Win or lose on the prescription drug pricing bill, Wednesday’s expected cloture vote will demonstrate how well Finance Chairman Max Baucus can hold Senate Democrats together behind a centrist principle.

Baucus, D-Mont., believes his party must run hard to the center in the 2008 election, and the drug pricing bill (S 3) is the latest issue on which he is trying to build the legislative record for a middle-of-the-road campaign platform.

Instead of bowing to the wishes of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., earlier in the 110th Congress, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., joined Baucus in rejecting a stand-alone House-passed bill (HR 2) that would raise the minimum wage by $2.10 over two years, to $7.25 per hour.

Baucus and Reid insisted it be tied to small-business tax breaks.

Last month, Baucus led the way again by helping to draft a winning amendment to the budget resolution (S Con Res 21) that called for extensions of some GOP tax cuts — excluding the lower rates for capital gains and dividends — and headed off a rival Republican proposal to extend President Bush’s tax cuts (PL 107-16, PL 108-27) across the board.

The only senator to vote against the amendment was Russ Feingold, D-Wis. — a noteworthy accomplishment for Baucus, said Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D.

“He is taking those positions because he feels strongly about them,” Conrad said.

Now, Reid has shied away from a House-passed bill that would require the government to negotiate prices for drugs provided to Medicare beneficiaries (HR 4). Instead, he has lined up behind Baucus’ plan to remove a current ban on such negotiations.

For Baucus, to be in sync with the leadership is somewhat new.

When Baucus last chaired Finance, for 18 months during the 107th Congress, then-Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. (1987-2005), criticized him for breaking ranks on Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

With Reid, “We’re reading on the same page,” Baucus said. “We totally trust each other. We talk on the floor almost daily.”

Charles E. Schumer of New York, a tax writer who is chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said Baucus seeks out the frequent communication.

“He is working more closely with the leadership. He does it on his own,” said Schumer.

“Max is very good at both having his own views and being part of his team,” Schumer said. “He knows how to get things done.”

However, all of this effort does not imply that Baucus has turned himself into a darling of the party’s liberal wing.

A pro-labor group, the Working for Us PAC, recently ran a radio commercial attacking Baucus for backing trade deals “costing Montana thousands of good-paying jobs.”

A leader of that group, Steve Rosenthal, who is a former political director of the AFL-CIO, portrayed Baucus as one of a number of “rogue Democrats” who defect on key domestic issues.

But liberals in Congress may give Baucus more time rather than judging him on past defections, said Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who heads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “They are taking a ‘wait-and-see’ attitude,” he said. “We’ve got a new majority. Everybody deserves a fresh start.”

Baucus also is working to thaw chilly relations with his longtime rival, House Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y. A rural populist, Baucus has had a history of conflict with Rangel, an urban liberal.

They clashed during the 2003 prescription drug bill conference (PL 108-73), when Baucus cut a deal with Republicans while Rangel and other House Democrats were excluded.

Now, they are at odds over Rangel’s push to repeal or restructure the alternative minimum tax (AMT). Baucus wants a more modest, temporary fix: a two-year extension of higher-income exemptions from the AMT.

But recently, the two filed to form a joint political action committee based on their common desire “to elect more Democrats,” said Baucus.

“What we have in common is he is the chairman of Ways and Means and I am the chairman of the Finance Committee,” he said.

On the drug negotiation bill, Republicans seized on the sudden timing of an April 12 markup to accuse Baucus of caving in to pressure from Reid to move a partisan bill.

“He’s only doing this because Reid put a gun to his head,” said Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss.

Reid confirmed he had met privately with Baucus and discussed the issue on April 9, but he and other Democrats said it was the Montana senator himself who came up with the outline for the proposal.

“Harry Reid is the holding company. Baucus is the subsidiary,” groused a senior GOP aide.

Wednesday’s vote also will be Baucus’ first high-profile disagreement with Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the panel’s ranking Republican, who is leading a blitz against the Baucus bill.

However, Grassley and other Republicans are trying to form a tough line on the prescription drug issue without souring relations with Baucus.

“I don’t want to get Max Baucus in trouble, but he’s been one of the reasonable Democrats,” said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “He understands it takes bipartisan agreement to move forward. I wish more of his conference would follow his example.”

In the coming weeks, McConnell may get his wish.