Ace of Spades HQ

January 26, 2010

Blanche Lincoln: I Will Oppose Attempts to Pass Health Care Through Reconcilliation
— Ace

They need 51 of 59 votes (well, 50, if Sheriff Joe plays the tie-breaker).

We can guess that Nelson, Lieberman, and Bayh will bail on this too.

I still think they will end up being able to cobble together their 51, but the reconciliation process, as I understand it, is there only for deficit-reduction. You can raise taxes and you can cut spending and that is it.

So reconciliation, if I understand it properly, cannot be used to pass the Cadillac Tax exemption for Obama's political allies. (Think how brazen that is -- Obama is setting up a system where his allies pay less in taxes and his opponents pay more in taxes. )

Because doing so -- cutting taxes -- is not permitted.

Now, I think maybe they could try to wrap this provision up with another provision to cut spending, so that on net, the two together supposedly reduce the deficit; but I don't know if provisions can be so combined.

Cite: My sketchy understanding of reconciliation comes lately from this Chris Matthews demolition of Grayson. Grayson keeps asserting that the whole bill can be passed through this process; Matthews tells him he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, and all you can do via this process is raise taxes or cut spending.

Harry Reid: "No Rush" on Health Care. No rush? Really?

Apparently so.

Even though I'm posting about reconciliation and stuff, I have to be honest, I think health care is dead. I think this crap about reconciliation is just holding out hope for the nutroots/cultists. Sometimes you have to let them down slowly.

And when I say "I have to be honest," I guess I mean I could pretend that I think this is some kind of big threat to drum up drama and hits.

But I don't. I think this is over.

Correction: Drew sends me this digest of what can and can't be done in reconciliation. Apparently I'm wrong -- you can past tax cuts in reconciliation.

Posted by: Ace at 10:49 AM | Comments (97)
Post contains 362 words, total size 2 kb.

1 This is almost bigger news than about John Edwards' huge-- er-- area!

Posted by: Phillip at January 26, 2010 10:50 AM (/z7x4)

2 How did they even get 50 to sign on to this cluster-fornication?

Posted by: rawmuse at January 26, 2010 10:51 AM (6Kciv)

3

Good thing President Toonces delayed the SOTU so he could sign the healthcare bill!

Posted by: nightwitch at January 26, 2010 10:53 AM (HFFM8)

4
if this thing gets killed and is taken off the table before the November elections, these assholes might be able to keep their seats, after all

Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 26, 2010 10:54 AM (jVldi)

5 Nice try, Blanche. You already signed your political death warrant.

Posted by: Hatchet Five at January 26, 2010 10:55 AM (wPZU5)

6 It doesn't look like they can get the mandate through reconciliation either. Or the Co-op, public option, anything about abortion... They must be trying to wind this thing down slow.

Posted by: runninrebel at January 26, 2010 10:56 AM (i3PJU)

4 if this thing gets killed and is taken off the table before the November elections, these assholes might be able to keep their seats, after all.

Good point, although I dunno if people will forget the shady, back-room dealing for Obamacare, despite the oft-noted short political memories of Americans. We'll see.

At least in the end, there will be only chaos.

Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at January 26, 2010 10:57 AM (9hSKh)

8 Ace, you need to update your last post.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at January 26, 2010 10:57 AM (ehLtp)

9 @4 - You expected anything less?

Posted by: Lone Marauder at January 26, 2010 10:58 AM (/bVuS)

Make that two. Bayh is bailing.

http://alturl.com/ixxz

Posted by: Olliander at January 26, 2010 10:58 AM (6uiF7)

"The concerns that I hear from Arkansans continue to guide my decisions on health insurance reform. Congress has now reached a critical juncture, and I believe the only way to proceed is deliberately and thoughtfully," Lincoln said. "In the meantime, Congress also has other important work that is underway and that the American people are relying on us to complete. My number one priority is to rebuild our nation's economy and put people back to work."

Geez, Blanche. Why this sudden concern for the great unwashed masses of your state?

