What I don't understand is I am pretty sure, in 2010, Dems could have passed the ACA with a public option via reconciliation. So why not do it? They had a commanding majority in both houses. Senators like Baucus definitely trolled the entire process but they could have told him to fuck off. They probably would have been able to get enough votes for a simple majority without their stubborn asses.
Of the five committees in the House and Senate which addressed health care reform, only the senate finance committee's draft excluded the public option.
For some reason, any time the senate finance committee is involved in legislation in the senate, Max Baucus automatically becomes the dominating force for the legislation, even if the legislation only involves the finance committee because of somewhat significant financial impacts, such as most educational, health, and infrastructure legislation. These types of legislation should primarily be driven by the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, or, in the case of infrastructure, the appropritate committe for that area of infrastructure (Probably one of the following four: Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; Commerce, Science, and Transportation; Energy and Natural Resources; or Environment and Public Works )
I don't know if it's because Max Baucus has naked pictures of Harry Reid, or if it's because of seniority, or because Max Baucus is just a political genius, but he's the poison pill through which nearly all democratic legislation in the senate gets watered down (with Reid's blessing, of course)
