Sen. Byrd Rushed To Hospital

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:04:30 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

First and foremost, let's hope Senator Byrd, 91 years young, is all right.

Second, the search for 60 for meaningful health care reform seems a Sisyphean task. d-day writes:

Robert Byrd is 91 and quite unwell. Ambulances raced to his house today because he got up too fast. Democrats may gain one seat in Massachusetts by the end of the week if the appointment law goes through, but Byrd has been in and out of hospitals for months and is rarely seen on the Senate floor.

d-day wants a replacement. I think it is time to stop chasing the unattainable 60 votes for real health care reform and instead pursue the Schumer Strategy -- a good bill with a public option through reconciliation and a second bill with the mythical "80%" that "everyone" agree on.

Speaking for me only

< CBO: Wyden's Exchanges As Useless As Conrad's Co-ops | Math Lesson For The JournOList: 60 More Than 50 >

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.

Sen. Byrd Rushed To Hospital | 35 comments (35 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Wishing Byrd well, of course (5.00 / 2) (#1)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:08:31 PM EST

but the upshot is that he can be quickly replaced if needed. Democratic governor with appointment power.

Agree with dday (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by NealB on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:38:09 PM EST

Byrd should resign. He's incapacitated. His seat in the Senate isn't an honorary, it's a job. He's made his contributions, the ones I remember most recently involving his eloquent and passionate speeches against the Iraq War were inspirational; but I'm so tired of old men in politics who don't know when to get off the stage.


I said before Teddy's passing (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:40:01 PM EST

that they both should show up to work or resign. Teddy obviously should have done so months ago.


FWIW (none / 0) (#13)
by CST on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:50:06 PM EST

It appears there will probably be an interum replacement. In time for the big votes. If I had to guess I would say Dukakis.


Olympia? (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by lentinel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:24:54 PM EST

Heh (none / 0) (#29)
by eric on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:33:16 PM EST

probably not. It would be cool have too Olympia's in the Senate, though.


: two (none / 0) (#30)
by eric on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:34:36 PM EST

that is.

Yup (none / 0) (#14)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:51:53 PM EST

The Globe endorsed him for the position.


What if he falls into a coma (none / 0) (#2)
by Maryb2004 on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:29:02 PM EST

and can't resign?


::groan:: (none / 0) (#3)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:35:30 PM EST

The Senate could expel him. . .


Which requires 67 votes IIRC (none / 0) (#4)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:35:52 PM EST

So you'd need a bunch (none / 0) (#7)
by Maryb2004 on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:40:33 PM EST

of Republicans to vote to expel him in order that the Dems could have 60 senators able to vote.

Not to mention the problem some Dems would have with putting an "expulsion" on his permanent record there at the end.

He should resign now.


Agreed (none / 0) (#8)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:41:30 PM EST

Disagree (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:46:35 PM EST

in that the chase for 60 is a fool's errand.

In some ways, Byrd's unavailability will drive that point home, so I hope he does not resign.


If we're doing a two-track bill (none / 0) (#12)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:49:08 PM EST

we still need 60 for the second track. . .


Hey the second will get 80 votes (none / 0) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:53:57 PM EST

right?


heh, indeed (none / 0) (#16)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:56:43 PM EST

I actually think it's worth discussing the political calculus on part II. IMO, because the Republicans are set to oppose everything healthcare, it will never get more than Snowe/Collins.


if that (none / 0) (#18)
by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:14:05 PM EST

its seem like its becoming either Rockey or Snowe.


: Mebbe (none / 0) (#20)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:17:36 PM EST

Snowe has some interesting options.

a little hard (none / 0) (#9)
by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:45:40 PM EST

to imagine


: Indeed (none / 0) (#10)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 01:46:25 PM EST

I hope Sen. Byrd will be healthy (5.00 / 4) (#17)
by Steve M on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:07:26 PM EST

The last thing anyone wants to see is the Byrd Memorial Filibuster of the Kennedy Memorial Health Care Bill.

: you're (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:14:48 PM EST

bad

: Heh (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:17:52 PM EST

: I'll try my pun (none / 0) (#25)
by vicndabx on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:08:48 PM EST

again.
Damn, that's fowl.

No one lives forever, as much as (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Anne on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:04:15 PM EST

we would like them to. That being said, if Byrd has the ability to step down, he should do so, post-haste. He does his country and his constituents no favors by being a Senator in name only, who cannot even make it to the floor to vote.

The Schumer strategy works if there is a comprehensively good package of legislation from which the elements that qualify can be carved out and sent through the reconciliation process; I'm not sure there is such an animal yet - a comprehensively good package - nor am I at all sure there will be. So, I think that means that care needs to be taken to make sure that what would be slated for reconciliation will still move us in the direction we need to go - expanding access to and affordability of care - even if that's all the Democrats are ever able to get passed.

Get well soon Mr. Byrd... (none / 0) (#22)
by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:21:50 PM EST

I wonder did he have to get his ambulance pick-up pre-approved by his insurance co?

: You can bet the pols would (none / 0) (#33)
by Wile ECoyote on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 07:26:35 PM EST

exempt themselves from any healthcare plan they craft for us unwashed.

With all due respect (none / 0) (#23)
by joanneleon on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:34:20 PM EST

to Sen. Byrd and other senators, I agree with dday. He's had a long career in the Senate. We need a reliable person in that seat. Why do these men insist on staying in the Senate for life when they could have had a carefree retirement?

Byrd (none / 0) (#26)
by lentinel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:22:54 PM EST

I remember that during the programmed hysteria leading up to the war in Iraq, Senator Byrd was one of the few voices speaking against it.

He was on Larry King's show one evening and gave a very powerful presentation of facts debunking the conventional "wisdom" being spewed by Bush and just about everyone else.

Larry, after listening to this, asked, "Say. Didn't you belong to the Klan?".

I wasn't going to bring this up (none / 0) (#28)
by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:30:56 PM EST

But go back to watch the original floor debate on DOMA and see how he come off.

All of his sins aren't ancient history.


: I (none / 0) (#32)
by lentinel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 06:10:55 PM EST

didn't mean to lionize Byrd.
I just remember that at the time, anyone presenting facts to debunk the immanent mushroom cloud scenario was slimed in one way or another. They were all commies, terrorist sympathizers, perverts or traitors.
Larry wasn't saying that business about the Klan in order to have a discussion about Byrd's life or politics. It was a way of dismissing the content of what he was saying about the potential war in Iraq.

It's quite evident that the man (none / 0) (#31)
by Radiowalla on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:35:27 PM EST

wants to die with his boots on. I think he has confused his own identity with the senate itself, much as Louis IV said "L'état, c'est moi."

At this point, I doubt he will resign.

We need to face an uncomfortable truth. (none / 0) (#34)
by s5 on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 01:14:56 AM EST

We need a mandatory retirement age for Senators and other elected officials. If someone under 30 is deemed to be wrong for the job, then we should accept that someone as old as 91 might not be the best either. Senators need to be present, on the floor of the Senate, ready to vote on legislation, and of sound mind and body so they can make important decisions on our behalf.

Two bills (none / 0) (#35)
by s5 on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 01:17:51 AM EST

BTW, if Democrats take a two bill approach, what makes anyone think that "everyone" will vote for the second bill if the leadership is using it as a way to ram through the reconciliation bill that not everyone wants? It's either one bill or no bill.