home

Forcing Reconciliation On HCR

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 09:43:55 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It is becoming more and more apparent that reconciliation is the only way to pass "health care reform," even of the Rahmbo "anything that can pass" variety. Ben Nelson says he will filibuster any bill that has a public option OR does not contain the Stupak Amendment. So regular order in the Senate is over. If President Obama and Senate Leader Reid want health care reform, even of the Rahmbo variety, reconciliation is the only way.

Next week Reid unveils the bill after it receives its CBO score. Then Lieberman and Nelson and Landrieu, etc. vow to filibuster. And then we can move to reconciliation. If Obama and Reid really want to pass health care reform. I assume they do.

Speaking for me only

< Veterans Day Open Thread | Reactions to Colo. Judge's Medical Marijuana Decision >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Forcing Reconciliation On HCR | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I wish I didn't have (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by Anne on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 09:54:53 AM EST
    this sick feeling that attempts will be made to somehow placate those who are threatening to sink this, in the interest of that thing known as bipartisansip.

    There's too much recent history in the chamber of strong talk that turns to dust when it really counts that I won't believe it until I see it.

    American Exceptionalism (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Dadler on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:02:28 AM EST
    New Definition: Great things happen except in America. This has become infinitely more than a joke, it is an absurd travesty. To call what we are going to get, if we get anything, reform is ridiculous, and flies in the face of logic and history. Big Pharma has their gross profits guaranteed thanks to follower Obama's backroom deal (he sure as hell ain't no leader of ANY kind), Big Insurance will get theirs too (whether we pass b.s. "reform" or not, they don't care really). We are nothing but widgets, and it is going to take rioting in the streets to change that at this point, I fear. The camel's nose gets sliced off a little more every day, if it ever existed at all.

    Happy Phucking Veteran's Day.  Especially to my little bro, wherever in Afghanistan he's rotting right now.

    Parent

    Funny how "bipartisanship" (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:10:46 AM EST
    only goes one way -- Dems give into latest Republican mantras and talking points

    Parent
    Watch out for LieCare (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by MO Blue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:40:26 PM EST
    LieCare will take all the worst elements of BaucusCare, add in the Stupid (Women are second class citizens) Amendment  and any other horrible ideas that the Republicans and conservative Dems can think of and put a HCR label on it. Progressives will be told that they will have to vote for it or stand in the way of history.

    The "Anything is Better than Nothing" crowd will cheer loudly and call it a win.

    Parent

    Wish everyone would drop the CARE (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 01:16:19 PM EST
    from HCR and call it what it is...HIS (Health Insurance Scam).

    I'm still trying to find an online source to download...all I find are so big, they freeze in the process.

    Parent

    Found a good place to download from (none / 0) (#25)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 02:32:39 PM EST
    Both HR3962 and the Amendment easily download in .pdf from here.

    I'm only just beginning the process of striking the lines noted in the Stupak/Pitts from the main document. But, I did search for a variety of words relative to female healthcare. It appears to me that all wellness checks from mammograms to pelvic exams are covered without restriction, as well as all prenatal care.

    Can't talk to the big controversy of abortion until I've finished my highlighting. Not sure that every presentation of abortion in the main bill was addressed in the SP amendment.

    NOTE: This is, again, a very easy/quick read with hardly any words per page. Any congressional representative who voted on it and didn't read it completely needs a stern threat from his/her constituents.

    Parent

    This is what (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:02:38 AM EST
    a leadless disaster looks like for anyone who ever wondered.

    The real problem here ... (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:41:40 AM EST
    is that the Dems and the White House have allowed public support for HCR to erode.  Even as recently as a month ago (according to Gallup) it had marginal support.  Now the numbers have flipped.

    I doubt we'd have all these filibuster threats if the numbers were reversed.

    Reconciliation may be necessary.  But politically it's a terrible idea.

    If I were in charge, I'd work on reversing those poll numbers.  Reconciliation is always there if you need it.

    This is the most sensible post ... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by nyrias on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 02:43:14 PM EST
    Public opinion is one of the, if not the most, important factor here.

    But the question is really not only whether the White House let public support to erode, but also if the other side has a compelling story to sway minds.

    Remember that not Americans care about covering everyone (aside from the ones who have no coverage). Change is going easy if it benefits you.

    Parent

    I think Robot is right (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 05:18:47 PM EST
    the White House needed to be so much more specific in what they were asking congress to do. Secrecy like the kind they use leads to speculation, and that's almost never good.

    I highly recommend people download these documents and start searching for the terms they are interested in. There's nothing specific I've found yet that says men are going to be well cared for while women are on their own. In fact, quite the opposite. But, everyone really should read it themselves.

    The part I'm most interested in is regulations on private insurance companies...if there are any. But, I haven't had a chance to start searching those key words.

    Parent

    Don't count on it ... (none / 0) (#29)
    by nyrias on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 07:08:48 PM EST
    "I highly recommend people download these documents and start searching for the terms they are interested in."