Posted by: runningrn at January 26, 2010 10:58 AM (CfmlF)

12 Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they still have to get the House and Senate to agree on a bill before it can later be "fixed" by reconciliation?

In other words, my understanding of this process is as follows:

a. House has to vote to pass existing Senate version of this bill, taking it on faith that objections they have will be fixed later by reconciliation, then.
b. House and Senate can amend existing passed bill via budget reconciliation, which (as mentioned) can only affect taxing and spending.

Needless to say "a" is NOT going to be appealing to House members on the fence, particularly in the "Brown" era.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 10:58 AM (PwGfd)

Good point, although I dunno if people will forget the shady, back-room dealing for Obamacare, despite the oft-noted short political memories of Americans. We'll see.

Well shoot, wouldn't that be one of the platforms Republicans should run on? The Democrats can't be trusted. They were willing to sell out America in "shady, backroom" deals until it became political suicide. Hello, paging the man of Steele?

Posted by: runningrn at January 26, 2010 11:01 AM (CfmlF)

Harry Reid: "No Rush" on Health Care. No rush? Really?

Rushing is so 2009-style thinking, when the upcoming midterm election wasn't so near.

I'm hoping at least Reid gets voted out this Nov.

Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at January 26, 2010 11:01 AM (9hSKh)

15 These two (so far) are making the best of their bad situation. They know HC sucks, and they know everyone hates it. But they can try to pass off their spontaneous "no to reconciliation" as "opposing" HC when they get back home.
Dance, Bluedogs, dance!

Posted by: Lincolntf at January 26, 2010 11:02 AM (V2pCF)

Uh...you can also print more money and fly over the country heaving it out of helicopter doors.

That makes them funicopters.

Posted by: Helicopter Ben at January 26, 2010 11:02 AM (CH5ak)

17 There will be some bill in the near future that will completely destroy the Health Insurance industry. Big Brother will be happy to step up and fill the void, when needed.

Posted by: kefka at January 26, 2010 11:02 AM (n1uMU)

18
I dunno. I think the Democrats are gonna put on their conservative hats and move to the center in the months before the election. And we all know the American people have short memories.

Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 26, 2010 11:02 AM (jVldi)

19 I can't wait for the "Let me be clear" moment during the speech.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:03 AM (iYbLN)

20 Ace,

Reconciliation is a method of passing bills that allows them to circumvent cloture votes but only under very strict rules.

They're meant to be budget-related only, which means raising or lowering taxes, changing spending levels, etc. Anything not explicitly dealing with revenue can be stripped out of the bill if challenged under Byrd rules.

If the current bill were passed through reconciliation, the raised taxes that are part of the program would go into effect but not any of the health care portions of the bill, such as insurance exchanges or forbidding insurance companies to reject people based on pre-existing conditions.

The other limits are that it would allow the bill to be overturned by a simple 51-vote majority and that, by law, the changes made would have a five-year sunset provision, meaning that the taxes would automatically expire by 2015 if no vote is made to retain them.

The Dems going down this route would be like handing out poisoned Kool-Ade at Jonestown, as no one who goes for this is getting out alive.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at January 26, 2010 11:04 AM (jGaqA)

21 Uhhhh ....Look Butthead. There's money coming out of that funicopter. uhhh uhhh uhhhh uh

Posted by: Beavis at January 26, 2010 11:05 AM (CH5ak)

22 22 Make it 3. Robert Byrd said back during the summer reconcillation was the wrong approach and that he would not support it. Of course, with Byrd, one has to assume he still remembers what he said.

I think he'll remember it... the method the Republicans will use to decimate the bill is called the "Byrd Rule" for God's sake.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at January 26, 2010 11:05 AM (jGaqA)

23 In a nutshell, with the Republicans now having a lock on (at least) 41 votes and a filibuster, nothing can get through Senate debate anymore.

