Dems lack votes for Health Care passage with simple majority

[VinnieKulick]

It's funny, when I was saying "the dems can't get the votes they need, and they are blaming the GOP", Ugmo made a point to call BS on it.

[tin00can]

The Senate does not have to govern according to the majority of the people, but they do so at their own peril. As has been shown in the most recent elections.

Including the 2008 elections? Was that the will of the people or just some sort of hiccup?

[SmokeyRamone]

Those senators are trying to get something for their votes. You're such a fucking rube.

maybe its that, or maybe it's because despite the fact that they're democrats, they're against expansive, intrusive, heavy handed government wanting to take even more controls of the lives of it's citizens

who knows, maybe it's something else entirely, either way, I'm glad there are some holdouts, I hope they don't cave

[vanitybinge]

Those senators are trying to get something for their votes. You're such a fucking rube.

maybe its that, or maybe it's because despite the fact that they're democrats, they're against expansive, intrusive, heavy handed government wanting to take even more controls of the lives of it's citizens

who knows, maybe it's something else entirely, either way, I'm glad there are some holdouts, I hope they don't cave

Is it possible that those (on either side) who are opposed to the current bill are actually listening to the citizens who for the most part also oppose the current bill?

[thejuggernaut]

President Obama and his Democrats, are so desperate to pass their unpopular partisan Obamacare legislation, they are now willing to pass it via reconciliation. A parliamentary trick considered so toxic it became known as the nuclear option.

In 2005, Senate Democrats Obama, Biden, Clinton, Baucus, Dodd, Feinstein, Reid and Schumer, railed against the proposed use of reconciliation to end Democrat filibusters.

Barack Obama 4/25/05: “The President hasn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting a change in the Senate rules that really I think would change the character of the Senate forever…what I worry about would be that you essentially still have two chambers the House and the Senate but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended.”


Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “So this president has come to the majority here in the Senate and basically said ‘change the rules.’ ‘Do it the way I want it done.’ And I guess there just weren’t very many voices on the other side of the isle that acted the way previous generations of senators have acted and said ‘Mr. President we are with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far we can’t go there.’ You have to restrain yourself Mr. President.

Charles Schumer 5/18/2005: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option. The checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing it’s almost a temper tantrum.

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: “Mr. President the right to extended debate is never more important than the one party who controls congress and the white house. In these cases the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: The nuclear option if successful will turn the senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next will be executive appointments and then legislation.

Joe Biden 5/23/2005: This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab.

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: “But no we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No, because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration.”

Chris Dodd 5/18/2005: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have a lead co sponsor that was a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and Democrat in the lead. That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the framers thinking about 218 years ago? They understood Mr. President that there is a tyranny of the majority.

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: “If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option the senate becomes ipso facto the House of Representatives where the majority rules supreme and the party of power can dominate and control the agenda with absolute power.”

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “You’ve got majority rule and then you have the senate over here where people can slow things down where they can debate where they have something called the filibuster. You know it seems like it’s a little less than efficient -- well that’s right it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”

Joe Biden 5/23/05: “I say to my friends on the Republican side you may own the field right now buy you won’t own it forever. I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”

Charles Schumer 5/23/2005: “They want their way every single time. And they will change the rules, break the rules, and misread the constitution so that they will get their way.”

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside out, to ignore the precedent to ignore the way our system has work, the delicate balance that we have obtain that has kept this constitution system going, for immediate gratification of the present President.”

Max Baucus 5/19/2005: “This is the way Democracy ends. Not with a bomb but with a gavel.” “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option. The checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing it’s almost a temper tantrum.

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: “Mr. President the right to extended debate is never more important than the one party who controls congress and the white house. In these cases the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: The nuclear option if successful will turn the senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next will be executive appointments and then legislation.

Joe Biden 5/23/2005: This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab.

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: “But no we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No, because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration.”

Chris Dodd 5/18/2005: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have a lead co sponsor that was a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and Democrat in the lead. That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the framers thinking about 218 years ago? They understood Mr. President that there is a tyranny of the majority.

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: “If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option the senate becomes ipso facto the House of Representatives where the majority rules supreme and the party of power can dominate and control the agenda with absolute power.”

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “You’ve got majority rule and then you have the senate over here where people can slow things down where they can debate where they have something called the filibuster. You know it seems like it’s a little less than efficient -- well that’s right it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”

Joe Biden 5/23/05: “I say to my friends on the Republican side you may own the field right now buy you won’t own it forever I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”

Charles Schumer 5/23/2005: “They want their way every single time. And they will change the rules, break the rules, and misread the constitution so that they will get their way.”

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside out, to ignore the precedent to ignore the way our system has work, the delicate balance that we have obtain that has kept this constitution system going, for immediate gratification of the present President.”

Max Baucus 5/19/2005: “This is the way Democracy ends. Not with a bomb but with a gavel.”

[Ugmo]

I'm guessing the Founding Fathers (invoking them automatically gives me more authority) weren't expecting the minority party to fillibuster every single bill just for political gain either. The Republicans brought this on themselves, and they set the precedent by using reconciliation plenty of times when they were in control. And now they're crying about it.

For that matter I don't think the Republicans even care whether health care gets passed or not. This isn't about policy to them, it's about politics. They'd probably be overjoyed if the Democrats actually get a health care bill through on reconciliation so that they can spent the whole summer trying to make the rubes believe the Founding Fathers wouldn't be happy about it.

[Cyber Spirit]

I'm guessing the Founding Fathers (invoking them automatically gives me more authority) weren't expecting the minority party to fillibuster every single bill just for political gain either. The Republicans brought this on themselves, and they set the precedent by using reconciliation plenty of times when they were in control. And now they're crying about it.

For that matter I don't think the Republicans even care whether health care gets passed or not. This isn't about policy to them, it's about politics. They'd probably be overjoyed if the Democrats actually get a health care bill through on reconciliation so that they can spent the whole summer trying to make the rubes believe the Founding Fathers wouldn't be happy about it.

Ugmo,where you been?.
Your musical insights are missed.

[Supersonic]

So Palin has used the Canadian healthcare system in the past to treat her family. Well wadda ya know...

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/03/0 ... ealth.html

Palin ridiculed for Canadian health care use
Admits in Calgary speech that family used Canadian system in '60s

Sarah Palin's weekend admission that her family once travelled to Canada to receive treatment under the public health-care system she's so often demonized prompted skepticism and ridicule Monday among her critics in the U.S.

"My first five years of life, we spent in Skagway, Alaska, right there by Whitehorse," the former Alaska governor and Republican vice-presidential candidate said Saturday night during a speech in Calgary.

"Believe it or not — this was in the '60s — we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse. I remember my brother, he burned his ankle in some little kid accident thing, and my parents had to put him on a train and rush him over to Whitehorse, and I think, isn't that kind of ironic now, zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada."

Always a popular whipping girl on liberal blogs and news sites, Palin was swiftly derided for the comments Monday as the news reverberated through and beyond the U.S. capital.

A headline on the New York media blog Gawker.com read: "Sarah Palin Supports Government-Run Health Care, Inadvertently Uses 'Ironic' Correctly."

Sam Stein of the Huffington Post suggested Palin was a hypocrite.

"The irony, one guesses, is that Palin now views Canada's health-care system as revolting, with its government-run administration and 'death-panel'-like rationing," Stein wrote.

"Clearly, however, she and her family once found it more alluring than, at the very least, the coverage available in rural Alaska."

Doubts about story
There were also doubts about the veracity of her story.

In a 2007 report in the Skagway News, Palin said her family travelled south from Skagway by ferry to Juneau, Alaska, so that her brother could get treatment after burning his foot when jumping through a fire.

"All these years later, that's still what people have to rely on here in some instances," Palin, who was Alaska governor at the time and pledging to improve Skagway's ferry system, said at the time.

One Alaska-based political blog, the Mudflats, wondered — tongue firmly planted in cheek — whether Palin's brother suffered a burned foot on more than one occasion and she was simply mixing up two different but extremely similar incidents.

"Or perhaps the story was simply tweaked to tell people what they want to hear while utilizing the perennial 'I'm one of you' meme — a great way to 'connect to the audience' while skirting those pesky things known as 'facts'," the blog reads.

An email to Palin officials requesting more information about her family's voyages to Whitehorse for medical treatment wasn't immediately answered on Monday.

The remarks come in the midst of a furious push by top Democrats on Capitol Hill to meet a deadline imposed by U.S. President Barack Obama to get a health-care bill signed into law in the next two weeks.

Palin attacked Democrats over health care
Palin, the self-styled hockey mom who is being coy about whether she's considering a run for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, has frequently vilified the Democrats for their health-care overhaul. She has characterized the proposed reform as socialism and accused Obama of conspiring to do away with the elderly and the disabled with "death panels" that would decide who does and doesn't get treatment.

In November, Palin told Canadian comedian Mary Walsh — in character as Marg Delahunty during an episode of the CBC's This Hour Has 22 Minutes — that Canada should dismantle its public health-care system and let private enterprise take over.

Republicans battling against health-care reform have long claimed that Canadians flood the U.S. to get health care because of waiting lists north of the border.

But Palin's experience, if accurate, reflects what some studies suggest is a more common trend: U.S. citizens travelling abroad to get cheaper care.

A report last spring by Deloitte Center for Health Solutions said 750,000 U.S. residents travelled abroad for medical care in 2007 and forecast that number would rise to six million by 2010. That trend far outpaces the number of Canadians coming to the U.S. for medical treatment.

[Ugmo]

Here's what has to happen: the Democrats have to "ram" health care through and not give a fuck about Republican threats to campaign on that. History has shown that the Republicans will win seats if they succeed in blocking the Democrats from passing progressive legislation, but the Democrats will win seats if they pass that legislation. It's like a Jedi mind trick by the Republicans: "If you pass health care we will punish you for it." The reality is that if the Democrats pass health care reform, the Republicans will not be able to punish them for it. Pelosi and Reid need to make that clear to the Democratic caucus.

[Ugmo]

The majority of Americans want health care reform. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history - again.

[thejuggernaut]

The majority of Americans want health care reform. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history - again.

Impressive.

[Ugmo]

I don't really know what you're getting at, but I realize that's how you like it.

[thejuggernaut]

I don't really know what you're getting at, but I realize that's how you like it.

Well, if I'm not providing you with an opportunity to cry about cryptic posts (even when the intent is perfectly obvious, like this time, like always), then what's the point ?

[Ugmo]

The intent is perfectly obvious? It is? What's impressive Juggy? Or is this gonna be another one of those deals where it takes you 20 posts to come out and say whatever it is you want to say?

You know, it doesn't mean you're winning the debate when the other guy doesn't know what you're talking about!

[thejuggernaut]

The intent is perfectly obvious? It is? What's impressive Juggy? Or is this gonna be another one of those deals where it takes you 20 posts to come out and say whatever it is you want to say?

You know, it doesn't mean you're winning the debate when the other guy doesn't know what you're talking about!

I'm debating ? That's news to me. Seems to me I simply said "impressive". I don't remember questioning anything. I certainly don't recall demanding links to prove anything.

Perhaps if you understood the words you use, you'd understand why I said "impressive".

Re-read what I quoted. Read it a few times. Say the words aloud if you have to. I am sure you can figure it out.

Now, don't forget to make another reference to cryptic posts, and toss in a "if you're not gonna explain it I am just going to assume..."

[thejuggernaut]

The majority of Americans want health care reform. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history - again.

The majority of Americans do not want health care reform legislation being pushed by Obama and the democrats. Maybe in Europe, not here. Sorry.

Look at that. Yourmomma got it. You're supposed to be stupid, right ?

Either Ugmo:

1. Was trying a nice little spin on words to spark more debate.

2. Is a fucking idiotic moron who doesn't understand the chasm of difference between people wanting something done, and wanting what's being handed to them.

Perhaps in his universe, wanting something other than steak means you definitely want chicken.

[bane]

The majority of Americans want health care reform. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history - again.

