This is where the silly putty meets the road. (0.00 / 0)

It's fun to see the pressure mounting on the individuals blocking health care reform!

---

by: anothergreenbus @ Tue Mar 09, 2010 at 22:32:42 PM UTC

It'll be even more fun (4.00 / 1)

in a sadistic kind of way to see the pressure mounting on the working class after this reform passes. You've got a mandate without cost controls--at least not controls that have ever worked in the history of the world. The poor will be reasonably protected but despised by their working class neighbors, who will proceed to vote Republican. {Insert sinister laugh here}

---

by: bmull @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 02:56:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not really... (0.00 / 0)

The subsidies are based on a percentage of income, so even if insurance costs more, the government will simply be more on the hook for the difference, not the individual.

The people who get really screwed over are the folks making over 80K.  That's a political problem for us 'cos the 80K=120K crowd are the biggest swing voters in elections, and ones that we've been winning handily until recently.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 03:29:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're wasting your breath... (4.00 / 1)

People like Bmull aren't going to let facts mess up their argument.    

---

by: yitbos96bb @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 05:34:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The challenge is explaining why the bill is fatally flawed in a paragraph or less. (4.00 / 1)

Subsidies are based on percentage of income in 2014, then percentage of premium thereafter. The significance is that the individual contribution rises at an annual rate equal to health inflation, not CPI. So both the individual and the government are on the hook for premium increases. Now the subsidies start to suck around 55K (for a family of four, i.e. not much) where it begins to become attractive to some people to go uninsured. Many of those people will be mad. And remember, this is just the 18 million who qualify for subsidies. There's a whole country out there that's going to be asking themselves what they got out of this reform, other than new taxes and a mandate to buy crummy insurance.

---

by: bmull @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 11:24:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

my read of WV politics (0.00 / 0)

Nothing definite here, but I'd say if push came to shove that Rahall (WV-03) is unlikely in a Stupak bloc with Mollohan (WV-01) a stronger possibility.

The main primary & general opposition to Rahall is around economic/environmental (coal!!) issues, not social conservativism. OTOH, Mollohan is catching heat with misleading out-of-state ad money on tea-bagger kind of issues.

Also, Rahall is member of Dem leadership (chair of important natural resources committee) and less likely to buck Obama admin on a must-pass bill. Mollohan's seat is marginally more vulnerable (I don't believe either one is really at risk) so he's less likely to get the full court press from White House on a vote.

None of this helps much for a hard whip count, but for those keeping score at home it's a little more background on what's going in West Virginia...

They call me Clem, Clem Guttata. Come visit wild, wonderful West Virginia Blue

---

by: WVaBlue @ Tue Mar 09, 2010 at 23:24:58 PM UTC

Only 12 (0.00 / 0)

Stupak says that he only has 12.Does this mean there are enough  pass healthcare?

Here is what he told the Weekly Standard:

My numbers remain firm at 12. These are 12 who voted for it [in November] who will not vote for it unless we resolve this issue."

So how many does that leave for votes? I would definitely count Solomon Ortiz among the Stupak 12

---

by: ben_nelsons_hair @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 01:40:16 AM UTC

This Is Where Party Discipline Comes In! (4.00 / 2)

Republicans have gotten their members to the point where they won't block Republican initiatives because they are AFRAID of being primaried!

They don't worry about losing wayward members. They saw their loss in the special election in NY-22 as a GAIN and not a LOSS! They got rid of a Republican "Moderate" and put the fear of God into the rest of the herd!

And notice that after that display their ENTIRE Congressional membership now blindly holds total ranks and refused to compromise at ALL with Democrats on anything!

We just saw Democrats turn traitor for 8 years during the Bush administration and join with Republicans to pass the Bush tax cuts, Iraq war budgets, etc. They are like a herd of cats --- easily manipulated by any Republican president.

What we really need to do is get primary members like these "dirty Stupak 12" -- regardless of whether Republicans win in November or not. That will put the FEAR OF GOD into the remaining members so that we can get them all going in the same direction!

At least we'd have members we can count on to support core Democratic initiatives and not vote with Republicans to block every item on Obama's agenda for their own selfish purposes!

Even a FEW primaries like the one in LA would do wonders for party discipline! ESPECIALLY if Landrieu winds up losing!

(Of course the village narrative will be how terrible and counter-productive it is that those DFH's weakened that nice "bi-partisan" Mary Landrieu!) But, Republicans never cared about losing members who help carry water for the enemy! Why should we?

All it would take would be the credible THREAT to a few of them each election cycle and it wouldn't be long before they would all have a "road to Damascus" moment like Arlen Specter!  

---

by: Cugel @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 01:48:10 AM UTC

Typo! (0.00 / 0)

Blanche Lincoln not Landrieu. That was a Freudian slip on my part. I'd LIKE to see Landrieu primaried, but alas!. . .  

---

by: Cugel @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 02:05:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

... (4.00 / 1)

Don't forget Delay.  He ran K Street through his office... you broke ranks and you got cut off.   See that's the system we need to figure out how to implement.   A way to earn enough in small dollar donations to influence people.  I think we could get a decent block together that eschews lobbyist money, IF we can raise enough to make up for them giving up.    The problem, Obama seems to be the only one able to do it on a grand scale, and stupidly, they didn't keep that running well enough to use it as a stick and carrot.

---

by: yitbos96bb @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 05:38:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Should we try another wip count (0.00 / 0)

effort on the remaining votes?

It is simply amazing that whip counts haven't been really a staple of news coverage of the Hill.  

---

by: fladem @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 03:20:29 AM UTC

Not really surprising.... (4.00 / 1)

Whip counts take time and effort.   The news media is lazy and reporters are selfish... looking for the cash-in story to get them a show, book deal, etc.    Unfortunately, the news media learned the wrong lesson from Woodward and Bernstein.   The whip counts won't get them any of those things and they won't put in the effort.

Unfortunately, you're still laboring under the impression that most journalist have ethics and integrity still.    

---

by: yitbos96bb @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 05:41:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good (4.00 / 1)

I called her office a couple days back and got filibustered  on whether she was with Stupad. I wouldn't be surprised if she flipped to a "no" vote, however, and confusingly convinced herself that her pay cut or black liquor tax gimmicks were going to get teabaggers out knocking on doors for her.

---

by: flounder @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 05:02:08 AM UTC

Lipinski, Berry, Costello, Kaptur, Kanjorski, and Doyle (0.00 / 0)

Have absolutely no excuse to vote against this.  Berry is retiring and the rest of them are from heavily Democratic districts.  Every one of them should be removed from the Democratic caucus or primaried if they vote against this.  

---

by: TroyEvans @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 05:18:04 AM UTC

Nobody wants to be called Stupak... (0.00 / 0)

...but are all those denials on the phone really serious and honest?
:-/

---

by: Gray @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 10:39:14 AM UTC

Those bloc members should wear a button: "I'm with Stupak!" (4.00 / 2)

That would be honest and transparent.

---

by: Gray @ Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 15:06:35 PM UTC