The only way the Democrats can pass anything now is

a. If the House can agree to sign off on the Senate version without ANY CHANGES AT ALL (or vice versa), or
b. If the Dems can find at least one Republican defector to break a filibuster, or
c. They start over from scratch, this time getting at least a few Republicans on board in the Senate.

a is unlikely for the reasons given above. . .there are serious objections in the House to the Senate bill (eg on abortion) and its pretty unlikely that there is enough faith in the House that its going to just sign off on the Senate bill blindly hoping its issues get fixed later.

b. Not likely. I think all the arms the Dems could twist have already been twisted.

c. Not likely either. Too much legislative energy, angst, and political capital has already been burned up here. The Dems are confused and angry, the public is fatigued on this issue (and worried about jobs) and they aren't going to want to just lick their wounds and start from scratch.

In short, its over.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:05 AM (6Q9g2)

OT - but I just have to ask:

Has a country western song ever brought tears to your eyes? Because this would make a good country western song, imo:

http://tinyurl.com/yc44c2u

Via HotAir

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at January 26, 2010 11:06 AM (r1h5M)

25 I dunno. I think the Democrats are gonna put on their conservative hats and move to the center in the months before the election. And we all know the American people have short memories.

I think they are going to talk like conservatives, and do a token trivial conservative headline grabbing item(spending freeze for .0001% of the budget). Otherwise its business as usual and hard left if you please Mr. Obama. We already know they think we are all barely smart enough to breathe on our own. Why would they change their glorious agenda for the likes of us?

Posted by: kefka at January 26, 2010 11:06 AM (n1uMU)

26 Harry, Nancy; RAM IT THROUGH! You ain't got the guts! 63% oppose this 'plan'. So go for it. And we'll see you in November!

Posted by: GarandFan at January 26, 2010 11:06 AM (ZQBnQ)

27 No rush? I thought people were dying every day because we didn't have "healthcare"[sic] with Obama's signature on it.

Why do you want poor children to be thrown out into the street to die, Harry Reid?!?!

^{_{Alinsky sez: hold them up to their own standards. Woo-hoo!}}

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 26, 2010 11:06 AM (mR7mk)

28 As Krauthammer said so eloquently many months ago, "This parrot is dead! It has ceased to be. It is bereft of life. It has gone to meet its maker. This parrot is no more!"

*I might have paraphrased Dr. Krauthammer slightly here.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at January 26, 2010 11:07 AM (usjNq)

Last month we were threatened by imminent death if we didn't get government-run health care without delay. We're feeling much better today, thanks.

Posted by: 40 Million Uninsured Americans at January 26, 2010 11:07 AM (QKKT0)

30 Are you sure Sen. Sheets can even remember his name? He is about 170 years old by now.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:07 AM (iYbLN)

31 I can't wait for the 'politics of the past' utterance.

Posted by: torabora at January 26, 2010 11:07 AM (CH5ak)

Ben Nelson---No On Reconciliation

http://is.gd/76owO

Posted by: Olliander at January 26, 2010 11:08 AM (6uiF7)

Rules? We ain't got no rules. We don't need no rules! I don't have to show you any stinkin' rules!

Posted by: Alfonso Bedoya Reid at January 26, 2010 11:08 AM (kJLH9)

34 Wait, Alan Grayson says 4000 Americans are dying every day, every day people! Oh the humanity!
If that was true it would look like Haiti in the streets of this country. What a dickbag.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:09 AM (iYbLN)

In a nutshell, with the Republicans now having a lock on (at least) 41 votes and a filibuster, nothing can get through Senate debate anymore.

Gridlock. I can haz gridlock now? Hoo, boy.

Posted by: mikeyslaw at January 26, 2010 11:10 AM (QMGr1)

36 I agree, all this talk of reconciliation is now post-game posturing to cover up the fact that the Democrats had an unprecedented 60-vote filibuster-proof Senate majority, a bigger majority in the House, a popular new President and **STILL** fucked this up.

