• Facebook
  • Twitter
nellie On March - 18 - 2010

Here is some basic info (which is surprisingly difficult to find).

UPDATE Mar 21 12:30 pm pst:
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has said that there will be no “Deem and Pass” vote on Sunday. Instead, the House will first take a vote on the reconciliation package. This wil be followed immediately by a vote on the Senate bill. This is the procedure they had wanted to do all along, but now the parliamentarian has ruled that they can take the reconciliation vote first.

Sunday the House of Representatives will vote on health care reform. They will first vote on the Reconciliation Sidecar, H.R. 4872. Then they will take a vote on bill that has already passed in the Senate, H.R. 3590. This is a change from the original plan, where they would have accomplished the vote on the Senate bill by passing the sidecar, H.R. 4872, which includes language stating that if H.R. 4872 passes, than H.R. 3590 will also have passed.

The House was not able to post the reconciliation sidecar until 2 pm Eastern Time today (Thursday), so Sunday’s vote will not take place until 2 pm est, to honor the 72-hour review period.

Update Mar 19 1:00 pm pst:
From John Dean:

Expect two votes on Sunday in the House. The first vote will be on the Rule to Deem and Pass. This will approve the procedure to pass H.R. 3590 as H.R. 4872 is passed. The second will be on the Resolution (revisions) to fix the Senate Bill, H.R. 4872.

The language of the rule will be something like: “The senate bill is printed in Section 2 of this Resolution and will be considered adopted by the House and the Committee as a whole.” CORRECTION: Once the revisions pass, the senate bill is passed, and whether or not the Senate adopts the House Resolution, we have health care reform.

The next step is to make sure the Senate adopts the revisions passed in the house. That will be the reconciliation measure.

The Reconciliation Bill (H.R. 4872) will be online for 72 hours — as promised.

The Senate Bill (H.R. 3590) has been available online since it passed on December 4, 2009.

Original Senate Bill
Action on the original Senate bill

This is the Senate’s health care bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The Senate is co-opting this bill as a vehicle for passage of their reform and will change the text of this unrelated bill in whole in the coming weeks. They do this because the Constitution requires all revenue bills to start in the House, and their health reform plan involves revenue. So they have chosen to work off of a bill that started in the House, even if that bill is unrelated.

CBO Report on the original Senate bill

CBO has just released an estimate of the budgetary effects of the health bill, H.R. 3590, that passed the Senate on December 24. Today’s estimate differs from the estimate for a slightly earlier version of the legislation that we released on December 19 in that it encompasses all of the amendments that were adopted by the Senate, reflects a revised assumption about its enactment date, and incorporates some technical revisions. Like the December 19 estimate, this estimate is based on CBO’s baseline projections from March 2009. We and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) prepared this updated estimate in preparation for further consideration of health care legislation. However, the changes we have made do not result in an estimate that differs substantially from the earlier one.

CBO and JCT now estimate that, on balance, the direct (mandatory) spending and revenue effects of enacting H.R. 3590 as passed by the Senate would yield a net reduction in federal deficits of $118 billion over the 2010–2019 period. (Direct spending—as distinguished from discretionary spending—is spending that stems from legislation other than appropriation acts.) In our earlier estimate, the budgetary impact was a net reduction in deficits of $132 billion.

CBO Director’s blog

House Bill
House version: H.R.3590 – Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Bill text

Govtracks summary

Reconciliation Sidecar
The HR 4872 SIDECAR — this is the bill that contains the fixes — has been posted. I will add to the above as soon as the problem with the categories has been fixed.

The House was not able to post this bill until 2 pm Eastern Time, so Sunday’s vote will not take place until 2 pm, to honor the 72-hour review period.

CBO Report on H.R. 4872

Immediate benefits
The Top Ten Immediate Benefits You’ll Get When Health Care Reform Passes
As soon as health care passes, the American people will see immediate benefits. The legislation will:

  • Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;
  • Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;
  • Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;
  • Lower seniors prescription drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole;
  • Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;
  • Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;
  • Require plans to cover an enrollee’s dependent children until age 26;
  • Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;
  • Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;
  • Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs.

