To Thwart The Stupak Amendment, Jettison The Exchange

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:09:52 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Via mcjoan, Ben Nelson threatens a filibuster if the Stupak Amendment is not included:

The Senate health care bill does not provide federal money for abortion, maintaining the status quo. But like Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and a sizable bloc of conservative House Democrats, Nelson says that's not good enough. Nelson said he plans to introduce an amendment to the Senate bill roughly resembling Stupak's. Would he vote for a final bill if he can't get that language included? "No," he told reporters.

The answer to this problem is perfectly simple and obvious - eliminate the Exchanges and the mandates. Instead use the money to expand Medicaid eligbility. What we have is a health insurance assistance bill anyway. Anti-choice and anti-women's health provisions are not a price we should be willing to pay so that the word "reform" can be bandied about by Obama and his lackeys.

Speaking for me only

< Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread | If You Give Away The Exchange, What Could You Get? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

To Thwart The Stupak Amendment, Jettison The Exchange | 38 comments (38 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I saw that yesterday and am outraged (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by Cream City on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:15:37 PM EST

but also am so weary of having to continue to be as outraged, and by Dems, after eight long years of outrage at such stuff from Repubs. The war on women never ends, and the enemy is within as well.

Btw, thanks for the link; I read about this elsewhere but will go to see what mcjoan says. She is about the only reason I still sometimes go to DKos.

the war on women continues (5.00 / 3) (#5)
by coigue on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:38:06 PM EST

yep.


Go forth to the orange (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by ruffian on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:54:54 PM EST

and report back. You're a braver woman than I!


: I just hide rated (none / 0) (#14)
by coigue on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:07:20 PM EST

someone who insists that
"although he hates to say it, abortion must be 2nd to the health care amendment" Ugh. Clueless.
However, just about everyone else is outraged.

Amen. (5.00 / 4) (#4)
by coigue on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:37:07 PM EST

I see this as an attempt by the socially conservative Democrats to forever change the priorities of the party.

: Or, a poison pill designed (5.00 / 1) (#29)
by MKS on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 04:41:27 PM EST

to sabotage health care reform. Nelson could say that he just had to oppose the final bill because of the abortion issue.....
There is no way the abortion language passes....

Oh, for the love of God... (5.00 / 4) (#6)
by Anne on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:41:46 PM EST

let's fit Ben Nelson for an Empathy Belly:

"The Empathy Belly"® Pregnancy Simulator lets you know what it feels like to be pregnant! It is a multi-component, weighted "garment" that will -- through medically accurate simulation -- enable men, women, teenage girls and boys to experience over 20 symptoms and effects of pregnancy.
Following are some of the symptoms and effects that can be felt by wearing The Empathy Belly for 10 minutes or longer:

Body weight gain of 30 or 33 pounds (2 sizes)
Pregnant profile of enlarged breasts and protruding abdominal belly
Change in physical and personal self-image continuous pressure on the abdomen and internal organs
Postural changes of the back with an increase in lordosis or "pelvic tilt"
Shift in one's center of gravity; low backache
Mild "fetal" kicking and stroking movements
Shallow breathing capacity and shortness of breath increase in body temperature, pulse and blood pressure
A flushing sensation and increased perspiration
Awkwardness in all body movements
Pressure on the bladder, with increased sense of urgency and frequency of urination
Increased fatigue, slowed pace and restricted activity
Changes in sexual self-image and abilities

The Empathy Belly simulates these effects through the use of a rib belt and strategic positioning of various weighted components. It is a strictly external garment, and does not have any mechanical, electrical or electronic components.

and let him live in it for a couple of weeks: maybe he'd be so grateful not to have a uterus to worry about that he'd STFU and stop trying to micromanage a women's HEALTH issue.

I loved being pregnant, and love my children, but I'm sick to death of these sanctimonious blowhards with pen!ses who don't give a flying you-know-what if women will suffer from these godawful amendments.

I'm all for your plan (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by Cream City on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:56:53 PM EST

as long as it is not called or claimed to be health care reform, health insurance reform, the Second Coming, etc.

Eliminate exchanges and mandates and what we have is the Medicare Expansion Bill. Fine.

Politically stupid for the Dems to (5.00 / 4) (#17)
by MO Blue on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:14:21 PM EST

include an amendment that would all but eliminate their argument that you have to vote Democratic to protect Roe v Wade.

Women who have money have always been able to get an abortion. Restricting abortion to only those who can afford the expense to all extents and purposes would be almost the same as overriding Roe v Wade.

BTW, if this amendment goes through, anyone who uses Roe v Wade as a reason for voting for the Dem can be sure to get an earful from me.

