Reconciliation in the Senate?

"The misuse of the arcane process of reconciliation—a process intended for deficit reduction—to enact substantive policy changes is an undemocratic disservice to our people and to the Senate's institutional role." ~~ Sen. Robert Byrd, D-West Virginia.

Senator Byrd has written a four volume set on the rules and procedures of the Senate and is not just "an" expert, but is "the" expert on the use of Senate rules. When he states that the process of "Reconciliation" is only for deficit reduction, then the authority on the matter has spoken. End. 30-30.

.

Yet the Obama Administration continues to push for Health Care reform, despite the fact that the American Public does not want it. The populace may want parts of it, but not the whole enchilada that consumed all of the 2009 legislative year. Why is President Obama persisting on making this controversial and destructive push again?

The Wall Street Journal has suggested a reason for the President's determination that seems plausible to me: "he's volunteering Democrats in Congress to march into the fixed bayonets so he can claim an LBJ-level legacy like the Great Society that will be nearly impossible to repeal."

Obama's legacy as President? Is this what this unpopular, unwanted exercise of power by the President is all about? Ego? All other reasons seem to pale next to this one. And if so, is this a proper use, or attempted use, of the Presidential powers? The Wall Street Journal's article is entitled "Abuse of Power." A serious charge for a serious matter, n'est-ce pas?

"Whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad with power."