What is Rand Paul thinking? Three thoughts.
1) Maybe Rand Paul is on-the-level. Maybe he looks at Graham-Cassidy, sees it as resigning to Obamacare, and refuses to do that because he is such a purist. He thinks that the proper thing to do to fight Obamacare is to defeat Graham-Cassidy, because that leads to more conservative outcomes. Leaving aside the fact that this is obviously bullshit to anyone with a brain (Rand Paul is an Aqua-Buddha worshipping moron who doesn't understand Milton Friedman, and is only a charlatan ophthalmologist), maybe this is sincere. Of course, the problem is that Rand Paul's past votes don't really vindicate this, since he wasn't this strongly opposed to the previous efforts. So...
2) Maybe Rand Paul is just being a drama queen. Again. I've been making this point for a while. You can never be sure until the votes are cast with this faction of the party, because they always have to go through the motions of whining about how nothing is conservative enough for them. That's why I dubbed Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Ron Johnson "the Drama Club" the last time around. Standing on his own, doesn't he look extra dramatic? Oh, look at my angst! I'm so deep!
Since he wasn't really going to follow through on past threats, this is always a possibility. Preening and strutting should be ignored. However, the real point of this post is possibility 3...
3) Remember the last real Obamacare "replacement" effort? Like I keep saying, Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ripped its fucking guts out, and ate its liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti. (I don't need a youtube link for that one, do I?) Maybe... maybe Rand Paul isn't as dumb as he looks. Or acts. Or sounds. Or as any previous empirical evidence would demonstrate. If he expected MacDonough to do what she did last time, then Graham-Cassidy is doomed anyway, so he gets a free ride on posturing and preening.
Ted Cruz and the rest of those suckers may have bought into a doomed bill, whereas Rand Paul remains pure. It doesn't matter how anyone in the GOP votes, or says they plan to vote, if MacDonough tells them she's feeling a bit peckish.* So, why not stay pure, keep saying no, and be the most conservative guy around just by rejecting everything?
Hypotheses 3 depends on a few things. It depends on the expectation of MacDonough ruling Graham-Cassidy to be in violation of the Byrd rule, Rand Paul's ability to predict that, and his willingness to exploit it. So, let's examine them.
How likely is MacDonough to eviscerate Graham-Cassidy? Hard to say exactly, but given what she did to McConnell's bill (see my description here), quite. Graham-Cassidy allows the states to get waivers for regulations on pre-existing conditions. The Byrd rule requires that budget reconciliation bills address only matters of revenue and spending. I call bullshit, and so did MacDonough last time around on regulatory matters. Either the GOP strips these provisions from the bill, or the Democrats can filibuster.
How likely is Rand Paul to understand this? Well, the problem is... 1. Remember that Hypothesis 1 depends on him being a fuckin' idiot, and... he's kind of a fuckin' idiot. Many Senators are asshats. Rand Paul, on the other hand, wears his sphincter as a necklace. Remember that Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy are actually pushing this bill. Right after MacDonough ruled McConnell's bill in violation of the Byrd rule. Is Rand Paul thinking two steps ahead of these people or are they all just shades of panicked and stupid? Default to the latter. And that reduces the likelihood of the third condition being met.
Nevertheless, this could turn out to benefit Rand Paul, totally by accident. MacDonough kills Graham-Cassidy, even if 50+Pence votes emerge, and while Ted Cruz and the other former Drama Clubbers look like sellouts, Rand Paul remains pure. Pure as an idiot child, too stupid to sin.
* Side note: I am vaguely amused by the thought of Elizabeth MacDonough ever stumbling across this extremely obscure, little blog and seeing these characterizations. I have now compared her to Hannibal Lecter and the Reavers. I have no clue what kind of personality she has, but somehow I have found amusement in these metaphors, which are based in nothing but my desire to make cultural references. I sincerely hope that, at some point, she was a member of the SCA and dressed up like a Visigoth, or something, because maybe next I'll portray her as a Visigoth sacking the GOP's Roman empire. These uninformed metaphors amuse me. Rand Paul, however, really is a dipshit.
