Wake Up, Health Care Spectators – It’s About to Get Interesting

“Sen. Lindsey Graham says immigration reform, an issue he’s been working on with Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, is dead on arrival if the Democrats use reconciliation to pass changes to the Senate bill.“

…They never give an inch of ground that they can keep; they keep all that they can get; they make no concessions that can redound to their own discredit; they assume all that makes for them; if they pause it is to gain time; if they offer terms it is to break them: they keep no faith with enemies: if you relax in your exertions, they persevere the more: if you make new efforts, they redouble theirs. While they give no quarter, you stand upon mere ceremony. While they are cutting your throat, or putting the gag in your mouth, you talk of nothing but liberality, freedom of inquiry, and douce humanité. Their object is to destroy you, your object is to spare them—to treat them according to your own fancied dignity. They have sense and spirit enough to take all advantages that will further their cause: you have pedantry and pusillanimity enough to undertake the defence of yours, in order to defeat it…

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/on-spirit-of-partisanship.html

I dare Lindsey Graham to kill immigration reform in retaliation. That should go over well with the GOP case.

These guys aren’t even trying with their bluffs. What’s next? Graham threatens to hold he breath until he turns blue?

BTW, does Graham have a position on Massa?

Interesting typos I chose there.

Sen. Lindsey Graham says immigration reform… is dead on arrival if the Democrats use reconciliation to pass changes to the Senate bill.
.
Yeah? Let’s see the GOP filibuster immigration reform into nothingness.
.
Let’s see just how many Latino votes that gets them.
.
Let’s see Newt Gingrich explain it on his Spanish language website.

Thanks for that Shep. I like this part too: “‘We’—i.e., the liberals, or the ‘popular cause,’ in Hazlitt’s terminology—’stand in awe of their threats, because in the absence of passion we are tender of our persons.’”
.
Connects greatly to this:
.
“Their object is to destroy you, your object is to spare them—to treat them according to your own fancied dignity”
.
As if their are rewards for being magnanimous! This is why, until we have party leaders equally poised to destroy, the dems will continue to serve as the transient, failing public servants they are, while the nation takes fleeting breathers from rightist destruction.
.
Of course, what Digby calls passion is an anachronism to our dem party leadership. If you don’t really believe in liberalism, what exactly are you going to be passionate about, other than disparaging the left. We know what the modern GOP’s passions are, we may hate everything they stand for, but passion, yup, they have it. Nothing plays more falsely than actors who don’t believe in the lines they’re reading (i.e. dem-kabuki-populism).

I hope Reid’s family doesn’t bring a frivolous lawsuit against the job-creating trucking company, stopping the economic recovery in its tracks.

From the cited Roll Call post:

Information Republicans say they have received from the Senate Parliamentarian’s Office eliminates that option. House Democratic leaders last week began looking at crafting a legislative rule that would allow the House to approve the Senate health care bill, but not forward it to Obama for his signature until the Senate clears the reconciliation package.

Hmmm… I don’t see a cited source here, other than the vague “Republicans”. And we know anonymous sources never lie, do they? Especially since they have learned that they never have to pay a price for lying to reporters these days.

Kate, do you have a single named source that can confirm this claim? It frankly smells like Republican FUD to me.

F@cking awesome quote—thanks, Shep!

I wonder how long it is before a Republican pol or conservative media pundit says one of two things:

a) Reid’s family tragedy is a good thing because it could hurt the chances of passing health care reform with the majority leader preoccupied;

b) This is a sign from the almighty himself that health care reform is wrong and should be stopped.

I hate to be so cynical, but the conservative right has proved again and again that they have no qualms to stooping to the lowest moral levels to advocate their cause.

Having said that, I wish Senator Reid’s wife and daughter a full and speedy recovery!

For those of you dozing off, perk up. Next week is shaping up to be a big one.

Not to be glib, dear Kate, but Swampland is not inhabited by very many “dozers”…

You say “retaliation”, I say, “reconciliation”…
.
“does Graham have a position on Massa?” ……………………….depends on how the “probe” is doing…

“Of course, what Digby calls passion is an anachronism to our dem party leadership.”
.
Maybe she can tell but I’m never quite sure who Hazlitt is really insulting. Obviously he “admires” conservative passion as a political tool.
.
The trouble is, and I’m sure this is how our technocratic functionaries in the middle see it, passion is emotion and emotion is irrationality and irrationality is no foundation for effective public policy. Second, passionate destruction is authoritarianism and that attracts a certain kind of follower who is unlikely to recognize their “actors who don’t believe in the lines they’re reading (i.e. [Repub]-kabuki-populism)”. Third, there’s no impartial third-party to tell the rest of the public the truth about dispassion in service of effective public policy vs. the destructive passions of movement conservatism.

Hmm.. Reid’s letter to McConnell more than just informed the Repugs that reconciliation will be used.
.
“..the vast majority of bills developed through reconciliation were passed by Republican Congresses and signed into law by Republican Presidents – including President Bush’s massive, budget-busting tax breaks for multi-millionaires. ”
.
“Given this history, one might conclude that Republicans believe a majority vote is sufficient to increase the deficit and benefit the super-rich, but not to reduce the deficit and benefit the middle class. Alternatively, perhaps Republicans believe a majority vote is appropriate only when Republicans are in the majority. Either way, we disagree.”

LOL.. I wonder what freeper has to say to that?

Instead we get Wolf Blitzer’s “Department of Jihad”.

No wonder Lindsey has been trying to make all this hay on Cap and Trade and Guantanomo, it was to set up his blackmail.
Earlier this week I asked one of the WaPo reporters during their daily “chats” why anyone would try to negotiate with Lindesey Graham, who is such a dishonest little creep that he lied to the Supreme Court during the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case. The reporter said because Obama wanted something “really bad”.
Effing stupid on the part of everyone from the White House to the Washington Post.

Here is what will happen:
-
1. House confers with Senate to develop a bulletproof reconciliation bill that will pass muster with parliamentarian.
-
2. 50 Senators will agree to passing reconciliation bill as is and vow to vote against any and all amendments to the bill, ensuring that there is no “ping pong” back to House.
-
3. House will pass reconciliation bill and send it to the Senate so they can schedule it.
-
4. Once the Senate officially schedules the time to deal with it, the House will pass the Senate Bill.
-
5. Obama will sign the Senate Bill like 2 hours before the Senate starts debate on the reconciliation package.
-
6. Senate passes reconciliation and sends to president for quick signature.

I’m wondering who the first winger will be who suggests that Obama called out a hit on Reid’s family so they could get a sympathy vote?
-
Just a couple more bodies on his “death list”.
-
http://myrightwingdad.blogspot.com/2008/07/fw-obama-death-list.html

Shep: Can you point to this “effective public policy” I keep hearing about?
.
Pafro, your first mistake was finding yourself in the sordid cyber-cafe known as washingtonpost.com. My hometown paper, I’ve not been back since Froomkin, Dan (i.e. coup de grâce)

Why would the Democrats drag out another Tea Pot/Mad Hatter issue during an election year? All they are doing is giving the other side a shovel to hit them over rthe head with. Blame it on Graham and the Republicans and wait until 2011.

Yeah, because if they bail now the teabaggers are sure to just give em a pass on the whole thing.
You should give my Representative a call. Ann Kirkpatrick might just be stupid enough to believe you.

Thanks shepherd. And jc– great:
.
what Digby calls passion is an anachronism to our dem party leadership. If you don’t really believe in liberalism, what exactly are you going to be passionate about, other than disparaging the left. We know what the modern GOP’s passions are, we may hate everything they stand for, but passion, yup, they have it. Nothing plays more falsely than actors who don’t believe in the lines they’re reading.
.
It dovetails nicely into Greenwald’s (link) piece today (it referred to the D’s stance on war and terror, but easily could be about healthcare or the public option):
.
One minute (Dems) were national security hawks cheering for Bush’s invasion (when that was popular) and the next minute they were anti-war candidates self-righteously criticizing the invasion (when the war became unpopular). Whether one agreed with their original view or their election-year view mattered little; what was clear is that they were poll-driven opportunists with no core beliefs who were eager to shift with the slightest change in wind. That — far more than any specific position on war and Terrorism — is what makes Democrats appear to be weak losers, and it’s what they’ve been doing… for years and years.
.
That’s the same mindset that led Democrats to pretend to want to end the Iraq War so that they could win the 2006 mid-term election by exploiting anti-war sentiment, but then, once they won, continue to fund the war without limits or conditions because they were politically afraid to follow through on their alleged convictions… Agree or disagree with whatever national security position Democrats happen to be espousing at the moment, what rational person would look at behavior like this and view such individuals as anything other than weak, mewling cowards?

Dang…sounds like Reid actually grew a pair. Who knew?

Pfft..yeah. To think that if the Dems had buckled down and seen this thing through a year ago, right now, we’d be talking about…what?…DADT? More Jobs Stumuli? The rebounding Dow?
.
Sad…

Sigh… Pickert writes: “The fact that House Democrats were hoping both chambers could pass a series of fixes to the Senate bill before the Senate bill itself is passed shows how much distrust there is right now within the ranks of congressional Democrats.”

Maybe. Or maybe it shows that Democrats fear that Republicans will somehow stall the reconciliation. Or that Republicans will launch a cynical mid-term campaign against what is signed into law without mentioning what’s changed soon after. Shouldn’t Pickert at least include other completely likely possibilities?

“Shep: Can you point to this “effective public policy” I keep hearing about?”
.
Only through their own, self-serving eyes (and the policies serve them very well, as a matter of fact).

Thank you Tom, I would like to know if this has been confirmed. Please Kate?

You guys sound like a bunch of magpies, strutting around, puffed up and self congratulatory. Celebrating what? The passage of a DEEPLY flawed health care bill, that could easily break the system it was designed (using the term VERY loosely) to fix. Pass it at ALL cost and FIX it later, our great leader tells us. What a cruel joke Obama is playing on America and it will COST the Democrats dearly, come election time. So by all means, keep celebrating , your mirth will soon be howls of anguish and despair.

I find this planted story particularly suspicious as past Senate Parliamentarians have already made public statements to the contrary.

Somebody seems to have got up on the wrong side of the bed today.. Anyways, its time to back to bed.. earljr1.

Great commentary.

[...] that could easily break the system it was designed (using the term VERY loosely) to fix.

Good. Honestly, that’s what I would call win-win.

What digby said. She always has it nailed.

earl: Can you contribute more than your usual the “Democrats will RUE the day” comments. Between you and freepers “looney left” it is so predictable.

None of us are celebrating. We are hoping that the Dems manage to do some good for the country. This is not something we expect from the right.

Because they want to witness how fast McCain, the Maverick, will back pedal on immigration reform.

The Senate parliamentarian says that President Obama must sign the Senate health reform bill before the Senate can vote on a package of changes to the legislation. (The parliamentarian issued the ruling after GOP lawmakers requested he do so.
>
>

Daily Kos has this to say:
.
”
The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress’ original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package, senior GOP sources said Thursday.

The Senate Parliamentarian’s Office was responding to questions posed by the Republican leadership. The answers were provided verbally, sources said.

It’s amazing that the parliamentarian, who does not talk to the press, is reported by anonymous Republicans to have verbally told Republicans exactly what those Republicans wanted Democrats to hear.

Could it be true? Sure.

But it’s also the opposite of what former Senate parliamentarian Bob Dove said, and he said it on the record:

Dove says the Dems’ planned use of reconciliation is highly unusual. “I’ve never seen a two-bill strategy” where reconciliation is used to fix another piece of legislation, he says. “It’s permissible, I’ve just never seen it.”

Why would he say that? Because the law appears to say so, too:

§ 641. Reconciliation

(a) Inclusion of reconciliation directives in concurrent resolutions on the budget
A concurrent resolution on the budget for any fiscal year, to the extent necessary to effectuate the provisions and requirements of such resolution, shall—
(1) specify the total amount by which—
(A) new budget authority for such fiscal year;
(B) budget authority initially provided for prior fiscal years;
(C) new entitlement authority which is to become effective during such fiscal year; and
(D) credit authority for such fiscal year,
contained in laws, bills, and resolutions within the jurisdiction of a committee, is to be changed and direct that committee to determine and recommend changes to accomplish a change of such total amount;

As does the Congressional Research Service (PDF):

Congress and the President could use reconciliation procedures to quickly make any adjustments in existing law or pending legislation that were required to achieve budget policies as they changed between the adoption of the spring and fall budget resolutions. “

your mirth will soon be howls of anguish and despair.
.
You know, I loved your work in “Silence of the Lambs.”

Adriel Bettelheim, Managing Editor at Congressional Quarterly, Tweets this:

Senate parliamentarian telling hill staff that GOP aides misinterpreted his opinion on health care + reconciliation process. #hcr

allthings,
.
Is “misinterpreted” a synonym for “spun” or “out-and-out lied about”?

Pickert, you owe us a correction, at least.

According to Congressional Quarterly:

The parliamentarian, however, later reportedly clarified his position to Senate aides, saying that the reconciliation bill could be written in a way that would not require Obama to sign the Senate bill into law before the reconciliation bill is voted on.

In other words, the anonymous Republicans were lying.

Again.

As always.

When will you reporters learn? If they won’t let you print their names, you shouldn’t print what they tell you.

a) Why all the trickery, deceit, and smoke and mirrors? If this is a good bill that the majority of Americans want, why is it is necessary to Rahm it down the throats of our citizens?

b) I don’t expect this post to survive because, like others that have never made it to the page, it doesn’t agree with the liberal left wing anti-American agenda of the few wackos that repeatedly post here.

c) My last post had a connection to a you tube video of Congressman Mike Rogers of MI pointing out some very disturbing aspects of this legislation. I’m positive that exposing any other troubling and back breaking provisions of either bill (House or Senate) would not make it to these pages. The left wing coup can not afford top lose any more sheep.

If there is such a crisis in health care, why do these provisions only begin years after this Bill passes yet the numerous tax increases and medicare cuts begin immediately?