Posted on 11/08/2009 10:34:57 AM PST by freespirited
It was always clear that the real health-care battle would be in the Senate. But what would have been shocking eight months ago is to hear that it would take until November for the Democrats to pass a bill even in the House. It would have been even more shocking to have heard that, even after a full-court-press by the White House, the bill would pass by only five votes — meaning that if just three of the 435 members had changed their minds, it would have changed the bill's fate. And it would have been shocking to have heard that 39 Democrats would jump ship.
The House bill has passed — barely and belatedly — and it is now dead. Nothing like it will ever pass the Senate. The question now is whether anything will, now that the voters have spoken in New Jersey and Virginia — and now that the exceedingly narrow margin in the House will likely invite even greater scrutiny of that which is being proposed.
Greater scrutiny will not help the Democrats' efforts. In truth, their hopes for passage largely hinge on successfully hiding two plain facts from the voters: One, the House Republicans and the Congressional Budget Office have now shown that a bill costing $61 billion can lower Americans' insurance premiums, while bills costing $1.7 trillion cannot (and instead would raise them substantially). Two, the Democrats' plans would be paid for only if they follow through on plans to siphon hundreds of billions of dollars out of already-barely-solvent Medicare, and to do so just in time for the baby boomers' retirement.
Given the magnitude of the challenge of continuing to hide these plain facts from an increasingly attentive citizenry, the Democratic health-care train has a very bumpy ride ahead — as it rolls into the chamber that the American Founders thought from the beginning would ultimately decide our fate: the Senate.
That didnt work in 1994 and wont work in 2010. History repeats itself.
This excrement from the house will be molded a tad to reconcile with the senate's version and by the time you are sitting down to turkey and stuffing it will be signed the zero.
I’m going to call my Republican office tomorrow to talk about launching a national campaign against this mess.
That’s the only way we’ll stop it.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
Okay reality Check here: The bill was going to pass no matter what. Pelosi allowed those 39 to jump ship so that they could use this for cover when it comes time for re-election. Madam Botox would not allow a vote to happen unless she knew exactly where everyone stood. that is why it took as long as it did, she and Obozo had to twist arms, bribe, and threaten all they could. Read the article about the Lone RINO that voted for the bill.
Never underestimate the ability of our Big Tent, win at all costs, RINO loving senators to screw us over and sell us out. You know the usual crew of backstabbers are not to be trusted: Snowe, Collins, Graham, McCain???
Does the bill have to be voted on again in the House after the conference stage? If not, the anti-abortion language can be dropped at the conference stage and the bill be sent to Obama. Rangell and Waxman yesterday refused to promise that the anti-abortion language wouldn’t be removed at the conference stage.
The Senate will not pass the Stupak amendement.
The big question: Will Stupak vote for ObamaCare again if his amendement is dumped?
Yes it does. But it doesn't have to go through the standard committee process again. From the conference committee the bill would go straight to the house and senate floors.
If not, the anti-abortion language can be dropped at the conference stage and the bill be sent to Obama.
No can do.
If I had to put money on it, mine would be on NO. He sounds truly adamant. He will not vote for anything that allows taxpayer money to be used for abortions.
He's not the only RAT who takes this position. Dozens of them do.
Remember B L A G O, and W H O outed him. This bunch requires anybody and everybody to ‘pay’ and then maybe they might get to ‘play’.
Thanks for the information. Is the final vote in the Senate subject to filibuster (meaning the ‘Rats need 60 votes unless they try “reconciliation”)?
I just read an article yesterday (can’t find it now) from a few days ago where Stupak said he will not vote for a bill that funds abortions. Childers said so as well. There are as many or more Democrats who will bolt if the bill doesn’t fund abortion as those who will bolt if it does. Pelosi can’t win either way.
Reid stated in August that with a public option, the bill is a non-starter in the Senate. I’m not sure how many Senators would vote against the bill if it didn’t have a public option and if those would be okay with a trigger.
If the Senate passes a bill with a public option trigger, can they reconcile that with the house? My bet is no. The CBC has said the bill must have a “strong” public option. But the CBC has a history of coming around when a lot of money is waved in their faces.
The conferees produce a conference report, and the proposed revisions go back to each chamber. IIRC, there is no opportunity to filibuster when there is a motion to take up the report. What happens instead is that opponents filibuster the report itself.
I guess it is possible that the RATS will try reconciliation. I believe it will be a complete mess. First, it will destroy any cooperation between the parties. Second, I dont believe that all of the bill's provisions qualify for reconciliation ... only those related to revenue and budget.
I believe the reconciliation route would jeopardize Reid's chances of re-election. So I have my doubts it will happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.