Thank you Nancy Pelosi !
She’s been saying all along that she can’t pass in house without public option even after the blue dogs. She’s been the only one pushing it.

I hope Reid finally listens to Pelosi instead of WH and passes public option with reconciliation. Maybe 51 dem senators can convince Reid.

Thanks Jon, this is best news.

“n her interview with Roll Call, Pelosi stopped short of saying the filibuster should be done away with altogether, but she used some of her bluntest language yet to defend the use of reconciliation as something that has been used with regularity by Republican and Democratic presidents alike.”

Seems like they are inching there way towards changing the filibuster rules

There are two plausable reasons for Obama’s “demand” hcr meet the 60 vote threshhold.
First, The Senate Bill was THE Bill Obama wanted.
Second, The Senate didn’t have 51 votes to pass a more reasoned Bill structured to benefit the majority of Democratic voters.
Either case is depressing.

Most real Dems in DC, know that the white house is full of Neo Liberals who are clueless about the current Political Climate.

Nancy Pelosi is no dummy. Nancy Pelosi knows that Awe of Barack Obama is wearing off, because of his Neo Liberal Ideas.

The Dems in the house are furious with the White House, the White House has undermine the House for 12 months. I don’t see Nancy and her followers playing ball with the White House much longer.

Your first explanation–that the Senate bill is the bill Obama wanted–is demonstrably true. Depressing, demoralizing, infuriating, but true.

I fear your second explanation–that there weren’t/aren’t really 51 Democratic senators to pass a common sense but not corporatist HCR bill–is also true. Equally depressing, but with different implications. The problem is not just Obama, although if he chose to lead instead of follow he could solve the following additional problem: more than 8-9 Democratic senators are not progressives in any sense. They should not be considered Democrats in a Democratic party that expects to govern and solve problems in ways that don’t further entrench corporate interests at the expense of the large majority of Americans. They should be purged.

Obama sees it differently. He believes he needs the votes from independents who prize bipartisanship more than he needs the votes from progressives who are paying attention. Unbelievable but true. Until you see Obama give up on the “bipartisanship please I beg you” meme, you will know this holds true.

I’m also afraid that even with reconciliation, Democrats will just resurrect the House Bill along with Stupak language. That won’t get them elected in 2010 however, and will do more harm than good for all the reasons outlined here.

What they need to do is a different reconciliation bill, one that:

1) expands Medicare to those over 45, and under 18;
2) expands Medicaid to those up to 200% of the poverty level;
3) Closes the Medicare donut hole
4) Pays for it with income taxes on those making over $250,000 per year and by repealing the Medicare Advantage

These changes must effective within one year from the date of the legislation.

Then they need a series of individual bills either passed separately or passed as amendments to bills Republicans won’t dare to vote to vote against, like defense appropriations bills. The provisions that need to be passed include:

4) removal of the anti-trust exemption
5) prohibition of denials due to preconditions
6) prohibition of rescissions
7) prohibition of discriminatory pricing against those who have preconditions or who have experienced illness while previously covered by insurance
8) limitation of premium increases to the general rate of inflation
9) A robust enforcement mechanism making it a felony to violate any of these prohibitions for individuals acting on behalf of the companies, and for the corporations themselves also, with the penalty for nay corporation involved being corporate dissolution.

All the above have to be effective upon passage of the legislation. No adjustment period so that the insurance companies can jack up prices before the legislation takes effect.

The above measures involve no PO and exchange, no neo-liberal BS about the wonders of a free market that has never worked in insurance, and no reforms that are coming into play years from now so that people don’t immediately see the benefits. That sort of thing is very bad politics for Democrats since the tolerance of Americans for BS from the Congress is particularly low right now.

But what is good politics is passing the above just as I’ve stated it. It will begin to change the impression that Democrats have sold out to the corporations, and unless they change that impression, they are goners in the Fall.

reconciliation sounds kinda bipartisany even tho it aint, but maybe she can pull it off.

Caveat emptor would be my first thought.

I would add that it is particularly important for the HOUSE to stand up for COBRA extension for the unemployed, which is in the House bill, Section 113. 
We need to help the unemployed keep their insurance until the exchanges start, without forcing them into expensive high-risk pools.
Section 113 of the House bill permits the unemployed, many of whom can’t get individual coverage because of pre-existing conditions, to buy into their old group insurance until the insurance exchanges start in 2013.

What made Pelosi finally figure this out? Now all she has to do is remind Reid that we live in a Democratic Republic, not a republican-controlled banana republic and we might have some sort of Health Care… not much, but something.

