I had a brief interview with House Rules Committee Chair Louise Slaughter today, in which I asked her whether House Democrats will indeed use the procedure now known as the “Slaughter Solution,” in which the House would pass a reconciliation bill that would deem the Senate bill passed.
The idea is that by doing it this way, House members don’t have to actually vote for the Senate bill, which many of them don’t like for various reasons. Here’s my back and forth with Slaughter, which begins with a question about the likelihood that House Democrats will use this procedure:
DAILY CALLER: How realistic is it that they would do that?
SLAUGHTER: Pretty good.
DAILY CALLER: Pretty good?
SLAUGHTER: I, no, I don’t know. I’m just being a smart aleck. That decision’s not been made yet.
DAILY CALLER: Who’s going to make it?
SLAUGHTER: Well, I think the Speaker and I will probably be in on that.
DAILY CALLER: Now, can I ask you a rhetorical question? If you do this, can’t your opponents still say, ‘Well they didn’t technically vote for it but they still—’
SLAUGHTER: Your opponents can say anything.
DAILY CALLER: Right, but which argument will win?
SLAUGHTER: What we’ve got to do here is the right thing.
DAILY CALLER: Do you think that the abortion caucus, the pro-life caucus, will go for this? Have you talked to them about it?
SLAUGHTER: No. I haven’t got time to do that. But that will only come, as you know, for the Senate bill. The House bill is not in this context here. You understand that?
DAILY CALLER: I think so. I think I understand the procedure pretty well.
SLAUGHTER: It’s the Senate bill—
DAILY CALLER: –that you’re fixing.
SLAUGHTER: Yes. So Stupak is not in the Senate bill.
DAILY CALLER: Right, but he wants the language fixed in the Senate bill.
SLAUGHTER: There is already language in the Senate bill.
DAILY CALLER: The abortion language.
DAILY CALLER: He wants it changed.
SLAUGHTER: Well I don’t know that we’re going to do that. I haven’t discussed that with them. I’ve just been up here working.