We are getting too focused on passing something instead of on doing what needs to be done. If Obama signs some crap into law with no mandates and no public option, it will be another failure.

These things are properly evaluated according to what should be done, not according to what will make Harry Reid feel good. As far as I'm concerned, anything less than socialized medicine is inadequate. But if they can't even pass a bill that covers everybody and puts PhRMA and the insurance companies in their place -- requires their compliance, does not beg for it -- then it would be better to give up and pass nothing.

If they pass nothing, they can probably try again next year. If they pass some crap, then they can pretend they did the job and let the health care system rot for another ten years.

He better mean 60 for cloture. Act like you're the MAJORITY leader, Harry! Let the health insurers, er, Baucus, get that abomination out of committee, and then strip it of all the crap.

If the progressives of the Senate hold firm, he can't get to 60, no matter how he cuts it.

50 may be the only option, and I think that's easier to do from the left than the "center."

I hope.

If Reid brings a vote to the floor without a mandate or public option, he should be removed from majority leader.

America is crying for healthcare reform that benefits Americans, not lobbyists and corporations

I am no longer falling for this 60 votes scam.

We have Republicans, Blue Dogs and virtually all the other Democrats who hide behind the Blue Dogs and use them as their excuse. Why can't they end war? Blue Dogs. Why can't they enable labor? Blue Dogs. What can't they pass meaninful financial reform? Blue Dogs. Why can't they repeal DODT? Blue Dogs.

Why are they totally incapable of doing anything but living large off the taxpayer? Republicans. Blue Dogs. Anybody and everybody but themselves.

Well, I'm holding my Senators accountable. Klobuchar, Franken -- YOU are responsible for getting the votes and if YOU don't get them then YOU don't get my vote.

This is probably the only health car plan an idiot like Sean Hannity can understand.

This is pretty funny.

http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2316

So what I'm trying to understand is whether, and how, the Democrats can get around Baucus.

If we have three committees in the Senate, and we have the House, and three of these four entities put out a good bill-- well, it seems like it doesn't matter that the fourth one fell down on the job. In fact it almost seems like if the fourth one isn't capable of doing a good job, we might as well let their bad bill pass out of committee so we can get to work on supplanting it with one of the three good bills. Just get it over with as quickly as possible.

What I'm not clear about is exactly what the process here is and exactly what are the chances are that the one bad bill coming out of Baucus' committee could overwhelm the good bills coming out of everywhere else. I'm trying to figure out who makes that decision, and what influences it.

Who is responsible for synthesizing the three Senate versions into a final bill? At some point I found an explanation giving a fourth committee that is responsible for reconciling the bill, but now cannot find it. Who is on that committee? Can they be influenced, either by the grassroots or the leadership? Is the leadership willing to exert pressure on them?

It definitely seems like it would be easier to make the argument "don't worry, the good HELP bill will override the bad Finance bill" if we had the leadership making strong statements that when the various bills enter the Thunderdome the bill that comes out will have a public option. Strong statements of intent from the leadership like that would not only assuage us on the grassroots side, but would also send a strong signal to the people responsible for reconciling the bills. Nancy Pelosi is making those sorts of statements. Reid on the other hand seems to be going out of his way to make it clear he will surrender early and often...

If Reid chooses the Finance Committee version over the HELP version in reconciliation, I'm going to be as pissed as anyone else. Party discipline, for chrissake. Democrats who won't vote for f*cking *cloture* on a bill of this importance need to get their asses primaried.

That said, I still hold out hope that the public option will get in, during the final reconciliation process. It's not about "perfect being the enemy of the good," or vice versa. It's about not giving up hope in the middle of a fight.

I am just beginning to think that this is all a set up. A bad cop/good cop situation. Reid blames it on Baucus. Baucus blames it on the liberal Dems. The liberal Dems blame it on Baucus and/or Reid. The WH blames it on Congress and the Progressives. Reid then says we need more and better Dems so please vote for us and send us money and hey, get your ass out these and work to get more and better Dems in. WH says something similar. Baucus goes back home and says keep me in because I'm a Dem and I have seniority and you don't want Repubs because they don't have power and anyway you know i vote like a Repub. And oh yeah, lets not forget the Chuckie Schumers and Barbara Boxers of the Senate go on the idiot box and talk about abortion rights, gay rights and civil rights to get the liberal base scared about what the Repubs will do if they get in because Dems are doing so much pushback right now on Dubbya era regulations.

Obama1st said it all. I like Harry but he can't be saying this kind of stuff... It's Not What I Want, It's What Can Get 60 Votes.. Jesus Harry. Translation; it's not the product, it's the 60 votes. WTF? Can anyone make sense of this. Harry can't put together a one car funeral. This is so depressing. I wish I could get mad but the dread is simply overwhelming. Somebody help me.

Let's set aside another distraction, a baseless, nominal, and minimal coverage by some senators. A new Gallup Poll released late last week shows that 71 percent of Americans want health care reform, with a substantial number calling for reform to come sometime this year.
A pay for outcome / value payment system, key to the deficit-neutral, might be capable of bringing all groups together.

Supporters of the agreement say it could save the Medicare System more than $100 billion a year and 'improve' care, that means more than $1trillian over a decade, and virtually needs no other resources including tax on the wealthiest. (Please visit http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=820455&catid=391 for detailed infos).

As much as 30 percent of all health-care spending in the U.S. -some $700 billion a year- may be wasted on tests and treatments that do not improve the health of the recipients,” Thus the remaining $239 billions over a decade do not matter.
Dr. Armadio at Mayo clinic says, "If we got rid of that stuff, we save a third of all that we spend and that is 2.5 trillion dollars on health care. A third of that and that is 700 billion dollars a year. That covers a lot of uninsured people."

1. There is no need for infighting and class conflict.

2. It can satisfy revenue-neutral raised by the Republicans.

3. It is able to resolve the regional disparity.

4. It may bring the private insurers to competition, innovation.

5. The focus on 'outcome' over volume can make the practitioners more accurate and creative based on IT SYSTEM and evidence, while eliminating the additional, unnecessary care that is increasing patients' pains, frustrations, and possible side-effects.

6. It undoubtedly allows for massive medical job creation.

7. The desperate people will get back American dream.

THANK YOU !