Same to KagroX, who is the representative blogger to whom Slaughter’s staff gave one of the five media seats available in the Rules Committee room, and who has been ‘livetweeting‘ from the start – demonstrating his wit in the process. [My favorite from him I think was this swipe at the hostile manner of Rep. Sessions (at least until Sessions's retired judge father and niece showed up): RT @pourmecoffee: "Sessions quietly cleaning and loading a rifle and making out a list of names." about 3 hours ago from TweetDeck.]

KagroX rightly notes:

Again, this debate is FAR superior to any floor debate I’ve ever seen in any bill.

KagroX 38 minutes ago from TweetDeck

I concur – this has been genuine debate that informs and advances understanding. And consider – the Rules Committee and its witnesses have been genuinely debating and discussing this bill (though without taking any votes) since about 2 p.m. today, with about one hour-long break during that time. Late this evening they started letting House members present their 200 proposed amendments to the committee.

And yet, word is that the Party leadership wants no such floor debate on amendments during actual consideration of the bill. And the general practice would make 4 hours of brief, Party-centric, talking-past-each-other floor speeches on the bill seem generous, and yet there’s been 7 hours and counting of genuine debate among a small group of the most-involved legislators in this committee meeting today.

In sum: The debate we are watching today in this small room, is the democratic debate that belongs on the House floor, along with the presentation of those 200 good faith amendments from House members not on the committees of jurisdiction. But instead, in a room with very limited access, and generally no audio or video coverage by C-SPAN or anyone else (this is only the third Rules Committee meeting covered by cameras this year), the only real debate the House as a whole is likely to see on this legislation is taking place. Taking place, too, with lousy audio that has faded in and out all day so that often only one side of the debate is heard, and creaking chairs and other distractions interfere with the speakers.

There’s something wrong with this picture. And that’s the desperate attempt by the Party controlling the House to stifle democratic debate, in order to precisely guarantee, and quid-pro-quo, outcomes to the exclusion of the democratic will of the House – all as dictated, literally ‘on-high,’ from the Speaker-controlled Rules Committee meeting on the third floor of the Capitol.

This Rules Committee debate today is helping to prove that genuine “bipartisan” debate is possible in the U.S. House if regular order is adhered to and opportunity for genuine debate were preserved and possible on the floor. So that amendments offered had a realistic chance of a genuine hearing and debate, and adoption, regardless of which side offered them. The way the process is instead generally shut down by the Party is itself what leads to so much partisan sniping during floor “debates” preceding the pre-determined outcomes – which leave little for the minority to do but score political and PR points, instead of attempting substantive improvements to the legislation.

I do hope the many worthy amendments being offered tonight will be somehow merged into the base bill that’s being brought to the floor, if the Party leadership continues to refuse to allow these individual amendments a fair pro and con hearing and vote on the floor.

These guys clearly do not care about the needs of the American people

Can not stand these people who quote from the Bible and are focused on making sure that people do not have health care. So fucking hypocritical.

It really is an American plan.”

Yeah, it’s a dog, if that’s what you’re meaning to say. I think only Americans would think that health care being a commodity that corporations “compete” over is actually a good thing for people.

A friend of mine recently missed a payment on his COBRA insurance. Just one payment, easily done. Blue Cross instacancelled his insurance. He couldn’t get insurance anywhere else: he has cystic fibrosis and needs continuing treatment after a lung transplant. Luckily, Blue Cross relented. If it hadn’t, he would die. I think not letting people die is more important than “personal responsibility for one’s own insurance” but then again I am a citizen of two countries that do not require me to insure my health because both provide health care as part of, you know, being a society.

I don’t see any good reason that Democrats should think there is any virtue in including “Republican ideas”. Their world is the levee breaks and everyone without a boat drowns. Few of us have boats, and you know, technically governments are not supposed to be serving the few, but all of us.

Sorry for being such a killroy ;)