Clear path vs. clear meltdown

by: Mike Lux

Thu Jan 21, 2010 at 11:38


Democrats have an absolutely clear path to passing a strong health care reform bill quickly that will re-establish their image for being able to deliver real change, begin to rebuild their bond with their base, and allow them to move on to dealing with jobs and the economy. To fail to take this path will lead to a worse meltdown and beat-down than the 1994 or 1980 elections. What they have to do is buck up their courage, stop acting out, and get the deal done.

The path, which has been suggested by many other people as well as me, is to simply pass the full Senate bill, and then immediately pass a clean-up bill through the reconciliation process, which requires only 51 votes in the Senate. The clean-up bill could include the provisions that progressives in the House and Senate, as well as wide majorities of the American people, have been demanding: the compromise on the benefits tax issue, more affordability for low and moderate income folks, ending insurers' exemption from anti-trust laws, a national insurance exchange instead of the weaker fragmented state run exchanges, and yes, some form of that public option that voters and activists keep saying we want. Doing this kind of double bill approach would allow all the good insurance regulations and other provisions in both the Senate and House versions of the bill that can't be passed through the reconciliation process because of Senate rules to still get done, while making the bill far more politically popular with voters and healing the rifts caused with the base because of all the bad compromises forced by Lieberman and other Democratic conservatives in the Senate.

If the Democrats turn from this path and give up on comprehensive reform after spending the last year working on it and coming so close, it would be one of the greatest tragedies in American history, a historic failure of nerve so unforgivable that I think it might literally break the party in two. If after spending a year on this, and putting Democrats' votes on the board in both houses in favor of it, they walk away and get nothing, they would be seen as utterly incompetent by swing and base voters alike. And don't think that going back to the drawing board and trying to get a scaled back bill that "everyone is in favor of" gets anything done. Having been successful by being the party of no, what exactly is it that the Republicans- any of them- would agree to? Olympia Snowe got every single thing she asked for in the Senate bill after delaying the bill for six months, and she still voted no. What makes anyone think she or any other Republican would vote yes for anything in an election year when it's working so well for the Republicans to say no to everything? And how long would it take to work out a deal with Republicans when we tried for a year and not one of them agreed to anything? While I'm asking questions, let me ask another: exactly which voters do Democrats think we pick up by walking away from health care reform after a year of work and already recorded votes on it in both houses? Certainly not the desperately disappointed base. Do Democrats think swing voters will reward them for spending a year on something, and then giving up on it and getting nothing? Swing voters are wanting results and real change. How does delivering nothing changing nothing on the main thing they have worked on the last year help them with those voters?

Okay, enough of asking rhetorical questions. As President Obama likes to put it: let me be clear. Democrats need to calm down, pull themselves together, and pass the Senate bill and then a parallel bill to clean up the problems in the Senate bill. Progressive leaders like Raul Grijalva need to stop making threats, join hands with their Democratic brethren, and just get this done. Conservative Democrats had their way in the Senate, but now they need to stop complaining  and telling Democrats they should give up on passing anything, and get with the program. The President needs to settle down and stop having a failure of nerves, and sending negative signals to Congress. It is time to take the path available to us on health care, do what we should have done four months and get it over with, and move on to jobs, banks, energy, and immigration. By actually delivering on the change we promised, by actually taking on the special interests we said we would and solving problems, Democrats can rebound from this bleak moment and do fine in the next election. All it takes is a little bit of courage and common sense to take the path in front of them.

Mike Lux :: Clear path vs. clear meltdown

Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
If Pelosi is right... (0.00 / 0)
Or, TPM's interpretation of her remarks, then it's too late.

TPM is right ... (0.00 / 0)
Pelosi flat out said she doesn't have the votes now .. sweet jebus!!  Where is LBJ when we need him?  We are so screwed come November

[ Parent ]
Can't they manage it to pass the clean-up bill first? (4.00 / 7)
I guess nobody has much trust in the Senators to fulfill their side of the deal. Totally possible that they will led the improvements fail after the House passed their crappy bill. Senate has lost all credibility in the last months, who would engage in an agreement that relies on good faith with those crooks ?  

I forget what David .. over at TGOS said yesterday .. (0.00 / 0)
but there are ways to pass the fix pretty damn close after the House would vote on the Senate bill .. but whether they want to is another matter

[ Parent ]
The problem isn't the timeframe, but the order! (4.00 / 5)
Again, Senators have NO credibility at all now. Passing the fix AFTER the House votes on THE CRAP requires trust in the Senate crooks. That trust isn't there. Nobody would give the damn sellouts any leverage now to block the House improvements. Liarman and Hellson have shown that Senate promises are worth NOTHING.

