Originally posted by no1marauderI think that sad reality is more a reflection of the fact that the symbolic vote has come to be played out on the final vote while the influential vote has come to be played out on the cloture vote.
The Democrats have the weakest party discipline in the history of the planet. A cloture vote is a procedural one and they can't even keep their party members in line on procedural votes? If Lieberman, Lincoln, Landrieux and Nelson insisted on voting against the final bill that was their call, but threatening to join the Republicans on a procedural vote t ...[text shortened]... high treason. That they got away with it without any consequences from the party is appalling.
As for Lieberman's "punishment," I'll quote again from my book, because I had the same thoughts until I read this excerpt:
By the time Lieberman entered the Lyndon B. Johnson Room, 50 paces off the Senate floor, most of the seats were filled. "Joe's here, now we can begin," one Senator teased.
Reid faced a rebellion. Many of his rank-and-file members loathed the idea of ceding to Lieberman.
"I understand you're angry," Reid said. "I'm angry. But I just want to talk to you a little about what he's meant to the caucas this year."
Reid reminded them of the big votes of 2009--and the mathematical realities of Senate life.
Economic recovery package? Sixty votes, "and Joe was one of them," Reid said.
Children's health insurance? Sixty again.
Down the list he went.
"I know you're upset with him, but look what he's helped us do," the majority leader concluded. "We need him to make 60 votes on this."
Lieberman inched forward in his seat to speak, but others moved faster. Don't let one senator hold us hostage, someone growled. Maybe we need to change the rules on committee chairmanships, another suggested in a not-so-subtly veiled threat.
Finally, Paul Kirk, the man temporarily filling the seat of the late senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), spoke. He said that Kennedy, the great champion of health-care reform, "knew when to fight and he knew when to close the deal," according to the notes of the session. "While Teddy might have wanted a public option, at this moment he would say: This is a great achievement, let's get it done."
Originally posted by KunsooAre there provisions that you think will make the new system worse than the old system, or are there provisions that you think will not go as far as revolutionary health care reform should have gone?
The jury's still out. I'll see how it works when all the provisions come into play. So far it's not sweeping me off my feet.
Originally posted by wittywonkaThe Republicans seem to get all their ducks in a row. One Senator of a majority party threatening to scuttle legislation overwhelming supported by his party unless provisions that are also overwhelmingly supported by his party (and the people) are dropped is a weird way for a democracy to work.
I think that sad reality is more a reflection of the fact that the symbolic vote has come to be played out on the final vote while the influential vote has come to be played out on the cloture vote.
As for Lieberman's "punishment," I'll quote again from my book, because I had the same thoughts until I read this excerpt:
By the time Lieberman entered ...[text shortened]... ment he would say: This is a great achievement, let's get it done."
In fact, by passing HCR without the popular public option (their idea) and with the very unpopular individual mandate (a Republican idea), the Dems unnecessarily inflicted political loss on themselves. To make matters worse, a credible legal argument has been made against the IM's constitutionality and because of their sloppy drafting, the Dems did not put in boilerplate separability language (i.e. if one part of the bill is found unconstitutional the rest stands). Thus, it will be left in the hands of conservative judges to decide IF the IM is unconstitutional and IF they say "yes" to decide whether the entire HCR falls. This would be an unprecedented result; a major indeed historic legislative policy being struck down because of a rather trivial drafting error but it seems that it will be within the power of a couple of conservative judges on the Supreme Court to do so (namely Roberts and Kennedy; Scalia-Thomas-Alioto are beyond hope).
Originally posted by no1marauderYes, Lieberman was selfish; yes, the IM was politically unpopular. I agree with what you're saying, but I simply don't see how anything better would have gotten through Congress, period. Even if Lieberman had eventually submitted to a more progressive approach, there's no telling whether the dozens of conservative Democrats in the House would have followed suit. Pelosi had to sweat and bleed to get her votes in line, too.
The Republicans seem to get all their ducks in a row. One Senator of a majority party threatening to scuttle legislation overwhelming supported by his party unless provisions that are also overwhelmingly supported by his party (and the people) are dropped is a weird way for a democracy to work.
In fact, by passing HCR without the popular ...[text shortened]... he Supreme Court to do so (namely Roberts and Kennedy; Scalia-Thomas-Alioto are beyond hope).
And for that matter, even if the whole bill is found unconstitutional, insurance will finally have been extended to persons with preexisting conditions for several years (until the hypothetical future date), and the populace might realize that some of these more progressive approaches weren't working too badly after all.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 214767
Originally posted by wittywonkal'm concerned that it will lead to no change in the cost of insurance and health care, but will create a captive consumer base for the industry.
Are there provisions that you think will make the new system worse than the old system, or are there provisions that you think will not go as far as revolutionary health care reform should have gone?
Originally posted by wittywonkaThe House had already passed a bill containing a public option.
Yes, Lieberman was selfish; yes, the IM was politically unpopular. I agree with what you're saying, but I simply don't see how anything better would have gotten through Congress, period. Even if Lieberman had eventually submitted to a more progressive approach, there's no telling whether the dozens of conservative Democrats in the House would have follo ...[text shortened]... realize that some of these more progressive approaches weren't working too badly after all.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 214767
Fail!
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/breaking-short-of-votes-gop-leadership-postpones-vote-on-debt-limit-bill.php?ref=fpa
I hope Obama finds the balls to invoke the 14th Amendment and unilaterally up the limit - on his terms! That the Republicans can't even agree to a draconian measure that will probably destroy GDP for the next five years - on the basis that it isn't draconian enough - is pathetic. Too much latitude has been given over to the crazies.
It's time for Obama to assert leadership of the country. A clean debt level increase - nothing else.
2 edits
Originally posted by KunsooGood luck with that!!
It's time for Obama to assert leadership of the country. A clean debt level increase - nothing else.[/b]
I think he is content to scare seniors about their social security checks not coming in to be bothered with the 14th amendment to position himself for 2012. After all, judging from his previous actions, I'm not sure he is up to date on what the Constitution actually says.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 214767
The Boehner plan, after rewriting it with absurd provisions which will never pass the Senate, would still sink the country's AAA rating.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/07/the_primal_scream_heard_round_the_world.php?ref=fpblg
The GOP has become an army of economic suicide bombers.
Originally posted by KunsooThe AAA rating is probably gone anyway.
The Boehner plan, after rewriting it with absurd provisions which will never pass the Senate, would still sink the country's AAA rating.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/07/the_primal_scream_heard_round_the_world.php?ref=fpblg
The GOP has become an army of economic suicide bombers.
The Dems have caved on everything else; they'll cave on the two votes. If Boehner's plan gets through the House, it will be tweaked, but substantially passed in the Senate.
The Dems are listening to the bankers, not the people.