CBO summary
March 18, 2010 CBO Report

Talking Points Memo: Dem Source: CBO Says Health Bill Cuts Deficit, Costs $940 Billion

A Democratic source provides TPM with the CBO’s final top-line numbers on the health care reform bill–the cost-estimate of the Senate health care bill as amended by a soon-to-be-released reconciliation bill. The findings, as expected, keep the bill in line with the Senate bill’s stand alone score:

The bill would reduce the deficit by $130 billion in the first ten years, and potentially by $1.2 trillion in the second ten years (though CBO always warns that projections into the second decade are extremely unpredictable).

According to the source, CBO finds that the bill reduces annual growth in Medicare expenditures by 1.4 percentage points per year, extending Medicare’s solvency by at least 9 years.

And, in a small, but significant improvement over the Senate bill, the combined package will expand health insurance coverage to 32 million Americans, as opposed to the Senate bill’s 31 million.

When it becomes law
UPDATE Mar 21 12:40pm
Now that H.R. 4872 will be voted on first, we will not have health care reform until the second vote is taken on H.R. 3590. This bill will go to the president’s desk for signature. H.R. 4872 will go to the Senate for a majority vote via the reconciliation process.

Mar 19
Once the House passes HR 4872, the Senate bill (H.R. 3590) will go to President Obama for a signature. The Senate will pass the reconciliation as a separate action. So we’ll have health care as soon as 4872 passes. Then we’ll have better health care when the Senate passes the reconciliation bill.

This post will be updated as I find more info. Please post any updates that can be included in this post.
Categories: Featured, Health & Science

656 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. KQuark says:


    • PatsyT says:

      From last fall….

    • PatsyT says:

      I am impressed, Another Congressman from Ohio doing the right thing!
      I love this guy!
      Any one have any info on Marcy Kaptur?
      I loved her in the Michael Moore film

      • choicelady says:

        Last I saw, she was still a hold out, but she just cannot vote against this bill and earn anything but contempt from her constituents who desperately need health care. How can you moo over TAX money for abortion to the point where you’d kill PEOPLE for a lack of health care? The idiocy is that if a woman did pick an abortion option and paid with her own money and then lost her health insurance support and had to be someone without, what if she then decided to HAVE a baby -- then she’d have no coverage for her pregnancy!!! How absurd!

    • nellie says:

      Wow — I love it. Let’s have more of that.

      • KQuark says:

        More of that indeed. It sucks that you have to respond to crap like this but the more it goes unchallenged the further they push and the more dangerous it gets.

        Did you see the Teabagger posters with guns on them?

        • nellie says:

          As far as I’m concerned, the Tea Party is no better than the Klan. It’s the Klan dressed up as some patriotic marching band. They’re violent, aggressive, and dangerous. And they’re getting much too much support from the Republicans.

          We’re lucky that the country has moved so far beyond this kind of thinking that the Tea Party is more of an oddity than a movement. But they’re dangerous. It only takes one nut to mess things up for everyone.

          • choicelady says:

            I’m convinced these are the same folks who voted for George Wallace. The inherent racism is now made manifest. It’s scary that they feel so empowered to be so violent as they were today.

    • Kalima says:

      Well done and good job!

      The teabaggers have the lowest common denominators in their ranks, it’s an image that will be seen all around the world as people look away in disgust and scratch their heads.

      Who will be the first lily-livered Repub to denounce them, they have been floating on this scum for far too long.

    • bitohistory says:

      And many on the other side of the aisle, jumped up and condemned the T-party’s actions!! 😉

    • SanityNow says:

      Hear, freaking hear!

  2. bitohistory says:

    Oh Sue, you will like this one!

    Bishops Dismiss Other Catholic Groups: We

    • KQuark says:

      What real life experiences do a bunch of rust crusty old celibate men know about women’s bodies?

      Talk about having no practical knowledge about an issue whatsoever.

    • Khirad says:

      They show the same haughty self-righteous flippancy of hardline mollahs. I’m not kidding. Same tone: you don’t really understand. We are the only ones who are truly qualified to interpret and know God’s word and his Will. God knows this is secretly in the bill, and he phoned only us about it. The little people cannot know the grander designs of the Dark Lord, the Morning Star Deceiver, yea -- it hat been written -- by us Bishops. Let it be done, Thy will to crush Democrats.

    • choicelady says:

      My, (she said in her best Church Lady voice) isn’t this special.

      NETWORK, the Catholic social justice lobby in Washington DC led the signing of the letter from 60 orders representing 59,000 nuns saying the Senate language is fine on abortion, and health care is absolutely about LIFE. Their ED used to be in Sacramento and a powerful woman. The nuns talk about how policy is always from The Boys who know nothing about anything. I imagine Sr. Campbell is gritting her teeth as only Sr. Campbell can! I’d not want to engender her wrath, if I were they. They VASTLY underestimate her and the whole group. I think they have met their match. I’d be lookin’ over my shoulder if I were they. Sr. Campbell is nobody’s pushover.

      • Khirad says:

        No kidding. I would think twice crossing nuns.

        As Rachel said: they will cut you! 😆

      • bitohistory says:

        Richard Doerflinger, Associate Director of the USCCB Secretariat of Pro Life Activities. And he speks for all the Bishops? Because he is a male? Why is he just an associate director?
        He is nothing but:

  3. javaz says:

    The Queen of the Tea Party twittered this :

    Pix of rally in DC look great,wish I were there!Patriots who r:Keep the faith!Keep up the good fight to”Kill the Bill”&take our country back


    • bitohistory says:

      Take our country back? To when? When you can spit on a black man and call some one faggot?

      Why doesn’t she just stat her own party? The “Know Nothings 2”

      • nellie says:

        Looks like they’re having spelling problems again. What they mean is not take our country back. They mean take our country backWARD.

      • SanityNow says:

        I should think they might think they’d be happiest in the year 1750: still the King’s colonies, slavery is legal, only landed white males allowed to vote, no health care system at all, only about 2 million people in the whole country. Those were the days…

        • choicelady says:

          Historical inaccuracy alert! No -- anyone who headed a household could vote (women, yes) and in the North that included any free person of color. “Property” included the tools of your trade, not only real estate.

          The health care system obviously was not a system -- but it might amuse Stupak and company to know that abortion was perfectly legal until “quickening” or viability. Even Puritans actually had no qualms about that at all.

          So I’d think they’d be happiest in the 1860s when slavery was still the law, women had been stripped of rights and not yet really reclaimed them, and indeed the white man ruled the land. Or even 1869. That’s when the KKK got going. Musta made a white guy proud! Those were the days. Free, white, and 21. What more could you ask?

          • SanityNow says:

            in 1750? I don’t think so.

            I think what I am about to cite was not the norm for women in early colonial America and didn’t last more than 50 years:

            In 1756, Lydia Chapin Taft became the first woman to vote in America.[3] She voted on at least three occasions in an open New England Town Meeting, at Uxbridge, Massachusetts, with the consent of the electorate. This was between 1756 and 1768, during America’s colonial period.[4]

            Women in New Jersey could vote (with the same property qualifications as for men, although, since married women did not own property in their own right, only unmarried women and widows qualified) under the state constitution of 1776, where the word “inhabitants” was used without qualification of sex or race. New Jersey women, along with “aliens…persons of color, or negroes,” lost the vote in 1807, when the franchise was restricted to white males, ostensibly, to combat electoral fraud by simplifying the conditions for eligibility

            So, I should think that the Tea Bagging Party would probably be happiest if the clock were to turn back to anywhere between 1808 and 1910. 1750 would also work but I would think the bulk of the 19th century was a meaner time and the baggers would enjoy that more.

    • Khirad says:

      Did you see my post earlier where she said that Obama was inexperienced and in over his head?

  4. javaz says:

    Finally, the MSM is reporting on the Tea Party people.

    The racism and bigotry was reported on CNN and ABC, and NBC interviewed Barney Frank.

    *** UPDATE *** NBC’s Shawna Thomas has more after an interview with Frank. Here’s part of what he had to say:

    “It’s just dissapointing. … John Lewis said he felt like it was 50 yearss ago. … I walked from the Longworth building to the Rayburn building … people started shouting and saying abusive things, and I just kept walking. …

    “The Republican leadership is making a mistake not doing more to disasociate from this. … It’s a mob mentality that doesn’t work politically. …

    “The only problem I have with this… They all said ‘You should quit. You should quit. We’re going to defeat you. At some point… I’d like to retire. As long as I think it might make some of those people happy, I can never retire. I may have to work forever as long as they’re out there.”


    • nellie says:

      I think this is a very important lesson for all us. We are always, at every moment, on the brink of this kind of barbarism. These people are always with us — they will always be part of humanity. And it only takes validation from political leaders and media personalities for these folks to come crawling out of the woodwork with confidence.

      We simply cannot tolerate people like Beck and Limbaugh in a civilized culture. Because this is what they bring to the surface.

      I believe in the Amish tradition of shunning. And people like Beck and Limbaugh should be shunned. Instead, they are propped up by corporate America. Beck has lost over 100 advertisers, and still, his show is running on Fox, subsidized by the network because he is spreading the message that Ailes and Murdoch want to spread. Limbaugh makes $400 million on a contract, because he disrupts our culture.

      We need to find a way to address this. Corporate America not only robs us of our votes, our legislature, and our judiciary, it tries to destroy our civility.

      • KQuark says:

        Exactly I always say Hitler and his henchmen are always out there and you just can’t give them the opportunity to take power.

      • SueInCa says:

        You know Nellie. I had a thought last night (watch out) but I thought what if I found all the corporations that I am a shareholder in through my investment fund. Then i check those companies(especially in the election process) and if they are running ads that I don’t agree with I sue them. They want to claim personhood and if I am a part owner in that comapny and I don’t like the way they go, why could I not sue them?
        I am far from being a legal expert but if their job is to satisfy shareholders why could I not sue them for making decisions I don’t agree with and don’t feel are in my best interest?
        Now, everyone tell me why I am wrong here……..

        • nellie says:

          I think that’s an interesting idea. Congress is working on something like that right now.

        • choicelady says:

          nellie -- I agree with the shunning and have tried to get my allies to do it, but the avid progressive advocates cannot shut up! We all have to have the last word! So we need some work on non-violent interactions with those we dislike. I think we’d benefit well from using quiet disengagement rather than yelling and confrontation. The Other Side has too much experience with that -- they’re Pod People gaining strength from our anger. They HATE being ignored!

          Sue -- I think this is well worth putting out with the Center for Corporate Responsibility. Many corporate by-laws now have passed “investor-approved” (because the managers hold all the proxy votes) rules forbidding suits against management. It might be a great test. I have a friend who works for them -- I will try to remember to write to him about this idea which, IMHO, is brilliant. Thank you for thinking of this!

          • nellie says:

            I can think of some very effective ways to shun media folks. Stop buying from their sponsors, and let their sponsors know THEY are being shunned along with the foul mouthed people they advertise with.

            And I agree with you that we spend WAY too much time arguing and repeating what these knuckleheads have to say. It only gives them more credibility — and air time. Why give up the precious little time we have to spread our message, playing and replaying sound bites from the right wing?

        • bitohistory says:

          I like that, Sue. Now to find a pro bono group to do it for you! They want to be “people” then they should be treated as that.

          • SueInCa says:

            I am sure there is someone out there who will do it. My sister’s brother in law is an attorney, corporate, so I am going to ask him if it is feasible.