If it looks like Democrats are using reconciliation to add very popular ideas like a public option, Medicare buy-in, drug re-importation, eliminating the excise tax, then I don’t think the American people will care about the process used to enact them. On the other hand, if Democrats try to use reconciliation to move very unpopular things, like more special deals and carve outs for special interests, it will be very bad politically for Democrats.

Uh, like their permanent minority on the political back-benches until about 3010?

I agree -

seems there would be little “left” left in the Democratic Party leadership if it was not for Nancy.

She has? Got a link to that… a statement to that effect less than 4 or 6 weeks old?

Jon said,

If it looks like Democrats are using reconciliation to add very popular ideas like a public option, Medicare buy-in, drug re-importation,

Where oh where does one look to think any of that is remotely under serious consideration?

I feel bad that you spent all that time listing demands that will never get passed.

True, and if there’s a bad finger or hand injury sustained from the typing process, what are the chances that it will be covered in the plan? Talk about adding insult to injury…

if Democrats try to use reconciliation to move very unpopular things, like more special deals and carve outs for special interests, it will be very bad politically for Democrats.

But…but…the WH will be able to put a check mark in the W column. Isn’t that what this is all about? Campaigns are about winning, right?

Corporate tools are well fed chickens…corporate slaves have to eat the well fed chicken shit.

O/T: After the ingestion of this little tidbit, I’d say that I’ve heard everything, but I’m already sure I haven’t.

Attaturk and tbogg both hit that column this morning.

Apologies for raising it again.

Does Broder need to retire, or am I missing something?

He should have retired 30 years ago.

Edit: and not to worry. Just like to point out that the folks at FDL manage to stay ahead of most of us each day.

It’s pretty comic, Nancy Pelosi making points by complaining about the Senate. This falls under the general election-year strategy “The House runs against the Senate” and she is obviously just trying to distract people from the colossal failure that the House of Representatives has been in 2009 just as any other branch of government has been a failure.

Nancy’s from CA where it’s been proven over & over & over that forcing super majorities for certain kinds of measures, like taxes, doesn’t work. Or in other words: the minority rules.

Good for Nancy. Not that I think it’ll make a whit of difference, but so sick of this 60 vote minimum from the Senate, who, should the balance swing back to Republics will got back to the 51 vote minimum.

It’s ridiculous, but then again: it’s all a kabuki show.

The HCR effort once again seems adrift with Pelosi, Reid and Obama all at crossed purposes.

Of the 3 Pelosi most closely reflects the sentiment of the majority of the people as to what they want from HCR, with Obama and Reid bent on accomplishing nothing of substance in their quest for a mythical bipartisan status quo that leaves the insurers in charge of financing health care. So nothing productive can be expected from these latter two.

At this point a proposal from the House which stands in meaningful competition with insurers over health care financing should be their goal. A medicare buy-in for all who want to participate in that program would suit that goal perfectly. All other reforms of private insurers would not be necessary since they would need to find a way to keep insureds that would otherwise opt for medicare.

The crucial point here is that the public has no and can expect no support for this measure either from the Senate or Obama. These two are obstacles not allies.

So stop talking and just do it already.

AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Jon Walker and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

I been sayin for a long time that Phony Nancy Pelosi is the key to anti-Clintonian politics between here and November. First, the House is MUCH more progressive (not in all it’s leadership but certainly in the solid rank and file) than the Senate. Second, the House is up every 2 years so they are MUCH more responsive to what a majority of their constituents want on major issues. Third, the House originates all revenue bills and DOESN’T have a fillibuster. Fourth, Nancy Pelosi wants to remain Speaker of the House so she will lead legislation that will protect her majority. Fifth, it is no secret that Rahm has been settin up a return to the House as Speaker in 2012 and the only way Pelosi stops ‘im is to keep ‘im from killin’ her Speakership in November.

So now the buck is on Obama’s desk, he either builds from his base in the House behind Pelosi and crams healthcare and a jobs bill down the Senate’s throat through reconcilliation or he is exposed as a Clintonian clone and both he and the Democratic Party are dead after November. In fact, I could make an argument that the Democratic Party could very well return to power in the House in 2012 without Obama on the Democratic ticket.

So let’s put our muscle and sweat behind the power we have that Constitution granted us and the coalition that Obama created in order to get his sorry ass elected, it seems to me that a new 21st Century politics could very well see the power of the Presidency eclipsed in legislative action by his party leadership in the House of Representatives.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION AND REMEMBER IT’S ALL ABOUT THE CORPORATE WARS!!

