Republican voices speaking out against this deeply flawed proposal. 

Incredibly, just a few years ago it was then Senator Obama and Majority Leader Harry Reid who spoke out loudly against the reconciliation process.  At the National Press Club on April 26, 2005, then Senator Obama said when talking about reconciliation, “You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there's a broad consensus before the country moves forward.”

For good measure, Senator Reid said “The right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House. In these cases a filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”

Polling shows that a solid majority of the American people want Congress and the White House to go back to the drawing board on health care.  A recent CNN poll showed that three in four Americans agree that Congress should start over or outright cease working on health reform.  Despite all of this, Democrats are ready to force a $2.5 trillion health bill through Congress without a single Republican vote. 

This is not the way to reform health care, and it’s not the way to serve the American people.  President Obama and Senator Reid were against reconciliation before they were for it.  What they knew years ago remains true today – a proposal this big with consequences so far reaching demands bipartisan consideration and support.  Are 60 votes too much to ask to rewrite a sixth of our economy?