      • javaz says:

        Very well said, Nellie, and I fully agree.

        My opinion of the Tea Party has taken a drastic turn because we just watched the footage on ABC Nightly News, and the level of anger and hate was palpable.

        They have absolutely no shame in showing their ignorance and bigotry and honestly, it shocks me.

        I find it additionally discouraging that not one single Republican spoke out against the racist comments and bigotry, and I do think it’s because the Republicans are afraid of the Tea Partiers, just as they are afraid of Limbaugh and Beck.

        The Republicans are cowards and their silence on this speaks volumes.

        ABC also reported that the Democrats do not have the votes, and more than ever now, I sure hope that they get the votes for HCR.

        Maybe if more of us wrote letters to the MSM complaining about their reporting or not reporting on the lies, racism and bigotry within the GOP, Tea Party, and displayed on FOX that maybe that might help.

        I’m just so saddened and numb from seeing the Tea Partiers.
        I know that racism and bigotry exists, but to see it like that is so disturbing.

        • SueInCa says:

          I am glad to hear you say that. These people are beyond reason and would never work well within a group that has different ideas. Most cannot even articulate what they are against. I don’t have to carry a mini copy of the constitution in my pocket to tell you what it says, these so-called patriots do.

    • SueInCa says:

      I heart Barney too. He knows how to deal with dining room tables

    • SanityNow says:

      I heart Barney

  5. choicelady says:

    Update from CA -- according to the NYT, all Dems in CA appear to be on board. Costa, Cardoza, and Sanchez, the three Blue Dogs, are not in play. McNerney, a liberal, was holding out because the bill was not ‘good enough’ (well, duh) but seems solid again.

    We appear to have fewer hold outs, though reports are still sketchy. Two did the McNerney thing -- not good enough -- as if that made ANY sense. Disgusting!

    I am hopeful but scared. The one bright note from the HuffPo -- Reid has MORE than enough in the Senate. The House is the weak spot, so let’s keep pushing.

    Here is the NYT list. Ohio -- boomer -- lean on Marcy Kaptur because she is a strong union supporter and smart cookie -- we need her to accept the existing limits on abortion and not kill real. live people to do nothing at all about abortion that is not already done in the existing Senate language in accordance with Hyde.

    Pelosi is NOT cutting a deal with Stupak. The Parliamentarian can keep Stupak’s alternative health care bill at bay as I understand it. It would be out of order.

    Brian Baird (Wash. 3) Tossup
    Marion Berry (Ark. 1) Tossup
    Rick Boucher (Va. 9) Leaning Dem.
    Jerry F. Costello (Ill. 12) Solid Dem.
    Henry Cuellar (Tex. 28) Solid Dem.
    Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa. 3) Likely Dem.
    Lincoln Davis (Tenn. 4) Leaning Dem.
    Joe Donnelly (Ind. 2) Likely Dem.
    Steve Driehaus (Ohio 1) Tossup
    Paul E. Kanjorski (Pa. 11) Likely Dem.
    Marcy Kaptur (Ohio 9) Solid Dem.
    Daniel Lipinski (Ill. 3) Solid Dem.
    Alan B. Mollohan (W.Va. 1) Leaning Dem.
    Glenn Nye (Va. 2) Tossup
    Earl Pomeroy (N.D.) Leaning Dem.
    Nick J. Rahall II (W.Va. 3) Solid Dem.
    Bart Stupak (Mich. 1) Solid Dem.
    John Tanner (Tenn. 8) Tossup

    Those living in the states with these waffle irons, please put pressure on them. They all can be found by googling their names. If you’re not right in their district, well, that’s what Cher gave us the ZIP code link for… Do not bother phoning -- voice mailboxes are full, and no one is answering. Email is GREAT and works. FAXes are better, if you have access.

    Damn -- why is this such a cliff hanger? This is a slam dunk -- people need health care coverage. This is affordable, reduces the national debt, and will be made better over time. Let’s DO IT.

  6. KQuark says:

    President Obama gave the most powerful, heart felt and introspective speech I’ve seen him ever give on health care. It’s really worth watching I promise. Near end when he talks about how he was a cynic like most of us are and still chose to run for office is an amazing insight into the man.

    Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

    • Kalima says:

      Thank you so much for posting this K, I would have missed it for sure.

      A speech from the heart, I can’t remember when words have touched me so deeply in the recent past.

      The President saying “Don’t do it for me. Don’t do it for the Democratic party. Do it for the American people” was extremely powerful. In the last 6 odd minutes of the speech I thought that if this doesn’t budge the fence sitters into action, to vote with their heart and conscience instead of their bank accounts, NOTHING will shift them and shame on them.

      Yes K it certainly gave an insight into the man who is your President and puts the naysayers to shame.

      • KQuark says:

        He spoke to the very root of what being a liberal is all about. Frankly I think it was the most ideological speech he’s ever given but in a very positive way. He basically said we are the party that is suppose to care about people while the other side can play their political games if they want at their own peril.

        • Kalima says:

          If his message didn’t hit home, they have no business being in the party and should run for office as republicans in November, they deserve nothing from Dem voters.

    • bitohistory says:

      Thank for posting this KQ!!!
      “We are not bound to win, But we are bound to TRUE.”
      Moving speech!

    • PatsyT says:

      I find so much inspiration in his words !
      I recored it from MSNBC
      Watched it twice !

    • nellie says:

      That was excellent, K. Where did you find it? I’m asking because I hope a lot of people will get the chance to see it. And I want to post it to facebook.

    • Chernynkaya says:

      I saw it over on the dark side, so thanks for posting it here. It made me tear up. So much more worth while than wasting time listening and reading about the TeaBaggers.

  7. javaz says:

    Harry Mitchell is a YES!

    But of course, his office was the target of the Tea Party rally today --

    “Tea party” protesters gathered outside the Scottsdale offices of Rep. Harry Mitchell on Saturday to protest federal health-care reform and what some called a “socialist” restructuring of the United States.

    The protesters were enraged by the Democratic congressman’s Friday announcement that he would vote “yes” on legislation to overhaul the nation’s health insurance system, adding to crucial momentum to party leaders trying to muster enough votes to pass the bill in the House of Representatives.

    “This is not about health care; they want to change the fundamental structure of America,” said Morton Mitchell, of Fountain Hills. “This is just the beginning. They want to make America a socialist state.”

    The so-called “tea partiers” rallied at the intersection of Camelback and Scottsdale Roads for more than three hours, waving U.S. flags and holding signs denouncing Mitchell and “Obamacare.”

    Several were also there to campaign for former conservative talk radio host J.D. Hayworth, who is trying to unseat Sen. John McCain in the Republican primary, though the state “tea party” organization has opted not to endorse Hayworth.

    Motorists who passed the demonstrators throughout the day sounded their horns in support. About 150 people gathered at the intersection for the rally.

    “The noise level is so high I’ve got to cover my ears sometimes,” said Suzanne James, of Tempe. “Harry is done for.”

    Judy Hoelscher, of Phoenix, carried a sign, saying, “Tar and feather Harry Mitchell.”

    The self-described “angry conservative housewife” said she is particularly alarmed by a mandate in the bill requiring that most people purchase health insurance or face a fine.

    “You’re being forced to buy a product. That’s unconstitutional,” Hoelscher said. “The end result will be single-payer, government-run health care.”


    • bitohistory says:

      Mitchell is in a very purple district. He always has had a tuff time there. It didn’t matter which way he voted, but I glad he voted yes!!

      • nellie says:

        Tomorrow is going to be exciting.

      • Khirad says:

        I am heartened too! Not an easy district for a Dem.

        Dittos Javaz, That is amazing!

        • bitohistory says:

          Gabby still seems to be non committal. WTF?
          She is the only AZ Dem “undecided.”

          • Khirad says:

            Her past vote and op-ed pieces aren’t disappearing.

            Maybe she’s playing it close to the vest because she also represents the kind of folks in Douglas (if you know what I mean)?

            But then again, seriously the only member of the Dem delegation? C’mon, Gabby.

            • bitohistory says:

              She may need a security detail down there if she votes yes. What a weird district.

            • Khirad says:

              When Colbert interviewed Grijalva he joked that he got the good side of Tucson. He didn’t know it, but he wasn’t all wrong. And, it’s not the Tucson area that is really creepy -- yes, many interesting places… Sierra Vista even makes me uncomfortable. 😆

      • javaz says:

        Amazingly, I read the comments on the article and most of the posters were pro-health care!

        Shocking for Arizona and at the Arizona Republic site.

    • choicelady says:

      I actually agree with the anti-mandate woman. But when it’s geared to a variable rate for your income level, it’s harder to call it unconstitutional. Forcing people to buy something at a flat market rate would indeed be unconstitutional I’d think.

  8. javaz says:

    Oh sheesh, Tea Party activist predicts if HCR passes, gun control is next.

    Inside House office buildings, protesters made their views known by visiting lawmakers’ offices and chanting at legislators walking by.

    Among the demonstrators was Delane Stewart, 65, of Cookeville, Tenn., who had come with her husband, Jesse.

    “You know what’s coming next if this happens?” she said, referring to the health bill’s passage. “They’re going to come after gun control.”

    Retired businessman Randy Simpson, 67, of Seneca, S.C., also said the health bill was just a first step.

    “My concerns are about the health care bill, and the direction it takes us is toward communism, quite frankly,” he said.


    • SueInCa says:

      So ask them are Canada, Britain, France, Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, Mexico, all commies? These people are so far past ignorant, I just don’t know what to say anymore.

    • nellie says:

      These people are so ignorant. We pass a bill that GRANTS rights to people, and from that they extrapolate the next logical progression is to start taking rights away from people.

      Seriously, I have never heard so much garbage in our discourse before. This must be what people felt like in the McCarthy era.

  9. bitohistory says:

    While watching the parade of Republican Reps and their amendments, the question is: if every one of these amendments were passed, how many R votes would the bill get?

  10. javaz says:

    On the eve of the historic health care reform vote, federal officials are investigating a brick thrown through a window of the Niagara Falls office of U.S. Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-Fairport.

    The incident occurred early Friday, when no one was in the office, said Slaughter spokeswoman Victoria Dillon. There was no note or message on the brick, she said.

  11. Chernynkaya says:


    From Nat Silver 538

    ORIGINAL POST (1:49 PM): As of about 5 PM yesterday afternoon, it appeared that the Democrats were well on their way to securing enough votes to pass health care reform. They had gotten commitments to vote yes from seven legislators — Betsy Markey, John Boccieri, Alan Boyd, Bart Gordon, Susan Kosmas, Dennis Kucinich, and Scott Murphy — who had voted no originally and most of whom (with the exception of Kucinich and the retiring Gordon) are in tough districts in which their switching their vote represents a significant political risk. It seemed highly unlikely that those Democrats would be willing to switch unless they were quite confident that the bill would pass — since switching making a public commitment to switch from no to yes becomes an even larger risk for them in the world in which the reform effort nevertheless fails.

    However, with 7 no-to-yes switches, the Democrats can afford at most 8 yes-to-no switches in order to retain the votes to pass their bill. And right now, Chris Bowers puts the number at 10 instead: the 8 most solid members of the Stupak block (Cao, Carney, Costello, Donnelly, Driehaus, Lipinski, Rahall, Stupak) and two (Arcuri and Lynch) who are prepared to vote against the bill for non-Stupak reasons (although Lynch is pro-life). Some people also put Marion Berry (Arkansas) in the Stupak group; I’m not sold on that that since Berry voted for the reconciliation bill in committee (“undecided” seems like a more appropriate tag).

    Still, Pelosi has several ways to get to 216.

    1) Convince the other two retiring Dems (Baird, Tanner) to flip and hold everyone else. It’s surprising, given how many Democrats in tough districts have agreed to switch, that the retiring Brian Baird and John Tanner haven’t, especially since Baird is fairly liberal. But neither has ruled out voting for the bill. The trick, of course, is that if someone is retiring, you don’t really have that much leverage over them — although things like Ambassadorships can sometimes be promised. In any event, these are the two “easy” renaming no-to-yes flips; there are maybe one or two other members that Pelosi could call on in a pinch, but most of the universe of potential no-to-yesses have either committed to voting for the bill or voting against it.

    2) Pick off Lynch and Arcuri and hold everyone else. These are the two yes-to-no defectees who aren’t members of the Stupak block. Both have resisted repeated calls to reconsider — but the Democrats have the opportunity to play hardball with each, as Lynch could lose his committee and leadership positions and as Arcuri could be quite vulnerable to a primary challenge.

    3) Pick off individual members of the Stupak block (and hold everyone else). The fact is that the Stupak block has never been totally solid, fluctuating between as few as 5 or 6 members and as many as 12 or 13. The statements that various members of the group have made about the bill involve varying degrees of equivocation. Someone like Carney, for instance, or perhaps a Driehaus, could still possibly be picked off. This may be one thing that Pelosi is trying to do by declaring that a Stupak deal is off the table — a Carney has no incentive to compromise if he thinks that Pelosi will just cut a deal with Stupak anyway.

    4) Cut a deal with Stupak after all. Risk-reward: you could get the yes votes as high as 220-223 (possibly including a Republican, Joseph Cao) — or you could see massive defections among pro-choice Democrats and the whole thing collapse. Although Pelosi might claim that a deal with Stupak is off the table, it seems unlikely that it wouldn’t revisit it if it’s her only renaming option. (EDIT: There also appears to be an option #4b — which is some sort of clarifying language on abortion via Executive Order.)

    Obviously, none of these paths (except #4 to a large extent) are mutually exclusive — nor are they necessarily sufficient if other undecideds and lean-yes votes (who have a number of unrelated objections) decide to complicate things for Pelosi. Still, the fact that there are several potential paths to 216 mean that the odds remain in the Democrats favor. On the other hand, the number of options also complicates things in another sense, since Democrats who might want to see the bill pass but don’t want to vote for it might not be convinced that their no votes would in fact doom the bill.

    The downgrade in the chances of passage at Intrade (to about an 80 percent chance of passage at this writing versus the high 80s yesterday evening) clearly seems warranted (I might go closer to 75 percent myself). Fundamentally, however, it seems likely to me that Pelosi has at least 216 members potentially willing to vote for the bill if their vote makes the difference between passage and failure — even without brokering a deal with Stupak. That she has 216 potential yes votes, however, doesn’t mean she’ll actually get them. This is a very complicated bargaining process. The greatest risk, perhaps, is that the negotiations start to break down on multiple levels — i.e. she’s having headaches with some members over Stupak, with others over deem-and-pass, with still others (like Pete DeFazio) over Medicaid equity, etc. If that happens, there could be a sort of “run on the bank” as wavering Democrats seek to distance themselves from the legislation. In particular, if some seemingly solid (but electorally vulnerable) yes votes start to equivocate — particularly no-to-yes flips that Pelosi previously seemed to have in the bag — that would be a sign of trouble.

  12. AdLib says:

    By acting like raving lunatics, do the the baggers think any sane Dem is going to say, “I better vote the way they want, then they’ll be reasonable and like me!”

    As the face of reform opposition, these loons cement the perception that only brainwashed wackos would have their position.

    Let’s see how the baggers hold together with HCR over for now and FreedomWorks funding going elsewhere.

  13. javaz says:

    More disturbing reports about the Tea Party Code Red rally --


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories