Video: Sanders breaks Senate rule by ending reading of his giant amendment

posted at 7:15 pm on December 16, 2009 by Allahpundit

Philip Klein is all over it. Plain and simple: Once a senator asks for a bill to be read, the reading goes on until he asks that it stop or, by unanimous consent, the bill is withdrawn. The whole point of Coburn’s delaying tactic was to buy an extra day so that opposition to the bill could further harden. Instead, as you’ll see below, Sanders somehow got away with interrupting his tantrum to unilaterally withdraw his amendment after just three hours of reading. Turns out there’s precedent for that — but the precedent was itself a mistake. That’s the point of the second clip, with Mitch McConnell in the role of prosecutor.

Karl e-mailed me earlier speculating that one of the reasons Coburn, DeMint, et al. have suddenly shifted to out-and-out obstruction is because they’re worried that Reid may force a cloture vote imminently. Makes sense in the abstract, but … where’s the bill? Does a bill even exist right now? I thought we were waiting for a CBO score on the now-dead Medicare buy-in. Assuming that’s been canceled due to Lieberman, does that mean we’re back to voting on the original Baucus bill? And I thought Pelosi already told Politico that she wants a conference with the Senate and thus there won’t be a vote on the final bill this year, in which case why is Reid still rushing?

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 3

Reid had them vote on the unwritten immigration bill…so…

Chris_Balsz on December 16, 2009 at 7:17 PM

November 2010 is going to be EPIC!

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Dems- ‘rules for thee but not for me’

cmsinaz on December 16, 2009 at 7:20 PM

Sheesh! That place is filled with a bunch of morons. Who think that we are the morons.

JamesLee on December 16, 2009 at 7:20 PM

Violation of Senate Rules this Afternoon [Veronique de Rugy]

Today Sen. Tom Coburn forced the reading of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s entire 767-page amendment to provide single-payer health care. This process would have taken some twelve hours at least. The Senate rule is that once the clerk starts reading the bill, no senator can stop the reading of that bill unless every senator agrees.

Somehow, though, the chair allowed Bernie Sanders to interrupt the reading and withdraw his amendment, which, under the rules, he should not have been allowed to do without unanimous consent. The reason the parliamentarian allowed the interruption was that he was relying on a similar incident in 1982 when the chair wrongly allowed an amendment to be withdrawn. Yet, as we know, two wrongs have never made a right.

This is a huge boon to Democrats who did not relish spending an entire day (or possibly two) reading the Sanders amendment to the American people.

The real story here, this miscarriage of justice in the Senate may just end up helping the Democrats squeeze passage of the health-care-reform bill before Christmas.

NRO

Wethal on December 16, 2009 at 7:20 PM

With this bunch, there are no limits, anything is possible.
There doesn’t appear to be any way to stop them either. The radicals could literally do anything, and who could stop them.

Declare Caesar Emperor for life, take it to the supreme court, and then who’s gonna remove the Emperor? How many federal marshals work for the supreme court?

Skandia Recluse on December 16, 2009 at 7:20 PM

I can’t believe he lists off all of those accomplishments catastrophes such as the 12 million dollar debt and then claims that the real outrage is forcing a bill to be read.

podank on December 16, 2009 at 7:21 PM

OT but here’s a diddy for Sarah fans.

txag92 on December 16, 2009 at 7:21 PM

now if an (R) actually broke this particular rule….whooooooaaaaa nelly

cmsinaz on December 16, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Rules are for SUCKAS!!

jukin on December 16, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

They don’t read the monstrosities they currently put out so maybe they decided to bait and switch with a blank bill to be filled in later. All those non readers wouldn’t know the difference anyway. Time to flush them all down the toilet of life and start again.

chemman on December 16, 2009 at 7:22 PM

C R I S I S

alexraye on December 16, 2009 at 7:23 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

Sadly, that sounds completely plausible. Actually, it sounds likely. They must have something soon, even if it’s random gibberish on paper…the Dems are so desperate, they couldn’t care less.

AUINSC on December 16, 2009 at 7:23 PM

What the Republicans are doing is getting all of the schmucks on the record as “knowing” what they’re voting for. And givin them notice that if the entire bill is read, then they’ll have no excuse when their constituents hold them to account. It’s pretty obvious now that Reid wants to vote on something that doesn’t exist so that the Dem in the Senate can say later “I didn’t know that was in there, Reid said so”. Reid also knows that if the true details of this are known, then it’s dead. So, in a nutshell, they’re trying to hoodwink the public by granting the Dems plausible deniability as to the bills contents. Pretty sneaky really.

volnation on December 16, 2009 at 7:23 PM

Elections have consequences.

portlandon on December 16, 2009 at 7:24 PM

The World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.

They are desperate to pass anything. Why bother writing it, just vote on a piece of paper that says “Reform” and then work it out in conference.

pedestrian on December 16, 2009 at 7:25 PM

SwampRat on December 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM

Banned.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:26 PM

A handful of people are going to alter America forever after all that has been fought in Civil Wars and the like. How can this be allowed to continue? This needs to stop. These guys will be long gone from old age by the time this passes. Think lf all the time thats been wasted on this piece of garbage. There are people needing jobs and this is all they can do is play doctor?

johnnyU on December 16, 2009 at 7:26 PM

Great job McConnell. Well said. If this is the game D.C. is willing to play, they are going to find the American people far less cordial than the various parliamentary procedures they currently engage in. Liberty.

Weight of Glory on December 16, 2009 at 7:26 PM

So when they do this when DeMint asks for the whole bill to be read, the whole bill will be unconstitutional. Even a wise Latina would know it to be so.

SouthernGent on December 16, 2009 at 7:26 PM

“Caning of Senators” sounds good to me.

farright on December 16, 2009 at 7:27 PM

volnation on December 16, 2009 at 7:23 PM

The GOP can still refuse to waive the reading of the manager’s amendment that Harry likely has to offer with changes that have been made, as well as the entire 2000+ bill.

Shamnesty was stopped the first time because Sessions and DeMint refused to waive reading of the bill. Harry gave up for the day (but tried again twice – with very little notice).

Wethal on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

So where were the Republican’s to call out the big faux pas on ending the reading of the bill?

Seriously, does anyone know what they’re doing up there?

Knucklehead on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

SwampRat on December 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Banned.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:26 PM

Why, AP?
He just stated the obvious….

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

I lack the words.
How many times can they be called thieves, traitors, liars and scoundrels! How many?
They may as well just throw the Republicans out, walk over to the White House and just tell Obama he can do what ever he wants. Why even pass a bill? Why even bother? Just send in the IRS and seize the hospitals, threaten doctors and nurses with jail unless they obey orders faxed to them from the White House!

JellyToast on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

Did you pause after writing that? Because that’s quite a statement. I fear it’s true, but still. Amazing amazing times.

Weight of Glory on December 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

You ever state it on my site and you’ll be banned too.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM
You ever state it on my site and you’ll be banned too.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM

The truth~NEVER!

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:30 PM

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:26 PM

Damn, I missed it again.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:31 PM

So obviously there’s no penalty for do whatever the Dems want. What’s the point then?

Iblis on December 16, 2009 at 7:32 PM

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

You ever state it on my site and you’ll be banned too.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM

State what? I’m going to the Boss’ page to see if she has a Google cache shot. She usually does.

Marcus on December 16, 2009 at 7:32 PM

Damn, I missed it again.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:31 PM

It had to do with the 2nd amendment~I don’t dare mention it~don’t want to be threatened again by a beta male.

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:33 PM

If they can withdraw an amendment while it’s being read, they can withdraw the final bill while it’s being read, too.

Emperor Norton on December 16, 2009 at 7:34 PM

Would any sane rational person buy a car or a house after being shown only a single slightly out-of-focus photo of said car or house? Not provided any details as to mileage or other important factors? Not being allowed to see the neighborhood, the local schools, the interior of the house and the condition of its furnishings and fixtures?

