TPMDC
House, Senate At Odds Over Health Care Endgame If Brown Wins
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)
Share
Send to a friend!
If Republican Scott Brown wins Ted Kennedy's Senate seat tomorrow, would the House go along with the health care "Plan B" we outlined earlier today? Would the House pass the Senate bill, on a promise from leadership and the White House that their concerns would be addressed in a filibuster-proof bill down the line?
"Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the San Francisco Chronicle today. "Just a question about how we would proceed. But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill.... Let's remove all doubt, we will have health care -- one way or another."
House aides say passing the Senate bill would be an extremely hard sell, and may not be possible. But they, and a growing number of members, are insisting that their main focus right now remains on "Plan A": amending the Senate bill and sending it back for final passage.
The hope, it seems, is that, if Brown wins, Democrats would have enough time to vote down a Republican filibuster in the Senate before Brown gets sworn in.
"There will be every effort to try and go ahead with 60 votes," Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-PA) said on Fox News today. "There is a sitting Senator from Massachusetts. So until the new Senator is sworn in, Massachusetts is represented by a [Democratic] U.S. Senator, and we will move forward if we can to get this done. It was always our goal to move forward in the next couple of weeks in any case."
Whether Dems can pull through in the 15-or-more days they'll have before Brown is seated (assuming he wins) is still very much an open question. Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "The fact that the CBO takes so much time is really more the issue."
Aides confirm that the House has already sent CBO significant portions of the final health care bill for scoring, hoping to beat the clock.
So what happens if the window closes before the Senate clears all procedural hurdles? That's where the House may differ with its counterparts in the Senate and White House. The latter would like to see the House swallow the Senate bill whole, and they seem to be staking out their ground to make sure that happens. If it does, Democrats could tweak the bill using the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process to reflect the changes the House wants to see.
House members, by contrast, seem to be suggesting that they'd prefer a complete overhaul of the bill, via the reconciliation process. Call it "Plan C."
As Schwartz noted, "of course really, we've set up the possibility if we needed to to really go with a majority vote, rather than the supermajority of 60 votes."
And appearing on Bloomberg television this weekend, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said, "Even before Massachusetts and that race was on the radar screen, we prepared for the process of using reconciliation," to pass health care reform.
Moving a full health care reform bill through the budget reconciliation process would mean a much different legislative package than the House and Senate bills, and would probably mean there'd be no bill for President Obama to sign for quite some time.
But, once again, it seems as if the two chambers are staking out two different endgame positions.
Additional reporting by Christina Bellantoni
Comments (66) | 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.
FreeRider
January 18, 2010 5:42 PM
There is no way the White House or the Senate would write a completely new bill to go through reconciliation. That would take 3-4 more months. Many of the members are madder than a wet hen that this has already taken up an entire year. They are anxious to get this sucker done and focus on the economy.
Pelosi is a very realistic and practical speaker, she will get option A or B. C is a total non-starter.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lord Mike
January 18, 2010 8:16 PM in reply to FreeRider
C (reconciliation) may be a non-starter, but it's how you threaten the blue dogs with the other plan. None of them want to continue the health care debate anymore... Tell them you can pass this thing in a day (which you can, it's been scored already)... the reconciliation fixes will come during the budget process, so not a lot of attention will be made on that... and you can move on!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DA in LA
January 18, 2010 10:54 PM in reply to Lord Mike
Yes, and then explain to them very carefully how they won't be re-elected because of this bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
patmcgrowen
January 19, 2010 7:41 AM in reply to DA in LA
They won't get votes for NOT passing the bill, and they won't get votes FOR passing the bill. The message that needs to be sent to them is, "you're out, what do you want to leave as your legacy?". Blue dogs signed their death certificate by being obstructionists like the GOP. There is no way any Republican will vote for a dem wheather they are a blue dog or not. Most dems aren't willing to vote for a blue dog, because they are the reason HCR took a year and is watered down to almost an impractical bill. Sorry blue dogs, but you're dead dogs walking.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 8:36 AM in reply to DA in LA
It looks like the Blue Dogs will get swept out of office in the next couple of election cycles. Problem solved. Now it's time for Obama to change the national narrative. Remember: government is how we solve our common problems.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darrius
January 19, 2010 8:58 AM in reply to DA in LA
That is not entirely accurate. They may be able to change the narrative if they pass the health care bill now. Passing the health care bill is the only way Democrats can win the next election.
You can't tell them that they will not be re-elected regardless. That would be wrong and unwise. They have to detect a reward for voting for the bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 19, 2010 9:21 AM in reply to FreeRider
A link from thinkprogress.org (to Politico)
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0110/Pelosi_We_will_have_health_care_one_way_or_
another.html?showall
January 18, 2010
Categories:
* House
Pelosi: "We will have health care, one way or another"
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tells reporters back home in San Fran that there will be health care reform whether or not Republican Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts Senate race tomorrow. A Republican win would cost Democrats the 60-vote majority they need to pass reform.
SanFran Chron's Joe Garofoli reports:
"Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts," Pelosi told us and our notebook-toting brethren Monday in San Francisco at an MLK event. "Just a question about how we would proceed. But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill."
She went on to say that Brown has said he want to go back to the drawing board on health care. Not in my House, Madame Speaker said.
"There is no back to the drawing board," Pelosi said. "The Republicans in Congress have said we will kill health care reform. They are the handmaidens of the insurance company."
"Let's remove all doubt, we will have health care -- one way or another," Pelosi said. "Back to the drawing board means a great big zero for the American people."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
January 18, 2010 6:08 PM
Here's one for ya: if there were a Plan C... call it "Single-Payer Lite By Reconciliation"... do you think President Obama would actually veto it? (serious question! To which I don't know the answer!)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steaming Pile
January 19, 2010 9:16 AM in reply to Barry Champlain
So why can't they swallow the Senate bill, move the down markers, and start tacking stuff like the public option, which everybody thought was deader than dead, onto the reconciliation bill for the touchdown? As in football, the immediate goal is to get the first down. That's how you get to keep the ball if you can't get it into the end zone on the first three tries.
Somebody needs to explain to certain House Democrats the concept of football.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Gooner
January 18, 2010 6:16 PM
To TPM-
it might have helped to put in a potential timeline into this story to see whether passing the bill could happen by 2/3 (15 days after tomorrow's election).
My suspicion is that tomorrow's election, should Coakley lose, will probably lead to round-the-clock negotiations wherein they would try to get a final package within 48 hours (that includes everything), plus a week to score it, plus 48 hours to view it, puts us right at 2/3, which is cutting it real close.
That said- that Pelosi says there WILL be a HCR bill makes me feel much better. She might be the only Democrat who acts like a Republican sometimes- that is, she puts the hammer down and gets things done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
January 18, 2010 6:29 PM in reply to Gooner
I just don't think that will happen. That would mean that Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Landrieu, Nelson, etc would have to vote again and any one of they could say no I won't vote for the compromise. Nelson's approval rating is in the 40s and he may even be spooked.
The best thing is for the House to pass the Senate bill with negoitiations ie the excise tax with labor to be passed via reconcilation at a later date.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Flybynite
January 18, 2010 7:06 PM in reply to Gooner
How are you counting 2 days + 7 days plus 2 days = 2 weeks? Seems to me you lost 3-4 days there somewhere.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
January 18, 2010 8:29 PM in reply to Flybynite
There are only 5 days in a week.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Evan Waters
January 18, 2010 9:18 PM in reply to Gooner
It depends on when the CBO finishes scoring, plus the House has said they'll have to have it online for three days after that before they vote it over to the Senate. So it depends on the budget office, and they're keeping mum about any timetables.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
January 18, 2010 6:26 PM
The only way to get this done is for the House to pass the Senate bill and then the differences can be passed via reconciliation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 18, 2010 6:31 PM
It's the delay in passage of the bill more than the bill itself that's got everyone so upset. More delay is not going to help. Pass the bill already. Honestly, whatever gets this thing done the quickest is the way to go at this point -- even if Coakley wins.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 18, 2010 6:32 PM
The problem is that Lieberman and other blue dog types will say "woah, let's slow down!"
I say they go "nuclear option" once a for all. Biden hinted at it.