You keep saying that Ugmo. Where is your data that says "the majority of Americans want THIS version of health care reform"? I'm reasonably certain that you won't find it. That's why they won't pass it. Simple fact is, the majority of Americans don't want what the dems are selling. If we did, they'd pass it. They're afraid to pass it. Ever wonder why? I think you are waaaay out of touch with what America wants. Just because you think it should be, doesn't make it so. Ask me, "Do you want health care reform" I'd answer yes. Ask me if I want either the senate or the house's versions of it and I'd say " fuck no". Most of the people I know feel the same way. You aren't measuring the pulse of America from your house in Austria while you're reading whatever recent doctored poll you're reading. Talk to people on the street, America doesn't want this.

[Ugmo]

The majority of Americans want health care reform. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history - again.

You keep saying that Ugmo. Where is your data that says "the majority of Americans want THIS version of health care reform"? I'm reasonably certain that you won't find it. That's why they won't pass it. Simple fact is, the majority of Americans don't want what the dems are selling. If we did, they'd pass it. They're afraid to pass it. Ever wonder why? I think you are waaaay out of touch with what America wants. Just because you think it should be, doesn't make it so. Ask me, "Do you want health care reform" I'd answer yes. Ask me if I want either the senate or the house's versions of it and I'd say " fuck no". Most of the people I know feel the same way. You aren't measuring the pulse of America from your house in Austria while you're reading whatever recent doctored poll you're reading. Talk to people on the street, America doesn't want this.

The public doesn't know what's in the bills. Everyone hates the Senate bill until it's explained to them what's actually in it, at which point they are in favor of it. That's what the polls show.

http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/kaiserpolls012210nr.cfm

And yes, the polls are a lot more representative than "talking to people on the street", which will get you the opinion of whatever person it is you talked to, not a representative cross-section. You can't dismiss polling and then tout "talking to people on the street." That doesn't cut it dude.

[Ugmo]

The majority of Americans want health care reform. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history - again.

The majority of Americans do not want health care reform legislation being pushed by Obama and the democrats. Maybe in Europe, not here. Sorry.

Look at that. Yourmomma got it. You're supposed to be stupid, right ?

Either Ugmo:

1. Was trying a nice little spin on words to spark more debate.

2. Is a fucking idiotic moron who doesn't understand the chasm of difference between people wanting something done, and wanting what's being handed to them.

Perhaps in his universe, wanting something other than steak means you definitely want chicken.

Yeah, well you're wrong as I just explained in my last post.

[thejuggernaut]

The majority of Americans do not want health care reform legislation being pushed by Obama and the democrats. Maybe in Europe, not here. Sorry.

Look at that. Yourmomma got it. You're supposed to be stupid, right ?

Either Ugmo:

1. Was trying a nice little spin on words to spark more debate.

2. Is a fucking idiotic moron who doesn't understand the chasm of difference between people wanting something done, and wanting what's being handed to them.

Perhaps in his universe, wanting something other than steak means you definitely want chicken.

Yeah, well you're wrong as I just explained in my last post.

Actually, no I'm not.

You posted a 2 month old article. Why don't you check the latest Rasmussen poll from 3 days ago, Hammer.

[Ugmo]

Grand, as that poll asks the broad question of whether people approve of the plan, and does not ask them whether they know what's in it. Once you tell people what the plan actually involves, their support for it increases.

Why do you keep calling me hammer? I can feign being insulted if you want, but once again I have no idea wtf you're talking about. Is this like some kind of Moncton NB insult that only acadians understand?

[Ugmo]

Wait, is it this?

hammer - Used in certain pockets of the stand-up comedy subculture. Can refer to a comic or joke that is particularly good or clever. The highest praise one can provide to or about a comic.

[thejuggernaut]

Grand, as that poll asks the broad question of whether people approve of the plan, and does not ask them whether they know what's in it. Once you tell people what the plan actually involves, their support for it increases.

Do you know what's in it ? People know the spin towards some of the more appealing parts, like a trailer for a movie. Any idea how those people feel about the cost or the requirements ? According to the speaker of the house, nobody does except the people on the inside and they "have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it."

Why do you keep calling me hammer? I can feign being insulted if you want, but once again I have no idea wtf you're talking about.

You seem to have that problem with a lot of things, not just me.

Is this like some kind of Moncton NB insult that only acadians understand?

Not that I am aware of. I am not Acadian, nor do I live in Moncton.

[tin00can]

The public doesn't know what's in the bills.