Just buy the damn thing. The details don’t matter. I want to sell it to you. That is all that matters. Trust me. I need to make this sale.

Congress and this Administration are trying to sell a lemon of a car or a run-down poorly constructed house at a price they have set, and enormous price, a price totally out of context to reality…the buyer be damned.

Now, jump ahead several trillion dollars.

Still want to buy that car or that house?

Reid said it is a great buy.

Pelosi said it was a great buy.

Obama says it is a great buy and if we don’t buy it the world will end.

Believe them?

I don’t.

If these are the best representatives of the people we can attain, then, perhaps, we deserve to be suckered into buying that lemon….and pay for it for decades, even after it fails to run, or the roof collapses on closing day, and the basement is flooded most of the year, and pass along what we owe to our kids and grand kids. Wonderful.

coldwarrior on December 16, 2009 at 7:34 PM

Jeez, who are they foolin with this nonsense.

Sounds like they are starting to get a bit desperate.

jhffmn on December 16, 2009 at 7:35 PM

I’m guessing the Republicans (and the rest of us) have no recourse in this matter of breaking the Senate Rules??

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:35 PM

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

You ever state it on my site and you’ll be banned too.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM
State what? I’m going to the Boss’ page to see if she has a Google cache shot. She usually does.

Marcus on December 16, 2009 at 7:32 PM

I didn’t STATE it, SwampRat did and he got banned.
I asked why and was threatened.
It’s MICHELLE’S site, AP is just the hired help.

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:36 PM

NOW is when you get them to vote for uncomfortable stuff. I know they’ve been working on this for the last few weeks, but they should figure out amendments that force them to make votes for things they can run against them the next election.

They already did a couple. They have already voted that it is OK to cut Medicare. This is on record now and they’ll have to run against it.

Now they should offer a million uncomfortable votes for them to have to vote for but not want to because they support this monstrosity!

Basically I am saying, now they are REALLY on the ropes. NOW – ATTACK!!!!!

ThackerAgency on December 16, 2009 at 7:36 PM

While it’s understood the meaning of “changing the rules in the middle of the game”, I wish Senator McConnell has used a different metaphor. Agreed, Obama, Reid, and the Democrats are playing a dangerous game with our lives in their attempt to make “history”, but the devastation of this bill and it’s ramifications are hardly a game.

That said, three cheers for the Senate Republicans, (and Joe Lieberman), for taking a stand against this potential travesty. Let’s hope more democrats come to their political senses, listen to their constituents and send this bill back where it belongs—in the shredder.

Rovin on December 16, 2009 at 7:37 PM

We are witnessing a King George congress in action. My 65 year old, lifelong democrat mother, said she was ashamed to have ever called herself a democrat.

alwaysright43 on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Call your Senator (especially D senators) and tell them that you don’t want them to vote for a larger unfunded mandate for your state in Medicaid!

Tell them your state is in the red in Medicaid as it is and that’s AFTER the stimulus package this year.

ThackerAgency on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

So… is there any punishment for breaking a rule?

kc8ukw on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Jeesh- Another moment of crisis?!?

I think my definition of crisis differs from Senator Sanders’ definition of crisis.

LASue on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

So… is there any punishment for breaking a rule?

kc8ukw on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

A sternly worded letter.

SouthernGent on December 16, 2009 at 7:39 PM

Pelosi already told Politico that she wants a conference with the Senate

She needs to hold her House Marxists in line by telling them that she’ll reinstall the public option in conference or she’ll have a revolt on her hands which means that there won’t be enough votes in the senate for the final bill.

One way or another the entire takeover is going to collapse.

elduende on December 16, 2009 at 7:40 PM

So… is there any punishment for breaking a rule?

kc8ukw on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

You have the fox guarding the hen house. The dems will NEVER punish their own.

I think the more noise that is made about this, the better~too bad it is during the holiday season, though. Fewer people will be paying attention and this is what the dems are counting on.

