Monday Open Thread

Filed in National by on March 22, 2010

Welcome comrades, to your new Socialist Utopia. All citizens are required to report to the nearest Death Panel for processing. It’s open thread time!

The major work of health care reform legislation is over, but there is still the reconciliation package to pass in the Senate:

The House approved the Senate bill last night, warts and all. Those warts – a tax on high-end insurance plans, several special deals made for members of the Senate on Medicaid and abortion language that pro-life Democrats in the House weren’t comfortable with – are removed through a budget reconciliation measure. That plan – which also passed the House last night – was the product of careful negotiations between the House, Senate and Obama administration and had the blessing of labor unions and many health care advocacy and interest groups. It also contained reforms to the student loan system.

Here’s where it gets tricky. Obama on Tuesday will sign the Senate-passed bill, clearing the way procedurally for Senators to begin debate on the reconciliation fix. The whole thing made House Democrats very nervous since that meant trusting the Senate would actually fix the bits they didn’t like. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid showed House Democrats a letter signed by members of his caucus proving they had the votes to pass the reconciliation measure on an up-or-down vote. That paved the way for Sunday night’s House victory. Still with me?

The Republicans will try to challenge the reconciliation under the Byrd rule. The Senate parliamentarian will rule on whether individual provisions in the bill are budget-related. If the parliamentarian rules agains the Democrats, that measure will be stricken from the bill. If the bill is changed, it will have to go back to the House for a vote on the changed bill. Members of the Senate are meeting with the parliamentarian today, so later we may have news about any changes to the bill.

Matt Yglesias has an interesting perspective on the health care reform legislative victory – that it was partially driven by Republican intransigence:

My point is even more basic—at a couple of moments along this race the conservatives won the argument and Democrats were ready to buckle. Credit for not buckling goes to Nancy Pelosi and other gutsy leaders. But it also goes to the GOP. They wouldn’t take “yes” for an answer when lots of people wanted to surrender and settle for something much smaller. Instead, whipped up into a frenzy of ideological fanaticism and overconfidence, they decided to take no prisoners. So nobody surrendered! And that’s how Mitch McConnell brought universal health care to America. And the thing of it is that most conservatives are so shallow, and so driven by hippie-hatred rather than any real views, that if they get to use this as an “issue” to win seats in the midterms and it never gets repealed, they’ll consider themselves vindicated.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (27)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Think Progress has a round-up of Republicans calling the health care reform bill dead:

    – Dick Morris, Fox News commentator, November 4: “A deathblow to ObamaCare.”

    – Fred Barnes, Fox News commentator, January 20: “The health care bill, ObamaCare, is dead with not the slightest prospect of resurrection.”

    – Robert A. Levy, chairman of the Cato Institute, January 26: “That’s why Obamacare is dead.”

    – Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Minority Whip, February 24: “Speaker Pelosi doesn’t have the votes in the House. . . . It is futile for for them to continue to try and push something on the American people that frankly won’t result in better health care.”

    – Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK), March 3: “I think the votes are not there and I don’t see where we get them.”

    – Cantor, March 5: “Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi doesn’t have the votes needed to pass a health-care bill in the House of Representatives.”

    – Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), Minority Leader, March 14: “If she had 216 votes, this bill would be long gone. They tried to pass it in September, October, November, December, January, February. Guess what? They don’t have the votes.”

    – Boehner, March 17: Health care reform will pass “over my dead body.”

    – Cantor, March 19: “[T]here’s no way they can pass this bill.”

    I’m enjoying the sounds of conservative head explosions.

  2. liberalgeek says:

    I’ll own up… I declared it dead also. Glad to be wrong on that one.

  3. cassandra_m says:

    Betting against Nancy Pelosi should be done with care. Seriously.

  4. The Huffington Post has another round-up, and it includes Democrats and media figures as well:

    It wasn’t just Republicans who thought health care reform was dead. Democrats, too, resigned themselves to dropping the bill.

    Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) – January 19, 2010
    “I think you can make a pretty good argument that health care might be dead.”

    Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) – January 20, 2010
    “I think the measure that would have passed, that is, some compromise between the House and Senate bill, which I would have voted for, although there were some aspects of both bills I would have liked to see change, I think that’s dead.”

    Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) – January 20, 2010
    “If [Martha Coakley] loses, [health care] over.”

    Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK) – March 3, 2010
    “I think the votes are not there and I don’t see where we get them.”

  5. I, for one, never thought it was dead.

  6. anon says:

    I, for one, never thought it was dead.

    It depends on what the definition of “it” is.

    I guess we can pass any bill if we just push it far enough to the right.

  7. cassandra_m says:

    Love this post at dKos — this poster went to Red State to report on the war they plan to wage on us. Or, rather, our bumperstickers.

    I’m wondering if those of us on Death Panels should dress alike. Sorta like Agent Smith or something.

  8. anon says:

    Best rationalization of the day (and today, the bar is set pretty high) from David A. defending Christine O’Donnell:

    “At least she is an anti-tax candidate so a tax lien won’t hurt her base. “

  9. Those Republican challenges to the Constitutionality of the bill won’t get very far.

    But these lawsuits seem as frivolous as the tort cases Republicans rally against. As Professor Timothy Jost of Washington & Lee University School of Law explained this morning on Washington Journal, “under the constitution as it has been interpreted by the Supreme Court — and that is really our constitution. Everyone has their own interpretation, but constitutional law is made by the Supreme Court — over the last 80 years, I do not see any serious problem with this legislation, and Congress did not either.” Jost noted that the individual requirement, which does not apply to anyone who is under the filing limit of $12,000 for individuals or $16,000 for couples or levy a criminal penalty for those who go without insurance — will likely stand up to a constitutional challenge:

    JOST: Well, what the Virginia law says is, ‘nobody can make our citizens buy health insurance.’ They can say what they want to. But under the supremacy clause, a sate cannot tell the federal government what to do…the Commerce Clause says Congress has the authority to regulate commerce among the states. And since the 1930’s, that power has been interpreted very broadly….basically, the law now is that if there is any kind of economic activity involved, Congress has the power to regulate it. And of course Congress does. We have lots of federal laws, regulating all sorts of economic activity. The decision of when to buy insurance — do I buy it now when I’m healthy or do I buy it once I’m in not ambulance on the way to the hospital — is an economic decision and Congress clearly has the power to regulate it. And once Congress has the power to do something under the supremacy clause, its laws are supreme to the laws of the states and the tenth amendment only provides that states retain powers that are not granted to Congress

    We also had a little thing called the Civil War, that answered this question as well.

  10. The GOP braintrust has come up with a plan to challenge the reconciliation bill. Kevin Drum says it means they got nothin’ which makes sense considering the bill was written with Byrd rule challenges in mind.

    We all know that Republicans are going to do their best to kill the healthcare reconciliation rider in the Senate. Their latest scheme, apparently, is to claim that the rider affects Social Security, thus falling foul of reconciliation rules. Igor Volsky provides the details:

    The most substantive and immediate GOP challenge could occur as early as Tuesday, when the Senate plans to take up the bill. Republicans will try to send the reconciliation package back to the House by citing a rule that prohibits reconciliation measures from making ‘recommendations’ about Social Security. “The Congressional Budget Office found that the bill would have an ancillary effect on Social Security’s trust funds, and GOP lawmakers will argue that such a finding constitutes a ‘recommendation.’” They’ll be arguing that since the excise tax on high cost plans “would cause some employers to reduce the cost of their workers’ insurance and pay them higher wages,” workers would have to pay higher Social Security taxes, which would also have the effect of extending the life the life of the Social Security trust fund by $53 billion.

    I’m not sure what to say about this. Volsky quotes Sarah Binder suggesting that Republicans might have a point, but that seems laughably unlikely to me. Seriously, the chain goes like this: (1) rider affects excise tax, (2) excise tax pushes down insurance costs, (3) lower insurance costs lead to higher wages, (4) higher wages lead to higher payroll taxes, and (5) higher payroll taxes affect the Social Security trust fund.

  11. cassandra_m says:

    Comrade UI, I’m reporting on another braintrust of FAIL — Time Magazine. Time seems to think that after last night’s votes it is Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh who are the winners here. Apparently you only get to win at politics if you increase your audience marketshare or something.

  12. Scott P says:

    Sounds to me like they’re playing Six Degrees of Social Security. If they can link Bacon, too, I hear Boehner gets 6 free tanning sessions.

  13. I know the Boren family. When did he become lumped in with Republicans? By the way, I like that opening. Too bad it is close to the truth.

  14. Scott P says:

    I hate to say it, Cassandra, but I agree with Time. The important point is where you said “Apparently you only get to win at politics…” Beck and Limbaugh aren’t politicians, they’re whiners, complainers, and fear-mongerers (of course, so is most of the GOP, but that’s fodder for another post). The more they have to whine, complain, and whip up hysteria over the better off they are. How visible was Rush during most of the Bush years? The stronger the Democrats are, the better off conservative entertainers are.

  15. cassandra_m says:

    I think that Time represents what is really despicable and really brain dead about the pundit class these days — it is the entertainment value and the entertainment assets that somehow are the privileged topics here. Not that the Democrats just changed their narrative here, just changed what the CW of the state of play on the political board,or even this remarkable achievement. It is whether the ratings will be good for somebody. And that isn’t all that interesting even when you are talking about entertainment.

    It is all part of Atrios’ persistent joke : This is good for the Republicans — as a response to every achievement the Ds come through with.

  16. P.Schwartz says:

    Key Gitmo Detainee Ordered Released

    Wall Street Journal ^ | 3/22/2010 | JESS BRAVIN
    A suspected al Qaeda organizer once called “the highest value detainee” at Guantánamo Bay was ordered released by a federal judge in an order issued Monday. Mohamedou Ould Slahi was accused in the 9/11 Commission report of helping recruit Mohammed Atta and other members of the al Qaeda cell in Hamburg, Germany, that took part in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Military prosecutors suspected Mr. Slahi of links to other al Qaeda operations, and considered seeking the death penalty against him while preparing possible charges in 2003 and 2004.

  17. Jason330 says:

    Re Yesterday’s Vote: Is there some kind of “Godwin’s Law” that applies if your political argument becomes “My opponents are niggers and faggots.”

  18. Breaking now: the Senate parliamentarian rules against the GOP Social Security challenge to the reform bill. I also haven’t seen video yet, but I heard that Glenn Beck was super-sized crazy on his show today.

  19. Jason330 says:

    Also…ice skaters should not be allowed on “Dancin with the Stars.”

  20. Jason330 says:

    “Glenn Beck was super-sized crazy on his show today” How is that different from any other day?

  21. I’m not sure Jason. I can’t watch Beck on most days. He apparently criticized civil rights hero John Lewis for comparing himself to civil rights activists or something.

  22. P.Schwartz says:

    Mmm Bacon…Flavored Vodka?

    FoxNews.com ^ | March 18, 2010 | Richard Goldsmith
    Mmm Bacon…Flavored Vodka? By Richard Goldsmith – FOXNews.com America’s favorite straight stuff gets an injection of flavor. Once upon a time, vodka was popular for being virtually tasteless, delivering all the punch of alcohol without all of that annoying flavor. It was the ultimate blank canvas, melding with pretty much any mixer a bartender could pair it with. As vodka popularity grew in the ‘80s and ‘90s, liquor distillers realized there was money to be made through product extensions, so companies dove in head first. Thus, the tidal wave of flavored vodkas was unleashed. Flavored vodkas have actually been around…

  23. Jason330 says:

    Al Mascitti touched on this during hour one of his show yesterday. At the heart of everything is Republican racism.

    Amanda Marcotte sums it up:

    Well, it’s simple, really. They (Republicans) assume, if they don’t state it outright, that large numbers of American voters shouldn’t have the right to vote. That’s the implicit argument when Sarah Palin praises white rural voters as “Real Americans”, when Birthers obsess over the idea that the first black President simply can’t be eligible for office, when tea baggers yell racist and homophobic slurs at politicians, and when they insist that you eliminate black voters from the count if you want to find out how popular a politician “really” is. When Bart Stupak laughed out loud at the very idea that nuns have opinions worth listening to—and listed a bunch of men whose opinions were the ones that counted—you had a similar sentiment being expressed. Universal suffrage seems like a fundamental part of democracy to liberals, but it appears that conservatives think it de-legitimizes the results of elections. And that if you do something without Republicans on board, you’re eliminating those who represent the only people who count.

  24. Rebecca says:

    On the front page of yesterday’s NYT on-line they had photos of the events leading to the vote. One was of Nancy Pelosi leading the Democratic Caucus to the Capitol. She was carrying the big gavel and behind her were men and women, whites and African-Americans, people of all hues and colors. A few clicks on we came to the photo of three white-guys on the Members-Only balcony with “kill the bill” signs. All male and all white and all Republican. The contrast could not have been clearer.

    Many here will remember President Clinton’s speech at the J-J dinner last fall where he made the point that the demographics of our nation will — eventually — defeat the Republicans. They know it. The screaming tantrums are simply a reaction to this reality. They’ve spent the past forty years stacking the courts, deregulating the banksters, tilting the playing field, amassing unimaginable wealth, turning the media into a corporatist propaganda machine, and fighting, fighting, fighting against the inevitable. Now, all they’ve got left are threats, wing-nuts, and Costa Rica.

  25. Jason330 says:

    Good riddance. (I feel bad for Costa Rica though.)

  26. Amanda is exactly right – people like Ann Coulter and John Derbyshire have stated explicitly that women shouldn’t vote since they vote the “wrong” way. One thing that’s always pissed me off is when the media plays the game that Obama’s favorability with white voters is low, like that counts more than voters of other colors.

  27. P.Schwartz says:

    AGW – it’s all about the funding…

    Researchers Present Study on How Global Climate Change Affects Violence
    Iowa State University via newswise.com ^ | 3/19/2010 | NA

    Newswise — If global warming is a scientific fact, then you better be prepared for the earth to become a more violent place. That’s because new Iowa State University research shows that as the earth’s average temperature rises, so too does human “heat” in the form of violent tendencies.

    Co-authored by Craig Anderson, a Distinguished Professor of psychology and director of Iowa State’s Center for the Study of Violence; and Matt DeLisi, an associate professor of sociology and director of ISU’s criminal justice program, the paper was presented by Anderson this week (March 15-19) at the Sydney (Australia) Symposium of Social Psychology.

    Using U.S. government data on average yearly temperatures and the number of violent crimes between 1950 and 2008, the researchers estimate that if the annual average temperature in the U.S. increases by 8°F (4.4°C), the yearly murder and assault rate will increase by 34 per 100,000 people — or 100,000 more per year in a population of 305 million.

    And while the global warming science has recently come under fire, the main premise behind the Iowa State researchers’ paper is irrefutable.