Quick PSA on reconciliation: the Senate Parliamentarian is likely to strike out many key provisions that will be found not to comply with reconciliation’s strict rules. This is largely out of Dems’ control and not at all the same as Dems intentionally slimming down the bill. 
Reconciliation is governed by strict rules that determine what can and cannot be processed along its fast track. For policies that push the limits, Dems argue their case before the Senate Parliamentarian, like arguing before a judge. Ultimately it’s the Parliamentarian’s call.
A lot of the pieces that have been written about what can and cannot pass under reconciliation are heavy on theory. Theoretically, many things can pass but those theories may not survive contact with parliamentary reality. Worth a try, but don’t be surprised when they get struck.
Reconciliation’s narrowness is why I and many others have been saying that it is at best a stopgap, and only delays the inevitable showdown with the filibuster. Which is fine for now, although the clock is already ticking - especially on democracy reforms.
https://twitter.com/ajentleson/status/1357849585167839232
But in the meantime, it’s inaccurate to say that a policy getting struck from reconciliation because it runs afoul of the Byrd rule (which sets the procedure’s strictness) is the same thing as an affirmative decision to slim down the bill, because they are not the same at all.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