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:40 PM

I’m guessing the Republicans (and the rest of us) have no recourse in this matter of breaking the Senate Rules??

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:35 PM

Other than not allowing them to do it again, not much. But that’s the real recourse anyway. This time was practice, next time it’s for all the marbles.

volnation on December 16, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Rules? We don,t need no stinking rules.We are the democrats we make it up as we go along.

thmcbb on December 16, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Bernie’s throwing a hissy! The senile old bastard should do what’s best AND RESIGN! The only “crisis” Bernie, is idiots like you!

GarandFan on December 16, 2009 at 7:41 PM

LASue on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

No, its the same definition….just that the biggest CRISIS is that the Left is running the Government.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:42 PM

Hey Allahpundit -

Could you please characterize in a nonoffensive manner whatever SwampRat said to get himself banned? I want to be sure that I don’t say that. Seriously.

Venusian Visitor on December 16, 2009 at 7:42 PM

A sternly worded letter.

SouthernGent on December 16, 2009 at 7:39 PM

And a nice cushy chairmanship if you’re a Donk.

Knucklehead on December 16, 2009 at 7:42 PM

Can the Senators throw shoes at Dingy Harry when he is on the floor, or is that against the rules too?

d1carter on December 16, 2009 at 7:43 PM

Bernie looks deranged. Made me laugh.

jeanie on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

I watched the panel tonight on Special Report and they seem to think this thing will eventually pass. I have to wonder though, if Reid can actually get the 60, why hasn’t it already happened?

This is stranger than the immigration debacle, and that is saying something.

Terrye on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

Um, Beck actually made this point months ago re: The Apollo Alliance’s hand in writing Porkulus.

RightWinged on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

Knucklehead on December 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM

Sen. McConnell pointed out the error:

http://mcconnell.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=320935&start=1

Sean Hackbarth
Senate Republican Conference

seanhackbarth on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

It took what, five hours to read just over 350 pages of the Sanders amendment today? So that means if the manager’s amendment is over 2k pages, AND the bill itself is over 2k pages, it will take…….(lessee, 2 times errrr, 2 divided by errrr) Ok, how long will it take to read the M.A. and the entire bill?

PS I did really well in other subjects, though.

Intrepid on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

LASue on December 16, 2009 at 7:38 PM

To paraphrase the immortal words of Mandy Patinkin as Inigo Montoya…

“Crisis? I do not think that means what you think it means.”

The actual “crisis” will arrive when the United States is firmly against the ropes and getting its gut punched into tapioca by the rest of the world…then, Obama can execute all sorts of non-Constitutional orders to “save” all of us.

I am convinced this is the goal of this Administration and this Congress.

coldwarrior on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

A 2nd amendment related ban hammer. I would love to know what that was all about.

Bishop on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

seanhackbarth on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

“For example, there is precedent for a Senator being beaten with a cane here in the Senate. If mistakes were the rule, the caning of Senators would be in order. Fortunately for all of us, it is not.

If it were, C-SPAN would be much more popular.

amerpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:46 PM

One way or another the entire takeover is going to collapse.

elduende on December 16, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Do you really think that? Because every time I think that it’s dead, it pops back up ready for more. I sure would like to think that it’ll die when it gets up to the brink, but I, for whatever reason, am not as optimistic as I’d like to be. One things for sure, I’m going to be sweating whisky and pi$$ing gin before this things over. Bottoms up…

volnation on December 16, 2009 at 7:46 PM

If Nan thinks the vulnerable members of the House are mad now, wait until immigration ‘reform’ rears it’s ugly head again.

jeanie on December 16, 2009 at 7:46 PM

Only the law abiding abide the rules. Where does that leave the Democrats? Certainly not under the heading of law abiding!

Woody

woodcdi on December 16, 2009 at 7:46 PM

I am pretty sure that this bill will be a disaster no matter what version is passed.

If anything is passed, I predict that five years from now, the Dems will no longer be in control of anything. There will be a mass revolt by the elderly (who always vote) and the younger set (who will vote en-masse because they will feel the pinch of mandatory medical taxes premiums).