They fumbled the ball bad, and now the "base" is (and arguably SHOULD BE) pretty angry.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:10 AM (PwGfd)

37 I can't wait for the "Let me be clear" moment during the speech.

What would be fun would be if the entire Republican caucus played the "Obama Speech Drinking Game" ^TM . Each time Obama says "Let me be clear...", "As I have always said..." or any of his other rhetorical crutches, someone rings a bell, the Republican congresspeoples all say "DRINK!!!", slam shotglasses on the desk, and gulp 'em down. Now that would be fun.

Oh yeah. Any strawmen gets a double shot.

Posted by: CUS at January 26, 2010 11:10 AM (wOGfT)

38 Color me unpersuaded. By hook or by crook, inch by inch, step by step, they'll keep their noses to the grindstone. These grifters aren't going to let trillions of $$ slither off into the sunset. Besides, what will this mean for all the deals that were made by the drug companies, insurance companies, etc?

Posted by: RushBabe at January 26, 2010 11:10 AM (LKkE8)

39 It is over. It looks like they will do the bank tax and the "spending freeze" right away. But then what? They have nothing but awful policy options in their bag.

Posted by: runninrebel at January 26, 2010 11:11 AM (i3PJU)

40 22 Make it 3. Robert Byrd said back during the summer reconcillation was the wrong approach and that he would not support it. Of course, with Byrd, one has to assume he still remembers what he said is still living.

Posted by: Mallamutt at January 26, 2010 03:04 PM (V9SYy)

FIFY

Posted by: conscious, but Light at January 26, 2010 11:12 AM (Vu6sl)

Oh yeah. Any strawmen gets a double shot.

"Some say we should simply allow the uninsured to die in the streets, and clog up traffic..."

Posted by: Cicero at January 26, 2010 11:12 AM (QKKT0)

42 It's amazing. Obama has managed to piss off just about everyone in the country on both sides. Only the hardcore money "stash" people are behind him now. Geez, what a cock up.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:13 AM (iYbLN)

43 "Some say we should simply allow the uninsured to die in the streets, and clog up traffic..."

(slam) gulp (slam) gulp.

Thishs ish jusht liyke mayyy ol fraternininity daysh.

Posted by: CUS at January 26, 2010 11:14 AM (wOGfT)

44 looking at Lincoln, Liebermann, Bayh, Byrd (if he can show up) Nelson. Have 5 - need 5 more. So, morons and moronettes, which one of these look possible: Landreiux, Dorgan, Baucus, Conrad, Hagan, Johnson, McCaskill or Pryor?

Money on Landreiux and McCaskill.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:14 AM (iYbLN)

45 Don't worry. Steiner will counterattack and break through. Then it's on to Moscow. You'll see.

Posted by: Dame Fuhrer at January 26, 2010 11:15 AM (5GcKk)

MAY I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE!

The "I cannot support reconciliation" bus is about to depart the terminal. This is the final call.

Posted by: conscious, but Light at January 26, 2010 11:15 AM (Vu6sl)

47 There's this, too:

http://www.bullshitbingo.net/cards/buzzword/

Posted by: CUS at January 26, 2010 11:16 AM (wOGfT)

48 Dick Durbin is measuring for drapes in Reid's office as we speak.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:16 AM (iYbLN)

49 What would be fun would be if the entire Republican caucus played the "Obama Speech Drinking Game" ^TM . Each time Obama says "Let me be clear...", "As I have always said..." or any of his other rhetorical crutches, someone rings a bell, the Republican congresspeoples all say "DRINK!!!", slam shotglasses on the desk, and gulp 'em down. Now that would be fun.

I would love it if everytime Obama did one of his, "On the one hand, we need to cut the budget, on the other hand you evil rich banker fatcats are going to have to pay more 'cuz Michelle and me need more date nights using Air Force One" the republican side of the chamber burst into laughter.

No need to scream, "You lie!", just give the fool his own laugh track.

Posted by: nightwitch at January 26, 2010 11:16 AM (HFFM8)

50 Bring it.

Posted by: RarestRX at January 26, 2010 11:17 AM (rmNST)

51 So, morons and moronettes, which one of these look possible: Landreiux, Dorgan, Baucus, Conrad, Hagan, Johnson, McCaskill or Pryor?

