TPMDC
No Room For Error If Senate To Pass Health Care Before Christmas
Democratic Senators Harry Reid, Chris Dodd and Tom Harkin
Share
Send to a friend!
With no bill or CBO score in hand, a maximum of 57 committed "yes" votes when he needs 60, and 90 to 100 hours of procedural down time ahead of him before he can finally hold an up-or-down, majority-rules vote on health care, it seems virtually impossible that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will be able to pass a reform bill by Christmas.
But Senate leadership aides say it could happen, if everything goes according to plan.
Early this morning--in a rare 1 a.m. vote--Democrats invoked cloture on a defense spending bill. Unless Republicans cede back some time, Senate rules allow them to eat up 30 hours debating that bill before it can pass...at 7 a.m. Saturday morning. Then it's back to health care.
"Following passage of the DoD bill, Reid would file cloture on the manager's amendment, substitute amendment and the underlying bill on health care," reads an outline provided yesterday afternoon by a senior Senate aide. "This would set up the first cloture vote on the manager's amendment on Monday morning at 1 am."
The second cloture vote on the substitute amendment would be Tuesday at 7 am. And, the cloture vote on the underlying bill would be Wednesday at around 1 pm.We could get an agreement to wrap up and have a final passage vote on the 23rd, however Republicans could continue to not cooperate and force us to have a vote on final passage on Christmas Eve.
The scientific term for this scenario is "tight squeeze." Last night, the whole plan nearly fell apart when Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) threatened to join the GOP filibuster of the defense spending bill. He came around at the last minute. "I do not support the defense funding bill and I will vote against it," reads Feingold's official statement. "But I am not going to be part of a partisan and cynical effort to delay passage of the defense bill in order to block the Senate from considering health care reform. I will decide how to vote on health care when the final bill is before the Senate. But the Senate should be allowed to continue debating and voting on health care reform legislation."
Now all Reid needs to do is not let any procedural hurdles trip him up, keep the unions quiet, tamp down a brewing revolt from the online left, deal with Howard Dean, and get assurances--privately or publicly--from the remaining holdouts. Then it's Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night.
Comments (31) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
sabocat
December 18, 2009 9:24 AM
Where's my yellow jump suit?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
December 18, 2009 9:26 AM
Reid will be at it until all the capitulating is done!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shortstop
December 18, 2009 9:39 AM
Feingold = grownup.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BossDrop
December 18, 2009 9:42 AM
good news. I feel like doing a Howard Dean scream.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thepeoplechoose
December 18, 2009 9:46 AM
Santa and his reindeer aren't guiding the sleigh tonight. That'd be Wall Street and the insurers. And that means coal in everybodys stocking. Joy to the World.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
December 18, 2009 9:49 AM
All due respect, Reid does not have to "deal" with the "Online Left" or "Howard Dean." They have screamed and kicked themselves out and are now merely sucking their thumbs, muttering about primary challenges and third parties.
It's all down to fending off the unions and, unfortunately, Ben Nelson.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
December 18, 2009 9:49 AM
All due respect, Reid does not have to "deal" with the "Online Left" or "Howard Dean." They have screamed and kicked themselves out and are now merely sucking their thumbs, muttering about primary challenges and third parties.
It's all down to fending off the unions and, unfortunately, Ben Nelson.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steaming Pile
December 18, 2009 11:58 AM in reply to felix
Hell, I would support Reid's Republican challenger (in other words, punt the seat) if that's what it would take to get him fired.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dtr
December 18, 2009 9:57 AM
What do folk here know about the Interstate compact?
"The interstate compact provisions in both H.R. 3962 and the Senate proposal, as currently written, will lead to a race to the bottom in insurance regulation and severely threaten the important and often lifesaving protections the residents of our states enjoy. In the Senate bill, insurers are permitted to sell policies in our states while only being subject to the regulations of the state in which the policy is written or issued. H.R. 3962 permits states to decide among themselves which regulations will govern, which could make the regulations in the consumer- friendly state irrelevant. Practically speaking, insurers will domicile their plans in states with less stringent regulations and market to the population in more protective states like ours, just like nationally chartered banks have done."
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/CompactLetter.pdf
Remember when Obama said this:
“Everybody goes to Delaware, because they’ve got very — pretty loose laws when it comes to things like credit cards. And in that situation, what happens is, is that the protections you have, the consumer protections that you need, you’re not going to have available to you.”
