The right-wing of Democratic Party is the obstacle to passing health reform

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Mar 15, 2010 at 10:00


While Dennis Kucinich's opposition to the health reform bill has taken up a good deal of attention online, a look at the vote count shows that the difficulty in passing the health reform bill comes overwhelmingly from the right-wing of the party.

Using Progressive Punch and David Dayen's latest whip count, here are how the "yes," "no" and "maybe" camps break down among Democratic members of Congress:

Vote for HCR bill? Democrats Crucial votes, lifetime Crucial votes, 2009-2010
Yes 191 81.2 75.7
Maybe 37 52.6 44.5
No 25 53.1 39.5
The "maybe" group includes anyone from "lean no" to "lean yes."

The final group of members who need to be won over have voted pretty conservatively, both in 2009-2010 and throughout their careers.  In order to win those votes over, some of the largest progressive organizations are now bringing the hammer down.  MoveOn.org, whose members endorsed the bill by a vote of 83%-17%, is raising money for primary challenges against any Democrat who votes "no."  SEIU is threatening to not only withdraw all support from Democrats who vote "no," but is even suggesting primary challenges, too.

The shift in focus from MoveOn and labor, combined with the ideological orientation of the Democrats who are publicly undecided, shows we have entered a different phase of the fight.  While there will inevitably be some continued left-wing opposition to the bill, as we enter the final week of the process in the House the main focus is going to be about twisting the arms of enough center-right Democrats to finish the job.

In fact, even the activists and the organizations who continue to make efforts to improve the bill are an important part of the effort of passing the bill.  While the focus in shifting overall, if the weight of progressive demands to improve the bill is lifted from the scale entirely, the balance shifts even more toward conservative Democrats.  From that point, the bill could be further watered down, or sunk entirely.

In 2009, the left did a remarkable job raising public hell over the inadequacy of the health reform bill.  Left-wing dissatisfaction was more than just an occasional, minor news story from August through December.  They were a very big deal, and resulted in some important concessions.  In fact, that there were any concessions at all, and that the bill didn't get even worse than the Senate Finance Committee version, is actually a pretty remarkable achievement.  Usually, the only direction that legislation moves in at every point in the legislative process is to the right.

It was a hell of an effort, but agitation is winding down.  Now it is time to force the right-wing of the party to pass the damn bill.

Chris Bowers :: The right-wing of Democratic Party is the obstacle to passing health reform

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The right-wing of Democratic Party is the obstacle to passing health reform | 75 comments
Too bad the Bill has been so watered down (4.00 / 11)
But what's the use in passing this bill if all it does is force people to give money to the Insurance companies? Without a public option (which Glenn Greenwald astutely notes, the senate dems have been fighting the inclusion of the public option tooth and nail whilst pretending that they're for it. What that leaves us with is a bad bill and without a public option, I don't see why we, the American People, should accept it.
I'd say (4.00 / 6)
at the end of the day most Americans with private health insurance claim to be happy with it. So giving the rest the same thing is not that outrageous. Though of course it is not "giving," but at most "helping to buy."

I don't say you have to agree because I know many here don't.



New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
I don't agree… (4.00 / 3)
...with this:

...at the end of the day most Americans with private health insurance claim to be happy with it.

...cuz if most folks were happy with their current providers, we probably wouldn't even be talking about the need for healthcare reform. I think a good percentage of people who are not rich think health insurers are gouging them and/or making them vulnerable to financial ruin, but in the absence of alternatives, what are they to do? That's where the opening for this whole debate came from. Insurers and conservatives have re-routed the discourse by focusing on costs, which to me is kind of ironic, but whatever...

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

[ Parent ]
Can't use you own facts (0.00 / 0)
The fact is, most people are happy with their own insurance.  That is one of the reasons it is so hard politically to change the system.  People understand there are problems, but don't want to give up what they've got.  They both fear and require change.

Googling around I found this older survey from 2006 (pdf).  Most are unsatisfied with health care and insurance in this country, but are satisfied for themselves.

Now, those statistics are changing.  (Can't find a link right now, but have seen that.)  Each year that contentness goes down a peg or two.  But almost everyone with private insurance gets it from their company and don't see the cost.  They don't realize how bad their situation is until something dramatic happens.

I doubt anyone paying for insurance privately, out of hand is happy about it, though.