In any event, I say Harry goes next November.

vnjagvet on December 16, 2009 at 7:47 PM

A 2nd amendment related ban hammer. I would love to know what that was all about.

Bishop on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

I think AP thought it was a ‘threat’ against the congress~

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:47 PM

HAHA! This is GREAT! Now they are wasting time debating the rules of the debate. When they get done with that, they will STILL have to read the WHOLE AMENDMENT!

Well done, Mitch, well done! Jesse would be PROUD!

ThackerAgency on December 16, 2009 at 7:47 PM

A 2nd amendment related ban hammer. I would love to know what that was all about.

Bishop on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

I’m guessing it was about violence against Sanders. No way to know for sure though.

Emily M. on December 16, 2009 at 7:47 PM

May 22, 1856
The Caning of Senator Charles Sumner

On May 22, 1856, the “world’s greatest deliberative body” became a combat zone. In one of the most dramatic and deeply ominous moments in the Senate’s entire history, a member of the House of Representatives entered the Senate chamber and savagely beat a senator into unconsciousness.

The inspiration for this clash came three days earlier when Senator Charles Sumner, a Massachusetts antislavery Republican, addressed the Senate on the explosive issue of whether Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a slave state or a free state. In his “Crime Against Kansas” speech, Sumner identified two Democratic senators as the principal culprits in this crime—Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina. He characterized Douglas to his face as a “noise-some, squat, and nameless animal . . . not a proper model for an American senator.” Andrew Butler, who was not present, received more elaborate treatment. Mocking the South Carolina senator’s stance as a man of chivalry, the Massachusetts senator charged him with taking “a mistress . . . who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean,” added Sumner, “the harlot, Slavery.”

Representative Preston Brooks was Butler’s South Carolina kinsman. If he had believed Sumner to be a gentleman, he might have challenged him to a duel. Instead, he chose a light cane of the type used to discipline unruly dogs. Shortly after the Senate had adjourned for the day, Brooks entered the old chamber, where he found Sumner busily attaching his postal frank to copies of his “Crime Against Kansas” speech.

Moving quickly, Brooks slammed his metal-topped cane onto the unsuspecting Sumner’s head. As Brooks struck again and again, Sumner rose and lurched blindly about the chamber, futilely attempting to protect himself. After a very long minute, it ended.

Bleeding profusely, Sumner was carried away. Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber without being detained by the stunned onlookers. Overnight, both men became heroes in their respective regions.

Surviving a House censure resolution, Brooks resigned, was immediately reelected, and soon thereafter died at age 37. Sumner recovered slowly and returned to the Senate, where he remained for another 18 years. The nation, suffering from the breakdown of reasoned discourse that this event symbolized, tumbled onward toward the catastrophe of civil war

portlandon on December 16, 2009 at 7:48 PM

that Saunders fella got pretty weee weeed up there now didn’t he?

ted c on December 16, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Ok so…

We need a poll. Does Obamacare die to infighting or does the current Reid bill pass?

Anyone remember SEIU throwing hissy fit over the Baucus bill too? I think they absolutely need some sort of socialized plan to survive. I wonder if that’s enough to derail the bill.

jhffmn on December 16, 2009 at 7:50 PM

Elections have consequences.

portlandon on December 16, 2009 at 7:24 PM

Ain’t that the truth.

Terrye on December 16, 2009 at 7:51 PM

Just have ‘em, read the whole Health Care bill, maybe they’ll withdraw the whole damn thing.

Mr Purple on December 16, 2009 at 7:51 PM

portlandon on December 16, 2009 at 7:48 PM

No current Senator has the balls….of either one.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:52 PM

A 2nd amendment related ban hammer. I would love to know what that was all about.

Bishop on December 16, 2009 at 7:44 PM

Wow, he not only banned swamprat, but offered to ban HornetSting as well, Hmmm does this smell like a Charles Johnson move???

doriangrey on December 16, 2009 at 7:53 PM

I like that rule where senators can be caned. There is a lot of them that need a near death caning for the corrupt practices and misuse of their office. More of bambi’s get in their face bullshit. I don’t think those accusing a president in an impeachment proceeding will be as kind to the next presidential impeachment prodeeding as they were the last liar. Our government is a joke to the world and I am truly ashamed of it. Can’t wait to vote these bastards out of office.

bluegrass on December 16, 2009 at 7:53 PM

November 2010 is going to be EPIC!

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM

If we make it that long.

5u93rm4n on December 16, 2009 at 7:53 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

Isn’t that Unconstitutional…?

Seven Percent Solution on December 16, 2009 at 7:53 PM

!Hornetsting!

You are valued member of our little clique in here, caution please. We wouldn’t want to lose you. Picking a fight with the administrator is a no win situation.

Please HS, keep your hands in clear sight, and sloooooowly back away from the key board before someone gets hurt.

Archimedes on December 16, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Isn’t that Unconstitutional…?

Seven Percent Solution on December 16, 2009 at 7:53 PM

It would be if we still had a constitution, sadly though the Dems have succeeded in pulling off a Marxist coup and we are now just serfs in their Utopia…

doriangrey on December 16, 2009 at 7:56 PM

So, really, is there any recourse for this? Besides elections, faxing, marching on Washington? Isn’t there a Senate jail somewhere to put these jerks in Time Out for a while?

Maybe when we re-do the country we should have special jail cells in the capitol for House and Senate rule breakers to sit for 48 hours for breaking the rules or something.

NTWR on December 16, 2009 at 7:56 PM

Nelson Under Fire In Nebraska [Robert Costa]

Sen. Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) is feeling the heat in his home state. A new Tarrance Group poll finds 61 percent of Nebraskans “less likely” to support Nelson in his 2012 reelection bid if he votes for Obamacare. Democrats, sensing trouble in the Cornhusker State, recently enlisted Bob Kerrey, the state’s former governor, to lobby Nelson off the fence.

TIME reports that Kerrey knows what it’s like to be the deciding vote on a big-time bill:

Back in 1993, Kerrey was the final vote that Bill Clinton needed to pass his economic plan. The relationship between the two still carried the strain of their campaign against each other in the Democratic primary the year before. In one of the oddest moments of the cliffhanger in 1993, Kerrey simply went missing. He strolled out of the Senate Chamber to go see a movie. (Trivia buffs will know that it was “What’s Love Got to Do With It?,” the Tina Turner biopic that was playing at nearby Union Station.)

While Kerrey calls, two senior Nebraska Republicans are publicly calling on Nelson to vote “no” on Obamacare. Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.) tells National Review Online that he’s “never seen Nebraska so fired up” against an issue. “Bob Kerrey certainly hasn’t called me,” laughs Johanns. “Senator Nelson knows that 85 to 90 percent of this state is against this bill. Although he’s not up for reelection for three years, he knows the sense of the people. In every town hall, the message is the same: defeat this bill.” Nelson, adds Johanns, “knows that the majority of Nebraska is pro-life” and, he hopes, will “not retreat in his fight with Democratic leadership on that issue.”

Gov. Dave Heineman (R., Neb.) agrees. He says that Obamacare is “bad news for Nebraska” and that the Senate’s health-care bill is “not the answer.” In a letter to Nelson, he writes: “You are now the 60th vote, and as Governor of the State that we both represent, I urge you to vote against this bill and against cloture.”

NRO. Nebraska tells Nelson to vote no.

(I had forgotten about Kerrey. Dated Linda Ronstadt and stiffed Clinton. Not bad for a liberal.)

Wethal on December 16, 2009 at 7:56 PM

Ok so…

We need a poll. Does Obamacare die to infighting or does the current Reid bill pass?

Sure would like to know what’s in the bill. Reid’s been so afraid to release the damn thing, it must have had some real doozies in it. If it gets “watered down” any more, would this be considered torture?

Rovin on December 16, 2009 at 7:56 PM

!Hornetsting!

You are valued member of our little clique in here, caution please. We wouldn’t want to lose you. Picking a fight with the administrator is a no win situation.

Please HS, keep your hands in clear sight, and sloooooowly back away from the key board before someone gets hurt.

Archimedes on December 16, 2009 at 7:54

I DIDN’T DO ANYTHING~I just made the mistake of asking a question.
I know the rules~I love posting here and I don’t want to be banned. I will sheath the stinger.

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM

Damn, I missed it again.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:31 PM

Yeah, me too. I always miss the good stuff. Whatever it was, it was instant and fatal.

BobMbx on December 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

Didn’t Pelosi already do that with CapNTrade?

joeindc44 on December 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM

I think they absolutely need some sort of socialized plan to survive. I wonder if that’s enough to derail the bill.

jhffmn on December 16, 2009 at 7:50 PM

They want Obamacare w/a PO so that all of their members can sign up, thus freeing all of the funds that are stowed away to ensure the “solvency” of the current health care plans of their members. That and the fact that if the Feds run HC, the union ranks will swell like never before, thus entrenching Dems and the union heads power. This is all about money and control, it was never about the welfare of the populace, but rather what sector, if effectively seized by the Feds, would yield the highest return.

volnation on December 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM

volnation on December 16, 2009 at 7:46 PM

Sure look at it this way.

In July, before the town hall meetings and ALL the wretched CBO scoring, and wretched economic news, and the wretched leftist tactics, and all the wretched Obama speeches, and Obama’s poll numbers were still in the 60s, they didn’t have the votes. Now it is suicide and they know it.

The other point is this if the House gets its way the Senate won’t vote for it. If the Senate gets its way the House won’t vote for it. No side gets there way then.

The last point is that the longer that something this unpopular goes into the new year, on an election year, the less likely it becomes.

elduende on December 16, 2009 at 7:58 PM

November 2010 is going to be EPIC!

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:19 PM
If we make it that long.

5u93rm4n on December 16, 2009 at 7:53 PM

We ARE the United States~we will make it that long, we will persevere and on a cold day in November, we will dance in the streets, claiming victory~we will claim our country back!
AND WE WILL NEVER FALL ASLEEP AGAIN!
We will make sure that our representatives REPRESENT US!

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 7:59 PM

You ever state it on my site and you’ll be banned too.

Allahpundit on December 16, 2009 at 7:29 PM

Last I checked, it was Michelle Malkins site, and you are an employee. Some of us would like to know what got him banned. As it was gone before we opened the thread. Oh, you can ban this nym if you like, I have about a dozen others. And I can change my IP address at will.

mrpeabody on December 16, 2009 at 7:59 PM

This is a zombie bill, it is left for dead, and still rises up …

lovingmyUSA on December 16, 2009 at 7:59 PM

Damn, I missed it again.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 7:31 PM
Yeah, me too. I always miss the good stuff. Whatever it was, it was instant and fatal.

BobMbx on December 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM

It was a blank.

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Banned quicker than Sanders can withdraw an amendment.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Banned quicker than Sanders can withdraw an amendment.

PappaMac on December 16, 2009 at 8:00 PM

HAHA! It’s funny because it’s true.

ThackerAgency on December 16, 2009 at 8:03 PM

@Sting

What’s this I’m reading above? Doesn’t make any sense… Maybe Whale Wars was moved to a new time.

MeatHeadinCA on December 16, 2009 at 8:04 PM

@Sting

What’s this I’m reading above? Doesn’t make any sense… Maybe Whale Wars was moved to a new time.

MeatHeadinCA on December 16, 2009 at 8:04 PM

Monthly cycle. :(

HornetSting on December 16, 2009 at 8:05 PM

Maybe we’ve actually reached the point where not only aren’t they reading the bill before voting on it, they’re not even writing it before voting on it.

So they don’t even know the cost yet! The Democrats are drunk with power.

TN Mom on December 16, 2009 at 8:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3