At today's HELP Committee hearing for Kathleen Sebelius, Ranking Republican Mike Enzi delivered the increasingly routine denunciation of the reconciliation process. "I believe if the reconciliation process is used it will be akin to a declaration of war," he said. The cooperative spirit and constructive process that Enzi prizes -- and, at the moment, is a crucial participant in -- will collapse. But the reconciliation argument has a Mobius strip quality: Democrats promise reconciliation won't be used unless the cooperative spirit and constructive process collapses. Republicans swear that if reconciliation is used, the cooperative spirit and constructive process will collapse. That's undoubtedly correct. But it's not really a threat, and it's in the wrong order.If Republicans don't want Democrats to use the reconciliation process, then there's a very simple answer: Cooperate to write and pass a health reform bill. If that cooperation never breaks down, then reconciliation will never be used. But if that cooperation breaks to the point that Democrats can't find three Republican votes to overcome the filibuster, then saying reconciliation will break it further isn't a particularly compelling threat. At the end of the day, the Republican argument over reconciliation isn't about how Democrats should handle a process in which Republicans are willing to cooperate, but how they should handle a process in which Republicans cease to be willing to cooperate. In that event, Republicans would like Democrats to admit total failure while Democrats would like to pass a bill. But once we're at that juncture, the supposed downside of reconciliation -- an end to Republican cooperation -- will already have happened. And in reality, it's Mike Enzi who has the power to avert that outcome, not Kathleen Sebelius. THE MOBIUS STRIP OF RECONCILIATION.
At today's HELP Committee hearing for Kathleen Sebelius, Ranking Republican Mike Enzi delivered the increasingly routine denunciation of the reconciliation process. "I believe if the reconciliation process is used it will be akin to a declaration of war," he said. The cooperative spirit and constructive process that Enzi prizes -- and, at the moment, is a crucial participant in -- will collapse. But the reconciliation argument has a Mobius strip quality: Democrats promise reconciliation won't be used unless the cooperative spirit and constructive process collapses. Republicans swear that if reconciliation is used, the cooperative spirit and constructive process will collapse. That's undoubtedly correct. But it's not really a threat, and it's in the wrong order.If Republicans don't want Democrats to use the reconciliation process, then there's a very simple answer: Cooperate to write and pass a health reform bill. If that cooperation never breaks down, then reconciliation will never be used. But if that cooperation breaks to the point that Democrats can't find three Republican votes to overcome the filibuster, then saying reconciliation will break it further isn't a particularly compelling threat. At the end of the day, the Republican argument over reconciliation isn't about how Democrats should handle a process in which Republicans are willing to cooperate, but how they should handle a process in which Republicans cease to be willing to cooperate. In that event, Republicans would like Democrats to admit total failure while Democrats would like to pass a bill. But once we're at that juncture, the supposed downside of reconciliation -- an end to Republican cooperation -- will already have happened. And in reality, it's Mike Enzi who has the power to avert that outcome, not Kathleen Sebelius. 