[ Parent ]
Whose facts are being used? (4.00 / 1)
Certainly not yours, that's for sure, or else as tru blu said we wouldn't be having this discussion.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." -- Harry S. Truman
[ Parent ]
How about changing… (4.00 / 1)
..."happy with their own insurance" to glad they have some form of health insurance? Maybe neither of us know what we're talking about in any large-scale statistical sense, but I do know about the company I used to work for, whose plan had such a bad premium/deductible/coverage ratio that more than one of my former co-workers looked elsewhere (spouse's plans, etc) for coverage.

Personally, I was certainly glad my wife and I had splashed on a better plan before she got sick some years back, and thankfully she's OK now and we didn't go bankrupt, though admittedly, as a family of freelancers these days things are pretty tight. My colleagues still joke about my former employer's plan, though, and I can't imagine--esp. with all the talk these days of exorbitant, steadily skyrocketing premiums--that they're the only ones across this big nation. Are they glad they have something? Sure. Do they love it? Not!...


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

[ Parent ]
Despite the concessions… (4.00 / 3)
...we're currently in a place similar to late last year. Perhaps the biggest difference is that Dems are now resigned to lose seats in Congress this November, which might have been avoided if progressives had held their ground and insisted that a truly substantive healthcare reform bill get pushed through in the first place. All this just-do-something-anything talk is maddening to me, but if there's an electoral bloodbath in November, at least they know they only have themselves to blame.

And for the record, I think we should all be very vocal (nuisances, even) about the need for a public option until the absolute point of no return.  

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

[ Parent ]
My sentiments exactly. (4.00 / 3)
This bill is worse than passing nothing: it institutionalizes the problem rather than solves it.  We cannot afford to pass this bill, for there will be no fixing it later -- just look at NAFTA, the patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and other atrocious legislation that were passed and are unlikely to ever be fixed or abolished.

We need to kill the bill and force Democrats to start over from scratch with single-payer as the starting point and a strong public option as the final result.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." -- Harry S. Truman

[ Parent ]
pretzel boy (4.00 / 9)
I've been watching with some trepidation the way Mr. Bowers is bending himself into a pretzel trying to defend the attacks by MoveOn and Kos and even himself on progressives who think this bill, if passed, will sink the Democratic party for a generation.  While I respect Mr. Bowers attempts at fairness in his posts, the bottom line is that he puts the Democratic party above the Democratic ideals.  This is the reason why so many of us have left the Democratic party.  

The only Democrats left seem to care more about retaining power, as evidenced by the ad nauseam whip counts on the 2010 election, then they do about upholding Democratic ideals.  What good is power if your party is not willing to use it?

I am very disappointed that intelligent and thoughtful people like Mr. Bowers are actively trying to push this piece of crap bill on the rest of us while simultaneously calling those of us who see this disaster coming-- "purists."

It really sucks when people who you thought were on your side are now fighting to get rid of you because they have lost the will to fight for what is right and are willing to concede to the Republican demands.

No wonder the country views Democrats as weak.  We have Kos and MoveOn and Bowers to prove their point.

Who's "willing to concede to Republican demands" again? (0.00 / 0)
The Dems, for whatever failings in will, strategy, or intention, compromised with the GOP and the turncoat Dems to come up with a bill they could pass. You apparently wanted them to "fight for what is right" and fail, as that would clearly be the outcome, given the realities the "debate" revealed. Sorry, but your argument at this point seems childish -- some kind of heroic self-image about fighting the good fight and losing with -- what?-- "honor", "idealism", "dignity"? What?

Personally I'm sick of losing. Even this flawed bill will mark a historic change toward accepting healthcare as a right, not a commodity. I think it is a foundation to build consensus for major improvements as time goes on.

You say you've left the Dem Party, yet mouth great concern about its electoral outlook. I can't help wondering about your real motives here. You really think failing to pass any health bill will not be an electoral disaster for the party? Really? Passing a bill that makes insurance available to millions of Americans who now can't get it at any price, banning rescission and preexisting conditions bullshit is weak, but ending the process with nothing is somehow "strong"? You rant on about the evil of "conceding to Republican demands", yet agitate to concede to the ultimate Republican demand: kill the bill entirely. I thought only the wingnuts were this good at turning logic on its head.

[ Parent ]
re: build (4.00 / 4)
I think it is a foundation to build consensus for major improvements as time goes on.

can you explain how will you build in the future by making the private industry more powerful?

[ Parent ]
Truer words have rarely been written. (0.00 / 0)
I've been watching with some trepidation the way Mr. Bowers is bending himself into a pretzel trying to defend the attacks by MoveOn and Kos and even himself on progressives who think this bill, if passed, will sink the Democratic party for a generation.  While I respect Mr. Bowers attempts at fairness in his posts, the bottom line is that he puts the Democratic party above the Democratic ideals.  This is the reason why so many of us have left the Democratic party.