Of those? Pryor, Hagan, Landrieu, and McCaskill seem like possibilities.

McCaskill is already distancing herself from Obama despite being one of the first people to really flock to him as the Dem candidate in 2008.

Pryor, Hagan, and Landrieu all represent red states which aren't happy about the way things are going.

Everyone else listed seems to be on the way out due to retirement and/or scandal.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at January 26, 2010 11:18 AM (jGaqA)

52 Dick Durbin is measuring for drapes in Reid's office as we speak.

I would rather have Dick Durbin's career measuring its own coffin, but that's just me.

Posted by: CUS at January 26, 2010 11:18 AM (wOGfT)

53 Can you imagine the nasty fight that will take place btw Schumer and Durbin? They loathe each other.

Posted by: MPFS at January 26, 2010 11:19 AM (iYbLN)

54 tax cuts can be passed through reconciliation (the 2001 Bush tax cuts were passed this way). So theoretically if the House approved the Senate version, the Senate could then through reconciliation alter the tax rates for the union plans. Once the plan exists, the Senate can screw with the all the budget numbers with 51 votes. Tax cuts through reconciliation need a sunset provision, which is why the Bush tax cuts are set to expire. Since the union exemption was to last until 2018, it would appear the unions could actually get another couple years of exemption because of the 10-year budget window.

It would seem this is a two-edged sword. If the House passes the Senate plan, couldn't a GOP majority of 51+ then alter the budget numbers as well, perhaps by eliminating some taxes and subbing in tax credits for individuals?

Posted by: just dandy at January 26, 2010 11:19 AM (WwcbY)

55 #45 For the last year, Obama has been pissing away his political capital like a drunken sailor on shore leave. A bad rookie mistake that an experienced elected executive wouldn't have made.

He's even gone so far as to alienate Wall Street and unions, amongst his two biggest big-dollar backers.

Obama still has time to earn back some political capital (as he is trying with this fiscally idiotic "bank tax" schtick), and I think his popularity probably will rebound a little bit when it becomes clear to everyone that Obamacare is finally dead, but he'll never be able to get back to where he was.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:20 AM (6Q9g2)

56 Hey democraps, how does my ass taste?

Posted by: General Gridlock at January 26, 2010 11:20 AM (Vu6sl)

57 Why do you build me up, Buttercup? Just to let me down, mess me around?

Posted by: Kos Kidz at January 26, 2010 11:21 AM (+nSFd)

58 If Durbin was ever so foolish as to get between Schumer and a camera, a knife would not be needed.

Posted by: huerfano at January 26, 2010 11:21 AM (kJLH9)

59 Only the hardcore money "stash" people are behind him now.

That'll only last until April 15th when they notice they've got to pay several hundred of those phony stimulus withholding bucks back.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 26, 2010 11:22 AM (ffbXx)

60 Only the hardcore money "stash" people are behind him now. That'll only last until April 15th when they notice they've got to pay several hundred of those phony stimulus withholding bucks back. Do the hardcore money stash people even pay taxes?

Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at January 26, 2010 11:25 AM (nlv2q)

61 Each time Obama says "Let me be clear...", "As I have always said..." or any of his other rhetorical crutches, someone rings a bell, the Republican congresspeoples all say "DRINK!!!", slam shotglasses on the desk, and gulp 'em down. Now that would be fun.

Can anything be done in the Senate with 41 of 'em comatose from alcohol poisoning?

I'm sending money to Republican who gets up and walks out.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 26, 2010 11:26 AM (mR7mk)

62 Do the hardcore money stash people even pay taxes?

Not income taxes.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 26, 2010 11:26 AM (mR7mk)

63 re: Durbin and Schumer -- its like Highlander "there can only be one"

Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 26, 2010 11:26 AM (ffbXx)

64 We can still do this, public opinion will change! Imagine what'll happen if Democrats get nothing done.

THIMK, people!

Posted by: Nancy Pelosi at January 26, 2010 11:29 AM (YoBot)

65 #61

On paper, in theory, there are ways this can still pass.

In practice, I don't think so.

The political winds have shifted with Brown's election and the willingness of House members to step out on a limb to support this unpopular reform is significantly LESS today than it was just 2 weeks ago (and probably still dropping).

Unless you didn't care about pissing away your own seat, you'd have to be crazy to be a House member and vote to pass the Senate bill blindly unsure of what exactly would get "fixed" in reconciliation and what wouldn't.

Also, I don't think reconciliation by itself can address House members concerns about abortion funding.

So again, I don't see any politically pragmatic way this can move forward now. You may have various legislators posturing around the dead horse now, making big shows of how they do or don't kick it, but I don't think anyone is going to be able to get it to walk.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:29 AM (6Q9g2)

But I don't. I think this is over.

Posted by: Ace at 02:49 PM

It aint over until the fat lady casts the first stone

Posted by: Joe the Biden at January 26, 2010 11:29 AM (sYxEE)

67 Harry Reid: "No Rush" on Health Care. No rush? Really?

It's just what I said. That fatass racist can pay for his own angioplasties and mountain of pills

Posted by: Harry Reid at January 26, 2010 11:31 AM (sYxEE)

68 When I choose a word, it means what I say it is.

That's why I'm the Delaware Scrabble Champion

Posted by: Joe the Sage Biden at January 26, 2010 11:33 AM (sYxEE)

Both of those guys are rookies. Try getting between me and a camera, bitch, and you will see what a real beat down.

You should really just travel with your own videographer.

Posted by: John Edwards at January 26, 2010 11:35 AM (kJLH9)

70 #66

I think Obama's ego is too big to let him NOT run for re-election in two years. Can you see the Nobel Prize winning Narcissist in chief admitting he can't get re-elected and stepping down? I can't. Its the "audacity of hope", right?

I also can't imagine the Democrat who would be able to unseat him via primary (though then again, I couldn't imagine Obama actually winning the Presidency 3 years ago. . .and neither could HE. . .having stated publically that he didn't think he'd be ready to assume the office then!).

So at this point, I'd take it as an article of faith that Obama will try to run for re-election as President, and that he'll receive the Democrat party nomination.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:35 AM (6Q9g2)

71 #77ouch

Posted by: torabora at January 26, 2010 11:35 AM (CH5ak)

In a nutshell, with the Republicans now having a lock on (at least) 41 votes and a filibuster, nothing can get through Senate debate anymore.

The only way the Democrats can pass anything now is

a. If the House can agree to sign off on the Senate version without ANY CHANGES AT ALL (or vice versa), or
b. If the Dems can find at least one Republican defector to break a filibuster

Oooh pick me! Pick me!

Posted by: Olympia Snowe at January 26, 2010 11:35 AM (plsiE)

73 I'm available.

Posted by: Reille Hunter at January 26, 2010 11:36 AM (CH5ak)

74 I wouldn't put it past Dean to run against him in the primary (and he might get a decent share of the hyperliberal vote too), but Obama would still crush him.

We need Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan to beat him on economic issues. Then we need to pass a free-market set of reforms to the healthcare system (i.e. let insurers sell across state lines) to take that talking point away from the Democrats.

Posted by: Griff at January 26, 2010 11:37 AM (YoBot)

75 #79 Want some action Big Boy? wink

Posted by: Ashley Dupre at January 26, 2010 11:39 AM (CH5ak)

76 "Cap and Trade" never really had a chance anyway; this debacle just makes sure that everyone knows it.

"Card check". . .maybe at one point, but probably not anymore.

Gun control was never part of Obama's overt agenda, but that's done too.

Any other liberal pipe dreams left?

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:39 AM (6Q9g2)

77 #4 if this thing gets killed and is taken off the table before the November elections, these assholes might be able to keep their seats, after all.

Maybe, but does anyone think they wouldn't try all of this again in Jan 2011? I think most people realize we need to get the knives away from the children as soon as possible and lock them (the knives) in a cabinet that is out of reach.

Posted by: Big Daddy at January 26, 2010 11:40 AM (pOcKt)

78 "Comprehensive immigration reform" is the last, most viable, and most dangerous (to Republicans politically) issue left for the Democrats. Who knows how McCain or Graham or any number of Republicans would vote on it.

Posted by: Griff at January 26, 2010 11:41 AM (YoBot)

This thing needs to die a horrible death. For among many other reasons, to enjoy watching the lefties use their twisted pretzel logic to whine that it only failed because the bill wasn't leftist enough.

It very well might be that Congress shifts a bit to the center in an attempt at self preservation, but Obama? I doubt it. Left wing idealism is all he knows, and given his monumental narcisism I don't see him willingly pulling a Clinton by triangulating further to the center.

I see some major friction between Pelosi and mainstream Dem senators coming very soon.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 26, 2010 11:42 AM (plsiE)

80 I think Obama's ego is too big to let him NOT run for re-election in two years. Can you see the Nobel Prize winning Narcissist in chief admitting he can't get re-elected and stepping down? I can't. Its the "audacity of hope", right?

There's always the chance that the UN will offer him the chairmanship (or whatever they call it) and he does not run 'for the sake of the planet'. Doubtful, but it would give him an easy out.

Posted by: CUS at January 26, 2010 11:44 AM (wOGfT)

"Comprehensive immigration reform" is the last, most viable, and most dangerous (to Republicans politically) issue left for the Democrats. Who knows how McCain or Graham or any number of Republicans would vote on it.
In an election year? Even for democrats it's toxic.

Posted by: huerfano at January 26, 2010 11:44 AM (kJLH9)

82 59 Can you imagine the nasty fight that will take place btw Schumer and Durbin? They loathe each other.

More popcorn please.

Posted by: wrg at January 26, 2010 11:46 AM (7t+Ws)

83 OT - If Pence isn't running against Bayh, who in the GOP is?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 26, 2010 11:46 AM (ucq49)

84 It does not matter what the dem senators do about this bill.

They need to be reminded that it is not about healthcare, but rather a power grab of 1/6 of the economy.

They need to be reminded that it is not fiscally sustainable.

They need to be reminded that it is a 2000+ page monstrosity, pushed through by backroom discussion, deals, and bribery, without any public transparency, hearings, and discussion.

They way they did it subverts the legislative process. ANY ONE who voted for this perverted bill supports this unethical process and needs to be thrown out. The big issue is not the bill. It is the process they did that undermines our constitution and our republic.

Their votes are recorded and they need the same treatment by the voters of Ben Nelson and group at the restaurant in Nebraska, just for starters, before election.
/boiler pressure venting.

Posted by: Alaska Paul at January 26, 2010 11:47 AM (rMkgW)

85 I worry about immigration. Sure, Democrats get destroyed in 2010. But do they even care anymore? They'll lose this election cycle and then have 15-20 million new Democrats to sweep them back into power in 4-6 years. Possibly with the help of certain Republicans.

True, I had forgotten about Hayworth, so McCain won't be down. I'm not so sure about Brown or some of our other moderates.

Posted by: Griff at January 26, 2010 11:48 AM (YoBot)

86 #87

After this epic "fail", the Democrats aren't going to be so eager to try this again in just a year, no.

If they couldn't get it done NOW with a filibuster proof Senate majority, and +37 seats in the House, how the hell are they going to do it next year, with what is sure to be smaller margins in both parts of Congress, a less popular President and party "brand", voter fatigue, and a lingering bad economy?

In short, they've shot their wad. If Obamacare doesn't pass right now, its dead for the duration of his term in office, I think.

Posted by: looking closely at January 26, 2010 11:49 AM (6Q9g2)

87 Former Rep. John Hostettler is running against Bayh. He's not a bad GOPer, but he got destroyed by Brad Ellsworth in 2006, something like a 15-point loss by an incumbent Republican in a red district. He's also got a reputation as a poor campaigner.