: Exactly (none / 0) (#19)
by ruffian on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:20:32 PM EST

How stupid of those who see stalwart Dem support of Roe v Wade as a liability, preventing Dems from getting "all those centrist votes", instead of their biggest bulwark keeping many more votes on their side.

: Stupak (none / 0) (#31)
by norris morris on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:40:20 PM EST

We all know that the WHouse wants a Healthcare Bill at ANY costs.
Yes, even if we have sabotage women and directly oppose Roe v Wade,...it's worth it?
Why?
Because Obama needs a bill, any bill as a feather in his cap to brag that HE brought us healthcare.
This perfectly compromised and dreadful Healthcare Bill robbed of a robust PO is just about a gift to Big Insurance. It's bait and switch, and on the backs of women's rights.
Actually, everyone get's screwed. But it doesn't matter, really, because The Precious needs to pretend he actually did something.
Afghanistan is a tragic error and it's simply what Bush/Cheney would do, [without telegraphing the date of the end]. What the hell are we if Generals run our country and why the hell are we sacrificing our men and treasure to a hopeless [for thousands of years] Failed State?
Obama is not a leader. He'a being led. And his cynical political opportunism is despicable.

If he actually comes through with a filibuster (none / 0) (#1)
by andgarden on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:14:48 PM EST

maybe leadership will be forced to use reconciliation. Indeed, this particular filibuster might even kill the two track process. Maybe we only have the votes for the public option now!

: That's an optimistic view (none / 0) (#30)
by MKS on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 04:45:14 PM EST

We are forced to use reconciliation....
I'm still depressed by the increase in troops.....I accept it intellectually but feel it will fail....If lucky, Obama could be the next LBJ by passing health care reform....Is that what it has come to....

Orrin Hatch (none / 0) (#3)
by jbindc on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:31:06 PM EST

plans to introduce an amendment much like the Stupak Amendment.

I don't think I care anymore (none / 0) (#7)
by katiebird on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:44:47 PM EST

I mean, I care but, the whole thing is making me sick. So, I'm trying NOT to care.

Same here (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by lilburro on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:47:37 PM EST

and reconciliation is the answer.


I can't for the life of me (none / 0) (#15)
by Anne on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:08:11 PM EST

understand why we would want to use reconciliation to pass what looks like it will end up being an utterly pathetic piece of legislation.

If you're going to use a procedure that opponents are going to make us pay for with what precious little political capital we have, at least use it on something that would truly be historic in its reach and revolutionary in the real and beneficial change it would bring to the people and to the economy. This is not that legislation - it is not even the camel's nose.

Seriously, if you only had one wish, would you use it to get what it looks like the Senate, and - after conference - the Congress is going to give us? Because that's what reconciliation is going to be for the Democrats - their one and only wish on this issue.


Not following (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:12:07 PM EST

"If you're going to use a procedure that opponents are going to make us pay for" How exactly wiull they "make us pay?" Silly framing by you.

As for making the bill the best you can make it, totally agree. I do not know what that bill would look like however.


I get it (none / 0) (#20)
by jbindc on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:40:47 PM EST

Wait until the majority Republican Congress comes along and then a truly horrible bill is introduced - watch lefty heads explode when they ram it through with reconciliation.

Then there's also the PR problem of when people realize what a truly horrible bill this is, and that it wasn't passed by normal Senate procedure.

Will be interesting to watch!


2 things (none / 0) (#23)
by CST on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:15:17 PM EST

number 1 - in order to use reconcilliation it has to be budget related - which limits it to only certain types of legislation.

number 2 - they already do (did) this. It was called the Bush tax cuts. What else is new? Only Republicans can do this now? B.S. If they can ram through regressive tax legislation, we can ram through health care.


I don't thnk we will have to wait (none / 0) (#26)
by Anne on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:57:38 PM EST

for Republicans to ram through terrible legislation; if Dems use reconciliation, they will be doing that themselves.

Sad.


Particularly silly (none / 0) (#27)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:59:03 PM EST

The GOP would not be ramming through a health assistance bill.

your comments are getting absurd.


That isn't what I said, or what I meant. (none / 0) (#32)
by Anne on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:46:54 PM EST

Commenter I was replying to said:

I didn't read that as jbindc suggesting that the GOP would be trying to pass health care legislation, just some typically awful GOP cr@p, as soon as they had a chance to.

So...all I was attempting to say is that since I think this health care thing is shaping up to be a terrible piece of legislation, if Dems did manage to use reconciliation to pass the budget-relvant parts of it, the foisting of bad legislation would be at the hands of Democrats.

Oh, never mind - you've already decided I'm not making sense.


: Sorry (none / 0) (#35)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:55:51 PM EST

that comment also does not make sense to me. I think you realized it while you were writing it.

well the point (none / 0) (#28)
by lilburro on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 04:10:02 PM EST

of reconciliation is that the bill would get a lot better.


: That was the point of electing Dems. (none / 0) (#33)
by Cream City on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:53:11 PM EST

: Reconciliation? NOBAMA (none / 0) (#37)
by norris morris on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 06:32:14 PM EST

Reconciliation is full of legal and parlimentary nightmares.
Besides, Obama is still under the delusion that he's forging a bi-partisan administration, and that means he won't do anything to really upset the flak from the right.
This is all smoke and mirrors.

Well, I guess I should say that (none / 0) (#21)
by Anne on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:46:01 PM EST

if reconciliation does become the plan to ram this cr@ptastic bill through, I fully expect the resulting outrage and squealing by Republicans to cow the Dems into not doing it.

But, if by some wild chance it should happen, I can't believe you cannot envision how the Republicans could come together to thwart the so-called Democratic agenda by any means possible, even though they have, themselves, used reconciliation in the past.

Republicans are masters of retaliation - and Harry Reid is enough of a wimp to make it possible for them to do it.


: Sorry (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:49:37 PM EST

Your comment makes no sense to me.
Republican retaliation? You think they are holding back or something? Silly talk.

: Reid, not Obama? (none / 0) (#38)
by norris morris on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 06:45:08 PM EST

This is not all Reid's problem. The President has played cool from the get go, and made concessions and compromises with BigPharma that did not seek our opinions.
It was a backroom deal and Big Pharma will make out like crazy as a result. Obama has never said a word about the donut hole in Medicare RX Drug bill that screws seniors big time. No benefits as they quickly reach the cap, get no reimbursement, but still have to pay monthly premiums inspite of receiving NO benefits.
Leadership from the White House would have helped ALL summer as the Republicans controlled and framed the healthcare debate, without even rebuttal and clarity on issues from Obama.
So you are saying that this is all Reid's fault when a distant and aloof President did nothing
but take political cover and allowed the dialog to shift to the right?
This kind of behavior was not what Obama led us to expect while campaigning.
I have come to believe that Obama has been a poor leader so far.

Easy (none / 0) (#18)
by coigue on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 02:19:31 PM EST

single payer.

(ha ha)


I care a lot (5.00 / 4) (#9)
by ruffian on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:53:24 PM EST

but the whole thing is so damaged beyond salvage that I can't do anything about it so I am paying less and less attention.

Useful exercise though for seeing who stands where, for women, health care, tax policy, etc. Pretty sure Dems are useless on all of the above so I will make my future decisions accordingly.


And you can't get sick (none / 0) (#13)
by jbindc on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:58:25 PM EST

Since this bill is such a mess!


: I AM SICK TO MY STOMACH (none / 0) (#34)
by norris morris on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:54:53 PM EST

The lack of leadership and cowardly political opportunism we're watching from the White House is sickening.
The confusion, political cover,compromising positions, and Obama's lack of leadership are all making me ill.
The White House's poker game re: Healthcare, Public Option, and Stupak on the backs of women, are losing hands.
Democrats will pay and pay for this mess along with the reaction coming against sending our military to Afghanistan. Disillusioned grass roots Obama supporters will be in revolt.
Both Healthcare and Afghanistan will cost the Democrats.

expand Medicaid eligbility (none / 0) (#11)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:56:02 PM EST

What is the point of that when you can't find a health care provider willing to take Medicaid payments?

Having heath insurance is meaningless if it does not result in access to timely and effective health care.

Yep (none / 0) (#24)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:24:20 PM EST

Having been a Medicaid recipient for the first 18 years of my life, I'm with you on this.

"Expanding Medicaid" will only create more competition for the few providers who are willing to accept it. In addition, it will increase the number of patients whom doctors consider deadbeats. My own mother was considered one of those deadbeats. Who knew that being beaten and emotionally abused by your husband, resulting in becoming a single parent, while courts forced ex-husband to pay child support to the state so the state could turn around and pay it to you as welfare and Medicaid made you a deadbeat. Only in America.

Medicaid is stigmatized. Don't expand it. Kill it and create something else.


: I meant (none / 0) (#25)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:26:11 PM EST

it will create more competition between patients for the few providers who are willing to accept it.

Medicare (none / 0) (#36)
by norris morris on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:58:50 PM EST

I have been finding it harder to find doctors in the New York area who take Medicare, as many doctors have been opting out of the system.

Can you imagine what will happen if this abominable bill gets passed?

The Republicans have won. They have finally managed to privatize Medicare because of the spineless lack of leadership from the President.