Get rid of the fillibuster and forget about reconcilliation. No tricks. Just 51 votes to pass a bill. It's called democracy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
January 18, 2010 7:14 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
This is not just 51 votes. This is having the House pass the Senate bill and then using 50 votes to pass any of the things that was worked on during the compromise.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
January 18, 2010 8:32 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
Not really. Not when Idaho or Alaska has the same voting power as California or New York. It's not a vote of the PEOPLE, it's a vote of the states. It's a republic, not a democracy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RIConservative
January 18, 2010 6:37 PM
What they should do is say "Hey, obviously the people who elected us, and whom we are supposed to represent, do not want this abominable health care takeover bill, let's go back to the drawing board". But they won't. They do not care what we feel or think, because they are the liberal left and we are the poor unwashed masses who simply do not understand their intelligence....
Go Scott Brown..let the left know what will happen in November should they continue to go against the wishes of their constituency.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 18, 2010 6:49 PM in reply to RIConservative
"back to the drawing board" = GOP code for not doing anything.
Total bunch of do-nothing cowards really. Everyone agrees health care is broken. It's 16% of GDP and climbing. It's a failure and an expensive one. Yet any attempt to actually fix it causes the spineless like yourself to wet your pants with "oh no, i'm afraid!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 18, 2010 6:58 PM in reply to RIConservative
I, and I think most Americans, want healthcare reform. This bill will give people the peace of mind that health insurers can no longer deny them care. It may cost me a little more, but having health insurance that actually pays for healthcare is worth it to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluebell
January 18, 2010 7:19 PM in reply to barbara63
The bill does not say that the insurance company cannot deny you care. It says you can deny them an insurance premium.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 18, 2010 10:30 PM in reply to bluebell
You can post all the misinformation you want, but the HCR bill bans the practice of denying coverage for pre-existing conditions and forces insurance companies to pay for healthcare.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DA in LA
January 18, 2010 10:57 PM in reply to barbara63
Right. You'll just have to sue or go to state regulators to get it to happen.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Evan Waters
January 18, 2010 11:59 PM in reply to DA in LA
Can you do that now? If not, then it's a step up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 19, 2010 12:01 AM in reply to DA in LA
The bill ends the practice of using pre-existing conditions to deny coverage. Period.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tytester
January 18, 2010 7:05 PM in reply to RIConservative
The problem is that even if Brownie wins, there is a very good chance that the HC bill will pass WITH GOP support in the Senate. To be more specific, if Brownie wins the CEOs of the health insurance co's will need to make a decision whether to scratch the HC bill now, when they have spent $500 mil on lobbying and have succeeded in getting a sweetheart deal that mandates their existence. And since $500 mil is not small change by any means, chances are that the health ins industry actually WANTS this bill. Hence, a moderate GOP senator would vote for it (if it makes its way back in the Senate).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ericf
January 18, 2010 7:39 PM in reply to tytester
A Republican who votes for a health care bill, any bill at all, better not be thinking about winning his next primary. I think the Republicans screwed up by opposing any reform at all instead of going for a regulated private system like Switzerland, Netherlands etc., but I can't see them changing strategy now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nutter
January 18, 2010 7:18 PM in reply to RIConservative
I can't believe you tea baggers want Romney Care, but hate the right wing Obama Care. You guys actually have a public option!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steaming Pile
January 19, 2010 9:20 AM in reply to Nutter
I believe it, precisely because it is RomneyCare. Same with Medicare - GOPers hate it until they need it to scare people with. Then it's, "those evil Democrats are out to take away your Medicare!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
January 18, 2010 8:33 PM in reply to RIConservative
Has anyone else noticed the sudden proliferation of one-shot freepers who spew their masters' official talking points of the day and the crawl off, never to be hard from again?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 19, 2010 8:45 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Yes, I do. I want to see how many of them will be here when they find out Coakley has won???
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
January 18, 2010 9:07 PM in reply to RIConservative
Spare me the BS.
This healthcare bill is almost a replica of the same bill Brown voted for in Massachusetts. Brown was on Fox with Neil Cavuto and he couldn't come up with a reason why he voted for Romneycare but opposes the HCR bill in Congress. He just rattled off some stock lies knowing fully well that Cavuto wouldn't question him any further.
He's just another obstructionist, but I bet the Dems will still try and be nicey-nice to him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
January 19, 2010 12:54 AM in reply to jsdc007
One big difference is that MA, like most states, must balance its budget each year. Property taxs are hemmed in by a Constitutional amendment (Prop. 2 1/2) and citizens can vote with their feet if income or sales taxes get too high (hello NH).