    In a country where most adults do not have a habit of reading, you expect people care enough to download difficult-to-read documents and be interested in the content?

    I bet MOST people in this country care MORE about who die next on LOST, than the details of HCR. They do care if they have to pay more taxes, but they probably will be getting their information from Jay Leno, then any real research.

    Parent

    I'm pretty sure the things that get (none / 0) (#30)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 09:01:27 PM EST
    typed on this blog are only read by the others on this blog.

    If they are going to argue and criticize and speculate the bill, it seems fairly logical that they would want to read it.

    Then, you could be right, they might not care.

    Parent

    No he doesn't want reform (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by DancingOpossum on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:29:19 AM EST
    Obama and Reid don't want reform, they want the pretense of reform.

    Obama has been plenty bold in the service of regressive forces and interests

    In his interview on Democracy Now yesterday, Dennis Kucinich made it amply clear that it was Obama who forced Congress to drop the Kucinich and Weiner amendments, which would have been real reform, and that it was "the administration" (iow, the Prez) who stripped out the public option:

    The fact that there's a shrinking public option is not a credit to the bill. And the administration, obviously, was terrified that anything could be identified as being adverse to the insurance companies, which is why they took privatization, they took single payer off the table immediately, they knocked down the robust public option. And after an amendment that would have protected the right of states to pursue a single-payer system was passed by the Education and Labor Committee, the administration weighed in heavily and influenced the leaders of Congress to take it out of the bill.

    http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/9/house_passes_healthcare_bill_with_amendment

    My favorite part (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by DancingOpossum on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:30:39 AM EST
    My favorite part: "the administration, obviously, was terrified that anything could be identified as being adverse to the insurance companies"

    Yes, God forbid. After all, this is is "insurance" reform, remember?

    check out dan froomkin (none / 0) (#5)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:21:02 AM EST
    on the huffington post for his solution.
    sorry, I'm a linky failure.

    Sorry, can't find it (none / 0) (#6)
    by Demi Moaned on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:33:30 AM EST
    How did you find it?

    Parent
    Me neither. (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by prittfumes on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:17 AM EST


    Parent
    I think ... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:45:11 AM EST
    this is what people are referring to.

    Parent
    My problem with Froomkin's ... (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:03:29 AM EST
    argument is it's not really true.

    Back when the public option looked dead the public responded.  As much 77% (in some polls) said they supported a "robust public option".  

    To use Froomkin's metaphor that's a lot of people behind Obama.  But rather than grabbing that banner, Obama was nuanced and timid.  

    Did he support the public option?  Some days it seems he did.  Others it seemed he didn't.  And, frankly, I'm still not sure what he thinks.

    Obama has been handed the banner several times.  It's not the public's fault that he chose not to pick it up.  

    Parent

    Actually (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:45:12 AM EST
    I completely agree with your analysis, Robot Porter, and wrote Froomkin about it.  He replied to a couple of my emails when he was at the WashPo, much to my amazement.

    I don't understand why Obama and Rahm are so completely out of touch with what the people want. BTD says pols are pols, and I do believe that, but we do vote once in a while.

    Obama's behavior since the election infuriates me, but I was never a Kool-Aid drinker to begin with.

    Parent

    Yup, and at this ... (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:03:02 PM EST
    point it's up to Obama to get the public back in this debate.

    Something he's perfectly capable of doing.

    Parent

    But apparently completely (none / 0) (#22)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 01:01:16 PM EST
    unwilling to do.

    Didn't Obama call the public option a "sliver" of
    health reform?  Or was that Rahmbo?

    No matter. No difference.


    Parent

    Just to be clear (none / 0) (#23)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 01:02:12 PM EST
    Obama behavior before the election infuriated me too.  ;)

    Parent
    Are they? (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Spamlet on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 04:01:48 PM EST
    I don't understand why Obama and Rahm are so completely out of touch with what the people want.

    I think they're completely in touch with what the people want. They've just chosen to ignore it.

    Parent

    Sorry, but (none / 0) (#14)
    by Spamlet on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:57:39 AM EST
    I read this as just one more text composed in the lingua franca of the PuffObama Post. Froomkin appears not to notice that Obama has been plenty bold in the service of regressive forces and interests. Yes, we should take to the streets, but not for the reason Froomkin suggests.

    Parent
    sorry I'm lame (none / 0) (#8)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:39:15 AM EST
    go to huff po then type in dan froomkin in their search.  just worked for me...now double cking...

    so shoot me (none / 0) (#11)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:45:18 AM EST
    long link

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-news/reporting/dan-froomkin/2009/11/06/

    thank you Robot Porter (none / 0) (#12)
    by kmblue on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:47:24 AM EST
    pls delete long link at will--my apologies

    You're welcome ... (none / 0) (#13)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:49:44 AM EST
    ;)

    Parent
    Another thanks. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by prittfumes on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:00:30 AM EST
    Any suggestions on how to reverse the poll numbers?

    Parent
    Forcing Reconciliation On HCR | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment