PDA

View Full Version : Democrats Seem Set to Go Alone on a Health Bill


masomenos
08-18-2009, 09:50 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/health/policy/19repubs.html?hp

Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority’s cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks.

Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans’ purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month’s Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair.

The White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/robert_gibbs/index.html?inline=nyt-per), said of Republican lawmakers, “Only a handful seem interested in the type of comprehensive reform that so many people believe is necessary to ensure the principles and the goals that the president has laid out.”

The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier. The party must still reconcile the views of moderate and conservative Democrats worried about the cost and scope of the legislation with those of more liberal lawmakers determined to win a government-run insurance option to compete with private insurers.

On the other hand, such a change could alter the dynamic of talks surrounding health care legislation, and even change the substance of a final bill. With no need to negotiate with Republicans, Democrats might be better able to move more quickly, relying on their large majorities in both houses. Democratic senators might feel more empowered, for example, to define the authority of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives that are emerging as an alternative to a public insurance plan.

Republicans have used the Congressional break to dig in hard against the overhaul outline drawn by Democrats. The Senate’s No. 2 Republican, Jon Kyl (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/jon_kyl/index.html?inline=nyt-per) of Arizona, is the latest to weigh in strongly, saying Tuesday that the public response lawmakers were seeing over the summer break should persuade Democrats to scrap their approach and start over.

“I think it is safe to say there are a huge number of big issues that people have,” Mr. Kyl told reporters in a conference call from Arizona. “There is no way that Republicans are going to support a trillion-dollar-plus bill.”

The White House has also interpreted critical comments by Senator Charles E. Grassley (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/charles_e_grassley/index.html?inline=nyt-per) of Iowa, the top Republican negotiator in a crucial Finance Committee effort to reach a bipartisan compromise, as a sign that there is little hope of reaching a deal politically acceptable to both parties.

Mr. Grassley, who is facing the possibility of a Republican primary challenge next year, has gotten an earful in traveling around his home state. At one gathering last week, in a city park in the central Iowa town of Adel, a man rose from the crowd and urged him to “stand up and fight” the Democratic plans. If he does not, the man yelled, “we will vote you out!”

The White House, carefully following Mr. Grassley’s activities, presumed he was no longer interested in negotiating with Democrats after he initially made no effort to debunk misinformation that the legislation could lead to “death panels” empowered to judge who would receive care.

Citing a packed schedule, Mr. Grassley has also put off plans for the bipartisan group of Finance Committee negotiators to meet in either Iowa or Maine, the home of another Republican member of the group, Senator Olympia J. Snowe (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/olympia_j_snowe/index.html?inline=nyt-per), before Congress resumes.

Further, Mr. Grassley said this week that he would vote against a bill unless it had wide support from Republicans, even if it included all the provisions he wanted. “I am negotiating for Republicans,” he told MSNBC.

In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Grassley said he had simply been repeating earlier comments that he would not support a measure that did not have significant Republican support. He said that raucous town-hall-style meetings might have made the job of reaching a compromise harder, but that he had not given up.

“It may be more difficult than it was before,” he said. “I am intent on talking. I am intent on seeing what we can do.”

Administration officials, who maintain that Republicans are badly mischaracterizing the legislation that has emerged from three House committees and the Senate health committee, said they had hoped to achieve some level of bipartisan support. But they are becoming increasingly convinced that they will instead have to navigate the complicated politics among varying Democratic factions.

The officials said the White House hoped to make the case to the American people that it was Republicans who had abandoned the effort at bipartisanship. Republicans countered by saying that they simply opposed the legislation and that the public outcry had validated their view and solidified their opposition.

One senior administration official said the sense within the White House was that Republicans, in an effort to undermine President Obama (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Congressional Democrats, had made a political calculation to oppose any health care legislation.

This week’s careful administration maneuvering on whether a public insurance option was an essential element of any final bill was seemingly part of the new White House effort to find consensus among

Democrats, since the public plan has been resisted by moderate and conservative Democrats who could be crucial to winning the votes for passage if no Republicans are on board.

