The Votes Are . . .?

Can the Senate Finance Committee please stop talking and just vote already? In other news, President Snowe has announced she will vote Aye for BaucusCare as will Blanche Lincoln.

That means both Rockefeller and Wyden can vote No. They should.

Speaking for me only

< Leave Obama, Pelosi And Reid Alone! | President Snowe's Endgame: BaucusCare + Trigger >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Snowe Queene voting Yes on BaucusCare (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Ellie on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:00:32 PM EST
    Olympia Snow's (R-ME Are Not Amused) not exactly closing the drama gap as promised in the NYT:

    ... With suspense building in the room as it became clear that she would announce her stance, Ms. Snowe said she still had many reservations about the legislation.

    "At the same time I have shared my Republicans' concerns about vast governmental bureaucracies and governmental intrusions -- that's why I opposed the amendment for the so-called public option," she said.

    "I happen to think that the consequences of inaction dictate the urgency of Congress to take every opportunity to demonstrate its capacity to solve the monumental issues of our time," she said moments later. ""There are many, many miles to go in this legislative journey."

    She also warned that she would want to see an updated cost analysis before she votes on a motion for the full Senate to take up the health care bill. "My vote today is my vote today," she said. "It doesn't forecast what my vote will be tomorrow."

    Ms. Snowe's speech came as the Finance Committee, forgoing a lunch break, edged closer to approving legislation that would reshape the American health care system and provide subsidies to help millions of people buy insurance.

    Eating at their desks?!?! Okay, so that was unexpected.

    FDL has been liveblogging it but I've been too busy to follow very closely.

    Eating at their desks (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:08:06 PM EST
    They're cranky anyway- Reid canceled their week vacation for Columbus Day, so maybe they figure if they get it done, they can still take a few days off this week.

    Talking is what they do (none / 0) (#1)
    by rdandrea on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:35:21 PM EST
    Voting?  Not so much.

    Snowe must not be all that worried (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:38:38 PM EST
    about GOP threatening her re her committee assignments.

    I think it's a strategic move, (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Anne on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:04:09 PM EST
    designed to make sure a lot of things the GOP does not want will stay out of the final bill, even if none of them vote for it.

    They know, just as we do, that the Dems are not finished giving in to Republicans in hopes of getting a bipartisan bill, and all Snowe has to do is continue to keep them guessing about how she will vote on a final bill, and the GOP - and some of the Blue Dogs - will get pretty much what they want.

    Which will work out well for the health and insurance industry, too.

    For us - not so much.


    What are they going to do? (none / 0) (#40)
    by FreakyBeaky on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:38:34 PM EST
    She's their Joe Lieberman.  

    Snowe is doing the Republicans a favor (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:45:26 PM EST
    that they don't deserve. She's now pretty much guaranteed to get whatever she wants--subject to the mettle of the progressive block.

    Yes, they could not walk the (none / 0) (#7)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:55:16 PM EST
    obstructionist high wire without her safety net. She ought to let them fall and think about representing her state, which is one of the most in need of a public option.

    What's the next step? How does the merger with the HELP bill happen? Or do they send both bills to the floor and let 'er rip?


    Leadership joins the bills (none / 0) (#8)
    by andgarden on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:57:38 PM EST
    and then floor debate begins. Typically, amendments require 60 votes. Thereafter, assuming final passage in the House and the Senate, the two bodies proceed to conference.

    Re "leadership joints the two bills": (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:00:48 PM EST
    As is, or does leadership of House and Senate have auth. to modify?

    I don't know for sure (none / 0) (#15)
    by andgarden on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:09:12 PM EST
    but I believe they have to stay within the bound of what was actually passed out of committee. There are internal Senate jurisdictional rules that I am not familiar with.

    So we have achieved bipartisanship (none / 0) (#4)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:46:11 PM EST

    Check. (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:01:05 PM EST
    And it was soooo worth it (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:07:06 PM EST
    wasn't it?

    So (none / 0) (#5)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:51:39 PM EST

    Baucus wanted to do something about health care costs.  He did.  Cost will go up.  What a farce.

    Let me guess (none / 0) (#6)
    by Steve M on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 12:54:01 PM EST
    You read the Washington Post yesterday, and then stuck your fingers in your ears so you wouldn't hear any contrary evidence, right?

    The tax on medical devices (none / 0) (#18)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:14:15 PM EST

    The tax on medical devices (!) is quite enough all by itself.  That is going to raise the cost of medical services.  Period.  

    There is more beside.


    Oh okay (none / 0) (#19)
    by Steve M on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:18:11 PM EST
    I guess trying to calculate the net impact of the bill would be a silly methodology.  Let's just cherry-pick individual provisions and lament that the party that thinks taxes should never be increased on anything, ever, has inexplicably lost power.

    But but (none / 0) (#38)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:29:38 PM EST
    Pricewaterhouse Cooper says that this will hurt America, and you know they're impartial after all they're funded by the Insurance Industry.


    Its all cost increases.  The young will be forced to buy more costly insurance or be fined.  Those with very high quality coverage will be taxed.  

    This is not cherry picking, that bill makes the problem of high cost health insurance worse.

    This is the Massachusetts mess on steroids.

    BTW, can you begin to explain how a tax on medical devices is going to lower the cost of procedures that use those devices?  Good luck.


    Well (none / 0) (#47)
    by Steve M on Wed Oct 14, 2009 at 04:13:08 AM EST
    if you rely upon the industry study that intentionally chose not to analyze the impact of the cost reduction measures, then you're right, it's hard to see any cost reduction.

    What cost reduction measures? (none / 0) (#48)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Oct 14, 2009 at 11:43:50 AM EST


    11th dimensional chess (none / 0) (#13)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:07:30 PM EST
    Another move is made.  But does anyone believe Obama is really going to fight for a public option now that he has Snowe on board?

    No, this is horrible news (none / 0) (#20)
    by magster on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:22:16 PM EST
    A big victory for the corporation funded Dems. There will be no public option in the merged Senate bill, all in the name of keeping Snowe on board.  

    It's just (none / 0) (#21)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:30:58 PM EST
    hard for me to imagine Obama pushing for the public option when the Baucus bill is going to be less contentious to almost everyone except for the Progressive Caucus.  

    Right now we have 2 Senators who are gathering around Carper's really crappy idea about state public plans (not the Federalist Option)(link from Ezra).  Carper voted for the Schumer PO amendment originally.  

    Somebody needs to get these people onboard some kind of national public option.  But who will?


    I was hoping CalPERS might (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:35:27 PM EST
    be a persuasive force in favor of a public option, but, looking at the CalPERS website, doesn't appear to be the case.  Committed to employer-based health care insurance.  Big push for managed care with only efficient providers.  Big support for preventive health care and monitoring known factors.  Big push for bargaining for drug prices.  

    More (none / 0) (#25)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:38:09 PM EST
    from the WaPo article Ezra links to in my other link:

    One big question that will be answered with Tuesday's Finance Committee vote is whether Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine) will remain at the table as the sole GOP negotiator involved in shaping the legislation as it moves forward. Snowe, a moderate, is promoting a plan that would create government coverage if private insurers do not offer affordable premiums. White House officials have indicated support for her approach, and Obama raised the issue during a phone conversation with the senator on Thursday, while prodding her about her vote. "He definitely was fishing," said Snowe, who remains noncommittal.

    Meanwhile, Snowe:  "When history calls, history calls."  I wonder how far answering history's call can take her.


    MSNBC saying there is no way (none / 0) (#27)
    by magster on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 01:59:10 PM EST
    the merged bill can have the public option now because a PO will not have the votes and need to keep Snowe on board.  So much for 11th dimensional chess, this is Obama securing Snowe in plain ol' 2 dimensional chess to pass a gutted, but bipartisan bill.  To have Snowe keep this a secret until today and make the big splash it has shows the progressives got outmaneuvered here.

    House progressives, you're our only hope...


    Start calling and writing (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:03:40 PM EST
    and, most of all, make sure those who vote in a way that doesn't support their requirement to serve the people who send them to DC know exactly why you are not voting for them in 2010.

    MSNBC (none / 0) (#29)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:03:15 PM EST
    They may very well be right, but I wouldn't believe MSNBC if they told me the Earth was round. It more likely that they just want to fuel the conflict for ratings.

    It's not that I believe MSNBC (none / 0) (#34)
    by magster on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:05:20 PM EST
    its that they are emblematic of the narrative in the days to come, which seems to have so much sway on our spineless Senators.

    Harkin has (none / 0) (#33)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:05:10 PM EST
    the opposite view.  And hopefully Obama knows he doesn't need Snowe.

    Who was saying that on MSNBC?


    NBC News correspondents (none / 0) (#42)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 04:06:12 PM EST
    have been saying it for several days-- quite confidently and firmly. (IOW, just because it's heard on MSNBC doesn't mean MSNBC-only staff are saying it.  Sometimes it comes from the "grown-ups" at the parent network.)

    Vote total (none / 0) (#32)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:04:39 PM EST
    The Senate Finance Committee voted on Tuesday to approve legislation that would reshape the American health care system and provide subsidies to help millions of people buy insurance, as Senator Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine,
    joined all 13 Democrats on the panel in support of the landmark bill. The vote was 14 to 9, with all of the other Republicans opposed.

    If the vote was 14 to 9, why is Snowe's (none / 0) (#35)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:17:02 PM EST
    yes vote so crucial?  Or is it?

    There is a video on TPM (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by lilburro on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:19:18 PM EST
    of Obama commenting on Snowe's vote and thanking her.

    So no, Snowe doesn't have to be important.  Unless someone makes her important.

    I thank not only Chairman Baucus and others, but in particular Sen. Snowe has been extraordinary diligent in working together so that we can reduce costs of health care, make sure that people who don't have it are covered, make sure that people who do have insurance have more security and stability, and that over the long term we're saving families, businesses and our government money.

    And somebody's doing just that.


    Drooling again (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:29:19 PM EST
    It sure would be great to see Obama slobber over his own base as much as he does with Snowe or Reagan!

    What has she got on him? (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 02:34:25 PM EST
    A Maine Voodoo queen. (none / 0) (#43)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:17:08 PM EST
    She worked a root on him. Or maybe a tuber... I think it was a red Kennebec.

    Can't be electoral college votes as (none / 0) (#44)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:31:55 PM EST
    she is GOP, Maine only gets 13 and it isn't winner take all.  Must dig further.

    Was she especially nice to him (none / 0) (#45)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 07:33:50 PM EST
    whime he was in the senate? Sincerely no idea here.

    I've got it. Maybe she has the original (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 13, 2009 at 08:02:56 PM EST
    of Obama's birth certificate.