And it's not just Chris Bowers and Kos who is guilty of this, but the moderators at FDL, MoveOn, MLW, and other prominent blogs.  They're more concerned with the Democratic Party than they are with the people it is supposed to represent.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." -- Harry S. Truman

[ Parent ]
To be fair (4.00 / 1)
I don't think Chris has demonized anyone the way Kos and some others in the pass-the-bill camp have.
[ Parent ]
Is it really (4.00 / 8)
that "remarkable" that the bill ended up a few ticks to the left of the Baucus bill given that the House also, you know, passed a bill?
The House and the American people don't matter. (4.00 / 5)

[ Parent ]
one more thing (4.00 / 8)
When did all the "cool kids" decide that it was time to give up on the fight for a public option?  The fight is still going on and yet Bowers et al are giving aid to the enemy and making it much harder for progressives to win this battle.  It is infuriating.

I could understand their position if the public option was dead, but it isn't.  We're using reconciliation right now and instead of pushing harder with the fight, the progressive establishment has decided that they want to stop our movement to include a public option because they have decided that it is just too hard.

With friends like these ...

You can rationalize away your capitulation as "pragmatism" if that makes you feel better.  You can call me a "purist" or "naive" or any of the other colorful monikers you have given to those of us who are willing to fight for our beliefs and it won't do a damn thing to stop us.  The American public deserves a bill that does not force us to patronize the institutions that have created the problem in the first place.  

We deserve the opportunity to get our health care from an efficiently run business like MediCare so our money is not used for marketing or CEO bonuses or more importantly, used to thwart any future improvements to health care through the use of their now unlimited corporate donations.  We want OUR money to be used for OUR healthcare.

Why do many progressives see that as too much to ask?

it's because (0.00 / 0)
If you use the public option to take down the reconciliation bill, you end up with the Senate bill. IMHO.


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
[ Parent ]
We are already (4.00 / 7)
stuck with the Senate bill.  I don't understand your logic.  Nobody is trying to take down the reconciliation bill with the public option.  We are trying to improve it with the public option thereby taking down the Senate bill.  How do you know that a public option will take down the reconciliation bill?  Nobody has voted yet.  You all seem to be prejudging the outcome and giving up because of that prejudgement.

Maybe we should start a war with Iraq because everybody knows Sadam has weapons of mass destruction.  Sound familiar?

[ Parent ]
I believe you said best above about pretzel logic (4.00 / 7)
You will get the same people saying a weakened public option is not a good idea because we didn't get the best public option, but a so-so bill is preferable overall to no bill. This conversation ceased to be about logic a long time ago. It is about distortion. Thus, someone will distort an argument that says under-insurance is not preferable to no insurance because you are just moving the chairs around the deck of the Titanic. They will re-engineer to the argument into "oh you don't want to insure people." The whole point of such a statement is to distort the terms of the debate to pressure you into agreeing with them. Glenn Greenwald also had an op ed about the nature of the debate on this level too. Some of the worst offenders of the distortion game is Nate Silver, but he's hardly the only one.  It is really just about pushing people into agreement, which is one of the reasons I say that this pretense that progressives can not fight is false. They simply are only willing to fight those who are the left rather than right of them just like the party leadership.

Let me repost part of Glenn's statement on the subject, and what you see here:

"As I've documented before, the "debate" over the President's health care reform bill has come to resemble most political debates in the U.S.:  dominated by ludicrous, obvious strawmen and bullying, manipulative tactics in lieu of substantive debate.  Proponents of the bill have continuously claimed -- falsely -- that progressive opponents object to the bill because they're petulant purists who didn't get everything they want and are therefore willing to sacrifice expanded access to health care in pursuit of ideological dogma.  We like to think we've come a long way since 2003, yet the health care "debate" is being shaped by the likes of The New Republic's Jonathan Chait and his fellow Beltway Democratic comrades reprising their standard, typical role of deriding anyone "to their Left" who opposes their President's plan as unSerious, unhinged losers who don't care about serious policy matters or progressive goals.  When it's The New Republic -- whose self-proclaimed editorial mission is to re-make the Democratic Party in Joe Lieberman's image -- taking the lead in dictating what every Good, Serious Progressive must affirm (this "bill is the greatest social achievement of our time"), you know the debate has gone seriously awry."

http://www.salon.com/news/opin...

The whole point here of all of this Centrist Noise Machine is to bully the left into capitulation. It serves no other function at this point. Even the Whip Counts are  about convincing you that you need to absolutely have the votes before they can even take up an amendment or else they engage the fear tactic saying the bill will fail. The truth is what they fear is that their own behavior will be exposed.  

[ Parent ]
Follow up on purists (4.00 / 5)
Notice, we are willing to accept a weakened public option, but we  see if chris's point is right in this diary, that the purists are the right side of the party. But no one ever calls them on it.
[ Parent ]
re: down (4.00 / 1)
If you use the public option to take down the reconciliation bill

a vote on a po/buy-in amendment won't bring the reconciliation bill down. if the bill was to go down, it would be because it doesn't have the votes. can we fight for an amendment?

[ Parent ]
the prospect of Obama having a big fat failure (4.00 / 2)
on his hands is frightening. That's motivation for some.  
[ Parent ]
On this, I hope the right-wingers succeed (4.00 / 5)
kill this thing
Preemptive Capitulation (4.00 / 4)
It's the rallying cry of the new Democrats.
for many (4.00 / 6)
this bill is more about making sure Obama looks good than it is about helping the American people.  
A bird in hand... (4.00 / 5)
...is worth two in the bush.

It is time to pass this bill, put it in our pocket, and move on to improving it.

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!

They won't fucking improve it. (4.00 / 3)
What's so hard to understand about that?

Obama has said that 90% of what he wanted is in this bill.

There will be no improving it. You're simply fooling yourself if you believe that.

[ Parent ]
This issue isn't going away. (0.00 / 0)
Once this framework is in place, there will be all sorts of attempts to improve it.

Nonetheless, even if you were right, and there was going to be no improvement, this bill is better than the status quo, and it is worth supporting for that reason alone.

Obama has said that 90% of what he wanted is in this bill.

Then obviously there is another 10% that he still wants.

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!
[ Parent ]
There are those of us who don't see this as a bird (4.00 / 2)
but rather a ticking time bomb.  We put that in our pocket; at some point in the future it'll blow our freakin legs off.

I may have asked you this before, but did you support the 2003 Medicare prescription drug law?  Was that a bird in the hand?

[ Parent ]
I don't know how I would have voted were I in Congress. (0.00 / 0)
I wasn't politically active enough at the time to be able to evaluate how I would have voted on the merits.  I remember being very unhappy about the process.  I think at one point the Rs even watered it down because an earlier version got too many D votes.

What I do know is that I have followed this from the beginning and despite all the negative things that have happened to this Health Care Bill, at its core, it is a strong step toward universal coverage, reining in costs, and improving care.

Let me ask you this.  Do you disagree that the status quo is its own ticking time bomb?  What if there isn't an opportunity to amend this bill in this go around?  Is this bill really worse than the status quo?

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!

[ Parent ]
Yes, the status quo is a ticking time bomb (0.00 / 0)
but at least we can see clearly that it is so, and so we will always be pressured to do something about it.

This bill is in effect wrapping up that ticking time bomb in gift wrap and saying, look we can't see it anymore, it's gone now!  And lulling ourselves into thinking that we've done something about the problem.  Even if we on Open Left know better, the rest of the public won't, and politicians will be happy to play dumb and rest on their laurels.

Yes, this bill is worse than the status quo - or rather, I fear it'll lead to a situation that is worse than what we have right now.  As bruhrabbit pointed out here, the insurance industry co-opted the term "universal health care" and turned it into meaning that everyone has to pay a tribute to insurance companies by law.  This is not like Switzerland or some other countries where insurance companies are required to be non-profit and are kept on a very short leash by the government; this is government basically selling its people into servitude to the insurance industry.  Without any real controls, this is clearly a recipe for giving the insurance industry more power and money and forever allowing them to dominate the health of our country.  With the increase in their power and money, they'll be able to totally own our government, even the Dennis Kuciniches and Bernie Sanders of the world.  We will never see even a negotiated rates public option, to say nothing of Medicare for All.

I do agree that maybe in the short-term, like the first five years or so after it's implemented, people who used to be unable to obtain insurance will benefit.  But watch those premiums, co-pays and deductibles rise out of control.  Then what?  There'll be no room for competition, as the insurance industry is probably the least competitive market out there.  What is Congress going to do, take away the insurance industry's power?  Highly unlikely - they have a hard enough time taking on special interests now, to say nothing of when the insurance industry has completely bought every politician three times over.  Essentially, this bill sends us in the direction of a corporate state, while dangling the prospect of spreading crap insurance to everyone - whether they want it or not - as a "liberal victory".

[ Parent ]
I think we both fear the same result. (0.00 / 0)
We just disagree about what will bring it about.

You fear that passing this bill as is will end the momentum for reform without solving the health care problem, leading to devastation.

I fear that failing to pass this bill will end the momentum for reform without solving the health care problem, leading to devastation.

I completely understand where you are coming from, and felt the same way myself for a time.  In the end though, my evaluation is that this bill will help people in the short term (which you also seem to agree with), while setting a precedent of regulations and reforms that can be built upon (which you don't seem to agree with).

I may not be able to change your mind, but I will say this...if we don't act now, why would it be any better next time?  The insurance industry is only going to keep getting more powerful, and not only that, we will have Democrats who are even more terrified to act on Health Care.

To me, the fear that after HCR people will ignore the need to do more is not sufficient.  If we fail, they won't trust our solutions either.

So in the end, I support reform because it is good on the merits.  It will help people.  It will build a foundation for further reform.  It will be up to people like us to keep the momentum for reform going, but I am not backing down from that struggle.

You don't have to agree.  I even understand why you don't, but those are my reasons.  And after reform is passed and it comes time to fighting the next health reform battle, I hope you'll stand with me.

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!

[ Parent ]
Of course I will stand with you (0.00 / 0)
But I don't think it'll be enough.  Nor will a solid majority of the American people be enough, as we saw with the public option.

Still, one can always hope. (Now I know what that "Hope" in Barack Obama's campaign meant: "HOPE... that someday someone else will come along and save you, cuz I sure as hell won't!")

[ Parent ]
Working Class voters need to see the connection... (4.00 / 4)
Since the middle class is now the working poor/working class, we need to make sure that Crazy Obama doesn't alienate (or manipulate) anybody else who may be too dumb or just plain Kansas-stupid like he did in the MA-Sen. race.

He (and Rahm) may have outsmarted themselves already by ceding power to R's in order to rein in the extraordinarily strong leftward shift in expectations that Obama's campaign engendered.

I'm seeing past it, but a lot of good folks who voted for change just won't show up. Some of them are really pissed off at all of D.C.

They only call it class war when we fight back.

"really pissed off at all of D.C." doesn't begin to describe this... (4.00 / 1)
feeling in America right now. Ordinary people who have now become convinced that D.C. has failed this country, are starting to come together, in communities everwhere to begin to reshape the debate and remake the government into what it was created to do. Serve the people. Mr Bowers please pass on to those who you may know in D.C. that they ignore this effort at their peril. They are not leading, they will hopefully follow but please get out of the way!
This is not a partisan bunch, not "activists", as he decribes using "agitation" to upset the Washington Parties.
These are a calm, logical, non-partisan, hardworking regular people who want honest,open debate to begin to set clear prioriries and come up with simple solutions to the critical problems threatening us all, and particularly this broken democracy. The failures become clearer everyday. It seems that this post and most in D.C. are the ones that get it. They are the opposition. they are the obstacle to finding solutions. Re-election over effective governance. That will soon end with a calm,quiet and powerful movement that is the only thing that ever has and ever will restore our democracy... a small group of committed people working for the common good. If you haven't heard of this yet, you will. Look for them soon, in a neighborhood near you.
[ Parent ]
Oooooh yes, the small committed groups of concerned people... (0.00 / 0)
the left's version of "the silent majority", or "the lurkers support me in emails".

Please, trying to make yourself feel better is understandable, but this kind of general-minded hopefulness is not real organizing.

Why don't you start up one of these "small committed groups of people" that are "just down the road from many of us" and see how it goes? Then we'll be more likely to listen when you speak of secret groups that will step in and fix the country for us.

[ Parent ]
We must be living on different planets (4.00 / 4)
In fact, that there were any concessions at all, and that the bill didn't get even worse than the Senate Finance Committee version, is actually a pretty remarkable achievement.

Chris, I thought you were liveblogging (0.00 / 0)
the Speaker's meeting with bloggers at 11am?
It was live twitter.. (0.00 / 0)
...look to your right and up.

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!
[ Parent ]
Thanks! n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Bizarre (4.00 / 1)
But what's the use in passing this bill if all it does is force people to give money to the Insurance companies?

Well, duh.  If that's all it did there would be no use in passing it.

What a bizarre argument.

Relatively speaking... (4.00 / 4)
...it's fair to say "all it does is force people to buy private insurance." That's the centerpiece of the bill. Those that will be forced to buy insurance will be paying the largest part of the cost of this bill. They'll be getting crappy insurance and lose money that they might have used for out-of-pocket health costs. Everyone else involved is going to profit.

So, on the whole, it's fair to say "all it does is force people to give money to the insurance companies."

What's bizarre is anyone thinking it does much more than that.

[ Parent ]
meh (4.00 / 6)
the feed of pelosi's comments convinced me that this is a time to oppose the bill.  to win concessions.  before that, i was leaning towards supporting it or of mixed mind.  I don't think they're ever going to give progressives anything more than bread crumbs until they take progressives seriously.
You won't get credit for kiling the bill.... (3.20 / 5)
...conservatives will... which means next time around (in about 30 years) a more "market based" solution will be proposed.  You can't win by losing.

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!
[ Parent ]
have you considered that by passing a mandate with no gov't option bill... (4.00 / 3)
...you will inflict more short-term and long-term electoral damage and make a more-to-the-right gov't that will makes people's lives worse a lot more probable?
[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
And found that notion easy to dismiss.  I think this is highly unlikely.  This is particularly true when you realize the PO passed by the house was a fairly poor one not expected to help much.
[ Parent ]
unlikely? (4.00 / 2)
we saw that in MA.
[ Parent ]
More damage than what? (4.00 / 2)
Than passing one with an option? No argument there. The question is, what if the PO or something like it is not in the cards? You apparently want the whole effort to go down in failure then. If you really think that won't sink the Dem Party and keep things miserable for millions of Americans, I think you're hallucinating. Failure will be credited to the Mighty Right and the lesson learned will be that you don't mess with the financial plutocrats. If you think the Dems are cowards now, wait til you see them scatter next time anything like HCR comes up again.

How that's not obvious is honestly beyond my understanding.

And PS: I'm as pissed as anyone about how the bill is turning out. I just don't see how making the ultimate concession to the GOP, killing the bill, is a rational expression of that rage.

[ Parent ]
re: damage (0.00 / 0)
You apparently want the whole effort to go down in failure then.

no. I'm ok with an amendment vote. if the vote fails, the bill won't go down.

[ Parent ]
Democrats will lose in November because... (4.00 / 1)
...they passed this bill. If they fail to pass it, they can, rightly, blame the whole fiasco on Republicans. They'll lose in greater numbers in November because they passed the bill.
[ Parent ]
they can't blame this on republicans... (0.00 / 0)
they are in charge with huge majorities...

If they fail to pas the bill, the GOP will roll over the Dems the rest of the year and the Dems will get crushed in November...

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!

[ Parent ]
They have a Dem president and Congress. (0.00 / 0)
How in hell are they going to blame the Reps? You're dreaming if you think some attempt to explain how the Reps used exotic Senate rules to defeat them is going to win them any votes. All the vast majority of Americans know is, either the Dems won on passing health care, or they spent a year on it and then lost to a minority.

If you want the bill to fail, your call. But arguing that that would be better for Dem electoral prospects is ridiculous. Personally, I think even this minimal bill will limit their losses, maybe to zero, if they acknowledge that it's not enough yet and they need to keep working on it next year after they dump the filibuster.

[ Parent ]
Who will believe Democrats? (4.00 / 1)
When people learn what this bill is going to cost and how little it will do for them, no one will believe a word Democrats say about health care for years to come. When, added to that, five or six years from now, they begin to threaten millions with fines for not carrying insurance (that they cannot afford), it will seriously damage the Democratic Party.

Democrats haven't got much credibility to lose; at less than 30% approval, they can't sink much lower. But they will when people find out what's in the bill.

[ Parent ]
Nope. (0.00 / 0)
People like the bill more when they understand what's in it.  The problem is that those who are advocating defeat for the bill (mainly Republicans) have been lying about what's in it.

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!
[ Parent ]
let's be honest here (4.00 / 3)
most of the people commenting on this site don't have the power to kill the bill.  that, in fact, is the whole point.  if the people on this site were making policy, then it would probably be a debate between a mixed private/public system and single payer healthcare.

so all we can do is simply think in ways that are appropriate.  what good does it do me to be a 'fan' of a bill that I think is shit and that people like Nancy Pelosi are now trying to guilt me into being silent about.

I'm not stupid - I know what the consequences of failing to pass health care reform would be - but I also know that the people in the center (like the administration) have much more to lose, and so I would like to threaten them as much as possible until they give me something I want.  Because that's what they respond to.  As long as that lesson is not clear from this yearlong process, the entire thing will have been a waste for progressives.

[ Parent ]
The Dems will sink themselves if they pass this horror. (4.00 / 3)
I don't think you understand the gravity of the situation or the public's understanding of what's about to be forced upon them.  The voters in Massachusetts elected Scott Brown because they didn't want another DLC flavor-of-the-moment getting in and helping to pass a bill that is essentially a clone of RomneyCare (forcing people to buy insurance they can't afford, with restrictions on abortion coverage).  They'll do the same for Democrats in general this November for the same reason.  As my signature reads, people would much rather deal with the monsters they know are monsters than with monsters they can't be sure of.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." -- Harry S. Truman
[ Parent ]
"sink themselves" (4.00 / 1)

Exactly, which could be the reason why House Democrats are seeking to avoid a roll-call vote. From McClatchy [emphasis added]:

Under the plan, the House of Representatives would approve the Senate bill by "deeming" it to have passed as part of a separate measure governing the rules of a House debate on a follow-up health care measure. That follow-up legislation will be designed to change certain controversial portions of the Senate-passed version, a path more palatable to House Democrats who fear that voting for the Senate bill could backfire against them in elections this fall.

The maneuver would enable House members to avoid casting a politically risky vote on the Senate package, and to say they voted only for the more popular follow-up measure.


[ Parent ]
And isn't passing the bill the ultimate concession to the insurance industry? (4.00 / 1)
Not to mention the "Don't you dare challenge the President and the Democratic Party!" crowd.
[ Parent ]
if you say so (4.00 / 4)
all i'm hearing is 'be afraid.'

i don't want to be afraid anymore.  i want the people who come up with or enable bad policies to be afraid that they won't get what they want without giving something in return.  they got like 78% of what they want instead of 80% and we got like 1% instead of 3%.  that's not good enough.

and i've paid high premiums as a self-employed person that i couldn't afford, been without health insurance- albeit for short times, and been on the medicaid extension in my state (which is brilliant), and considered the implications of massive debt on my generation (i'm 32).  i still want something better.  

i don't know if it's the second hand-through twitter feed or if it's just being fed up, but i want something better than this piece of $hit bill and i want whoever is responsible for that not happening to know that.

who knows, maybe i'll change my mind tomorrow.  i doubt it though.  i really don't think enough people are committed to getting even adequate healthcare for all the people in the United States.  Starting with the president - people who were never going to vote for the bill get their ideas into the bill, but people who are responsible for getting him elected are left out in the cold.

[ Parent ]
I'm afraid... (0.00 / 0)
I'm afraid of losing my health coverage with my pre-existing conditions...  why do you want me to continue to live in fear.

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!
[ Parent ]
You still won't be covered if the bill passes. (4.00 / 2)
You'll have to wait until 2014, by which time the new GOP majority will have repealed it or amended it more to their liking.  As it is, the loopholes in the Senate and House bills will still allow you to be denied coverage.  And you'll still be unable to afford it.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." -- Harry S. Truman
[ Parent ]
i don't want you to be afraid (4.00 / 1)
and i understand why you support the bill.  I have a lot of anger towards insurance companies because they - and the medical system as a whole - played a part in my father's passing.

I think it's extremely healthy that we have different viewpoints on this because we've had different lives, and I respect you a lot for stating yours.

[ Parent ]
Obama's bill is a market based proposal (4.00 / 2)
Who cares if it fails?
[ Parent ]
why is someone troll rating this?! (0.00 / 0)
that's really unethical.
[ Parent ]
Thank you Chris! (4.00 / 1)
...for being a beacon of reason in a sea of nihilism.  Thank you for all your efforts!  Let's pass the damn bill and move forward!  

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!
Why not kill it (4.00 / 4)
and move forward?
[ Parent ]
When bad leaders are calling the shots... (4.00 / 2)
...doing nothing is always better. Whatever the majority, corporate-owed legislature passes is going to be worse than the status quo. The only upside to this bill passing is that it will be years before it does anything. In the meantime, insurance premiums will continue to rise, millions will continue to lose their insurance, hundreds of thousands will continue to die. Meanwhile, Republicans and more centrist, corporatist Democrats will win seats in Congress.

By the time the bill takes effect, there won't be a Democratic executive to administer it's provisions properly and I can't see them enforcing fines on those that choose not to comply with the mandate.

By the time this bill is supposed to take effect, a huge majority of Americans will be screaming for its repeal and blaming Democrats for its passage.

[ Parent ]
Exactly, how does one :"move forward"... (0.00 / 0)
...by killing the bill?  Non-fantasyland answer please.  'cos there won't be a new vote on anything "better"--not now or in 20 years.  That's ignoring both history and reality.

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!
[ Parent ]
If this bill fails (4.00 / 2)
The health care problem won't go away.  There'll still be the same immense pressure to pass health care reform.

