For almost a year, President Obama has spent countless hours trying to woo Olympia Snowe to support heath care reform. He has been willing to bend over backwards to give in to almost every one of her demands. It is very unfortunate that Snowe decided to use her new-found power for evil instead of good.
Snowe used her leverage to almost exclusively ensure very bad ideas made their way into the final bill. She fought to reduce the minimum actuarial value of “qualified” insurance to 60%. A level that I feel every health care policy experts would define as junk insurance. She was instrumental in making sure that the state regulation-gutting “nationwide plans,” much sought after by insurance companies, remained in the bill.
Even though Snowe claimed her top concern was to ensure reform would make health care affordable, many of her demands will end up making health care reform more expensive for the government and the average American consumer. She made sure John Kerry ‘s amendment to turn the new state-based exchanges into prudent purchasers failed. Despite the fact that the CBO concluded a public option would reduce costs for the government and bring down average premiums on the exchange, Snowe threatened to filibuster the bill if it contained a public option.
Not everyone of Olympia Snowe’s health care reform ideas are terrible. She has one very good idea that has broad, bipartisan support and is proven to “bend the cost curve.” That idea is Byron Dorgan’s amendment to allow for drug reimportation, which she has cosponsored. It would finally give Americans the legal right to buy the exact same drugs for less money from Canada or Europe.
The amendment will bend the cost curve and improve affordability. The CBO projects that it will save the government $19 billion, and the American consumer roughly $100 billion over ten years. This is the only idea I have heard from Snowe that will actually deal with her reported concerns about cost without reducing quality.
Instead of killing the public option, or reducing minimum qualified insurance to junk level, why did Snowe not make this reimportation amendment one of her top demands? Why was a bipartisan, proven method to instantly provide relief for millions of Americans not the number one “must have” concession on her list? I think it is likely if she took a hard line on the issue, Obama would have traded it to her in exchange for a final vote on cloture. Senator Snowe, why did you not use your power for good?
The only thing sadder than Snowe’s failure on the matter is Obama’s complete betrayal. He repeatedly campaigned on the issue, but quietly traded it away to PhRMA with a sweetheart deal. Now, the president is resorting to Karl Rove-style dirty tricks to kill an amendment he once cosponsored. His FDA commissioner penned a ridiculous letter against Dorgan’s amendment. Maybe there was nothing Snowe could have done. It is possible Obama is so in bed with the drug industry that he would not have considered breaking his secret deal, even to win Snowe’s vote, should it be needed to pass the bill.



37 Comments








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Obama is using Karl Rove-style dirty tricks to kill the amendment? Seriously? I would be very surprised if that was true – I wasn’t aware he’d even lifted a finger to protect the PhRMA deal. Can you tell us what you’re referring to? I hope it’s not just that little joke of an FDA letter – Karl Rove wouldn’t even sneeze on that.
Betrayal
The FDA letter and his anti endorsement of the amendment that he cosponsored only 20 month ago.
When you campaign on a promise, it is 5 yards from the endzone and you spike the ball that is betrayal.
THX again, Jon! This is now THE principal question facing Dems. Do they have the nerve to pass a HealthCare Bill without ONE ckear and significant benefit in it for the majority of Americans?
Can you point me to his “anti-endorsement” of this amendment? I’m trying to gather facts about what Obama’s really doing.
Obama has not endorsed the amendment. Given that it has five Republicans cosponsors his endorsement is all that is needed to pass it. http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/71387-obama-supports-re-importation-but-fda-doesnt
Yes. The FDA letter is allowing Republicans and Democrats to go the floor against it, quoting from the letter. And yes, Obama specifically stated that he would allow negotiation for drugs and seriously criticized others from doing so. This is a flat out betrayal of what he campaigned on. And i still have hope for him.
But that hope is getting weaker. Can’t you just see the campaign ads on this and on the increased health care costs to the lower and middle classes? (no new tax, eh? it will feel like a new tax to these people).
I hope Dorgan wins!!!! Vote for that amendment, y’all.
Thank you for that link! But you must read it the same way I do, that Obama wholeheartedly backs Dorgan and never intended to keep the deal. This proves what I’ve thought all along – Obama is a masterful operator. He’s really so much smarter than almost everyone that even those of us who agree with him sometimes get confused by his jujitsu. But I think this makes it all clear, from the article you cited:
“Dorgan recently said that a senior White House official denied the assertion that the president would oppose drug re-importation provisions in healthcare reform.”
BFF = Big Fuckin’ Fool…
Jon Walker: I continue to be sadly surprised by the writing here at FDL on the topic of health care reform. Only Hamsher makes any sense, and that is because she has gone from the shock and denial phase to the anger phase. In your writing, you are expressing surprise that elected officials in particular those surrounding the Democrat leadership are not working to make a genuine reform. It has been clear for some time now that neither Obama nor the vaunted Democrat majority nor the “centrists” of the GOP are interested in creating any reform that directly prioritizes making a better system from the standpoint of the broad public.
The goal is to a) create an upwards wealth redistribution scheme that benefits the health insurance and pharmaceutical cartels, and b) to make a salable fiction to present to the base and “independent” voters for the imminent election year.
The time is long gone for expressing dismay or shock in the face of the naked corruption of the Obama team and its Congressional allies. The time for anger is here, now. These parasites we looked to for leadership and hope last year need to suffer a complete loss of support from their supposed base, the most complete loss possible. I am talking about the need for the Democrats to face the worst mid-term election losses for an incumbent White House party since Charlemagne.
My, oft typed words: O hasn’t disappointed me yet.
Think that’s the 6th stage of grief, beyond acceptance.
Am I the only one who, at first glance, thought Snowe was winking in that picture?
Please cut that out, Senator. It’s giving me nasty debate flashbacks.
Chicago.
I used to be confused about O’s Afghan strategy. But then this chart made it perfectly clear.
From the 2008 election cycle here are the top recipients of pharmaceutical funding in the Senate [plus President Obama]:
1 Obama, Barack (D) $1,123,228
2 Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $342,874
3 McCain, John (R) $308,588
4 McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $195,450
5 Specter, Arlen (R-PA) $169,700
6 Baucus, Max (D-MT) $162,220
7 Cornyn, John (R-TX) $105,200
8 Coleman, Norm (R-MN) $102,100
9 Alexander, Lamar (R-TN) $92,950
10 Enzi, Mike (R-WY) $92,500
11 Lautenberg, Frank R (D-NJ) $90,300
12 Sununu, John E (R-NH) $83,000
13 Smith, Gordon H (R-OR) $78,800
14 Roberts, Pat (R-KS) $77,250
15 Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $76,800
16 Collins, Susan M (R-ME) $73,800
17 Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA) $72,050
18 Dole, Elizabeth (R-NC) $69,450
19 Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) $64,950
20 Harkin, Tom (D-IA) $62,000
george:
Snowe isn’t even on the list.
Below are the recipients of funding from the pharmaceuticals/health products industry—all U.S. Senators plus President Obama:
Obama, Barack (D) $2,135,376
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $689,099
McCain, John (R) $671,722
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $353,035
Baucus, Max (D-MT) $337,864
Specter, Arlen (R-PA) $283,699
Coleman, Norm (R-MN) $267,678
Cornyn, John (R-TX) $184,796
Harkin, Tom (D-IA) $177,682
Smith, Gordon H (R-OR) $176,200
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) $171,899
Enzi, Mike (R-WY) $151,000
Sununu, John E (R-NH) $139,355
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) $137,700
Collins, Susan M (R-ME) $117,300
Lautenberg, Frank R (D-NJ) $117,000
Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $115,200
Dole, Elizabeth (R-NC) $114,460
Alexander, Lamar (R-TN) $111,350
Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA) $102,250
Barrasso, John A (R-WY) $86,889
Salazar, Ken (D-CO) $83,350
Murray, Patty (D-WA) $81,250
Rockefeller, Jay (D-WV) $75,250
Voinovich, George V (R-OH) $74,650
Reid, Harry (D-NV) $72,150
Burr, Richard (R-NC) $70,748
Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) $66,650
Durbin, Dick (D-IL) $64,500
Wicker, Roger (R-MS) $63,100
Kennedy, Edward M (D-MA) $62,690
Graham, Lindsey (R-SC) $62,120
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) $60,704
Cochran, Thad (R-MS) $59,500
Kerry, John (D-MA) $57,080
Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI) $51,118
Reed, Jack (D-RI) $49,800
Pryor, Mark (D-AR) $46,900
Hatch, Orrin G (R-UT) $46,100
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL) $44,550
Bennett, Robert F (R-UT) $43,544
Menendez, Robert (D-NJ) $35,800
Boxer, Barbara (D-CA) $29,300
Brown, Sherrod (D-OH) $28,800
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) $27,600
Crapo, Mike (R-ID) $25,550
Biden, Joseph R Jr (D-DE) $25,275
Nelson, Ben (D-NE) $23,750
Levin, Carl (D-MI) $23,700
Coburn, Tom (R-OK) $23,551
Mikulski, Barbara A (D-MD) $22,997
Conrad, Kent (D-ND) $22,750
Leahy, Patrick (D-VT) $22,350
Bond, Christopher “Kit” (R-MO) $19,800
Gregg, Judd (R-NH) $19,500
Kyl, Jon (R-AZ) $19,000
Stevens, Ted (R-AK) $18,600
DeMint, James W (R-SC) $18,300
Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) $18,000
Inhofe, James M (R-OK) $17,750
Corker, Bob (R-TN) $17,550
Cardin, Ben (D-MD) $17,500
Nelson, Bill (D-FL) $17,500
Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $17,000
Brownback, Sam (R-KS) $15,000
Johnson, Tim (D-SD) $15,000
Domenici, Pete V (R-NM) $14,550
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK) $14,500
Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX) $14,300
Lott, Trent (R-MS) $12,300
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA) $11,800
Vitter, David (R-LA) $10,500
Tester, Jon (D-MT) $9,500
Thune, John (R-SD) $9,000
Dorgan, Byron L (D-ND) $7,500
Feingold, Russ (D-WI) $7,458
Martinez, Mel (R-FL) $7,000
Inouye, Daniel K (D-HI) $6,700
Klobuchar, Amy (D-MN) $6,500
Bunning, Jim (R-KY) $6,000
Casey, Bob (D-PA) $5,500
Carper, Tom (D-DE) $5,000
Webb, James (D-VA) $5,000
Akaka, Daniel K (D-HI) $4,000
Hagel, Chuck (R-NE) $3,550
Craig, Larry (R-ID) $3,100
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA) $2,500
Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $2,500
Ensign, John (R-NV) $2,000
Lugar, Richard G (R-IN) $2,000
McCaskill, Claire (D-MO) $2,000
Snowe, Olympia J (R-ME) $2,000
Bingaman, Jeff (D-NM) $1,500
Byrd, Robert C (D-WV) $1,000
Lieberman, Joe (I-CT) $1,000
george:
Snowe is near the very bottom of the list.
So it can’t be crony capitalism, right? Not on her part. Not with respect to the pharmaceutical industry.
On the other hand, the role Barack Obama has played in this farce so far sure makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?
yeah, either that, or there was something else obama, clinton, and mccain had in common.
So do you have an hypothesis as to why Snowe is against all the medical reform proposals? (BTW, thanks for the data.)
Cheap drugs is THE way to win Americans hearts…
If I were president… I would hand our free valium.. especially to the wingnuts.
mikesong, the (genuinely) “bipartisan” Dorgan amendment (with 30 co-sponsors) was introduced on the floor of the Senate last evening (along with one Republican-sponsored amendment). Yet, despite no other amendment votes on the bill today, no vote has yet been scheduled on either amendment, despite Dorgan openly assuming both amendments would be voted on this evening.
Yet now no votes are expected this evening either according to Harry Reid just after 5 p.m. this afternoon, as I’ve posted in a few of the recent, fast-moving threads here:
Note: Just as I finished writing this, Harry Reid came to the floor to recess the Senate for an hour so that the Democrats could adjourn to a caucus meeting to be told about the privately-negotiated deal that is being foisted upon them. The Senate will reconvene at 6:15 p.m. for debate only for another hour. And then Reid added quickly that there won’t be any votes after the Senate reconvenes because they “can’t be arranged.”
The intentional secrecy of the backroom negotiations prevents us from knowing why those two votes – or even one vote – “can’t be arranged” (or why 60 votes are being required to pass every amendment, by unanimous consent). Doesn’t that unexplained delay at least raise a question in your mind, knowing about the secret White House/Baucus PhRMA deal, which Democrat Bob Menendez (Chair of the DSCC) for one, has openly resisted?
Please, please, everyone, leave room in your assumptions for the plausible-deniability tactics of Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama, particularly on popular provisions (like the public option), as they jerk around Harry Reid and the Senate, with his blessing, behind the scenes. They are intentionally and knowingly abusing the secrecy of the process that the Party has imposed on Congress to work the will of Party campaign donors, as all public indications make quite clear.
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN2_rm.aspx
Posh, not valium, but free Cialis to all the males (including husbands) of members of both houses.
Won’t work on ‘em. They need lithium, at least.
What they shared in common a year ago of course was their proximity to the White House.
Wall Street has always played a fundamental role in selecting the candidates we go about electing.
In fact, that is where “democrcy” comes into play. The top candidates strut there stuff to the Big Buckmeisters and the Big Buckmeisters place their bets.
Indeed, wait until the Supreme Court decrees that campaign finance laws are unconstitutional. That’s when the “money democracy” will go through the roof. The amounts will be so embarrassing the mainstream media will have to double down on keeping them from the public.
But Chris Matthews and his ilk will find a way. Hopefully, Rachel Maddow will then double down on exposing it all the more.
(lamenting the loss of luudes)
I’m surprised that free Cialis has not been written into healthcare legislation. Abortion services out–Cialis in.
Senator Dorgan has been trying to get this legislation passed for years. With friends like too many of his fellow Democrats you don’t need enemies…or an opposition party.
Has anybody gotten a straight answer from Snowe or any of these other characters on just how Big Pharma and Big Insurance are going to suddenly turn honest and be held accountable
ifwhen they’re not?Any media person asking? At all? Whups, shiny object…Tiger’s penis. Or Chee-knee’s sociopathic anti-American babble. Or Sarah’s faux writing…..
Kinda makes me wish I was still back in the Blue Mermaid enjoying the sausage and mussel chowder.
If I were I guy, I’d look for the small print to insert that. We need to scrub the final legislation carefully for such gems.
I”m skippin this thread other than to suggest:
“Legalize pot, grow yer own, put an END to the high cost of drugs!”
*G*
(not meant to trivialize ANY one (like me) using any scrips for any reasons as part of health issues)
And for those of you out there who depend on life saving drugs to help you I’m all for legalizing imports and ending the fucking time lapses on development of generics.
Fuck the free market, they are NOT paying for the research, development and trials of new drugs.
We the people are, thru university’s, and med schools, are paying for the 99% bulk of it, the pharms and others come in at the end and buy off the fucking regulatory body’s in question to PASS shit thru the FDA.
Private sector competition does NOT exist, and it’s a fallacy that it promotes and pays and supports development and production of life saving inovations in ANY sector.
Fucking Harumph.
(first time today I’ve been really pissed off)
Carry on. My bad. I ranted.
I don’t know.
I was, of course, surprised to discover this myself. Whenever a discussion revolves around a Congressional vote the first place I go is opensecrets.org. This is by far the best site to go to [in my view] when you want to find out about campaign contributions and Congress.
I was expecting her to be way up on the lists. But no.
For the insurance industry, same thing—-she’s not in the top 20 for 2008:
1 McCain, John (R) $2,451,306
2 Obama, Barack (D) $2,314,070
3 Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $1,216,240
4 Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $857,006
5 McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $400,583
6 Coleman, Norm (R-MN) $396,379
7 Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) $344,736
8 Sununu, John E (R-NH) $303,804
9 Cornyn, John (R-TX) $287,569
10 Dole, Elizabeth (R-NC) $284,662
11 Baucus, Max (D-MT) $281,350
12 Smith, Gordon H (R-OR) $232,650
13 Collins, Susan M (R-ME) $215,700
14 Reed, Jack (D-RI) $202,050
15 Wicker, Roger (R-MS) $170,200
16 Johnson, Tim (D-SD) $164,586
17 Roberts, Pat (R-KS) $158,900
18 Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) $157,249
19 Reid, Harry (D-NV) $148,900
20 Durbin, Dick (D-IL) $135,400
FYI:
Here is a snapshot of the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry for the 2010 race [so far]:
[notice how evenly dispersed democrats and republicans are. To Wall Street they are both the same]
1 Burr, Richard (R-NC) $66,900
2 Murray, Patty (D-WA) $47,550
3 Specter, Arlen (D-PA) $46,700
4 Reid, Harry (D-NV) $43,900
5 Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $43,800
6 Hatch, Orrin G (R-UT) $41,800
7 Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) $36,100
8 Mikulski, Barbara A (D-MD) $35,224
9 Coburn, Tom (R-OK) $33,000
10 Crapo, Mike (R-ID) $31,000
10 Bayh, Evan (D-IN) $31,000
12 Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) $29,500
13 Bennett, Robert F (R-UT) $27,000
14 Leahy, Patrick (D-VT) $26,200
14 Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) $26,200
16 Nelson, Ben (D-NE) $21,500
17 Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $17,800
18 Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) $17,400
19 Carper, Tom (D-DE) $17,200
20 Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $14,900
Also, the pharmaceutical/healthcare products industry for 2010 [so far]:
1 Burr, Richard (R-NC) $129,219
2 Reid, Harry (D-NV) $113,600
3 Hatch, Orrin G (R-UT) $106,985
4 Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) $86,050
5 Murray, Patty (D-WA) $85,550
6 Specter, Arlen (D-PA) $84,850
7 Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $77,350
8 Mikulski, Barbara A (D-MD) $67,374
9 Bayh, Evan (D-IN) $58,837
10 Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) $50,600
11 Crapo, Mike (R-ID) $48,121
12 Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) $46,500
12 Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) $46,500
14 Bennett, Robert F (R-UT) $45,000
15 Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $38,150
16 Coburn, Tom (R-OK) $37,000
17 Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $35,700
18 Casey, Bob (D-PA) $31,700
19 Leahy, Patrick (D-VT) $29,700
20 Brown, Sherrod (D-OH) $26,500
Finally the insurance industry 2010 so far:
1 Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $188,100
2 Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $137,250
3 Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) $125,450
4 Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) $112,550
5 Reid, Harry (D-NV) $106,500
6 Bennett, Robert F (R-UT) $96,900
7 Bayh, Evan (D-IN) $84,100
8 Burr, Richard (R-NC) $81,700
9 Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) $79,600
10 Crapo, Mike (R-ID) $77,650
11 Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) $75,850
12 Murray, Patty (D-WA) $67,650
13 Thune, John (R-SD) $67,200
14 DeMint, James W (R-SC) $65,800
15 Nelson, Ben (D-NE) $63,000
16 Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $54,600
17 Ensign, John (R-NV) $48,526
18 Vitter, David (R-LA) $46,700
19 Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) $46,600
20 Dorgan, Byron L (D-ND) $45,500
To make sure there is no misunderstanding caused by my garbled sentence above mentioning Bob Menendez, my second-to-last paragraph above should have read:
The intentional secrecy of the backroom negotiations prevents us from knowing why those two votes – or even one vote – “can’t be arranged” (or why 60 votes are being required to pass every amendment, by unanimous consent). Doesn’t that unexplained delay at least raise a question in [mikesong's] mind, knowing about the once-secret White House/Baucus PhRMA deal, which Democrat Bob Menendez, (Chair of the DSCC) for one, has openly assisted, by publicly opposing the Dorgan amendment?
[Also, FYI, the (public...) Senate is now adjourned for the night.]
For Goodness Sakes! Somebody went wild with Photoshop on that photo. Her face looks like a baby’s butt.
it seems like you have some good points, but no links, so i’m not sure how Reid suddenly acquired the ability to summarily shut off debate without 60 cloture votes.
Not being a Mainer I can’t get into her email to ask her this – but I sure hope her constituents are asking her to justify the plans and amendments she’s proposing by comparing what would have happened to both her parents and her adoptive Uncle under her schemes.
Her morther died of breast cancer when she was not even a teen. Her father died about a year later of respiratory disease. She was then adopted and her Uncle passed away from a heart attack. Plenty of hardships that one would think would make her a tad more sensitive on this issue than she is.
All of these people who cared for were working class. All would benefit from a strong public option, an extension of Medicare, or Universal Health Care. They could have received early diagnosis, perhaps have been able to adopt their lifestyle an kept their family together.
But Snowe seems particular hardened to dealing with the human side of peoples suffering. Has she simply eliminated any emotional bond with her parents? Has she so cast her fate in with the insurance companies that she would have no problem having her parents live their last years out of a box on the street? That’s what her dilatory and blocking tactics seem destined to accomplish for many working class people in identical circumstances.
Mainers should challenge her on this point.Imagine if she was a Senator at the time her parents were alive. Would her parents be able to obtain insurance under the status quo? Or would she toss them to their deaths? Would her Uncle and Aunt be tossed in destitution? And what if her first husband had survived as a paraplegic…would the insurance industry have found a way to pare away his care until he was langoring in poverty?
“Fucking Harumph.”
Hey, didn’t Major Hoople used to make that noise?!
Thanks for that. TPM has also been documenting this. It’s as clear as it can be barring a bald admission by the Obama admin that they’re using conservative Dems and Republicans as cover in an effort to pass anything they can while not making waves for moneyed players. Pharma and ins. industry PACs will come in handy in ’12; they’ll need lots of airtime to overcome public outrage over skyrocketing premiums for junk insurance.
Here’s a link, mikesong, and an excerpt, demonstrating – at least if you understand the usual meaning and practice of “reaching a broader agreement on…a set amount of amendments” – that Reid (as explained by his chief spokesman Manley) was initiating the effort to require 60 votes on amendments to this bill (allegedly so as to be able to prevent and control “30-second attack ad” threats):
Hundreds of amendments have now been filed on this bill, by Senators of both Parties. [You like links, here's a link to all 78 amendments filed yesterday alone, and their text. (Don't be fooled by the nomenclature; H.R. 3590 is the Senate health care bill, because of a Reid substitute amendment - SA 2786 - that has been offered on the misleadingly-titled empty shell of a House bill.]
But every one of those amendments is first going through a politically-motivated backroom Party filter controlled by Harry Reid (doubtless in consultation – secretly, so as not to alert trusting Obama supporters like you – with the White House) and Mitch McConnell. As a result, only something around or under 15-20 amendments and motions to commit (at least several of which have been non-binding “Sense of the Senate” amendments) have actually been able to reach the floor for debate or a vote in a week and a half of floor time (weekend included).
Only after that privately-conducted filtering lets an amendment through (always two at a time – one offered by a member of each Party), are Senators able to call up their amendment (as Dorgan did Tuesday evening after the Nelson amendment had been tabled) without hearing an objection on the floor. Usually, by that time, the timing of the vote has also been at least informally established, and a unanimous consent request readied to set that time, and to require a 60-vote margin for passage. The second step of actually setting a time to vote, as I’ve noted, has not been reached on the Dorgan amendment (nor was it on the tabled Nelson abortion amendment) for unknown reasons.
A reminder: The United States Senate exists for the use of United States Senators. The fact that these Senators – from both Parties – voluntarily sit through this politically-driven Party manipulation in the backroom, where their amendments are cherry-picked without public accountability, so as to prevent them from calling up their filed amendments, or asking for a simple majority vote (and exposing the actual objectors, if any), is a disgrace. [Apparently, at least on the majority side, one incentive for not making too much of a scene is the fact that those Senators have hopes of seeing their proposals simply swept up into one massive "manager's amendment" at the end, without the Senate ever conducting a separate debate or vote on the measures.]
Another reminder, which goes most directly to your reply: If any offered Democratic amendment is truly opposed by a Republican or the Republican caucus, that Republican Senator or caucus is not going to agree to it being brought to the floor, even with a 60-vote margin for passage (which the Democratic caucus alone can reach), via Unanimous Consent Agreement. Instead that Republican Senator or caucus, provided real obstruction is their motive, is going to hold out for the days of guaranteed delay they can painlessly obtain simply by withholding consent and forcing the filing of a cloture motion, should the Democrats in fact be committed to the amendment (and so long as the Democratic leadership continues to refuse to force Republicans to publicly object or filibuster).
In short: We have no proof that Republican objections to proceeding to amendments are the cause for the 60-vote margins needed to pass every offered amendment. But Harry Reid thanks everyone – especially the gullible types in the media – for simply assuming that, unquestioningly, so that he can quietly get on about the backroom business of rigging the amendment process for the Party’s donors, and stifling the democratic will of the Senate, in service to the desires of the White House.
Ok, thanks for the reply with even more info, now I think I understand what you mean. Tell me if I’ve got this wrong: in order for an amendment even to be brought up for debate, it needs 60 votes (never mind whether we think it should if we were interpreting Senate rules.) So because of the math of the current Senate, that means that if the Republicans hold together and refuse to give consent to debate, they can force all 60 Dems to unite or else nothing can be considered? And you’re saying that even if some Republicans like Snowe really do like an amendment, party dynamics in their current state will usually prevent her from actually letting the amendment go to the floor?
Do I have that right? If so, that definitely sucks. But now what I’m unclear on is why this is Reid or Obama’s fault? Assuming my summary of your info is right and if so of course the WH knows all this. So their calculation all along would have been not to support anything without a very broad support in the Democratic party, because that would mean such a provision couldn’t either get brought to the floor or have enough support to persuade Reid to put it in the bill. So I guess my question if I do have this premise right, is whether re-importation does have broad support in the Democratic Caucus that Obama is stifling, or whether Menendez is just the tip of the iceberg of sellouts, and Obama’s just bowing to that reality?
The way that the Canadian government arranged for prescription drugs to be far lower cost than they are in the US is that Big Pharma was trying to lobby the Canadian government for longer patents (to keep generics off the market longer). The Canadian government gladly gave them longer patents, in exhange for GOVERNMENT NEGOTIATED PRICE CONTROLS. The result was drug prices that are about 40% of what they are in the US. I guess the US government is not smart enough (or maybe bought out by Big Pharma) to have negotiated a similar deal.
About the only difference in prescriptions between Canada and the US is:
In Canada, cortisone needs a prescription and codeine is sold over the counter.
In the US, cortisone is sold over the counter and codeine requires a prescription.