Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Will 51 Senators keep their promise and add a public option amendment to reconciliation bill?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:24 PM
Original message
Poll question: Will 51 Senators keep their promise and add a public option amendment to reconciliation bill?
The health care reform bill isn't over yet, just the bulk of it that deals with private insurance.

http://whipcongress.com/">51 senators pledged to vote for an amendment adding a public option.

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have been playing a pretty obvious game of keep away with the public option, tossing blame for who won't allow it back and forth and expecting us not to notice that at one time or another, both have claimed to be for it, but gosh darn it, the other chamber won't allow it.

They have one last chance to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/19/AR2009101902451.html">add some democracy to their health care reform--the health insurance industry got their say in the main bill.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. Not to influence anybody's vote or anything
But Lieberman tweeted that he's voting yes.

But call your Senators!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. no way! got a link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. I can't log into Twitter here.
But his twitter name is @JoeLieberman, I do believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elias49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. It's true. On Rick Sanchez/CNN
They put up a facsimile of his 'tweeet'
Fucking snake wants it both ways.
But a vote is a vote.:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. Other. I don't fucking know but I wish they would squash the repubs dirty tricks and get on with it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Point of fact- your link doesn't show there are 51 Senators who promised anything
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. they supposedly pledged support to vote in favor of it if it is put before them
it shouldn't matter whether it came to them from the house or through an amendment one of them proposes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Wrong. One of those "pledges" is video of Sen. Byrd saying "I'm doing this for my friend Ted"
as he voted for the Senate bill in December. That's not a pledge to support the PO.

Another Pledge is Durbin... who openly does not support the PO.

Whipcongress is full of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. The answer is simply: "no". WH blames Congress it isn't there, Senate
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:29 PM by harun
blames the House it isn't there, and the House blames the Senate it isn't there.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Plausible deniability, complete lack of accountability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPedigrees Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. To avoid having the bill returned to the house, where it could fail,
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:34 PM by SPedigrees
it is essential to keep the present bill intact, with no changes or additions. That is why republican senators are now trying to make additions and/or changes... to get the bill sent back to the house. Hopefully democratic senators will be able to prevent this, and certainly not monkey with the bill themselves.

A public option should be voted on later as a single bill. Now isn't the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. if it's a separate bill, it has to start with the stupid 60 vote nonsense again
and Democrats will have an excuse not to add it.

Since this is just amendments anyway, not much is at risk if they change it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #13
34. Note the pro-HIR posters moving the goalposts again?
I'm hardly surprised. "We'll fix it later" was a lie.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #13
36. WRONG. READ POST 5 AGAIN - IT IS EXPLAINED VERY COMPLETELY.
ANY CHANGE - ANY CHANGE - WOULD SEND THE BILL BACK TO THE STARTING LINE.

THIS BILL MUST PASS AS IS WITHOUT ANY AMMENDMENTS, OR IT WILL NOT PASS AT ALL...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. 51 Senators never promised to support a PO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. I don't believe there was ever a time when we didn't have that many
Our problem was needing 60 to break the Republican filibuster. Most believe the Medicare expansion that Lieberman killed had 59 votes, worst case scenario 58.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Prove it then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Well, berni, without getting the bill to the floor we can't prove it but I think we all here were of
the opinion back in August, September, October that the problem was trying to reach 60. I can tell you this much. I know Harry Reid believes there's at least 50 votes for it. His problem is how to get it to the floor under some sort of reconciliation bill and he is working on that. He's never been very happy about the Medicare expansion tanking.

Question for you: if we could do it, would you support it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. he killed a Medicare expansion? when was that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. December
After the public option with an opt out for the states was failing to get 60 (although it had the support of well over 50) Reid then wrote an expansion of Medicare into the bill. It went to CBO for scoring and, while waiting for it to come back, Lieberman went on FOX one Sunday morning and announced he would join the Republicans in their filibuster of the bill if any form of PO, including the Medicare expansion he had been stumping for in September, was in it. Rahm Emanuel showed up in Harry Reid's office that night and ordered him to make the deal with Lieberman and kill the expansion. Reid was pissed off about it but did it, nevertheless.

Most people believe there were 58 or 59 votes for the expansion prior to this happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. hmmm...so why wouldn't that many support reinserting it now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. There are 2 reasons they will not amend the reconciliation bill to include it
1) if they amend the bill in any way it must return to the House for another vote. The House has passed the bill. If it passes the Senate without changes, it can go to the President's desk for his signature without returning to the House for a new vote

2) if they allow any amendments at all the Republicans will delay the process endlessly by offering hundreds of amendments which would then all have to be voted on.

My question is about Pelosi refusing to put it in the reconciliation bill. She gave her reason as the Senate not having the votes but I believe the Senate did have the votes and I believe the House had the votes.

I just hope we can see it introduced and passed before the exchanges go into effect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. the second is legit, the first is not unless the Democrats are intentionally trying to avoid
adding a public option. Which they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. deleted post
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:52 PM by G_j
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. I don't expect to see it in the reconciliation bill
I'm away from the news today but the plan has been to reject all amendments so the reconciliation bill does not have to return to the House for another vote.

Reid promised (yeah, I know) Sanders if he would drop his plan to offer an amendment creating a public option in this bill that he would bring a bill creating a public option under reconciliation in the next couple of months. We'll see.

If there was a way to get it to the floor for a vote under reconciliation I do believe it would pass. We were never under about 53 votes for it in the worst case scenario. As far as most people could tell we had 58 or 59 in favor of the Medicare expansion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
14. No way. The senate is more conservative than the house. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
17. No, because they don't want to send the bill back to the House for approval.
The odd thing is that the Senate probably has the votes to pass a PO at this point but the House doesn't. Send the bill back to the House with a PO and it will fail, thereby wiping out any fixes to the HCR that was signed into law yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #17
41. The Whip said it would go through the house. Go for it is my opinion.
And, side note. the GOP would be buried in the mid terms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
20. They didn't say they would add it. They said IF it was added they'd vote for it. :)
Edited on Wed Mar-24-10 04:53 PM by Political Heretic
See how that works?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. like I mentioned in the OP, a chain of interlocking loopholes. Pull on one, and the whole thing
comes to nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
24. No. Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-PA) said that will not happen on the
Stephanie Miller Show yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Rep said the Senate wouldn't do it or the House wouldn't approve it if it was sent back to them
amended?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #26
38. No amendments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MajorChode Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
27. Hopefully not
Any such amendment would force another vote in the House and could very easily send the whole process back to square one with NO progress made after more than a year of effort. It would also give the wingnuts another chance to kill it completely.

I'd rather see the public option stand on it's own bill or get amended to some other legislation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
29. Not on this bill
They want to get this bill out and not have to go back to the house. Hopefully they will in the future, but I don't think that can be done by reconciliation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
30. sadly, doubtful; they're all in the grip of big Pharma and the insurers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-10 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
31. He's trying to rehabilitate himself, he knows it doesn't
have a chance.

Private Insurance will never let it happen. If you think they are not in control of Congress, you only have to read the internal memos sent to Democrats regarding Michael Moore's movie SICKO. They threatened them that if they did not marginalize MM or praised his movie in any way, they make sure they remained a minority party.

Bill Moyers, the only real journalist left in American, revealed the power they have in his interview with Wendall Potter which for anyone who cares, can be found here:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html

BILL MOYERS: So what did you think when you saw that film?

WENDELL POTTER: I thought that he hit the nail on the head with his movie. But the industry, from the moment that the industry learned that Michael Moore was taking on the health care industry, it was really concerned.

BILL MOYERS: What were they afraid of?

WENDELL POTTER: They were afraid that people would believe Michael Moore.

BILL MOYERS: We obtained a copy of the game plan that was adopted by the industry's trade association, AHIP. And it spells out the industry strategies in gold letters. It says, "Highlight horror stories of government-run systems." What was that about?

......

BILL MOYERS: And there was a political strategy. "Position Sicko as a threat to Democrats' larger agenda." What does that mean?

WENDELL POTTER: That means that part of the effort to discredit this film was to use lobbyists and their own staff to go onto Capitol Hill and say, "Look, you don't want to believe this movie. You don't want to talk about it. You don't want to endorse it. And if you do, we can make things tough for you."

BILL MOYERS: How?

WENDELL POTTER: By running ads, commercials in your home district when you're running for reelection, not contributing to your campaigns again, or contributing to your competitor.

BILL MOYERS: This is fascinating. You know, "Build awareness among centrist Democratic policy organizations--"

WENDELL POTTER: Right.

BILL MOYERS: "--including the Democratic Leadership Council."

WENDELL POTTER: Absolutely.

BILL MOYERS: Then it says, "Message to Democratic insiders. Embracing Moore is one-way ticket back to minority party status."

WENDELL POTTER: Yeah.

BILL MOYERS: Now, that's exactly what they did, didn't they? They--

WENDELL POTTER: Absolutely.

BILL MOYERS: --radicalized Moore, so that his message was discredited because the messenger was seen to be radical.

WENDELL POTTER: Absolutely.


They bought this bill and they wrote it and one thing they made sure they got was no Public Option.

As can be seen from this insider information from Wendall Potter, when Big Business sends lobbyists to bribe Congress, they do not have the guts to throw them out of their offices and then go to the media and let the people know what is going on. But then, they like the perks and the money I suppose.

If they surprise me, I'll be more than willing to apologize, but I think it's safe to say there will be no need for that, and Lieberman is a snake, but he's in good company in the DC cesspool. The whole place needs a good cleaning out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
42. In control of Congress & The White House....
...and the Supreme Court.


We reformed the Democratic Party
The Old Fashioned Way!

We BOUGHT it!!!
Hahahahahahahaha


If you haven't already moved to The Woods, its probably too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
33. ..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
35. NO - any ammendment would send the bill back to the starting point
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE REPUKE FUCKS WANT SO THEY CAN STOP THE RECONCILLIATION!!!

They can consider it UNDER SEPARATE BILLS once this one passes!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
37. Other.
Edited on Thu Mar-25-10 02:48 AM by BlueIris
They'll try, but get no media coverage of or party recognition for their efforts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
39. Any amendment to the reconciliation bill would defeat the legislation
by putting it back to the house and another round of bullshit. The deal is done and the sausage is wrapped. It is what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-10 07:14 AM
Response to Original message
40. Will they? I can only say they should and can't think of one reason why they shouldn't.
The doooooorrrrrs wide open. Do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC