It Ain't Over Till It's Over

Jon Cohn pats progressive activists on the head:

Disappointed progressives may be wondering whether their efforts were a waste. They most decidedly were not. The campaign for the public option pushed the entire debate to the left--and, to use a military metaphor, it diverted enemy fire away from the rest of the bill. If Lieberman and his allies didn't have the public option to attack, they would have tried to gut the subsidies, the exchanges, or some other key element. They would have hacked away at the bill, until it left more people uninsured and more people under-insured. The public option is the reason that didn't happen.

(Emphasis supplied.) I guess Cohn missed the part where Ben Nelson is still undecided (and who knows about Lincoln and Landrieu.) I wonder if this bill could ever reach the point where the Village Bloggers will say "kill the bill." I think we will certainly be testing their limits before all is said and done.

Speaking for me only

< What Should Have Obama Done? | Guantanamo Detainees To Be Moved to Illinois Prison >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I think that (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by Zorba on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 12:22:08 PM EST
    Cohn's wrong- the "campaign for the public option" did not "push the entire debate to the left."  Rather, the failure to even consider single payer pushed the entire debate to the right.

    Lieberman still not done gutting Senate bill (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 12:58:17 PM EST
    Lieberman Closer To Supporting Reform -- But Still Not There

    Surprise, surprise - House will bow to will of the Senate. Progressives will once again prove without a doubt that they are totally irrelevant.
    Hoyer: House Will Accept Public Option-Free Bill

    This should just be called (none / 0) (#1)
    by lilburro on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:03:43 AM EST
    the Insurance.com bill, since the structure of the Exchange, to make it more like Amazon.com and permit reviews, is the best we could do by way of reform.

    And what is there to hack at when it comes to the Exchanges?  Or to the simple regulations placed upon insurance companies?  How hard is that stuff to pass?  It doesn't seem to me to be very difficult at all.  

    If the whole goal of this was just to raise taxes on the wealthy, which is apparently the reason the Senate bill should be voted for, then maybe we should've taken another approach.  But of course that wasn't the whole goal of this at all, although some "progressives" seem happy to pretend it was.

    Obama knows what framing he wants, but it's incredibly disjointed from reality.

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:08:28 AM EST
    The progressive taxation is good (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:08:12 AM EST
    Not sure how much will survive Nelson.

    Thanks for the truism. (none / 0) (#5)
    by lilburro on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:21:10 AM EST
    In this climate, was banning rescission and the practice of denying people based on pre-existing conditions really so impossible?  Come on.

    Thank you for the reminder, Donald (none / 0) (#7)
    by christinep on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:27:04 AM EST
    We always hear about the banks being "too big to fail." And, of course, AIG. So, maybe AIG was the beginning of the skein that ties the giant insurance groupings together. That everyone who has tried to unravel or rework the skein has failed in these past decades should tell us something. (At some point, when we look back, one of the first lessons may have to do with any administration falling into the trap of thinking nice & easy pacing and confident civility is an administration about to get tied up in a tiger's ball of yarn.)

    orange (none / 0) (#6)
    by jedimom on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:27:03 AM EST
    is Kos in the Village? Or is he just the former GOP guy leading the pitchfork bearing mob? Cuz he tweeted 'kill the bill' today..

    Never (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:34:15 AM EST
    Kos has never been a Villager.

    How fitting (none / 0) (#9)
    by Spamlet on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 11:35:01 AM EST
    that Kos's "Waterloo" (as he put it some weeks ago) should come in the form of a demure little tweet.

    Why not do reconciliation next year? (none / 0) (#11)
    by nicolen922 on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 12:25:47 PM EST
    I said this in another comment thread, with no response (maybe b/c it was so far down in the comments).  

    Wouldn't it be possible to pass a robust public option next year in a reconciliation bill?  I keep hearing pols talk about how you can't get the insurance reforms into a reconciliation bill, which is what makes it not worth it, so I have an idea.  Pass this imperfect bill now, and then January 1st, or October 1st (I don't know when reconciliation is possible) pass a reconciliation bill that creates a robust public option.  Is there a reason this isn't a viable possibility?

    Also, I had a question about the process.  After the conference committee, does reid still need 60 votes to get a final vote on the bill or can he get one with just 51 votes?  

    Yes (none / 0) (#12)
    by jbindc on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 12:26:46 PM EST
    It's called an "election year"

    then do it after nov. 2nd. (none / 0) (#13)
    by nicolen922 on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 12:29:49 PM EST
    then shouldn't they do it after nov. 2nd?  if they're all lame ducks anyway, why not pass it then under reconciliation?

    The Weakly Standard... (none / 0) (#15)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 03:11:56 PM EST
    ...is pushing the story that the Administration is holding the closure of Offut Air Base over the head of Nelson.  Per an unnamed "Senate aide", of course.

    Seems like a good idea (none / 0) (#16)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 03:24:07 PM EST