home

3 Weeks

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 09:59:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit
Via Ezra Klein, Politico reports:

There was some talk among Senate leadership on Thursday of putting together a letter signed by 51 Democratic senators pledging to pass a cleanup bill if the House would pass the Senate bill. But that effort fizzled when support for it didn’t materialize, insiders said. “The Senate moderates’ viewpoint is, ‘We passed our bill. We’re not going to spend three weeks on some other bill,’” said a Democratic lobbyist who represents clients pushing for reform.

(Emphasis supplied.) The Senate is the problem. First they let Max Baucus waste 3 months last summer on health care. Then they let Max Baucus insert the poison pill excise tax. Now they refuse to agree to fix the excise tax. The Senate has always been the problem on the health bill.

Speaking for me only

< Friday Morning Open Thread | They Send Letters . . . >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    3 Weeks | 23 comments (23 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Too (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 08:13:51 AM EST
    bad the problem isn't just the senate. It's more than that.

    "They" (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Cream City on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 09:31:01 AM EST
    wasted monthz, "they" let Baucus do so, etc. -- you don't see that, either?

    FDR and LBJ -- and, for that matter, Bush/Cheney -- would not have blamed it on "them" in Congress.

    Parent

    it may be more (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 09:51:11 AM EST
    but the senate and the 60 vote myth is central.


    Parent
    the senate is the problem (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 09:43:05 AM EST
    period.  60 votes is the problem.
    they do not need 60 votes.  Bush passed most of his crap, including tax cuts for the rich, with reconciliation.

    I want the progressives in the house to stick with it.  make the gutless spineless jellyfish senate understand that they are willing to walk away with nothing.

    THEN I think they will miraculously become more reasonable and pliant.

    Really? (none / 0) (#8)
    by pooks1976 on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 09:59:21 AM EST
    I get the impression that the senate wants to walk away from HCR all together.  They don't want the house to pass their bill.  They know the public hates it (mandates, exercise tax, Nebraska......)

    Parent
    if you mean excise tax (none / 0) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:13:15 AM EST
    let them walk away and see how many return to their cushy offices next cycle.

    Parent
    Yes excise tax. (none / 0) (#13)
    by pooks1976 on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:23:20 AM EST
    Sorry about that.  An exercise tax would be something totally different and I'm not sure how the IRS would track that!

    Parent
    that would be one (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:44:34 AM EST
    excus . . , um TAX I would welcome.


    Parent
    Reconciliation (none / 0) (#12)
    by Socraticsilence on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:22:03 AM EST
    is limited though- you can pass tax cuts through it you can't do things like mandate guaranteed issuance by insurance companies.

    Parent
    Pass separately (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by waldenpond on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:56:42 AM EST
    I'd love to see the Repubs vote against the insurance reforms. But I expect the Senate will refuse to work on health insurance at all.  They are done with the health issue.  Time to move on to jobs.

    Parent
    Too bad they didn't do jobs first (none / 0) (#16)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 01:58:49 PM EST
    to begin with. If people still had their jobs and homes, they might be less troubled by this HCR bill they are trying to force on them.


    Parent
    That's already in the bill passed by the Senate (none / 0) (#18)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 02:58:58 PM EST
    so if the House passes that with the understanding (in writing, if not already passed by the Senate) the Senate through reconciliation will fix the funding issues, expand Medicare (S-CHIP went through reconciliation) and do other fixes then we'll have something to run on.

    Parent
    I agree, but give the Dem Congress critters (none / 0) (#19)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 03:00:50 PM EST
    some time to work through the 7 stages of grief.  Then we'll see some action to improve the bill.

    Parent
    The GOP never had 60 senators (none / 0) (#21)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 03:17:29 PM EST
    durign the Bush nightmare.

    60 votes is no longer the problem as Democrats can't get them in any event.  This is, or can be, a good thing.

    Parent

    3 weeks (none / 0) (#1)
    by klassicheart on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 08:05:49 AM EST
    I thought there were 50 senators that supported more reform, medicare buy in, etc.  Where are they?

    They're still crying (none / 0) (#20)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 03:15:31 PM EST
    give a month or two before they figure out how Brown's win has liberated them.

    Parent
    I think this is pretty much over (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 08:08:33 AM EST
    If the House passes the Senate bill, it will be in an unpleasant lame duck session. And it sounds like we can forget about reconciliation improvements.

    I felt like Reid was part (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 09:42:47 AM EST
    of that poisonous Senate problem too.  I know that Unions are big in Nevada.  Has Reid placed himself in political jeopardy with some of his actions and what has seemed to me to be some calculated inactions?

    Very good chance (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by MO Blue on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:01:24 AM EST
    that Reid is toast.

    Parent
    Well in my opinion he's (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 10:04:37 AM EST
    generously earned it.

    Parent
    That was when we "needed" 60 votes (none / 0) (#17)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 02:55:54 PM EST
    Now that is an impossibility so what can we get with 51 votes.  Democrats are going to find out they can get quite a bit more progressive legislation through with 51 votes.  

    Why am I so confident they will?   They have no other choice.  

    Here are the Senators who no longer matter:

    Leiberman
    Lincoln
    Nelson
    Landrieux
    Bayh
    Baucus
    Conrad
    & 41 Republicans

    Everyone knows what happened in 1994 and, except for Holy Joe, no one wants a repeat of that.  

    What's so hard (none / 0) (#22)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 03:20:45 PM EST
    to enact a bill with Medicare buy in, adopt the House finding proposal etc, speed up whatever bennies are in the bill so voters see them before Nov.  Hell, these bills were already written & introduced.  

    The Dems can shed up to 9 of these so called moderates.

    Hmmmm (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 03:47:01 PM EST
    Well, your list includes, what?  7.  What about Senators who supported this originally, but are reading the tea leaves and see this is not going to be good for them or their constituents.  I'm thinking in particular of those Dems from manufacturing states where there is a large union presence....

    Parent
    3 Weeks | 23 comments (23 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment