Oh my: Kill the bill, says … Howard Dean

posted at 4:10 pm on December 15, 2009 by Allahpundit

The only thing that can save us from final passage now is the insane bitterness of “principled liberals” at seeing their dream of true socialized medicine smashed. Help us, Dean-o, you’re our only hope!

The gauntlet from Dean — whose voice on health care is well respsected among liberals — will energize those on the left who are mobilizing against the bill, and make it tougher for liberals to embrace the emerging proposal. In an excerpt Kinzel gave me, Dean says:

“This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate. Honestly the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill, go back to the House, start the reconciliation process, where you only need 51 votes and it would be a much simpler bill.”…

Dean had previously endorsed the Medicare buy-in compromise without a public option, saying that the key question should be whether the bill contains enough “real reform” to be worthy of progressives’ support. Dean has apparently concluded that the “real reform” has been removed at Lieberman’s behest — which won’t make it easier for liberals to swallow the emerging compromise.

That makes two leading nutroots lights to come out against the bill since the Medicare compromise was dropped. I’m skeptical that there are any Senate liberals willing to be the 41st vote against cloture — Burris made some noise this morning about demanding a public option, although even his language was qualified — but there’s a huge bloc of House progressives that will take this under careful advisement. Remember, Pelosi’s bill only passed by five votes; the more momentum there is on the left for the idea that Reid’s bill is a grand sellout, the more precarious this gets. No wonder Democratic pundits were rushing out pieces this morning urging liberals to take the deal.

As for Dean-o’s point about reconciliation, after all the damage this process has done to Democrats among independents, the left’s big vote-winning plan now is to have Reid … cram the public option down America’s throats using an arcane parliamentary procedure? With Lieberman, Nelson, Lincoln, Bayh, Pryor, and possibly one or two other Blue Dogs screaming “no way”? We may have actually reached the point where true-believin’ progressive ObamaCare supporters are so desperate to have their dream bill that they’re willing to trade the House majority for it. Which is well and good, but someone had better let Pelosi know pronto.

Update: It’s popcorn time, kids.

Democratic votes may stay home from the polls in retribution for Congress failing at health reform, a top liberal lawmaker said Tuesday.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), the co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that members of the Democratic Party’s base “aren’t even going to go to the polls if they don’t have a public option.”…

“I don’t see what we’ve accomplished,” Woolsey said. “If we were going to have insurance reform, we could have done that very simply. If we don’t have a public option and at the very least we don’t have a Medicare buy in then we aren’t offering any competition to the insurance industry.”

She says she doesn’t know if she could vote for Reid’s bill.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Kill Bill – part II

moc23 on December 15, 2009 at 5:08 PM

You mean a majority vote by democratically elected Senators?
I fail to see how this is any more or less democratic than the filibuster. If you’re so interested in “democracy,” give it an up-or-down vote.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 5:00 PM

Except the democratically elected senators are passing something the electorate does not want. This is why our prescient fore-fathers put such protections in the Senate rules- to protect the country from you and the ignorati.

Chuck Schick on December 15, 2009 at 5:06 PM

The voters will make that determination at the ballot boxes. As someone pointed out to me the other day, we have a republic, not a pure democracy for a reason. Elected representatives have to walk a fine line between their consciences and their re-election campaign but they are not under any obligation to submit to government by poll.

As I look inot this, however, this whole discussion is essentially moot. The bills would have to be re-written and go through the House and Senate Budget Committees and would be subject to the “Byrd Rule” wherein any clause not deemed relevant to the deficit could be challenged. This is why Bush could — what’s the phrase? — “undemocratically cram down” his tax cuts, but it probably won’t work for health care.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 5:13 PM

“If we were going to have insurance reform, we could have done that very simply.

Translation: Instead of pulling the engine and tranny, we just could have tuned things up.

unclesmrgol on December 15, 2009 at 5:13 PM

This is why Bush could — what’s the phrase? — “undemocratically cram down” his tax cuts, but it probably won’t work for health care.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 5:13 PM

Tax cuts are budgetary issues to the core. This is not.

I’m not saying the Senate can’t legally or morally follow this path with ObamaCare, just that is will make matters worse on them- which as even you must admit with Obama’s record drop in the polls- takes some real doing.

Chuck Schick on December 15, 2009 at 5:17 PM

The delicious irony of Roland Burris being a potential dagger in this is, well, almost too much for my palate.

SouthernGent on December 15, 2009 at 5:18 PM

Liberals and lefties are horrible liars. That includes you Lynn. yeah, like you lefties would stay home. Your insane, it’s not an option. oh, Democrats like myself WILL be coming out on droves in 2010…to boot the current Democratic encumbants out ASAP. Just to screw with you Dems in office, we didn’t switch party affiliation but you won’t be getting our vote. You can’t even imagine how many registered Dems will be voting Repub. in 2010.

You don’t have to wonder what happened to those millions of Palin/McCain voters. You know damn well they aren’t going to vote Democrat in the coming election, Just like they didn’t in the last election. You Lynn, and every Democrat in Washington should be very scared of passing this trainwreck

Niteowl45 on December 15, 2009 at 5:20 PM

What was that song by ABBA? Oh yes…Waterloo! Love it!

redwhiteblue on December 15, 2009 at 5:22 PM

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), the co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that members of the Democratic Party’s base “aren’t even going to go to the polls if they don’t have a public option.”…

Exactly as I predicted yesterday; The Congressional Marxist Caucus are ideologues, not pragmatists. They won’t support this Senate plan because they see it as a sell out and Obama is not popular enough (anymore) to use moral suasion on them.

elduende on December 15, 2009 at 5:25 PM

I may be missing something here, but what Howlin’ Howie seems to be advocating is for the Senate to go with the House bill, which is a slimy government takeover of our rights and a major budget-buster all on its own.

Why does anyone find this a good sign?

One thing you can depend on: the greedy totalitarians in congress will get this passed while the talking heads on our side are distracted by supposed “defections” from the libs.

All this nattering about how this might “kill” Osama Obama Care is so much — you should pardon the expression — hot air, and simply means that the righties who buy what they’re hearing/reading right now will be in for an even bigger shock when the traitorous scum in congress and the White House get their way.

MrScribbler on December 15, 2009 at 5:25 PM

Tax cuts are budgetary issues to the core. This is not.

I’m not saying the Senate can’t legally or morally follow this path with ObamaCare, just that is will make matters worse on them- which as even you must admit with Obama’s record drop in the polls- takes some real doing.

Chuck Schick on December 15, 2009 at 5:17 PM

I’m not saying they’re not. I’m just saying that if it’s democratic to dispense with the filibuster on tax legislation, it should be equally democratic to dispense with it on health care.

Frankly, I’m not sure it can get any worse. Passing a bill and speaking with a unified voice in support of a finished product is certainly going to be better on a political basis than having the sausage-making process make headlines every day.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM

I think it is quite telling that the Anointed One actually said in public that congress is “on the precipice” of passing the bill.

“On the precipice” is correct and rather a Freudian slip, I think!

Dhuka on December 15, 2009 at 5:39 PM

If we don’t have a public option and at the very least we don’t have a Medicare buy in then we aren’t offering any competition to the insurance industry.

‘Zounds! The sheer idiocy of this statement is of epic proportions. Medicare to create “competition” for the private insurance industry? What does “competition” mean, anyway? Have words, at last, been emptied of all meaning that is not Orwellian?

smellthecoffee on December 15, 2009 at 5:40 PM

having the sausage-making process make headlines every day.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM

What the Senate is producing may be vaguely sausage-shaped, but if you actually catch a whiff of it you’ll have to admit that it’s definitely not sausage.

notropis on December 15, 2009 at 5:43 PM

Is it wrong for an atheist to pray for this?

Ann on December 15, 2009 at 5:50 PM

I’m not saying they’re not. I’m just saying that if it’s democratic to dispense with the filibuster on tax legislation, it should be equally democratic to dispense with it on health care.

Frankly, I’m not sure it can get any worse. Passing a bill and speaking with a unified voice in support of a finished product is certainly going to be better on a political basis than having the sausage-making process make headlines every day.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM

From your point of view I don’t know how this can get any worse. Everything this bill was supposed to do is gone:

- Obama horsetraded away any chance to bring down pharma costs with his backroom $80B deal which, as paltry as that is over 10 years, they still don’t have to stick to. And seriously- do you think anyone is going to have the stomach to revisit HCR anytime soon?

- Drug reimportation dropped as part of the plan to not break apart above deal

- The very insurance system you all complain about is 100% in place- with potentially 30 million new customers

- The minority of patients with pre-existing conditions have their premiums held down, which means the vast majority will have theirs raised to compensate for it

- Massive medicare cuts the seniors are going to lose their sh1t over

- Doctors costs left alone

- Deficits expand and accelerate once 100% of the costs kick in after 4 years

- No public option, no Medicare buy in

And if they add reconciliation, this will all be undoable withiout a filibuster as well.

And you know Obama will cave like he does with everything else. Obama has shown zero leadership on this issue and will sign anything he can at this point.

Chuck Schick on December 15, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Plus I forgot all the mandates and taxes on companies- especially small ones- that will suppress wages, bonuses, benefits, employment and coverage as well.

Chuck Schick on December 15, 2009 at 5:54 PM

Bringing the public option into play through reconciliation or conference is nothing more than aggressive posturing. I’ve yet to see anyone outside of the extreme left wing fringe take it seriously. Don’t take my word for it, but ask yourself why the democratic leadership is pushing to compromise with Lieberman.

But I’m sure that will be the new lefty troll meme. Blah blah blah we are going to pass this with reconciliation blah blah blah. It’s not happening.

jhffmn on December 15, 2009 at 5:56 PM

The backlash has begun.

Senator Roland W. Burris, Democrat of Illinois, has vowed that he will not vote for a health care bill that does not include a government-run insurance plan, or public option.

No backlash, this is no longer a health insurance reform bill, it’s going to be a bill to see who can get the biggest piece of Zero’s stash. It’s going to be nothing but a huge pork barrel spending bill with some health care mandates in it. Now to pile on the pork.

Brat4life on December 15, 2009 at 6:05 PM

“We got to have the public option, we’re going to California, then Ohio, then Florida, then Michigan… until we get the public option. ARRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!
Bring in the clowns.

Hummer53 on December 15, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Hold out Burris, baby, hold out! The cesspool city, Chitown, armpit of the midwest needs a bailout bad!

Hold out Burris you can get more than that two bit Ho from Louisiana, baby, hold out.

Get yours befo the rest of the scumbags figure out the scam and jump on the “I can’t Vote for this crap sandwich without a lot of money for my constituents” bandwagon.

Hold on, baby, your in the catbirds seat don’t settle for less than $500 BILLION, man!
You’ll be a Hero in Zero’s hometown!

Your name will be forever Rolland Burris, “the man who saved Chi-town the armpit of the midwest and brought tons of money home to the Daley machine”!

dhunter on December 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Reconciliation means shoving the bill into the budget for an up or down vote. However everything not pertaining to the budget can be challenged and thrown out leaving a giant cratering mess of a bill.

jhffmn on December 15, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Give that man a gold star for his knowledge of and insight on matters of Congressional procedure.

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2009 at 6:33 PM

It’s like watching a bad Mexican soap opera on Telemuuuuuundo.

SouthernGent on December 15, 2009 at 4:31 PM

That is where you are mistaken, sir.

There is no such thing as a bad soap opera on Telemundo!!

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2009 at 6:36 PM

From Robert Tracinski’s TIA:

TIA Daily • December 13, 2009

COMMENTARY

The Pledge

The biggest mystery about the health-care bill is why we’re still debating it. By any normal political calculation, it should have been dead months ago. No piece of legislation on this scale, a reform that affects every American, has ever been passed by Congress without public opinion behind it and significant bipartisan support. Yet this bill is now unpopular by a very wide margin—61-36 in the latest poll—and it has not attracted any significant backing from Republicans.

All it would take would be for one Democratic senator to come out and say that it’s over, that he won’t vote for the bill and it won’t pass. So why hasn’t anyone done that yet?

The answer is that the Democrats sitting on the fence are not just afraid of the small-government “tea party” types on the right, or the independent voters who have swung decisively against the bill. They are afraid of the Democratic “base” on the left. No one wants to be singled out as the senator who killed the most cherished item on the left’s agenda. No one wants to be the first Democratic senator to come out against the bill, for fear that he or she will then be targeted by the far-left fanatics from the MoveOn.org-Huffington Post-Daily Kos faction.

As a matter of practical politics, this is a rational fear, so to counteract it I have a modest proposal. Those of us who oppose the bill have tried threatening Democratic senators with a negative incentive: the withdrawal of our votes and our active support for their opponents. How about enticing them with a positive incentive? Let’s pledge to give our support to the re-election campaign of the first Democratic senator to come out against the health-care bill. If enough of us make that pledge, it would counteract the political threat from the far left.

The deal is this: come out against the health-care bill, and we will pledge to donate time or money to your next re-election campaign, and those of us who live in your state will give you our votes. We will do it because of your stand on this one bill, regardless of any disagreement we may have with your other policies.

But here’s the catch: we’ll only do it for the first Democratic senator to declare clear and unequivocal opposition to the whole bill. You can’t earn it by opposing one provision but implying that you would support the bill with minor amendments. And you can’t earn it by jumping on the bandwagon after another Democrat takes the heat by being the first to oppose the bill. No, our support goes only to the Democrat who sticks his or her neck out to kill this bill.

And there’s a catch for us, too. We have to actually mean it, and we have to follow through. We have to be willing to support a Democrat we may not like, out of gratitude for this one political act. But I think the senator who steps up to kill this bill will deserve our support. He or she will have taken a significant political risk to stop a threat to our liberty. And it has been a long time—far too long—since any of our political leaders took a risk for the cause of liberty.

Here’s what you can do: send this e-mail to all of your like-minded friends to get the maximum possible exposure for this idea. Get as many people as possible to take this pledge of support and—here is the crucial part—to send it to as many senators as possible. (Remember, to support a senator’s campaign, you don’t have to live in the same state.) The pledge won’t work unless we get a lot of people to sign it, and unless they let the senators who are on the edge about this bill know about it. The senators who are persuadable on this issue need to know that they have something to gain, and not just something to fear, from blocking the bill.

Take the following message, which I have also put up at TIA’s Health Care Guide (www.TIADaily.com/healthcare), and send it by e-mail, fax, or snail mail to the senators whose votes it is most likely to sway. (I’ve given a list below of some of the top candidates.) Or even phone it in to the senators’ office.

Dear Senator,

I think you know that the health care bill handed down to you by the Democratic leadership is a disaster and that it does not deserve your support. But I understand why you might be reticent about being the first Democrat in the Senate to go on record opposing the bill. You are afraid that the far left wing within your own party will blame you, and not Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi or Barack Obama, for the failure of the bill. You are afraid that they could target you for defeat in the next election, either by backing a challenger in the primary or by convincing your Democratic “base” to sit home in the general election.

To compensate, I pledge that I will offer you my support in your next election. I will make a significant contribution of time or money, and I will give you my vote—if you take the lead as the first Democratic senator to declare unequivocal opposition to the whole health care bill.

I am not someone who would normally support you, but I am willing to do so because the health care issue is so important to me, and the bill being debated in the Senate is so bad, that it overrides any disagreement I have with you on other issues. If you are willing to stick your neck out to preserve my health-care freedom, you will have earned my enthusiastic support.

So that you know this pledge of support is serious, I give you my contact information below and encourage you to remind me when the time comes to make good on my promise of support.

Be sure when you send this to include your contact information, as proof that you are serious enough about this pledge to, in effect, put yourself on the senator’s fundraising mailing list.

JDPerren on December 15, 2009 at 6:39 PM

If the Democrats truly had any willpower or competence whatsoever, they could have simply steamrolled the bill through Congress and onto Obama’s desk to the cheers of half the nation

Dark-Star on December 15, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Just for fun, take a look at the 89th Congress, which I think is the last time the Dems had majorities this large. Go ahead and look at the legislation they pulled off.

The ghost of Lyndon Johnson is laughing/cursing at the Harvard trained buffoon who is sitting in the same funny shaped room he used to sit in, preparing to destroy the party he once led to triumph.

Do you hear it Barack?… Do you hear the laughter?

JohnGalt23 on December 15, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Does anyone remember the GOP ever even contemplating using “reconciliation” to pass major legislation?

Seriously, how the fuck are they getting away with floating this notion?

Can you imagine the “OMG THEY’RE SHREDDING THE CONSTITUTION” that would have been raised if this had been tried under Bush?

I really worry they are floating it out there so later when they do it the idea won’t seem as batshit crazy as it actually is.

TallDave on December 15, 2009 at 6:58 PM

Does anyone remember the GOP ever even contemplating using “reconciliation” to pass major legislation?

Seriously, how the fuck are they getting away with floating this notion?
TallDave on December 15, 2009 at 6:58 PM

Not gonna happen. They would have to put all the provisions back in that just got scrapped out and then do the reconciliation. Too late for this tactic.

Rovin on December 15, 2009 at 8:11 PM

Does anyone remember the GOP ever even contemplating using “reconciliation” to pass major legislation?

Seriously, how the fuck are they getting away with floating this notion?

Can you imagine the “OMG THEY’RE SHREDDING THE CONSTITUTION” that would have been raised if this had been tried under Bush?

I really worry they are floating it out there so later when they do it the idea won’t seem as batshit crazy as it actually is.

TallDave on December 15, 2009 at 6:58 PM

Bush passed his tax cuts under reconciliation.

Senate internal procedures are not in The Constitution.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM

I think it is quite telling that the Anointed One actually said in public that congress is “on the precipice” of passing the bill.

“On the precipice” is correct and rather a Freudian slip, I think!

Dhuka on December 15, 2009 at 5:39 PM

Wait. I’ve heard that twice now. Is that actually TRUE? Did Barak Hussein Obama, The Most Articulate Human Being Ever, REALLY say that Congress is “on the precipice” of passing his socialized health care bill?

logis on December 15, 2009 at 8:27 PM

shove it HoDe you Obama selecting idiot

ginaswo on December 15, 2009 at 8:28 PM

I wonder if they will hold their noses and vote for it in the end..but if they do, can it be undone? I hope so. The whole thing is just absurd. Worse political class ever.

Terrye on December 15, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Bush passed his tax cuts under reconciliation.

Senate internal procedures are not in The Constitution.

Bleeds Blue on December 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Oh yes, those horrid tax cuts. Tell me, are the Democrats planning to raise all those taxes again? And what about the millions of people Bush took off the rolls, are they going to have to start filing again?

BTW, reconciliation is meant for budgetary process..not the passage of major domestic policy.

Terrye on December 15, 2009 at 8:38 PM

What the Senate is producing may be vaguely sausage-shaped, but if you actually catch a whiff of it you’ll have to admit that it’s definitely not sausage.

notropis on December 15, 2009 at 5:43 PM

Also, it will look similar…

Schadenfreude on December 15, 2009 at 11:26 PM

This is getting insane. I think these freaks are going to pass something/anything to give Obrother something to crow about at his State of the Union address Nuremberg rally. Whatever they take out, they will doubtless put back in during reconciliation or attempt to, which I can’t understand why the leftist don’t see that. They want gold on a silver platter immediately.

No matter what, we must run on a platform that proudly affirms conservative principles and promises to REPEAL as much of this communist garbage as possible.

Courage my comrades (I meant that last word in a friendly non-commie way)

J.J. Sefton on December 16, 2009 at 6:05 AM

Yeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhh!!!!!

adamsmith on December 16, 2009 at 7:03 AM

And if they add reconciliation, this will all be undoable withiout a filibuster as well.

Chuck Schick on December 15, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Ya know, I had completely missed that. If they can pass it with 51 votes, they can un-pass it with 51 votes. My previous premise had always been that the republicans will never, ever have 60 or more votes to stop this, and certainly not between now and it’s implementation.

That being said, I can guarantee you that even in the unlikely event the republicans do get 51 votes in 2010, or the more unlikely event of 60 later on, they will never repeal this. They have not the balls. You know this as well as I do, republicans are simply not up to the task, and conservatives don’t have the demographic base in this country to get to the majorities they need.

runawayyyy on December 16, 2009 at 3:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2