Still, Rasmussen only has him down 3 to Bayh, so maybe the tide will be strong enough to sweep him in this year.

Posted by: Griff at January 26, 2010 11:50 AM (YoBot)

#61 Senate could then through reconciliation alter the tax rates for the union plans

True, but then it would be for everyone, not just the unions. Which would take away a lot of the proposed revenue to pay for the bill. Which even futher complicates the reconciliation process. From my understanding, is that anything passed though this process has to show actaul savings to the budget deficit, no accounting tricks. There is a 5 year timeframe, so everything passes though reconciliation would expire after 5 years, unless voted on for extention. I it also my understanding that anything created with 51 votes, can be destroyed with 51 votes. No supermajority to override a veto.

Posted by: Opus at January 26, 2010 11:52 AM (IebeI)

I wonder if the Won will reconcilliate during his State of the Unions' Address?

Won't be much clarity there?

Posted by: chicocano at January 26, 2010 11:55 AM (2n5cq)

90 There's always the chance that the UN will offer him the chairmanship (or whatever they call it) and he does not run 'for the sake of the planet'. Doubtful, but it would give him an easy out.

Chairman Brown Mao?

Posted by: runningrn at January 26, 2010 11:55 AM (CfmlF)

91 @99 Thx

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 26, 2010 11:56 AM (ucq49)

92 Slightly O/T, but has anyone heard from Billy Jeff lately? Wonder what his take is on Obama blaming him for the 1994 rout of Congress and calling him a "mediocre" two-term president? I think that says it all about whether Obama is really going to tack to the middle. He thinks Clinton was mediocre because he eventually worked with the GOP in the interest of political self-preservation (which also in many ways benefited the country). He sure seems to be saying that he will sacrifice his own political life for lefty pipe dreams. Is this his new sales pitch to nervous Dems? I'll drink the kool-aid too, but you go first.

Posted by: just dandy at January 26, 2010 11:57 AM (WwcbY)

93 I also can't imagine the Democrat who would be able to unseat him via primary (though then again, I couldn't imagine Obama actually winning the Presidency 3 years ago. . .and neither could HE. . .having stated publically that he didn't think he'd be ready to assume the office then!). Obviously, one of them gun totin', noose lovin' RACIST Dixiecrats!

Posted by: runningrn at January 26, 2010 11:58 AM (CfmlF)

94 #100

From my understanding, is that anything passed though this process has to show actaul savings to the budget deficit, no accounting tricks.

How did that work for the Bush tax cuts? Did they project tax revenue would increase (the way they did for JFK and Reagan) to get them through the process?

Posted by: just dandy at January 26, 2010 12:03 PM (WwcbY)

95 72 -- Hey, if Reid, Durbin, and Schumer want to engage in a circular firing squad I say "let 'em". In fact, encourage them to go after each other. Just getting rid of one (especially if it's Durbin) would be great, but if they manage to terminally damage each other...well, break out more pudding and beer!

Posted by: unknown jane at January 26, 2010 12:06 PM (5/yRG)

I just got back and this may have already been said. My understanding of the latest strategy was for the House to pass the Senate Bill as is with no changes. (even though that consitutes fraud in my opinion).

Once the bill is signed into law they come back and make the changes that the House wants and pass it using reconcilliation. As it would be a much smaller bill the Republicans would not be able to tie it up for ever and a day with objections to each part and calls for votes to override the lead Senator.

If they tried to pass the current 2000 pp bill using reconcilliation the Repubs could tie it up until after the fall election.

Posted by: Vic at January 26, 2010 01:32 PM (QrA9E)

97 Since this is sort of about Arkansas, a long time ago I interned with this girl, and she should definitely be the Republican nominee to succeed the not-Bitch set me up Marion Berry of AK.

Posted by: Mippilis at January 26, 2010 02:13 PM (VWhPF)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.

127kb generated in CPU 0.1141, elapsed 0.3104 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.2873 seconds, 225 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.