If it looks like Democrats are using reconciliation to add very popular ideas like a public option…

Jon, why do you keep repeating the ‘include the public option’ canard when you know as well as anyone that there aren’t 50 Senators who support it? Really, this is just tiresome. The focus at this point should be on getting the bill passed now and fighting for improvements in the future.

Firepup Freedom Fighters:

Actually, the Speaker of the House has exerted tremendous power over Presidents in the past both of their own party and the party opposite…just remember Sam Rayburn and the Dixiecrats in the House for decades dictated domestic spending and social policy.

[E]xplaining reconciliation to the American people is going to be difficult. Most people don’t even know this 60-vote threshold even exists in the Senate.

I keep hearing people say things like this and it makes no sense. If people are ignorant of the way the Senate works despite how dysfunctional it has been recently (and if they didn’t learn about Senate rules when the Republican noise machine was whining about “up or down votes” a few years past), I doubt they are going to get much more educated (or outraged by Senate rules) at this point.

Person A: I am completely outraged at the Democrats attempts to pass the health care bill through reconciliation.

Person B: Huh? What is a reconciliation?

Person A: It is when the heavy-handed Democrats pass bills with only 51 votes instead of 60.

Person B: How many people are in the Senate.

Person A: 100.

Person B: Wow, I never knew that…so if they pass it with 51 votes who gives a shit? Say I gotta let you go. I gotta take my kid to the dentist.

Citizen scudbucket:

Where do you get that double top secret info Citizen…there are 51+ votes for ANYthing the leadership and Obama bring to ‘em in reconcilliation all ya hafta do is count the votes and remember that any Democratic Senator up for re-election who doesn’t vote for a bill is toast in November and at least one fascist fellow traveler, Blanched Lincoln may very well get primaried by a much stronger candidate this Spring.

There are 50 Senators who support a public option.

FDR is turning over in his grave.

The Dem party has allowed traitors like Ben Nelson, Obama, Rahm, Blanche, into the party of FDR. Clinton goal was to make the Dem party of FDR Republican Lite. This has resulted in the total collapse of Capitalism.

The Senate DEM HCR scam is a perfect example of the Clinton agenda, the Senate DEM HCR scam bill is a piece of REPUBLICAN GARBAGE.

scudbucket, what PROGRESSIVES must do is KICK the traitors out of the DEM party of FDR. It is open season on BLUE DOG Dems, if you want to be a republican run as one. DEM progressive will try to destroy all BLUE DOGS in novemeber.

Ben Nelson, Blanche, Obama, Lieberman, Baucus, are not welcome in the DEM party of FDR.

Firepup Freedom Fighters:

ALERT!!!! One Hung Harry Reid got his one legged mojo workin’ and is re-writing the jobs bill and is gunna stick it up Baucus’s ass!! Now tell me again about how the politics of this November is gunna play out in legislation…folks, ya gotta watch where the votes are gunna come from in November and who’s up for re-election!

There are 50 Senators who support a public option.

Cite a credible source which has good evidence that right now 50 Senators support a public option. I’d love to be proven wrong about this.

I take it your suggesting that running as a defector from the Dem party line on HCR will kill any chance at re-election. But this is simply not true. Landrieu is sunk of she votes for HCR. And even Reid is getting pummeled in the polls for supporting it. Now, I agree that in most cases incumbents will gain votes by passing it, but not by much. Independents are luke warm – at best – about it. Further, I was saying that there aren’t even close to 50 who favor the PO to begin with. If it was one or two arms that needed twisting, maybe it could happen (tho even that’s unlikely, we’re talking Dems here). But nobody (Reid or Obama) is gonna go out on that limb to twist 6 arms.

If the Health Care bill passes, I would love it to pass with reconciliation. If passed with reconciliation, then it can be repealed with reconciliation when the GOP takes over.

Obviously to anyone with a brain, the Blair House meeting is part of the reconciliation strategy. Its only purpose is to attempt to paint the GOP as wanting to block anything and so the Dems “must” use reconciliation since they “tried” to do it bipartisan style and the other side just didn’t want to.

Unfortunately, it is so obvious a strategy that no one is going to fall for it. It was like a second grader came up with it.

Since the actual benefits of the HC bill don’t begin for some years, there will be plenty of time to scotch it with reconciliation should it pass.

Better to actually try bipartisanship for real and get a bill both sides can agree on. A good public option with strong tort reform and national insurance sales would be a good start.

But, this is all pretty stupid to begin with. I just saw the bill my brother got for a gall stone problem. didn’t even need surgery and was in the hospital for a day and a half. Bill: $12,000. THAT is the problem. $1200 for a single demerol shot! Some thousands for a certain kind of scan.