If it does pass, however, all the political impetus to get something done or "improve" the bill will deflate like a popped balloon.  Any public demand for improvements like a public option, more subsidies, Medicare for All, etc. will be met with "Hey we already did health care, what more do you want?"  Members of Congress will be "too tired" to touch health care again for, indeed, 20 years.  Okay, maybe not that long, just until the point when the public is sufficiently fed up with this country's health care system that they again revolt.

Now, I'd like you to explain how consolidating the insurance industry's power over our daily lives and giving them the entire freakin country as a captive market will somehow make it easier for us to take away their power in the future.  Non-fantasyland answer please.

[ Parent ]
If the bill passes (4.00 / 3)
the presence of "guaranteed issue" will act as a gigantic impediment to moving forward on universal healthcare. The argument will be "well, everyone's covered, so what's the problem?"

Meanwhile, the problems of inadequate subsidies for mandated insurance, underinsurance, lack of insurance and the consequent fines through non-compliance, among others, plus the underlying enormous costs incurred by a health care system based private, for-profit health insurance (unique among the advanced countries of the world)-with an industry further enriched, entrenched and made even more powerful by the mandate and the subsidies-will remain.

[ Parent ]
Every time I turn around there's another Democrat . . . (4.00 / 3)
. . . explaining why the Left just isn't very significant.  I suppose it's marginally better when they trot out the 83%-17% figure from the MoveOn Poll - unless you think about that poll for a minute or two.

I'm reminded of David Axelrod's recent comments saying essentially:  "When you get into the details, people like our plan."  Gotta love a man with the brass to claim his push poll is more accurate than less slanted ones.

Similar with MoveOn.  The only information on "opposition" to the health plan I received through MoveOn e-mails referenced death panels and other goofy faux attacks.  Hey, if death panels and fascist socialism were the only arguments against this plan, we'd all be on board.

But they're not the only arguments against the plan. In fact they are not even legitimate arguments by any stretch, yet they are heavily promoted by Establishment interests, including Democratic interests, to drown out actual criticisms like "another industry give-away."

In the vote itself, MoveOn threw a bone to debate and put up some short comments in support and in opposition to the plan, but the arguments were necessarily superficial in the limited space provided.  "Industry give-away" was mentioned but it was never explained, for example, that Liz Fowler, a former exec at WellPoint essentially drafted Obama's/Baucus's plan.

Also missing was a range of choices.  The Democratic false dichotomy of "this plan or no plan" was presented squarely in the poll.  Other options like pushing for a Medicare for All buy-in or a meaningful public option were not mentioned.

And 17% still hated the plan so much that "no reform" looked better.

Elections are in about eight months.  I've a feeling that this 17% is going to look a bit more significant as time goes on.

Or not.  These are the same Democrats that got their asses handed to them in Massachusetts, over Ted Kennedy's seat, by a teabagger.  

It not going to "look significant" it will become significant... (4.00 / 1)
because it will grow dramatically once this HC bailout bill passes and voters really see how they got bait-and- switched. In fact numbers are mounting quickly, of citizens who have realized who the "opposition" to finding simple solutions to critical problems like HC. They are quietly gathering out of the DC spotlight right now in an effort to have calm and logical coversations, setting priorities and acting on fixes so despartely needed to right our democracy. There is probably a group down the street from most of you right now. Lets embrace civility,respect and consensus building.
[ Parent ]
Start with cost (0.00 / 0)
Obama should have taken a lesson from Romneycare and understood that the HCR the voters REALLY want is reform that starts with controlling costs. Obamacare does precisely the opposite; it focuses on expanded coverage and uses utterly transparent accounting gimmicks that give only the appearance of cost control. A five year old child would realize that this Bill will explode HC costs 10 years out. My god, we can't even pay for what we already have. Medicare alone has future unfunded liabilities of $30T (that's trillion). And so what does Obama do? He throws gasoline on the debt fire.
You dupe. (4.00 / 1)
Obamacare is very close to being Romneycare, as you could see for yourself, if you ever got passed your "deficit-hawk" bullshit.
[ Parent ]
Move-On NOT PROGRESSIVE (4.00 / 2)
For the sake of fucking fuck, can we please get over the idea that Move-On.Org is progressive? It's a top down, DNC fluffer org that was started to pushback against the move to impeach Clinton.

Today they are protesting Dennis Kucinich for fuck's sake. This is NOT a progressive organization, at best they are center-left or moderate left.

The right-wing of Democratic Party is the obstacle to passing health reform | 75 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox