Health reform updates

by: Chris Bowers

Sat Mar 20, 2010 at 14:40


( - promoted by Chris Bowers)

3:45 p.m. Live audio of President Obama addressing Democratic caucus: Watch a video the speech here.

Update 3:30 p.m.: Chris Carney to vote yes.  He had been "yes to no." Very important pickup.

Update 3:00 p.m.:  House will have three separate votes tomorrow: on the rules of debate, on the Senate bill, and on the fixes to the Senate bill in the reconciliation.

The changes to the reconciliation by can be seen in a nine-page PDF here.

President Obama is supposedly about to address House Democratic caucus, but he hasn't left the White House yet.

****

This just in:

2:21 PM ET -- Democrats say no deem and pass.

Two Democratic lawmakers tell the Huffington Post that the party will not use the controversial measure known as deem and pass to get health care into law.

Rep. Eliott Engel (D-NY) said the House will vote on the Senate bill first before it considered a separate package of reconciliation changes. Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) confirmed.

"Deem and pass" was only being considered to make some Democrats more comfortable with voting for the Senate bill. The right-wing attacks against the procedure must have scared off a number of Dems, thus no longer making it a net positive for overall comfort level in the caucus.

Still, except for once again showing how many Democrats are scared of right-wing media, dropping "deem and pass" isn't really a big deal.

More importantly, negotiations with the Stupak bloc remain the largest obstacle to passage.  The current discussion is focusing on President Obama signing some sort of executive order as a compromise.  And by "some sort" I really mean "no one seems to know right now."

Apparently, both Diana DeGette's pro-choice bloc and House Progressives but the brakes on giving Stupak a separate vote.  One way they did it was by threatening to force a separate vote on the public option if Stupak got a separate vote.

Still, it's not clear at all that Stupak will lose, or reach an acceptable compromise.  The whip count remains close, and the outcome is far from clear.

Chris Bowers :: Health reform updates

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Health reform updates | 31 comments
From the quick hit I posted: (4.00 / 1)
The Times also reports that Pelosi is meeting with Christopher Carney and Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania, and Steve Driehaus of Ohio. Carney and Driehaus are both yes to no votes according to Chris.  If she flips both, there are 8 yes to no's and 7 no to yes's, which means (I think) she can pass the bill without Stupak.  

Am I right in thinking if she gets these three votes she can pass the Bill?

Assuming no more Yes to no's... (0.00 / 0)
I still think there'd theoretically be too many "undecideds" based on the whip counts we've seen.
[ Parent ]
I think she has the votes without (0.00 / 0)
Stupak - and if she does it is a pretty big win for Progressives.

[ Parent ]
Those 2 both had nasty ads trying to force no votes (4.00 / 1)
I think those ads backfired. They said of Dahlkemper that a yes vote would cause people to die of cancer. Both her parents died of cancer in the last month.  
[ Parent ]
... (0.00 / 0)
No one ever said the opposition were geniuses.   In fact, the only real intelligent opposition has been from those who oppose the bill because it doesn't go farther, which is respectable (albeit something I and many others disagree with).
[ Parent ]
Well, that was worth it (4.00 / 5)
Too clever by half to start with, the same morans who thought it would give them cover are the one's cowering at the right-wing flak they've taken all week. So stoopid...

Executive order? Some idiot suggested that a while ago.

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans

The Democratic Party should fine (4.00 / 1)
any member or staffer who talks process rather than substance. Ever.

Why is the Democratic end of the Village so enamored with endless process talk?

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

... (0.00 / 0)
I assume you are looking for something more than "They are jackasses"?
[ Parent ]
Surely you jest (0.00 / 0)
The Democrats having any actual media strategy, let alone message and member discipline?  You make a funny...

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans
[ Parent ]
Sadly, I think you're wrong (4.00 / 1)
The "deem and pass" talk, and all the similar stuff before it, seemed pretty coordinated. When all the Dems talk from the same page, I think its fair to assume that they have a strategy, even if it appears foolish.  

That is, I think this isn't about bad tactics, I think it's about bad goals. I think, for some reason, that they want to talk process. I suspect it related to Lakoff's arguments about avoiding talking about our values - process talk is one way to talk about something else. What they would say is the reason I cannot guess.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
You mean... (0.00 / 0)
...the Van Hollen memo that advised members not to discuss possible Rules and process? That worked well... Which is to say that every member ended up speaking from his/her own page and there was no discipline at all.

"When all the Dems talk from the same page..." Sorry, I don't see it.

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans

[ Parent ]
Fair enough (nt) (0.00 / 0)


Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.
[ Parent ]
That's An EXCELLENT Piece of Process Talk, David! (0.00 / 0)
Jus' messin' witch you, bro!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
DAMN YOU ROSENBERG! (nt) (4.00 / 1)


Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.
[ Parent ]
This is the time ... (0.00 / 0)
where Obama and Pelosi need to pull a Senator Geary(or Jack Woltz .. and no .. it doesn't mean killing anyone or anything) on Stupak and his insane clown posse
In her inimitable way, Speaker Pelosi, (0.00 / 0)
with her ruling that this is a healthcare bill, not an abortion bill, laid down her iron fist in a velvet glove.

BTE, what was/is the situation with Sen Geary?

[ Parent ]
... (0.00 / 0)
He is the honorable senator from the State of Nevada... don't you know him?  He's a bit corrupt and tries to shake people down, but they know how to keep him in line.  I've heard he is fond of Cuba and live sex shows.   Here's a little more on him...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

[ Parent ]
Personally, I always wanted to see this tried (0.00 / 0)
on Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman.
[ Parent ]
... (0.00 / 0)
Put half a healthcare bill in their bed while they are sleeping?

How about a sex doll dressed to look like a hooker?

[ Parent ]
... (4.00 / 3)
On the bright side, this eliminates one of the possible court challenges that are sure to ensue.   And given the activist right wing courts, there is a possibility they could ignore precident and screw the American people.
this is funny- po is that scary to them (4.00 / 2)
hah wait a minute- the mere threat of a pub opt vote got our leaders to take stupak off the table? that is not encouraging is it??
Obama sounds slightly off... (0.00 / 0)
Still sounds pretty good... maybe just lack of sleep or something. =)
.. (0.00 / 0)
Yeah, I'm exhausted from this whole process and I've basically just been an armchair quarterback, protester, etc... in other words a very small cog in the machine. I can't image what the people who have been working on this for the last year plus are feeling  
[ Parent ]
isn't it time to start pressuring the senate? (4.00 / 1)
or past time?  the bill or something close to it is probably going to be law by sunday and the last and almost riskless chance to improve it before this debate ends is coming up. sirota's post is a start, but it would be good to mobilise people for something - a vote on the public option, a vote on medicare for all - something.
... (0.00 / 0)
Here is the one problem with David's and your argument... Can you prove you have enough support FOR a PO, without Stupak in the house?   The house is as big a part of this puzzle as the Senate, and without Stupak in November, the PO wouldn't have passed the house.  

So the question is... can it be done?   Remember, offering of amendments opens up for a long GOP delay possibility.    If you don't have the votes in both chambers, offering it would be strategically stupid.

The other question... are you willing to trade the PO for Stupak?   If the only way to get the PO is with Stupak, are you willing to sacrifice those rights for getting a PO?   I ask this out of curiosity, as I am curious to hear people's opinion... which is more important.   This is hypothetical of course, but in the land of pragmatism and horse training, is the sacrifice worth the prize.

[ Parent ]
... (0.00 / 0)
Just for the record... if the votes are there in both chambers, then hell ya, I say offer it and risk the GOP's amendments.   But I want a good whip count on the votes for the PO.   Otherwise, if there is no chance at the PO, then its not worth the risk, IMHO.

Also to answer my above question, I would take Stupak for the PO... then I would work to repeal Stupak in the future or through the courts.    Not my FAVORITE solution and I know some will disagree but to me the PO is more important.  But I am curious to hear others' POV.

[ Parent ]
it's not really up to me to decide what to trade or not (0.00 / 0)
that's part of the problem with not having democratically structured progressive infrastructure like trade unions.

However, personally, I would not.  My main point is that it's not an arbitrary trade of the PO and Stupak.  First you have to look at what's likely to happen in the Senate on the basis of who has what power (see herefor an example of writing about community organizing and analyzing power as a tool in progressive struggle).

I'm not very good at this thing wrt vote counting and whatnot- I'm sort of just asking someone who IS good at this thing to stop counting votes in the House, let alone pushing for or against, votes for something that is likely a foregone conclusion.  It makes more sense to develop your own agenda than react to circumstances and this I think would be the very short term version of that on one particular issue.

[ Parent ]
What can be done to defeat this bill?... (4.00 / 1)
...It looks like this abomination might squeak through.

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me-and I welcome their hatred. - FDR
I'm sure redstate or freerepublic might be able to help you out... (4.00 / 1)


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 ]
... (0.00 / 0)
What I don't get is why you torture yourself on this issue here.   Chris and many others are for the bill even if it is not what we want.  I would argue a majority of the site is in favor, as it seems to be the same 10-15 people who are vocally opposed.  And that's fine... we all get passionate and sometimes pissy at each other but we are all entitled to our own positions.  But if this is this torturous to you, why keep coming back?   I mean, there were some blogs like MyDD I had to leave during the primaries because it was making everyone nasty, Jerome was acting like the douche of the year (ok THAT hasn't changed... he is still one of the biggest d-bags in the blogosphere and that site has NEVER been the same since Chris and Matt left), and there was a LOT of anger.  Since it had a decidely pro-hillary stance, I spent the majority of my time here where it was pro-obama.   I just didn't want to keep beating my head against the wall.  It will always still be there when this is over, win or lose.
[ Parent ]
I'm waiting for the pass-the-bill camp's vitriol (0.00 / 0)
to be directed at either the Stupak bloc or the DeGette bloc.

Anyone?

Health reform updates | 31 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