None is certain to work, and all carry political risks.

One possibility is that the House could quickly pass the Senate version without changing it, and later, both chambers could pass fixes that reflect the evolving House-Senate compromise. This could be done using a special parliamentary procedure called “reconciliation,’’ which requires only a simple majority vote of 51 votes in the Senate.

Whether House Democrats who disliked the Senate bill can be persuaded to go along with that idea, remains in question. It would outrage Republicans and provoke the conservative grassroots. Antiabortion Democrats in the House oppose the Senate bill’s provisions on abortion coverage; liberals might prefer to ditch the Senate bill and start all over again; and moderates might balk at voting for any health care bill after what went on in Massachusetts.

But Ron Pollack of Families USA, which supports the health overhaul efforts, called this “probably the cleanest, most effective, and most practical way to pass the legislation, and do so quickly.’’

Another possibility would be for Democrats to hurry and pass a compromise bill before Brown were seated.

It is not clear how much time Democrats would have in that case. Before the new Massachusetts senator takes office, Secretary of State William F. Galvin must certify the vote, and town clerks have to wait 10 days after the election to allow time for the ballots of military members serving overseas to arrive, then they have another five days to deliver the final results to Galvin, according to state election law. After that, the new senator can be sworn in.

Democratic leaders would need to get cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, which could happen in just a few days. Once a price is nailed down and a deal announced, a vote could proceed, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised to wait 72 hours before a floor vote. The Senate would then have a procedural vote before a final vote, which could take a day or two.

Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, said that if Brown were elected, rushing a bill through or using reconciliation to pass it “would be Chicago politics at its worst.’’ (Emphasis added)

Continued...