Isn't there a legal construct that allow to pass an improvement bill before the main thing? A conditional clause, or something like that?


[ Parent ]
That's the whole thing ... (0.00 / 0)
I think you can .. and basically what I think happens .. is that Pelosi holds it at her desk .. so Obama can then sign the Senate bill first .. at least that's what I hope ... but it might all be moot now

[ Parent ]
Thinking more about this, I don't see any reason... (4.00 / 4)
...why a Medicare expansion, allowing the 50+ part of the population to sign up, can't be passed through reconciliation TOTALLY INDEPEDENTLY of the Senate bill. This could come into effect regardless if THE CRAP passes or not. First pass this, and then let the House vote on the additional stuff in the Senate bill. Imho that's the way to overcome the difficulties, and pass a meaningful, popular refrom. The House should have the last word, not the proven liars!


[ Parent ]
They should pass ONLY Medicare 50+ buyin (4.00 / 3)
And then call it a day and pivot quickly to jobs. It's the only constructive thing that has a prayer of passing, and it can easily be sold to voters.

[ Parent ]
Much? I'd say any. (0.00 / 0)
Including driving up the deficit with WS bailouts and the wars, it is pretty much BS as usual.   I can't wait until they use the deficit to cut Social Security and Medicare.  It will be a blood bath.  

[ Parent ]
It's already a blood bath ... (0.00 / 0)
just look up thread

[ Parent ]
Sequence (0.00 / 0)
I don't think you trust the Senate. Do the language noiations first. The Senate then passes the fix it bill through reconciliation. The House then passes both bills.  

[ Parent ]
Mike ... (0.00 / 0)
have you talked to any of your DC sources?  Are you hearing things like TPM is reporting?  And why are Democrats in DC always afraid of their shadow?  Have you talked with anyone about the polls Dean talked about last night on Tweety's show?

Pelosi (0.00 / 0)
said the right and true thing: there aren't the votes to pass the senate bill as is. that's why you need this strategy.

[ Parent ]
OT, just two points for your information (0.00 / 0)
Firstly, good idea to repost the info about the Denver event, but the "time to post comments has expired"!

Secondly, pls check the "hidden comments" list. There's a new guy using "Lux" as his username. Prolly not a good idea.

Oh, and btw, what about your AirAmerica cruise? Will you still get it? Keeping my fingers crossed for you!


[ Parent ]
Tickled pink (4.00 / 6)
The Senate bill gives me everything I don't want and takes away my reproductive rights.  That ought to tickle me and the rest of the base pink.  What would really tickle me pink is for Obama to fire Geithner, Rahm and the rest of the Clintonites he surrounded himself with and to return to the platform he ran on.  C H A N G E  

the last thing Grijalva should do (4.00 / 8)
is stop making threats.

I have zero trust in the Senate to hold up its side of the bargain.

Pass a strong clean-up bill first, or just pass a simple bill (along these lines) using reconciliation and then put the insurance reforms in a regular bill Republicans will be afraid to vote against.  

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


That's where I'm at… (4.00 / 1)
...although I'd add that Grijalva et.al should only make threats if they're willing to stand behind them. Folding is what got us here in the first friggin' place. Hasn't that become clear?

"This ain't for the underground. This here is for the sun." -Saul Williams

[ Parent ]
Absolutely (4.00 / 2)
No one should trust the "we'll fix it later" promise.

[ Parent ]
The best idea is expand medicare... (4.00 / 1)
... and medicaid, and fund it through taxing the wealthy. Quick math tells me you'd immediately remove 10 million of the most vulnerable from the ranks of the uninsured. It's a less costly plan that's easy to understand and could be implemented in less than two years. It would have been better for Congress to have produced a bill like this in the first place, but there's no reason for them not to get something like this passed as soon as possible using reconciliation if necessary.

[ Parent ]
Sauve qui peut (4.00 / 4)
It hasn't been a pleasant sight, watching you smile, retreat and smile again over the course of the past year or so, Mike. I've admired your pluck, and I've never wanted to bet against you, but my experience, going back 40 years or more, tells me that where we are today is not an accident.

Fraternity boys, black or white, are not the key to anyone's salvation. We're going to have to go all the way to the bottom this time, much as we very nearly did in 1931, and there just ain't no tellin' how it's gonna turn out. I believe in keeping the faith, but that faith has nothing whatever to do with the established order. If at some point you're willing to see yourself on the barricades, I'll be happy to welcome you. In the meantime, I'd be the last person on earth to ask you to take my word for what's coming.


Mike is right ... let's just get on with it. (4.00 / 1)
"We're going to have to go all the way to the bottom this time, much as we very nearly did in 1931.."

Pity we havn't a white patrician millionaire from the Hudson Valley via Harvard to lead us from the wilderness. Elitist? Not half.

As Augustus Caesar used to say "We must work with the Cato we have".


Mike Lux for President? (4.00 / 2)
Where is the actual President giving more or less this exact speech?

AWOL, as usual. (4.00 / 3)
Bush at least went to his ranch. Obama stays at the WH and still isn't really there.

[ Parent ]
Split the party in two (4.00 / 2)
This my worst nightmare.

If you have the numbers to pass arguably the singular liberal issue of our time, and then refuse to do it, then why are we here?

http://ta-nehisicoates.theatla...

Democrats are creating a new reality in which they abandon the most important thing they've done in the past 40 years because, well, they're afraid to do it, or too tired to do it.

http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

The 41 Republicans in the Senate come from states representing just over 36.5 percent of the total US population. The 59 others (Democratic plus 2 Independent) represent just under 63.5 percent. If you count up the totals and split a state's population when it has a split delegation, you end up with about 112.3 million Republican, 194.7 million Democratic + Indep. Before Brown's election, it was about 198 million Democratic + Ind, 109 million Republican.)

Let's round the figures to 63/37 and apply them to the health care debate. Senators representing 63 percent of the public vote for the bill; those representing 37 percent vote against it. The bill fails.

http://jamesfallows.theatlanti...

The underlying reality here: if the governing political party is not united, and the opposition party is determined not to improve legislation but to kill a presidency, and exploit populism for purely partisan purposes, then it's very, very hard to pass major legislation.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...

We have a majority in numbers....in population and representation. But we are divided. Its a tragedy of epic proportions.

What does the House propose to do: PUNT.


health care (4.00 / 2)
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/

Not One Dollar
by publius

From TPM:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi just told reporters that she does not believe she has enough votes in the House to pass the Senate health care reform bill as-is -- at least not yet.

Here's my proposed response:  Not one dollar.  Not one ounce of effort.  Not one word of support.  The Democratic Party gets nothing until they pass health care.  And if they don't pass it -- if they are too cravenly and cowardly and pathetic to move the ball one more inch across the goal line -- they get nothing from me.

I'm small fish but hopefully others will join.  This is unacceptable.  And the Dems deserve zero support -- and aggressive primary challenges -- unless and until they finish the job."


Sorry, I'm not buying it (4.00 / 1)
We cannot force this bad bill down the house's throat to save political face. We don't even collectively like this bill! We wanted progressive leadership to take a harder line, I'm not gonna complain when they do, even if it's a year too late.

Who says it's necessary to pass the bill now or lose in November? David Broder?

WTF is the point of giving to the party anyway? The only person who knows how to run the DNC is Howard Dean. Give to candidates who do the right thing if you have the cash to spare.


[ Parent ]
I'm with you on everything... (0.00 / 0)
...except blaming Grijalva.

Face it - at this point, there is no path forward on anything. Period.

Finally - Obama is ready to take on the banks - but he's got no legislative path forward to do it.

Sure - we can just pass the public option through reconciliation - nice and easy - just as soon as Senate Dem leadership gives up on their chivalry toward the minority.

At this point, there is nothing to lose for the progressive caucus to refuse to go along with anything until the Senate Dems are willing to pass legislation with 50 votes + Biden. Whether they do it through reconciliation, whether they nuke the filibuster, it doesn't matter. But absolutely no legislating will happen until one of two things happens: either the Dems sidestep the filibuster, or the Republicans get 51 votes in the Senate.

Mike - what makes you think that there is anyone in either the House or Senate leadership willing to even listen to the idea of sidestepping the filibuster right now - not sometime in the indefinite future, but RIGHT NOW

And if there is nobody willing to take that idea seriously, then why shouldn't Grijalva use the only leverage he's got: blocking passage of the only piece of legislation that the leadership - without sidestepping the filibuster - can get done this year? If the House passes the Senate health care bill without forcing the Senate's hand on the filibuster, NOTHING will get done this legislative session or the next - because the Senate will not get around to sidestepping the filibuster without outside pressure.

That's the argument Grijalva should be making. I hope he is. But even if he's not, then he's still not the one to blame: until Sen leadership starts moving on a health care reconciliation bill, then there is no reason to blame anyone but Senate leadership for the dysfunction in Congress. Senate leadership is the only entity that has full power to make Congress functional; all other entities will only spin their wheels until Senate leadership uses the power of the majority.


Mike (0.00 / 0)
Could they strip out the mandate, pass that, and then add riders for the medicare expansion and wealth tax (or a robust PO)?  

I think if we could ditch the mandate, I'd be all for it.  Plus that gives the insurance companies something to come back to the table for later, in case we need to expand the program and fill the gaps?

Is that possible?  I just don't care a lick for the mandate.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox