The outrage if this was Palin
object width=”425″ height=”344″>
The outrage if this was Palin
object width=”425″ height=”344″>
Obama said he told House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) that his core goals — lowering health-care costs for businesses and individuals and expanding coverage to the uninsured — remained non-negotiable. But Obama said he would consider GOP alternatives that accomplish the same results. He also said he would sign what he considered to be a less-than-perfect bill.
“I am going to be starting from scratch in the sense that I will be open to any ideas that help promote these goals,” Obama told reporters. “What I will not do, what I don’t think makes sense and I don’t think the American people want to see, would be another year of partisan wrangling around these issues, another six months or eight months or nine months worth of hearings in every single committee in the House and the Senate in which there’s a lot of posturing.”
The president added, “Let’s get the relevant parties together. Let’s put the best ideas on the table. My hope is that we can find enough overlap that we can say, “This is the right way to move forward, even if I don’t get every single thing that I want.”
Yes, Yes…thats what we need, a less than perfect bill to go along side all the other less than perfect bills.
The White House and Democratic Congressional leaders, scrambling for a backup plan to rescue their health care legislation if Republicans win the special election in Massachusetts on Tuesday, have begun laying the groundwork to ask House Democrats to approve the Senate version of the bill and send it directly to President Obama for his signature.
Please dont tell me its true? The health care bill as its written right now, only makes the “evil” insurance companies richer, gives breaks to unions etc, etc and because the discussions have gone on behind closed doors we have no way of knowing how many under the counter handshake deals are going on.What – you did’nt know the Insurance companies were going to stand to make more money? Hehehehe, you did’nt really think some of the biggest financial contributers to the previous election were going to go without, did you?
Some Democrats suggested that even if their candidate, Martha Coakley, scraped out a narrow victory on Tuesday, they might need to ask House Democrats to speed the legislation to the president’s desk, especially if lawmakers who had supported the bill begin to waver as they consider the political implications of a tough re-election cycle.
It is unclear if rank-and-file Democrats would go along, and House Democratic leaders said no final decision would be made until they talked to their caucus.
But even as Democratic leaders pondered contingencies, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, insisted that the legislation would move forward, though she acknowledged that Tuesday’s results could force a tactical shift.
“Certainly the dynamic will change depending on what happens in Massachusetts,” Ms. Pelosi told reporters in California on Monday. “Just the question of how we would proceed. But it doesn’t mean we won’t have a health care bill.”
So much for fair, bi-partisian, transparent politics?
Everyone is talking about the Massachusetts election between Coakley and Brown and I know many people are scratching their heads as to why this election is so close given the nature of such a blue state…well I think the simple answer is – Massachusetts already has health care so why on earth would they risk higher taxes given the fact that they are already set up.
Brown said, “The health care bill that’s being proposed in Washington is broken,” BrownThe back-room deals, Nebraska, Louisiana, we all know about it. We need to start over.” He added a short while later: “I would be proud to be the 41st vote, and go back to the drawing board.”
Coakley responded. “I would be proud to be the 60th vote,” she said, and discussed the importance of passing a health care bill. “As Sen. Kennedy said, it should be a right, not a privilege. I believe that doing it in Washington, and doing it incrementally is apparently how we will do it, we can lay the groundwork.”
Brown shot back that Massachusetts shouldn’t vote for national health care reform, because they already have an insurance reform program. “We have insurance here in Massachusetts. We have some of the best doctors, nurses and hospitals in the country, that’s why people come here,” he said. “Not only is this bill going to be bad for the state, my job is to be the senator from Massachusetts. I’m not going to be subsidizing for the next three, five years, pick a number, subsidizing what other states have failed to do.”
So what will happen tomorrow is anyone’s guess, but its certainly one worth taking an interest in.
…..hahahahaha just kidding!
Look for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to try to circumvent the traditional conference committee process by which the different versions of health care reform passed by each house will be reconciled. If so, it will be the latest example of violating principles of transparency and accountability in the single-minded pursuit of legislative victory.
Ahhhhh, so many people dont know this and dont care….its a shame
Conferences involving members from both houses are messy things. They are usually conducted in public and often televised, and can produce a compromise version of the bill that leaves rank-and-file members tempted to vote against the final version. That could be perilous in the case of health care since it’s likely to pass without a vote to spare in the Senate and the House’s version passed by only five votes.
Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi would love to come up with a way to bash heads in private and skip any public discussion that further reveals just how incoherent and unworkable both the bills are. Luckily, there is a subterfuge readily available that wouldn’t require the House to swallow the Senate’s bill unchanged but also ducks the traditional give-and-take of the conference committee.
When Democrats took over Congress in 2007, they increasingly did not send bills through the regular conference process. “We have to defer to the bigger picture,” explained Rep. Henry Waxman of California. So the children’s health insurance bill passed by the House that year was largely dumped in favor of the Senate’s version. House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel and other Democrats complained the House had been “cut off at the knees” but ultimately supported the bill. Legislation on lobbying reform and the 2007 energy bill were handled the same way — without appointing an actual conference.
Despite a last-minute weekend deal that put the Senate on the brink of passing health care reform this week, liberal and moderate Democrats remain on a collision course over the bill, as both sides dug in Sunday for the next phase of negotiations.
President Barack Obama’s liberal base and powerful union leaders once hoped the expected House-Senate conference would partly undo a year of retreats and compromises, with Obama weighing in to nudge the moderate Senate bill to the left.
But the titanic struggle to lock in Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) as the 60th senator for the first key test vote early Monday morning has changed all that. The need to hold Nelson and other moderates in line means major changes on the public option, abortion, taxes, Medicare and Medicaid are unlikely — and that the Senate’s vision of health reform is likely to prevail over the House’s in the final talks.
So do they think there will be many more changes to the bill?
“It is very clear that the bill — the final bill — to pass in the United States Senate is going to have to be very close to the bill that has been negotiated here,” Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Otherwise, you will not get 60 votes in the United States Senate.”
So who has read the bill anyway and how many pages is it now?
And on Monday, after Democrats indicated that they were prepared to meet the demands of Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, and strip the last vestige of a public option from their bill, Mr. Burris went to the Senate floor to warn that he had not committed to vote for the legislation.
Good for him…although….
Mr. Burris, however, did calibrate his language: “I am committed to voting for a bill that achieves the goals of a public option: competition, cost savings and accountability,” he said. “I will not be able to vote for lesser legislation that ignores those fundamentals.”
But most importantly the Dems may have no choice but to pass this through to avoid a failure to achieve President Obama’s top domestic priority….it could also be a smoke screen to help keep the loud voices outside down
Jesse Jackson: ‘You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man’
Ahhh – if yo black yo better agree with Jesse
The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill.
“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”
The remark stirred a murmur at the reception, held by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Foundation as part of a series of events revolving around the 25th anniversary of Jackson’s run for president. Several CBC members were in attendance, including Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who’d introduced Jackson. Davis, who is running for governor, is the only black member of Congress from Alabama.
He is also the only member of the CBC to have voted against the healthcare bill earlier this month.
Davis referred to Jackson’s 1988 run for president in a statement, issued through his office, that said he would not engage Jackson on his criticism.
“One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” Davis’s statement said. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”
Jackson said later that he “didn’t call anybody by name and I won’t.”
Ive always wondered what he calls those kids running around with their pants down to there ankles?
He added that he wasn’t saying that black lawmakers must vote a certain way. Instead, they should vote the interests of the people in their districts, and he said the healthcare bill would help Alabama because it’s one of the poorest states in the country.
“The poorest people need healthcare protection,” Jackson said. “They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They’re dying from lack of access.”
Other members of the CBC found no fault in Jackson’s words. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) was in the audience. He called Jackson’s criticism of Davis “accurate,” but said he did not hear Jackson say “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”
“If it is an issue that disproportionately impacts black folks, race has to be considered,” Cleaver said. Jackson, he added, “is expected by his constituency to call balls and strikes.”
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called the remarks “vintage Jesse Jackson,” but said Davis’s vote against healthcare was consistent with a voting record more conservative than many CBC members.
“Artur Davis has a more conservative constituency,” Waters said. “Since he’s running for governor of Alabama, he reflects an even more conservative constituency.”
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) said each man was doing what he considered the right thing.
“People have a right to vote their constituency, and people have a right to speak their conscience,” Jackson-Lee said. “Both happened.”
Davis’s Democratic primary opponent, Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, highlighted Davis’s status as the lone African-American vote against the bill.
“He was the only Black Caucus member to vote against it. I don’t get it,” Sparks said last week, according to The Associated Press. Sparks is white.
Davis said he voted against the healthcare bill because “House leadership’s approach is not the best we can do.” He said he preferred a version passed by the Senate Finance Committee because it reduces subsidization of the healthcare industry, taxes high-value health plans instead of wealthy people, and is more effective in getting employers to help with health coverage.
Davis has countered that Sparks’s position on healthcare has changed over time, saying he’s being “deliberately dishonest.”
During an exclusive interview with ABC News’ Jake Tapper today, President Obama said that penalties are appropriate for people who try to “free ride” the health care system but stopped short of endorsing the threat of jail time for those who refuse to pay a fine for not having insurance.
“What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don’t, you’re subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it’s affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there’s a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are — are burdened by because of the fact that people don’t have health insurance, you know, there’s nothing wrong with a penalty.”
The only thing wrong with that Mr President, is you are not required to have a car, so therefore you dont have to have health insurance
With Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats unveiling their 1,990 page health care reform bill – it made you wonder about other landmark pieces of legislation in U.S. history and how long they were.
The original draft of the 1935 Economic Security Act, which established the Social Security Administration was 64 pages
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 – forbidding discrimination based on race and sex: 8 pages The 19th amendment to the Constitution, giving Women the right to vote in 1920: 1 page
The Emancipation Proclamation, with which Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves in 1863: 5 pages
Or, if you really want to get back to basics: The Declaration of independence came in at 1 page in 1776
The Democrats say they’ll post the final version online for lawmakers and the public to read 72 hours before a vote. Good luck reading 2,000 pages in 72 hours.
Meanwhile although the Democrats keep talking about openness and transparency in this process, there are reports that they blocked the public from attending the unveiling ceremony for their health care bill outside of the Capitol yesterday. Videos online show people – not on a pre-approved guest list – being turned away.
Note to Nancy Pelosi: You people don’t own the Capitol – we do.
So much for saving the environment