So as a matter of the economic condition created bu such a policy, there are serious limitations put on future growth of run away costs. No such condition exists federally. All new spending is just tacked onto the already massive federal budget.
Plus, as was proven successful with welfare reform, allowing and incentivizing the states to develop plans that address this concern locally is better than a one size fits all policy from Washington.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 8:28 AM in reply to jsdc007
As an aside, I'd to ask which FOX anchor is the most revolting. Caputo is up there but I'd have to go with that guy Greg Whatever (from COURT-TV). He's even more unctuous than Caputo which is quite an achievement.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BruceInAustin
January 18, 2010 7:09 PM
If they go for passage with only 51 votes, then they don't need Lieberman. Therefore, they should put Medicare expansion back in.
And if they are willing to do it with 51 votes now, why weren't they willing to do it before with only 51 votes?
If Brown wins, and we lose this by a vote of 59 to 41, then this effort at bi-partisanship was a strategic political error from the beginning. And Rahm will not be the one to blame.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fiddystorms
January 19, 2010 1:05 PM in reply to BruceInAustin
Just remember everyone, the ends justify the means. It doesn't matter what the rest of America thinks, we're smarter and we know we're right! What do a bunch of working class Americans know about their own health? We can force them to be healthy too if we must. We will succeed in creating a completely dependent recipient class and then we won't have to worry about those greedy capitalists, except to keep them working so we can do great things with their money, things that we think are great. They'll fall for anything that we can attach a benevolent action to. We'll ridicule them into submission if necessary, now get out and vote!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
January 18, 2010 7:20 PM
Bill Press was on Schultz's TV show and he is a single payer guy as well as a fan of the public option. He basically said today that the House needs to pass the Senate bill and get this on the President's desk by the SOTU so that Obama can say that we have just passed the biggest legislation for the middle class since medicare.
He wants this to just get done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
January 18, 2010 7:25 PM
They had weeks to negotiate a bill since the Senate voted.
WTF is wrong with these people?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
January 18, 2010 8:35 PM in reply to Rich in NJ
I'm with you. The leaders should have put the pedal to the metal and sped this thing through conference in less than a week. They should say to the CBO, you've got one day to score this, and they should pass it no matter WHAT the CBO says.
Just farging DO IT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GermanyOrFlorida
January 18, 2010 11:05 PM in reply to Rich in NJ
The worst part of it was reading all the press quotes from House members complaining that "He just wants it so he can put it in the State of the Union" and that they should be able to take their sweet time to quibble. Turns out, no, it wasn't just so he could have a State of the Union line item and all the quibbling jeopardized the whole thing.
The bright side of this is that Plan B doesn't depend on Harry Reid or Joe Lieberman or anyone in the Senate doing anything and that it's really only a test of Nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel's vote wrangling skills. They passed a public option AND a cap and trade bill last year. They have the power to get this Senate bill through if it is the only realistic option.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fred17
January 18, 2010 7:55 PM
if the republicans are able to defeat health care reform then they will have to defend the continuing mess and i don't think they can do that. right now they can say things will be worse if it passes, and in the short run they would probably be right, things will still be tough and people will be dissappointed that there is not some miriculaous turn around after a bill signing. but my guess is that in the short run things will be worse either way and it will be the republicans who get the blame if there is no change because they filibuster and then things still get worse.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rstephen
January 18, 2010 8:37 PM
This is all due to Obama's weak leadership.
It's crazy that this debate has gone on for so long. He played right into Republican hands and allowed them to drag this thing out, hoping for some chance to kill it. And now they have it.
Even the best scenario is to pass a fatally flawed plan that voters will blame on the Democrats when it doesn't work. When if they'd pushed it through by reconciliation last August, when Obama set his first deadline, they could have ended up with a much better bill and could have been working on other things after that - the economy - like the voters wanted.
This whole thing has been such a tragically mismanaged farce that students will one day study it as a prime example of poor leadership.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KarenJG
January 19, 2010 12:45 PM in reply to rstephen
But is it "weak leadership"? I don't think so. Obama showed that he's perfectly capable of digging in his heels and fighting for what he wanted. My problem is that the only things he fought for were things that hurt the middle/working class or helped the insurance companies. I think Obama's got exactly the bill he wanted.
That said, I want the bill to pass, even if it's "Plan B," for the political win, that, regardless of my fellow DFHs' opinion, will make an impact on that low-information, can't-be-bothered-to-pay-attention "swing voter." But I'll never forget who Obama fought for when push came to shove. It wasn't me and people like me who voted for him. So I'll hail the passage with a cheery wave, and a hearty "screw you, too, Obama."
I prefer having a Democratic President, but I see no reason to bestir myself to fight for the guy, when he's so clearly disinclined to fight for the policies that I, and most of the people who voted for him, support.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Debra
January 18, 2010 11:33 PM
It has taken 50 years to get the HC Bill this far. I would say that's hardly lack of leadership from a president in office for only one year. Once the bill is passed, it can be amended with only 51 votes, which we would have. We just need a bill passed!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
barbara63
January 19, 2010 12:16 AM in reply to Debra
Agreed!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
January 19, 2010 12:47 AM in reply to Debra
How does this math work? Bills that amend current law need to move to cloture in the same manner as bills that create new law.
Unless you are talking about using the budget reconciliation method, in which case the bill can't contain provisions that are not revenue related and none of the provisions can extend beyond 10 years, which is why the Bush tax cuts, which went this route, expires next year. Since most of the real benefits won't be in place until just before they expire, well, you can see the problem with this.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Debra
January 19, 2010 12:06 AM
I guess a lot of people weren't listening the night Obama won the election or during the inauguration speech. Obama told us how difficult this fight would be, people pushing back hard against change, many terrified of change. The president never said, "It's all down hill from here folks." Obama always knew he was trying to accomplish the impossible. So whatever happens tomorrow in Mass., the fight is still on. We won't win all the battles, but Ted Kennedy's legacy is about the spirit of not giving up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cce
January 19, 2010 12:14 AM
The House would pass the Senate bill if the carrot was big enough. With just 50 votes + Biden, even the public option could go back on the table. The conservative Democrats can vote against it and tell their constituents that they "tried to stop it" and the liberals will be euphoric and snap out of their malaise. The savings could be used to fund more generous subsidies, so it's good all around.
This has always been a remote possibility, but if Coakley loses, the unusual circumstances would be a good reason to go this route.
Whatever losses occur for the Democrats in November will come in exchange for endless campaign footage of conservatives railing against policies and programs that will be hugely popular in ten years. Fair trade
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lord Mike
January 19, 2010 3:42 AM
This is extremely disturbing:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/01/pelosi-we-will-have-health-care-one-way-or-another.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
What a horrible way to end Teddy's legacy...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
January 19, 2010 5:24 AM in reply to Lord Mike
It doesn't have to happen. It may be time for Pelosi to become the best whip counter of all time and get this thing passed in the House.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 19, 2010 10:01 AM in reply to Lord Mike
January 18, 2010
Categories:
I found this link from Thinkprogress.org
* Househttp://www.politico.com/livepulse/0110/Pelosi_We_will_have_health_care_one_way_or_
another.html?showall
Pelosi: "We will have health care, one way or another"
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tells reporters back home in San Fran that there will be health care reform whether or not Republican Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts Senate race tomorrow. A Republican win would cost Democrats the 60-vote majority they need to pass reform.
SanFran Chron's Joe Garofoli reports:
"Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts," Pelosi told us and our notebook-toting brethren Monday in San Francisco at an MLK event. "Just a question about how we would proceed. But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill."
She went on to say that Brown has said he want to go back to the drawing board on health care. Not in my House, Madame Speaker said.
"There is no back to the drawing board," Pelosi said. "The Republicans in Congress have said we will kill health care reform. They are the handmaidens of the insurance company."
"Let's remove all doubt, we will have health care -- one way or another," Pelosi said. "Back to the drawing board means a great big zero for the American people."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
January 19, 2010 5:47 AM
Here it is well into 2010 and we're still hearing from the latest politicians about why HIR will or will not pass; or move forward at all.
And do you know why? Two reasons.
1. Corruption.
2. The Senate Bill does not reflect the will of the base of the Democratic Party.
I've always believed the House Bill and Senate Bill were irreconcilable. And that you would wind up having to have multiple bills to get something through.
That's probably going to happen. Or, it won't. We may not be ABLE to get past # 1 above.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
January 19, 2010 6:25 AM in reply to willia451
Moreover, if we can't find a way to get past the corruption in our Congress, it will just keep getting worse. And eventually threaten our Republic as a whole.
I am not nearly as concerned about whether or not HIR will pass; as I am about the spotlight it has beamed on just how corrupt our Congress has become.
There IS historical precedent for Republics being swept aside, and tuning into dictatorships; due primarily to rampant corruption.
I'm not saying that will happen today, or tomorrow, or next year. But it will eventually. If we don't deal with the corruption at some point.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 8:34 AM in reply to willia451
I complement on your numerous thoughtful comments. Which is to say, I largely agree with you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 8:34 AM in reply to wbgonne
"compliment"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
patmcgrowen
January 19, 2010 7:33 AM
Now that the public option is dead, why isn't Snowe for the HCR? Hell she was even the one who came up with the "trigger", now even better for her it's not even there. The focus needs to be on Snowe for HCR. Either she stands by her principles or the voters of main is exposed to her hypocrisy. We need to converge on Maine. This is the last option for HCR to pass in its current form. However, if the Coakley/Brown race is even a little close, there should be a Coleman like recount/tantrum. Just as a little payback for the the whole Franken thing. Dems are gonna have to learn to play some of the dirty tricks Repubs do. Do to Republicans as they do to Democrats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 8:26 AM
Well, my Congressman is Capuano whom I intend to call and say: if you vote in favor of the Senate bill I will never vote for you again. So, we'll see.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 8:32 AM
Another point: While Obama and the DLC-Dems are largely responsible for their own failure to date, there is no question that having a 24/7 "news" network as a propaganda arm is a monumental benefit to the No-Nothings. CNN has sunk to unforeseen depths and now exists mainly to parrot DC talking points (no offense, Josh) and to wallow in disasters. Why the hell isn't MSNBC is real, full-time news network? There is clearly an available niche for intelligent, left-of-center news. What's the problem?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jim43
January 19, 2010 9:06 AM
Maybe this will lead Dems to the wake-up call on health care they so sorely need. Americans want more aggressive reform, not a cop-put to centrists.
http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Owen
January 19, 2010 9:07 AM
Obama should be the one who publicly kills the bill if it does have to die. He should then propose a very short bill that removes the insurance companies' exemption from anti-trust laws and makes it illegal for them to drop sick customers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 19, 2010 9:10 AM in reply to Owen
Bulls-eye!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
January 19, 2010 10:59 AM in reply to wbgonne
It's not health care reform, but I'd take it over the regulatory capture this bill represents.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 19, 2010 9:20 AM
January 18, 2010
Categories:
I found this link from Thinkprogress.org
* Househttp://www.politico.com/livepulse/0110/Pelosi_We_will_have_health_care_one_way_or_
another.html?showall
Pelosi: "We will have health care, one way or another"
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tells reporters back home in San Fran that there will be health care reform whether or not Republican Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts Senate race tomorrow. A Republican win would cost Democrats the 60-vote majority they need to pass reform.
SanFran Chron's Joe Garofoli reports:
"Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts," Pelosi told us and our notebook-toting brethren Monday in San Francisco at an MLK event. "Just a question about how we would proceed. But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill."
She went on to say that Brown has said he want to go back to the drawing board on health care. Not in my House, Madame Speaker said.
"There is no back to the drawing board," Pelosi said. "The Republicans in Congress have said we will kill health care reform. They are the handmaidens of the insurance company."
"Let's remove all doubt, we will have health care -- one way or another," Pelosi said. "Back to the drawing board means a great big zero for the American people."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
June 12, 2010 2:06 PM
Just remember everyone, the ends justify the means. It doesn't matter what the rest of America thinks, we're smarter and we know we're right! What do a bunch of working class Americans know about their own health? We can force them to be healthy too if we must. We will succeed in creating a completely dependent recipient class and then we won't have to worry about those greedy capitalists, except to keep them working so we can do great things with their money, things that we think are great. They'll fall for anything that we can attach a benevolent action to. We'll ridicule them into submission if necessary, now get out and vote!
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?