What sort of guarantee does the House want from the Senate?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yesterday, Roll Call reported that the parliamentarian had ruled against Democrats who wanted to pass a package of reconciliation fixes to the health-care bill before the underlying legislation was signed into law. This in theory made it harder for Democrats, as it left House members scared that the Senate wouldn't actually pass the reconciliation package at all, as their bill would already be law.

Today, it seems that report -- which was echoed by Sen. Kent Conrad in comments to his colleagues -- might have been wrong. We'll see. But the hubbub got me thinking. We're hearing a lot about the need for Senate Democrats to give the House a "guarantee" that they will pass a reconciliation sidecar. But what would that guarantee look like?

Turns out no one knows. And most don't think it can possibly exist. The most common expression of this idea is that 51 senators will sign a letter promising to pass a reconciliation package. "Frankly, the idea of a little letter is the stupidest thing I've ever heard," says a House aide. "It’s 100 percent laughable."

"One of our takeaways from this whole process is to never underestimate the power in the Senate for just one senator to jam up the works," says the staffer.

Some of this fear, however, is a byproduct of uncertainty. House and Senate leadership haven't released their package of reconciliation fixes. Once they do, there will be a specific document that represents an agreement between the two chambers. And once that happens, support from the president and crucial senators might be enough to convince the House that the other chamber is on the same page as them.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klei...ee_does_th.html

Edited March 12, 2010 by ##########