A public option will do NOTHING to stop the spiraling costs because these costs are not going up because of insurance companies but because of the PROVIDERS of the services themselves. The actual costs are going up ridiculously. No insurance reform can hold that up. The entire bill is attacking the WRONG problem. The public option will give you a ONE time discount, but will then skyrocket from that base level because the costs are going to go up no matter who pays the bill—you, an insurance company, or the public option.

How much of the good cop bad cop BS are we going to buy:wait for the inevitable “we didn’t have the votes”.

A public option will do NOTHING to stop the spiraling costs because these costs are not going up because of insurance companies but because of the PROVIDERS of the services themselves. The actual costs are going up ridiculously. No insurance reform can hold that up. The entire bill is attacking the WRONG problem.

I completely agree that a public option does very little (nothing!) to address costs. That’s one reason I find it odd that so many here are making it a deal breaker. There are two problems in HC: cost and accessibility to care. The current bill primarily addresses the accessibility issue by mandating coverage in exchange for guarantee issue, no rescission, no annual or lifetime cap on claims, etc. It does some to address the provider cost issue: by squeezing insurance companies who in turn squeeze providers.

Just got Lawrence Lessig’s email

The Democratic leadership in Congress just announced its response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, the case that struck down limits on independent corporate campaign expenditures.

In a word: hopeless.

Combine that news with the many other failures this year and I now expect nothing from this Democratic Party. All this talk about modifying the filibuster and using reconciliation is just that–meaningless hot air. The Party is “but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

It is too late to change the filibuster rules. I hope progressives and liberals think about what will happen when the Republicans get back in control of the Senate and House. They will almost certainly start turning back every program loved by Democrats such as Medicare, Social Security and any other program that helps the poor and less fortunate.

Betcha 50% of Americans will think “reconciliation” is some bipartisanship love-in following the bipartisanship summit.

nice fantasy. Did it feel good? (Not that I disagree with you. Just sayin’, when pigs fly.

Wake Up?

Obama, Rahm, Blanche, Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, Max Baucus, are for practical purposes republicans, trying to turn back what Dems Love.

You do know that poor in the USA is facing 30.8% unemployment? and the rich Bankers Obama bailed out are at full employment and getting bonuses.

Wake Up?

Obama, Rahm, Blanche, Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, Max Baucus, are for practical purposes republicans, trying to turn back what Dems Love.

You do know that the poor in the USA are facing 30.8% unemployment? (this is higher than the rate of un-employment during the great depression)

and the rich Bankers Obama bailed out are at full employment and getting bonuses.

There are 50 Senators who support a public option.

There are 50 Senators who claim to support a public option assured they will never have to vote for it.

There, fixed it for you.

It is too late to change the filibuster rules.

I’d argue with you on that on constitutional terms–reference Sen. Tom Udall’s case–risking a reversal by the “non-partisan” SC.

You’ve thought more about what the Republicans will do if they regain power than they have. They haven’t a clue what they’ll do to retain it. They’re just riding the wave of utter frustration with Washington, D & R alike.

Pelosi is good at making cases after the fact. The time to act was months ago.

Democrats who have power and don’t use it don’t belong in office.

The US is ungovernable.

After the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat, it appears the only path forward for health care reform is through use of reconciliation, either with a new reconciliation bill or a reconciliation fix to the current Senate bill

would that be the health INSURANCE reform bill that the majority of the country is against?

letting the republicans filibuster, and then when the filibuster is over, pass the bill by a simple majority, which appears to be another alternative path, would be a political disaster if the public already doesn’t like the bill. probably only works politically for publicly popular bills. now, if the dems could just write one of those.

Since you seem enamored with the GOP ethos and by extension an acolyte of the profit making motive in all things under the sun, then why do you begrudge health providers and hospitals the same right to pillage and gouge as private insurers.

Your superior 2nd grade mind must know that gouging by private insurers leaves millions of people uninsured by design and leaves behind a hefty cost assumed by everyone else in the process. And advocating for the sale of for profit national health insurance plans does nothing to obviate the cost of health premiums and leaves the millions of uninsured no better off when they have to meet premiums beyond their means.

Or maybe disallowing lawyers to gouge private insurers is where you draw the line in the grand profit making scheme of things.

The truth is you haven’t a clue of how to rid yourself of this profit making trap in which you are ensnared and which only the all knowing free market ideologues of the GOP will free you from.

The tried and true solution for managing of costs related to health care is for a single not for profit entity to manage that cost and to exert pressure on providers and drug makers to reign in their fees. In this scheme all costs are reduced and everyone is happy. Even a dunce can appreciate this.

Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. All we ever get out of the Dems is talk, talk, talk, talk. Never any action unless you count giving in to the Repubs on every single freaking issue of importance.

The number one problem with the Dem leadership is that they are a bunch of (fill in the blank). meow, meow, meow.

I am so sick of these LOSERS… Has Harry Reid EVER not backed down on anything??????

Do you think the Repub leadership would EVER let any of it caucus stray from the positions their leadership has taken??? Give me a break. The Repubs may be evil but when it comes to pushing their agenda they make the Dems look like a bunch school children.

Dems use reconciliation??? Gee we can’t do that. The Republicans might get mad at us and you know we can’t have that.

When will Obama and the Dems learn that the Republicans have ZERO interest supporting legislation that might help the American people? Why is it so hard for the Dem leaderhip to accept that the Republicans have concluded the fastest way for them to regain power is to ensure that things get so bad that the voters in desperation put them back in control.

What the hell is this obsession with bipartisnship????????? I don’t recall Bushing giving a hoot about bipartisnship when he was in the oval office.

What exactly is Obama’s “major malfunction?”

Majority rule, Yes! It would be nice having Senators who could be viewed as democratic, rather than just imitations elected under a label spelled Democrat.

When it comes to Senatorial candidates in primary elections it is important to remember that one elected politician can’t pass a law. One elected politician cannot even get a bill out of committee! That’s why voters are attracted to party platforms. We have to start demanding something more from our Senators.

Elections for the U.S. House often have party platforms with at lest a few specific issues. Examples would be the Democratic 100 Hour Plan or the Republican Contract with America

Modern U.S. attempts at realistic party platforms.

When will the Dem leadership learn that Americans HATE and will not support leaders that appear weak. The Repubs figured this out decades ago. Their policies may be bad for most Americans but as long as they appear strong and decisive they will keep getting elected. How else to to explain how Reagan and W who pursued policies that were very bad for most Americans got elected. Not only elected but reelected to 2nd terms WTF???

Majority rule, Yes! It would be nice having Senators who could be viewed as democratic, rather than just imitations elected under a label spelled Democrat.

When it comes to Senatorial candidates in primary elections it is important to remember that one elected politician can’t pass a law. One elected politician cannot even get a bill out of committee! That’s why voters are attracted to party platforms.

We have to start demanding something more from our Senators. Elections for the U.S. House often have party platforms with at lest a few specific issues. Examples would be the Democratic 100 Hour Plan or the Republican Contract with America

Modern U.S. attempts at realistic party platforms.

Since the actual benefits of the HC bill don’t begin for some years, there will be plenty of time to scotch it with reconciliation should it pass.

LBJ began signing up Medicare recipients immediately after bill signing (and I mean like 5 minutes later. Harry and Bess Truman were registered while reporters watched). Clinton had kid enrolled in SCHIP within 3 months of bill signing. The only reason Obama chose to wait 4 years to begin coverage is because of his stupid $900 billion over 10 years promise… the only way he could meet that promise is to wait 4 years to start spending any money.

If Congress and the president chose to expand Medicare with the Americare bill, it’d start providing universal coverage on Jan. 1, 2011.

Just heard some bad news on CBS. Just caught last minute of it but it appears a new poll now says americans do not want healthcare as it would add to deficit.

Maybe this is what the white house was waiting, delaying for till they can say the public doesn’t want it now. They wasted 1 year and now we know why.

I feel so hopeless.

As I see it they haven’t been ‘undermining’ one another. They just have slightly different ideas about what needs to be done. I think all-in-all they’ve worked together very well.

It just hasn’t been easy to find a bill which can satisfy the very wide range of views in the House and Senate and White House. But, don’t forget, they are almost there and that’s something of a miracle.

Lets jump in the side car and enjoy the ride. Accentuate the positives of the side car reforms (Medicare for all, I hope) and put a guilt trip on any Dem or Republican who will not ride along. Best news all day Nancy!

It seems very odd that the Framers would not have incorporated a supermajority rule in the Constitution if that had been their intent.After all they did provide for two instances of requiring supermajorities- Impeachment and Amendments to the Constitution. They did so expressly to prevent these from happening as a normal part of the political process. Clearly they knew that requiring such supermajorities for other normal processes would actually prevent ANY activity from occurring.

In addition the Constitution expressly states that tie votes are to be broken by the vote of the Vice-President. On cannot have a “tie vote” except when both sides of a position are split evenly. A 59-39 is not a tie by any stretch of the imagination. Neither is a 66-34. A tie is when the votes are 50%-50%. That’s it. So how a “rule” that clearly violates the majoritarian rule established by the Constitution is legitimate and not UnConstitutional befuddles me.