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
December 18, 2009 12:57 PM in reply to dtr
Yes, another reason to kill this bill. It's an awful provision.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
December 18, 2009 10:06 AM
To delay this thing, The Rev/Dr/Sen/Counselor Coburn will take a dump on the Senate floor if he has to.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
December 18, 2009 10:16 AM
Since nothing "meaningful" kicks in until 2013 or 2113 or 3326, who knows, what does it matter if passes before Chanukah or after Quanza?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ft
December 18, 2009 10:21 AM
Why do disrespectful statements so often start with "all due respect"?
On the substance of the case, either the Democrats to the left of the senate bill don't matter, in which case why waste time telling us we're thumb suckers? Or, we do matter, in which case calling us thumb suckers is bad politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
December 18, 2009 10:33 AM in reply to ft
Because, at this point, the noise on the left is just that - noise. Dean, Kos, etc. don't have any clout with the current players on whom the survival of this bill depends. In his post, Brian added them to Reid's challenges going forward, but it's just not so.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BohemianBill
December 18, 2009 10:57 AM in reply to felix
Tell that to Dodd in CT who is seeing support for the bill collapse and the active help of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party for his re-election bid along with it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
December 18, 2009 11:02 AM in reply to BohemianBill
That's true, and it's also a huge problem for Reid in Nevada, who is sunk in 2010 if he can't get the big turnout in Clark County. But their tact is to educate the base AFTER passage about the bill's virtues, whatever they may be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
December 18, 2009 10:34 AM in reply to ft
Because, at this point, the noise on the left is just that - noise. Dean, Kos, etc. don't have any clout with the current players on whom the survival of this bill depends. In his post, Brian added them to Reid's challenges going forward, but it's just not so.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
December 18, 2009 11:12 AM in reply to felix
The problem is that Senators are who Reid has to actually work with. We mostly get our say every 2,4 or 6 years. At this point, we can make noise, but we can't change the make up of the Senate, and esp. have little say over Dems from states we don't live in.
Bottomline: Reid is stuck with Conrad, Nelson, Snowe, Lieberman, etc. That's life. No amount of screaming about it will change anything. Only efforts to primary and defeat the worst offenders will.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
December 18, 2009 10:35 AM in reply to ft
And I apologize for these double-postings. Keep on hitting the 'back' button.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Progressive Party
December 18, 2009 10:26 AM
If I was a bookie, I'll lay some pretty good odds that Harry will not get this done before xmas. Better than that, what do say the odds are that he completes the passage of this bill?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
December 18, 2009 10:41 AM
Everything good in the Senate Bill has been taken out. And even the pre-existing conditions and anti-rescission measures have been compromised.
Tell me again why Progressives and Labor should support this bill?
I'm against it.
If covering more people is all that's left in there to support, we can do that without capitulation to corporate blackmail, imposing new taxes on the middle class, and forcing individual mandates.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
December 18, 2009 11:09 AM in reply to willia451
New taxes and mandates == those are GOP talking points.
Any good socialist would be in favor of tax increases -- and actually this isn't one -- and mandated insurance. In Europe, it is mandatory to by health insurance. Insurance only works when mandated. Next time you get in your car and take for granted that most drivers are insured if they hit you, you'll see why.
So yes, covering more people by imposing more govt regulation (ie. taxes, mandates, etc) is a good thing.
Liberals shouldn't drink the govt bashing rhetoric of the rightwing.
Bottomline: Progressives have a good basis here to build upon. They should avoid being swayed by the "kill the bill" venom of the right, which frankly wants to kill everything along with it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
December 18, 2009 11:40 AM in reply to AnswerFrog
Insurance only works when mandated.
As a former underwriter, I would have to say that your statement is, at best, woefully incorrect. To clarify it, you would have to define for whom insurance works.
Insurance works for whoever has a risk the repair or replacement costs of which he cannot afford to bear in the event of loss or damage. Insurance is by no means mandatory. In cases where the risk of third party liability exists, one merely has to prove that he has the financial wherewithal to cover that risk. This is often done by posting a surety bond or providing other means of collateral with the interested state administrator. Insurance exists as a means for those who are not able to self-insure. Those who have a fiduciary interest in your property (banks and other lenders) may require you to purchase insurance, but if you wholely own your property and have no third party liability risk, you don't need insurance.
Insurance works for insurance companies by offering coverages to consumers, collecting premiums, and paying out less in claims than you take in in premiums. You can spread your risk by either raising rates, insuring more consumers who present fewer claims, and/or reinsuring your portfolio with other insurance companies.
Insurance works for society by spreading the risks of liability from the public sector to the private sector.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cool Blue Reason
December 18, 2009 2:12 PM in reply to Schmed
You're thinking like...well, an insurance underwriter. All you've said is true.
I think what AnswerF is getting at is that "Insurance *against common risks* only works *for society* when mandated."
What we're trying to achieve here is a system in which everyone is protected against ruinous medical costs, and in which everyone pitches in a modest amount to cover catastrophic risks as well as payment for more routine expenses. There are people who are known to have high probabilities (or current realities) of very expensive conditions, and there are people who are known to have high probabilities of bearing little or no medical expenses. We're trying to smooth that out and make it more equitable in an egalitarian sense.
It would be better if we were just honest and mature about all of this, as a society, and we implemented the system as a straightforward tax and single payer. However, our government (as well as our civics-challenged citizens) have been too thoroughly co-opted by these putatively redundant private interests to actually make that happen.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JC Aevaliotis
December 18, 2009 11:42 AM in reply to willia451
I like Answer F's comment a lot. There's A LOT good in this bill, from Progressive and Labor perspectives. We simply cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good here. The bill likely insures tens of millions of uninsured, ends pre-exclusion and recission, and implements some important pilot programs. Pragmatically, Dems will get hammered even further in 2010 if we don't pass this bill. This is the moment. This is what change looks like. It's not pretty, but there was never going to be a decisive blow that won the culture wars or ushered in the society we're all working toward all at once.
Paul Krugman has a great piece on the Senate bill today. It's pragmatic but also inspiring. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/opinion/18krugman.html?hp There's a lot of good in this bill. For reasons of justice and for pragmatic reasons, we have to pass this. It's not the bill we want, but it's the bill we've got.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
December 18, 2009 1:09 PM in reply to JC Aevaliotis
I disagree. Reading Kos' "20 Answers" at the dailykos is very informative as to why this bill is worse than nothing (or what we know of the bill being negotiated in secret, based on what had already been bargained away between Democrats).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ft
December 18, 2009 11:28 AM
I'm very familiar with the sentiment, but I really don't think it's helpful to your cause, which one assumes is getting a good healthcare bill passed (my cause, too, incidentally).
Things are changing very quickly on this legislation, but the battle line to fix the Senate bill is shaping up to be the conference committee and what the House negotiators will seek from the Senate team. Implying that the dissatisfaction with this week's concessions on HCR by Reid are limited to the blogs and Dean, and that no one who matters listens to them anyway, pretends that the GOP's caricature of the Democratic party's leftwing (Dean screamers and hippies) is something that has actual analytical value for Democrats.
The caricature notwithstanding, and speaking for myself and acquaintances only, there's usually activism that goes along with trying to be informed. The local chapter of Democratic party I belong to is also unhappy about the watering down of the bill and looking for ways to pressure the leadership to fix it. We know we don't have the pull of a DC lobbyist much less a sitting senator, but we still do our bit.
But it's not the bit that stops or passes bills by itself. The House of Reps is different. Pelosi has to deal with a progressive caucus of 81 reps and the AFL CIO and SEIU, both of which want to see elements of the House bill brought back in. Raul Grijalva, chair of the progressive caucus, said he's got Pelosi's promise to insist on a conference committee. The statements of those inside Congress and the union leadership and they are less combative than those outside (Kos, Dean, and the thread posters), but the point's the same: fix the bill.
This week has seen a lot of bad blood among Democrats. Next week may see us get back on track to make a better bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ft
December 18, 2009 11:29 AM in reply to ft
meant for this be a reply to Felix.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
December 18, 2009 11:50 AM in reply to ft
if the bill moves to the left in conference, won't the same people filibuster the bill in the senate, or house?
Once a bill comes out of conference, don't you expect the same people who are arguing to just pass it now, regardless, to lean on the same progressive and liberals senators to just go along then as well?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ft
December 18, 2009 12:06 PM in reply to Indie Pro
Quite likely centrist Dem senators will join a GOP filibuster on the conference bill, but conference gives the other players a chance to at least change the public debate over the bill and make this a tougher move for the intransigents than it is already. One more run at them might be different, no second chance assures the current bill in its current form. And even if Lieberman proves omnipotent post-conference the fix-it-later tactic is not forestalled by trying to fix it now.
As for leaning on the progressives, let them lean. How's it working so far? Meanwhile no shame in trying.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
December 18, 2009 12:16 PM in reply to ft
fair enough. I think people should work to fix it before it goes to conference, as the results coming out of conference will likely be better then.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?