And Now A Word About Reconciliation

From one of my favorite columnists, E.J. Dionne. [side note: the op-ed Dionne is objecting to was in his newspaper, WaPo, which has increasingly come under fire for its conservative views and misrepresentation of fact. Sorry to see my former hometown paper move to the dark side ].

I'm even more disappointed in Hatch--he's been one of the more reasonable Rs in the past and his close friendship with Kennedy made him almost likeable. But his trafficking in lies and repub talking points is unbecoming. Not sure what's happening to people like McCain and Hatch who used to be reliably independent and, dare i say, straight talkers. Something about Obama is bringing out the worst in them.

--Right off, the piece was wrong on a core fact. Hatch accused the Democrats of trying to, yes, "ram through the Senate a multitrillion-dollar health-care bill."

No. The health-care bill passed the Senate in December with 60 votes under the normal process. The only thing that would pass under a simple majority vote would be a series of amendments that fit comfortably under the "reconciliation" rules established to deal with money issues. Near the end of his column, Hatch conceded that reconciliation would be used for "only parts" of the bill. But why didn't he say that in the first place?