It's those damn ignorant Americans again!!!

The same ones who voted for Obama, right?

[SmokeyRamone]

Grand, as that poll asks the broad question of whether people approve of the plan, and does not ask them whether they know what's in it. Once you tell people what the plan actually involves, their support for it increases.

of the 30 or so people I've talked to about it over the last 8 months, friends, family members, coworkers, strangers in a bar, etc, only 3 were for the mandate, most, about 20 were strongly against a mandate, and 7 or so saw it as a necessary evil for Obama's plan to work, but still didn't like it

there's nothing scientific about this poll, some were democrats, some were republicans, some libertarians, and some weren't affiliated with any political party, but the vast majority of us weren't happy at all with the heavy handedness and the government's presumption that they have the right to dictate how we spend our post tax income

[chickenona]

The public doesn't know what's in the bills.

Most of the lawmakers don't, either.

[absolutely fabulous]

The public doesn't know what's in the bills.

of the lawmakers don't, either.

, we have to pass the bill in order to find out what's in the bill.

i am not a person who's big on surprises.
this is like, 'you'll never guess what i got you for christmas. guess!!'
more than likely, it's not something that i really hoped it was..

[Ugmo]

Paul Krugman explains why the bill is a good idea:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/opini ... mesKrugman

Now I could take Paul Krugman's word, or I could take the word of a bunch of random people surveyed by Rasmussen who have been given no background info whatsoever on the bill. This thing isn't some big government bogeyman that's going to fast-track America to communism.

Grand, as that poll asks the broad question of whether people approve of the plan, and does not ask them whether they know what's in it. Once you tell people what the plan actually involves, their support for it increases.

of the 30 or so people I've talked to about it over the last 8 months, friends, family members, coworkers, strangers in a bar, etc, only 3 were for the mandate, most, about 20 were strongly against a mandate, and 7 or so saw it as a necessary evil for Obama's plan to work, but still didn't like it

there's nothing scientific about this poll, some were democrats, some were republicans, some libertarians, and some weren't affiliated with any political party, but the vast majority of us weren't happy at all with the heavy handedness and the government's presumption that they have the right to dictate how we spend our post tax income

Here is the way I look at it. You cannot rely on anecdotal evidence to guage the support for something. I can guarantee you that if I talked to people "in the streets" (in America) I would find overwhelming support for "Obamacare" - you know why? I'm a Democrat. Everyone in my large extended Irish Catholic family is a Democrat. And I'm originally from solidly blue Maine. Democrats overwhelmingly support what Fox News and Yourmomma demonize as Obamacare. So the people I would talk to on a daily basis if I still lived in America would almost certainly be in favor of the proposed health care reform.

By contrast, Bane for example is a Republican. His family are Republicans (I'm pretty sure he said that once), and he's from solidly red Texas. I don't think it's a stretch to assume that the people he is surrounded by on a daily basis are more conservative than liberal and therefore are not in favor of the Senate's proposed health care reform. And if he were literally to talk to people "in the streets", it would make a big difference what streets he went to. You'd get a much different response in the Barrio than in some upscale Houston neighborhood where everyone has healthcare that they're satisfied with and would probably be willing to pay a little more to keep it.

You (SmokeyRamone) have been highly suspicious of health care reform right from the beginning if I am characterizing you correctly. You have to have gotten that mindset from somewhere. Is it faulty for me to assume you come from a conservative background and communicate on a daily basis with people who are more conservative than liberal?

That's why I think polling is important and needs to be viewed in the correct context. Ask a bunch of people if they favor a health care bill, but not if they know what's contained in it, and you need to be wary of the results.

[Ugmo]

Does anyone here except the Juggernaut know what a "Hammer" is, and would someone be willing to explain it to me? Cause obviously Juggsy isn't going to.

[Ugmo]

You seem to have that problem with a lot of things, not just me.

I don't really have a problem with you, except that you insist on dancing around every single topic we debate about and then expect me to know what you mean. And if the point you are trying to make is flawed from the beginning, then there is no way I can possibly guess what you're getting at (like when it took you 20 posts to explain what you meant by "tax cuts" and that turned out to be completely wrong in the first place).