For the second time in two days, Mr. Obama did not mention health care on Tuesday, a marked departure from the aggressive public relations campaign he mounted in July and early August. The White House is striving to stay out of the fray, aides said, until the president can get away on vacation this weekend.

Even as the administration showed some flexibility, angering liberal Democrats who consider a public plan essential, Republicans turned their attacks from the public option to the health care cooperative idea being promoted by some Senate Democrats.

In what Democrats regarded as further evidence that Republicans were not serious about negotiating, Mr. Kyl and Representative Eric Cantor (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/eric_cantor/index.html?inline=nyt-per) of Virginia, the second-ranking House Republican, described a co-op as a public option carrying another name.

MetalHead
08-18-2009, 10:54 PM
Let them..2010 will kill that verminous party for good.l

trickblue
08-18-2009, 10:58 PM
This will be feast or famine for them...

Get it right, and they rule... screw it up and they are toast...

They've had the ability to pass this all along, just wanted some from the other side to make it sound bipartisan in case it failed...

TheRat
08-18-2009, 11:08 PM
They've had the ability to pass this all along, just wanted some from the other side to make it sound bipartisan in case it failed...
Not really. Just a few "moderates" in the Democratic party wanted it to be bipartisan. Most of the Democrats could give a flip about the Republicans.

MetalHead
08-18-2009, 11:16 PM
Not really. Just a few "moderates" in the Democratic party wanted it to be bipartisan. Most of the Democrats could give a flip about the Republicans.

Go ahead vermin..pass it unilaterally.
November 2010 can't get here soon enough.

trickblue
08-18-2009, 11:20 PM
Not really. Just a few "moderates" in the Democratic party wanted it to be bipartisan. Most of the Democrats could give a flip about the Republicans.

I have to respectfully disagree here...

Reid and Pelosi will browbeat the Blue Dogs into submission...

They want an ace in the hole in case it fails...

If it fails they can claim it was bipartisan no matter the number of Republicans that sign on...

If it's successful then they will turn that as very few Republicans signed on...

It's all about spin and power...

TheRat
08-18-2009, 11:30 PM
I have to respectfully disagree here...

Reid and Pelosi will browbeat the Blue Dogs into submission...

They want an ace in the hole in case it fails...

If it fails they can claim it was bipartisan no matter the number of Republicans that sign on...

If it's successful then they will turn that as very few Republicans signed on...

It's all about spin and power...
Not really. Pelosi is pretty staunch in her belief that there should a public option. And she knows as well as anyone that no Republican will sign onto a plan with a public option. She never expected Republicans to sign on, nor does she care. Her only concern is getting the blue dogs on board.

trickblue
08-18-2009, 11:44 PM
Not really. Pelosi is pretty staunch in her belief that there should a public option. And she knows as well as anyone that no Republican will sign onto a plan with a public option. She never expected Republicans to sign on, nor does she care. Her only concern is getting the blue dogs on board.

Kinda what I just said... except she WOULD like a couple of Republicans to sign on to cement her case...

She'll have a hard time with a couple of the Blue Dogs, although in the end she won't need them...

She still remains the worst speaker in my lifetime... and born with a silver foot in her mouth...

TheRat
08-18-2009, 11:59 PM
Kinda what I just said... except she WOULD like a couple of Republicans to sign on to cement her case...

I WOULD like Jerry Jones to transfer ownership of the Dallas Cowboys to me, but that ain't never going to happen. (yes I am aware that is a double negative, but I put it in there for effect)

She still remains the worst speaker in my lifetime... and born with a silver foot in her mouth...
I believe that honor would go to Newt who left in disgrace and utter disdain by his own party.

trickblue
08-19-2009, 12:02 AM
I WOULD like Jerry Jones to transfer ownership of the Dallas Cowboys to me, but that ain't never going to happen. (yes I am aware that is a double negative, but I put it in there for effect)

I believe that honor would go to Newt who left in disgrace and utter disdain by his own party.

I will pray for you...

ScipioCowboy
08-19-2009, 12:15 AM
I believe that honor would go to Newt who left in disgrace and utter disdain by his own party.

No. It definitely goes to Pelosi.

Despite his personal shortcomings, Newt was an effective Speaker. Pelosi isn't.

SuspectCorner
08-19-2009, 12:37 AM
Kinda what I just said... except she WOULD like a couple of Republicans to sign on to cement her case...

She'll have a hard time with a couple of the Blue Dogs, although in the end she won't need them...

She still remains the worst speaker in my lifetime... and born with a silver foot in her mouth...

You should expect to hear from the estate of former Texas governor Ann Richards - you know she had that copyrighted? Guess not. :D

trickblue
08-19-2009, 12:54 AM
You should expect to hear from the estate of former Texas governor Ann Richards - you know she had that copyrighted? Guess not. :D

I welcome ANY litigation from her estate...

Worst governor in our history...

I dealt with her first hand... you wouldn't want her to be your mother... I assure you...

She would cuss you into oblivion, while fully intending NOT to pay her bill... been there... done that...

She was an embarrassment...

She could drink... I'll give her that...

SuspectCorner
08-19-2009, 03:14 AM
I welcome ANY litigation from her estate...

Worst governor in our history...

I dealt with her first hand... you wouldn't want her to be your mother... I assure you...

She would cuss you into oblivion, while fully intending NOT to pay her bill... been there... done that...

She was an embarrassment...

She could drink... I'll give her that...

I'd always heard that about her... I like a gal that can hold her booze. :toast:

burmafrd
08-19-2009, 07:08 AM
Pelosi and company are even dumber then I thought if they think that a public option has any hope of passing now. After what the congress has heard during this recess, no way. Politicians only really care about getting re elected- and most of those Democrats that were elected in the last two elections are vulnerable on this- and THEY are the ones that will kill it.

canters
08-19-2009, 07:13 AM
I heard some speculation yesterday that Barry is willing to be a one-term POTUS if it means that he gets "health care reform" passed,,with a one-payer system included. IF true, this tellls me he knows that most folks don't want it that way, but he does not care. He must be so much of a hard core lefty type that he would risk making these folks in fly-over country so mad.

burmafrd
08-19-2009, 07:17 AM
I really REALLY doubt that is true. No way does he want to be a one term president- because in peoples minds that means failure. His ego is way too big for that.

canters
08-19-2009, 07:25 AM
I just hope he is a one termer.

sbark
08-19-2009, 07:29 AM
I could almost say that the behind the scenes leadership of the DNC, the ones that pull Obama's puppet strings are setting him for the blame....but there are the midterms in between.

The Liberals have never been this close before, they will not let this opportunity go. Its now or never as Krauthammer has stated.

The next push will be for Illegal Amnesty........to replace the votes lost in this chessmove..........

it will be another Ram-down

Doomsday101
08-19-2009, 08:14 AM
Go ahead vermin..pass it unilaterally.
November 2010 can't get here soon enough.

I agree. There are large numbers of voters out there who do not want Government ran healthcare and if passed this will motivate them to get to the polls on 2010. People are already showing the willingness to stand up against this at town hall meeting taking time from their day to fight against this bill pass it and the Dems will lose seats

TheRat
08-19-2009, 08:37 AM
I heard some speculation yesterday that Barry is willing to be a one-term POTUS if it means that he gets "health care reform" passed,,with a one-payer system included. IF true, this tellls me he knows that most folks don't want it that way, but he does not care. He must be so much of a hard core lefty type that he would risk making these folks in fly-over country so mad.
firstly it's called single payer. Secondly, none of the bills in Congress calls for that. Even though I would love for that to happen, there is about a 0% chance of that happening at least in his first term and about a 2% chance if he would have a second term.

TheRat
08-19-2009, 08:40 AM
No. It definitely goes to Pelosi.

Despite his personal shortcomings, Newt was an effective Speaker. Pelosi isn't.
How can you say that? Pelosi got cap in trade passed through the house, and basically got most of the blue dogs on board with a public option. Whether you agree with her policies or not, she has been very effective.

TheRat
08-19-2009, 08:44 AM
I welcome ANY litigation from her estate...

Worst governor in our history...

I dealt with her first hand... you wouldn't want her to be your mother... I assure you...

She would cuss you into oblivion, while fully intending NOT to pay her bill... been there... done that...

She was an embarrassment...

She could drink... I'll give her that...
I wonder if she called Bush a jerk today people would have had the same reaction.

TheRat
08-19-2009, 08:47 AM
Pelosi and company are even dumber then I thought if they think that a public option has any hope of passing now. After what the congress has heard during this recess, no way. Politicians only really care about getting re elected- and most of those Democrats that were elected in the last two elections are vulnerable on this- and THEY are the ones that will kill it.
Just like in '94 when conservative dems voted against healthcare and summarily got their collective tuchases spanked by Republicans? If there is any lesson from the '94 election is the success of conserva-dems is tied to the success of the President.

trickblue
08-19-2009, 09:03 AM
I wonder if she called Bush a jerk today people would have had the same reaction.

Well she was called a ***** quite frequently... if the shoe fits...

Richards always thought quite highly of herself even though she barely beat Clayton Williams in '90 even after his stupid rape remark. She had less than 50% of the vote but somehow thought it was a mandate. Her issue with Bush was that she took him as a lightweight in the '94 Texas Governor's race and kicked her *** by around 8 percentage points. She later admitted he was much more savvy than people gave him credit for...

DIAF
08-19-2009, 09:07 AM
Just like in '94 when conservative dems voted against healthcare and summarily got their collective tuchases spanked by Republicans? If there is any lesson from the '94 election is the success of conserva-dems is tied to the success of the President.

healthcare isn't why they got spanked.

Viper
08-19-2009, 09:08 AM
This will be feast or famine for them...

Get it right, and they rule... screw it up and they are toast...

They've had the ability to pass this all along, just wanted some from the other side to make it sound bipartisan in case it failed...

This is so true, if it works the DEMa Nazi-es:D will rule. They'll be creamed if this fails.

zrinkill
08-19-2009, 09:16 AM
This will be feast or famine for them...

Get it right, and they rule... screw it up and they are toast...

They've had the ability to pass this all along, just wanted some from the other side to make it sound bipartisan in case it failed...


This is right on the money.

Danny White
08-19-2009, 09:28 AM
Not really. Just a few "moderates" in the Democratic party wanted it to be bipartisan. Most of the Democrats could give a flip about the Republicans.

I have to respectfully disagree here...

Reid and Pelosi will browbeat the Blue Dogs into submission...

They want an ace in the hole in case it fails...

If it fails they can claim it was bipartisan no matter the number of Republicans that sign on...

If it's successful then they will turn that as very few Republicans signed on...

It's all about spin and power...

It has very little to do with "moderate" or "liberal" Democrats.

The truth is that any Democrat with an even remotely tough re-election battle looming in front of them wants to have a bi-partisan bill in order to give themselves some political cover.

ConcordCowboy
08-19-2009, 09:40 AM
Good...they need to grow a pair and get the public option.

zrinkill
08-19-2009, 09:45 AM
Good...they need to grow a pair and get the public option.


<sigh>

ConcordCowboy
08-19-2009, 09:47 AM
<sigh>

Zzzzzz...

zrinkill
08-19-2009, 09:48 AM
Zzzzzz...

If you would get a job and stop asking other people to pay for your healthcare you would not be so tired.

;)

ConcordCowboy
08-19-2009, 09:54 AM
If you would get a job and stop asking other people to pay for your healthcare you would not be so tired.

;)

Work?

I HATE work!

But I can go on this forum at work like now...so I got that going for me.

:p:

zrinkill
08-19-2009, 09:59 AM
Work?

I HATE work!

But I can go on this forum at work like now...so I got that going for me.

:p:

Be like me .... I own the damn company and I still hide that I am on a football forum.

:D

ConcordCowboy
08-19-2009, 10:04 AM
Be like me .... I own the damn company and I still hide that I am on a football forum.

:D

I know every time the door opens I'm furiously trying to close the forum window.

:D