I am urging my Senators to vote against any bill which contains any version of the Stupak Amendment. I am pledging to vote against any one who votes for any version of the bill which contains such an amendment. Obama has betrayed women.

Stop being naive....you believe he is offering only praise for this bill in public and his forces were not working to get it passed in private?

Harry:

You need to pull a Pelosi: give the Senate bill some favorable GOP language (i.e. no federal money for insurance plans that cover abortions) in exchange for the vote on the full bill. We need a vote on the full bill.

I will be the one liberal to admit this: elective abortion is not health care. The consitutional right to choose in one thing; the right to have a subsidized abortion? I don't think that there is such a right.

Profoundly ambivalent here, because it's impossible to tell how it will pan out. At best, this legislation will provide the framework for something better later - much, much later. It could also mean a huge defeat for the Democrats in the next couple election cycles because it's so weak and provides so much corporate welfare.

The process has been revealing, that's for sure. I see the Administration and House leadership very differently now. Obama and Rahm just want to pass anything, slap it with the 'victory' sticker, move on to the next item on their agenda. I believe progressives have to do for Democrats what teabaggers are trying to do with their Party: tear it down, if necessary, to rebuild it along traditional, Great Society and New Deal, European-style social democratic lines. Kucinich is the only real progressive around, for now. I'd be very happy to see a movement coalesce around his leadership. And I'd urge great caution in giving for a while, until we see whether the Democrats are willing to strip the abortion amendment, add the Kucinich amendment, lower % of income the families must pay out of pocket annually, what they do with the public option.

I think you mean Nancy Pelosi. Remember her, the first female Speaker of the House?

AJM, what do you expect when two-thirds of the House is opposed to legalized abortion?

Best to get the health reform package now, and work over the next several years on challenging incumbents who think abortion should be illegal, and then amend the section on abortion funding. Specific sections of a health care reform can always be amended, as can be seen over the years from the number of changes in Medicaid and Medicare. The health care reform as a whole is an opportunity that only comes along every ten to twenty years, and on top of that look at all the previous opportunities that have been blown (1946, 1974, 1993).

Besides, there is some progress even on abortion in this bill. At least you'd now have required coverage for abortions in the case of health, rape or incest.

Regarding this post by Josh (and it remains annoying that we can not post comments to his items):

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/11/2010_or_2013.php

That certain things won't kick in until 2013 and could be a political problem has been known for a while. Two things to keep in mind:

* certain things kick in earlier

Your update points out. The people pulling for the "get a win" strategy in the White House (Rahm & Co.) think that they're going to be able to point to those things and lots of people will love them. I'm mixed on the success of those being that big of a win. For the most part, folks only know or care about those things when they happen to themselves. So if you're not recinded or don't get hit with "pre-existing condition" nonsense, you don't really know that you've gotten a good shake out of this bill. It's not like your insurance company is going to send you a note saying "We would have cancelled you for this, but those Pesky Democrats saved your bacon".

It appears that some Dems are grasping that, because:

* there's been a good deal of talk about speeding things up

That means finding ways to get bridge coverage. One gets the idea that rather than looking at Last Year's Numbers of uninsured (or even 2007 data), some folks are starting to get an idea that the 2009 and on into 2010 numbers for the uninsured have gone from Huge to Ridiculously Huge.

"D'oh!"

That's a block of people who will be losing their insurance under Obama's watch, along with a good chunk losing their job as well. A rather unhappy voting group. Since we're having a jobless recovery (and the recovery part is suspect to say the least), that's potentially a very unhappy voting group not just in 2010 but also 2012 if things continue to drag out.

So there has been quite a few hints being dropped out to (i) get things passed, then (ii) look to speed up coverage aspects.

Once the structure is in place, it's easier (though not easy) to adjust things and expand them.

Take unemployment insurance.

If it didn't exist and had to pass congress, do you think it would right now?

Exactly.

But since it does exist, it is only "annoyingly hard" to pass extensions.

You see some looking at healthcare in the same way.

It's not the way I wish it worked. I wish we didn't have to go from A-to-Z stopping at each letter in the alphabet before we get to single payer. Especially when we're largely stuck at D and trying to move to F. On the other hand, of that's the only way we can get there in our screwed up system, we do need to get to F because it's a big step and does create some things that can more quickly move up through other letters.

Anyway, sorry for the long post. I don't entirely disagree with what BK is saying, nor Josh. But they're talking about things that have hit the blogs roughly six months ago when the concept of 10 Years Of Revenue Paying For 7 Years Of Coverage became clearer. And in the last few months we've heard the pols start to realize that they have a three year window that could be an election problem. Even Snowe has talked about speeding some things up.

John

I support abortion rights very strongly, but I desperately want this bill to pass the Senate.

Opposing the bill because of the Stupak amendment is tremendously short-sighted. Think of the other healthcare concerns that women have; abortion is dwarfed by the need for pre-natal and post-natal care, obstetrics, breast exams, PAP smears, colon cancer screening, diabetes treatment, cancer treatment, hypertension treatment--PLEASE think before you trash health insurance reform because of restrictions on abortion.

Remember that this is just the first step (but a huge one) in the reform, but we have to take this step before we can move on.

The real barrier to passing this health care bill, or even a much more liberal bill, is the Senate rule on ending debate and moving on to a vote. Having to invoke cloture with 60 votes is the real problem in the Senate. We the People elected a majority of senators ready to establish a reasonable, centrist reform of health care. We the People are being denied this reform in deference to a Senate rule that was trashed early in the Bush II administration to grant a multi-trillion dollar tax cut to the wealthy on a 50-50 tie vote broken by The Big Dick Cheney. I say, if cloture fails, poll until you find the 50 senators who will vote for the most liberal bill possible, bring it forward as budget reconciliation and ram it through. Those who would not compromise need to learn that the difference between 50 and 60 is an even more bitter poison.

The Democrats passed the HCR W/PO with tremendous health insurance company and republican (influenced by H.I. company campaign contributions) opposition. It was a Herculean effort on their part. There will be no restraints (whether totally or partially based on deceptive rhetoric )on H.I. companies and republican party's effort to stop this legislation. Because of the total immoral view on the American Voters health issues, big business will do anything to protect their profits. As the party of "no" (REPUBLICANS) continue to lick the heels of "big" business. We will be locked in this discussion for sometime still, but, hopefully we will get a reform bill signed in. The economy will continue to be put on the "back burner" until this issue is behind us. I believe that jobs and the economy could and should be tackled at the same time as H.C. reform. The entire basket of issues that this administration was handed to deal with, are being solved one by one. I have more confidence in our current President to deal will all these issues than any other politician in in the country. He has sought out and included every type of American out there to help solve these gargantuan issues. Great job Mr. President and congress.