. And that was costly partly because it created the kind of partisanship and bickering that really turns people off.

If that’s the lesson he took from it then he’s a f*cking idiot. No dumbass, what turns people off is “compromising” everything progressive away even after it’s become clear that you aren’t going to get any cooperation. What turns people off is mouthing things about supporting a public option when you’ve already struck a deal with big insurance and big pharma. What turns people off is putting in a framework to punish consumers for not following the rules while giving companies that cheat a free pass. I could go on but one thing that is certain: it’s not “partisanship” and “bickering” that have “turned people off, it’s your selling us out to the very people who have put us in this state.
Moron.

When the president met with the House GOP, he admitted the same. Sickening

For Obama, you avoid the “partisan bickering” by surrendering in advance.

Dude,

Where have you been for the last year? Obama and the Democrats admitted that this was a truly named Republican bill the moment it passed. That bastion of Obama Kool-Aid drinkers, otherwise known as MSNBC has been saying this since the day it passed and the truly named Republicans rightfully began to demonize it………

Republicanized Democrats have been pretending since day one that it is a liberal (stop saying progressive, it is a weak word) bill so why stop pretending now? Why take their fun away………?(LOL)

“I gave the GOP everything they had asked for, why won’t they love me?”
/Seeking Absent Daddy

Obama’s negotiation strategy for Dummies:

1. Roll Over
2. Capitulate
3. Grovel
4. Explain that he needs 60 votes in the Senate
5. Explain that using reconciliation would not be “Post-Partisan”
6. Complain that the Left is trying to make “The Perfect The Enemy of The Good”
7. Claim that he got 70% of what he wanted
8. Make that 90% of what he wanted
9. Punch a Hippie
10. Claim that he needs to be more pro-business

You forgot 11:
11: Whine about his base abandoning him

The only real evidence we’re likely to see is that the Republican House won’t act to repeal that vote.
Too many times Obama’s pretended he’s forwarded centrist solutions “to encourage across the aisle support” for any Democrat to believe him. I suggest we call him “Clarence Thomas” Obama. He’s sold his soul to gain membership into a club that will love him dearly UNTIL the day he can no longer carry water. Shameful, just shameful.
ps. Dems may say what they like against “Tea-Partiers”, but the fringers have one thing right – Good grades & communication skills alone do not make a good President!

Now can we get Steve Benen and John Cole to admit that what was essentially passed off as a great progressive victory is republican health care reform.

again, eerie silence on this interview from the usual apologist suspects – was it OFA Movie Night or something ??

12 should be ‘Use reconciliation anyway, but don’t use it to pass the things you said you couldn’t pass because you only had 58 or 59 votes.’

In his desire to create a bipartisan fantasy world he has proven himself to be not only disingenuous but dangerous.

The simplest way to think of U.S. politics is to see the Republicans as pit bulls and the Democrats as “Rags”, the robotic dog in Woody Allen’s “Sleeper.”

But, but, but…. Mean, Scary Republicans….

I agree with you and stevo67 in Obama giving away the store. My question is how a highly effective campaign with an orator the equal to the “great communicator” and sterling intellectual bonafides, then translates into a dumbass, Moron (I agree btw) and inept Administration. Bottom line, it doesn’t translate. Just as moving Elizabeth Warren up and out from Consumer Protection to BFE as “council to the President to doubling down in Afghanistan, it’s got to be planned. This Pres is the result of a one party State with the Dems playing the good dumb cop and the GOP playing the bad no government cop. Same coin, different sides.

It would have been SO easy for the Dems to have proposed simply extending Medicare to everyone. People know about it, they understand it, and they like it. But no. Obama and the Dem “leadership” had to capitulate to capture a few Republican votes they never had a chance to get anyway.

It would be nice if Obama and his team would show some backbone and stick up for the progressive principles we voted them into office to advance.

It would also be nice if pigs could fly, if unicorns could roam the earth, and if we could spin straw into gold. All of which are just about as likely.

Another parallel to number 6 is the ol’ Half a Loaf gambit. Half a loaf is better than no loaf.

The fault with the analogy is that it assumes facts not in evidence: that a concerted effort and the goal is to get a whole loaf initially.

OilyCleanCoal concedes 7/8ths of the loaf from the get go.

It can only get worse from there and it does. Public Option.

We thought that if we shaped a bill that wasn’t that different from bills that had previously been introduced by Republicans, including a Republican governor in Massachusetts who’s now running for president. That we would be able to find some common ground there. And we just couldn’t

Okay, he admitted the bill is not progressive, but why would he say he couldn’t find common ground. They obviously did because that’s all he tried to get out of the Republicans and that’s all they got. It’s just more bullsh*t and obfuscation of what health care reform (from his campaign perspective) was supposed to be about. Obama is a walking contradiction and enigma wrapped into one.

Like a wounded animal, how much damage is he going to do in the next two years?

Comparing the Obama Health Care Law to Part D shows a major difference in requiring coverage. Part D is not a mandated plan. It would have been good if the Health Care Law would have taken a hint for Part D and instead of mandating coverage just put in penalties for those who decline coverage just as Part D does.

All this “bipartisan” crap is just that: crap. It’s code word for cynical, craven capitulation — even when it is not necessary — in order to pass the Republican agenda. The problem isn’t that there is too much partisanship; bipartisanship in today’s political parlance is simply defined as Democrats caving in to Republicans all the time, while the GOP never, ever reciprocates, nor is it ever obligated to. No, the problem is that there isn’t nearly enough partisanship. Obama was not elected to give the Republicans everything they demand in hopes of getting the weakest legislation imaginable. He was elected to deliver the change he promised, and he has wasted the last two years refusing to even try. Now he faces two years of even harsher obstructionism, likely impeachment, and as always, it’s the public that suffers for the crimes of the elites.

Obama is simply a neoliberal. Watch when he signs a bill giving AWOL Bush’s tax cuts to millionaires. He likely will actually be a one-term president. The American people really didn’t want that kind of guy in the White House.

Impeachment is the least of our worries. Indeed, I would welcome it, support it, donate for it.

I was being insulting, not necessarily situationally accurate in my name calling. Sheesh!

Ok HCR passed by Lieberman et al only, at best, addresses coverage issues, not cost and efficiency issues and it continues the anti-trust exemption. So who is to blame for this, the voters in Connecticut and Massachusetts who elected Lieberman and Brown, for starters? If there had been any effective dynamics in the so called democratic “controlled” senate for truly progressive hrc, that would have been great. But to blame Obama for the lack of support in Congress for progressive hrc, is simply whining.

He made a DEAL with pharma and the insurance providers that there would be no publicly funded insurance options WHILE talking about how he supports a “robust public option”! How does that translate to Congress’ fault?

Not really news. Been apparent since May ’09 he’s a Republican at heart. Actions taken on justice, war and health care fit that mold to a tee. No more evidence needed.

Blue Texan’s regularly scheduled post is now available: Obama Calls Tea Party “As American As Apple Pie”

We thought that if we shaped a bill that wasn’t that different from bills that had previously been introduced by Republicans, including a Republican governor in Massachusetts who’s now running for president. That we would be able to find some common ground there.

Oh for Christ’s sake.

How about shaping a bill that actually addresses the problem, you know, you are allegedly trying to solve? And then use the bully pulpit to browbeat, humiliate, and harass every Blue Dog and moderate Repug who stands in your way?

My pretend scenario for an actual “Democratic” President. Odds of Obama doing something for anyone who makes under $10 million a year hovering right around 0 percent. Give or take.

I heard a third party candidate in a West Virginia debate say he couldn’t understand why people say the health insurance bill is called Socialism. He said it’s Capitalism on steroids. Exactly!

A Republican Plan?? – well sort of – - -

I wish it was the Nixon plan – but Nixon’s plan was too progressive for Obama.

I wish it was the Oren offer in 93 – but that did not give a big enough welfare check to the health care industry.

And indeed Medicare for all would have been a simple concept on which to run – we could have explained the additional tax/premium collections as a replacement for current Ins. Co. premium collections – and note that there would be little Ins Ind disruption because – as with current Medicare – claims administration for the new Medicare would have been done by the Ins ind just as they are done now for Medicare.

Every time I see and hear him I like him – but that does not make a good President. And Wishing Hillary is the nominee and gets elected in 2012 does not mean we get 60 Senators in 2012 for her to push through Medicare for all. But losing the public option vote because Obama ordered it off of the 51 vote needed 2010 reconciliation bill really hurts. And maybe a Hillary could get a reconciliation bill with the public option passed.

Meanwhile, is Russ Feingold’s comment post the election of “on to 2012″ meant to mean he would replace Democratic Senator Kohl for the 2012 cycle, or does it mean he intends to primary Obama?

” Odds of Obama doing something for anyone who makes under $10 million a year hovering right around 0 percent. Give or take.”

Unfortunately, he will go into the negative for us middle class Americans when he cuts Social Security benefits!

absolutely correct busto… Obama campaigned like Bobby Kennedy and has governed like Ronald Reagan, by design. Pretending to be a populist wins elections but the one corporate Party with fake dem and repub wings is always calling the shots. The problem for Obama is he didn’t think we the people would see the little man behind the curtain this early in the con game, that’s why he’s been pissed at Libs/Progs for the last year – we didn’t clap loud and hard enough.

It’s still privatize the profits, socialize the
costs, of course, and Medicare is entirely
National Health Insurance for those 65 and older
because the health insurance cartel want nothing
to do with them except on a lavish cost-plus basis.

However, obviously by their actions the cartel
prefers retaining the risk management flim flam to
(a dash of risk only with a premium death spiral)
so much as privatize the profits, socialize the cost
(basically just an administrator.)

Separating the point of care and expense of care from
the receiver of the cost of risk actually separates the
party interested in cost control from directly being able
to control cost.

http://sites.google.com/site/evernewecon

Hey, anyone else notice that Mitch McChinless is calling this the “Health Spending Bill”?

I really don’t like that guy.

By the way, MSNBC Chris and Chuck (And CNN, HLN, and CNBC)seem to be selling that the House can never have a majority that are progressive – so blue dogs are necessary to get power and thank god for Rahm for getting those blue dogs elected – and once power is obtained progressive ideas can not pass because Blue Dogs will kill them, so why do progressives even try to have an impact on politics since they can never expect to pass progressive legislation.

don’t forget that Obama campaigned for Lieberman and against Lamont in the 2006 primary, nor that O’loser’s mentor in the Senate was Liarman, nor that Obama wanted Loserman to keep his seniority and chairmanship in the caucus.

Obamco knew and got exactly what he wanted from Joementum – which was a conservative stalking horse who made every progressive Senate bill and initiative more corporate and centrist.

Proof in black-and-white that BHO (Now to be known as Preznit Spineless) was all for the sell-out before the game was even afoot. I guess all that his desire to live in the opulent bubble of being the Preznit was more attractive than being true to the base that sent him there.

Fucking jellyfish. To the one-million power.

Excellent point. Funny how Joementum repaid the loyalty isn’t it?

Joementum is, has, and will only be loyal to AIPAC.

This health insurance bailout bill could have done abolished medicare and medicaid, and the teabaggers would still call it socialism.

Woohoo, it’s sock it to me time at the Lake! Nice post, JW.

@stevo67 Lieberman! You got that right. He’s Grimer Wormtongue in the flesh.

And re: selling us down the river in the name of good governance.

That’s exactly it, it’s all about the damn Hamilton Project’s effort, aping the success that folled Lewis Powell’s infamous Chamber of Commerce Memo creating two major parties devoted to kicking our asses. Brilliant!

Progressives and the Democratic Party Part 2

Paul Jay interviews Jeff Cohen
The Real News Network
February 3, 2010

COHEN: A lot of people know that there was a memo written by Lewis Powell, a corporate lawyer lawyer, to the US Chamber of Commerce in 1971 in reaction to the new left, saying that big business has got to fight for itself: we’ve got to do messaging; we’ve got to deal with liberals and leftists in academia; we have to challenge the media. And that Powell memo set off a series of fundraising by big corporate forces and big donors. They set up their think tanks; they set up the Heritage Foundation; they mobilized the Christian right.

JAY: Also in response to, I guess, partly what you’re calling new left, but the antiwar movement. The politics was very in flux.

COHEN: Oh, yeah. And, understandably, this corporate lawyer, who became a US Supreme Court justice after the memo was written—but the memo didn’t surface until he was already on the Court, or he may never have been confirmed—they had real reason to be upset. And he’s writing it to Chamber of Commerce, saying the business class has got to stand up for business and fight these forces of, you know, new left, anticorporate—.

JAY: Sometimes referred to as the forces of anarchy, I think.

COHEN: Yeah, right. And what’s interesting is that that memo to the US Chamber of Commerce—we look at the Scott Brown victory, where he takes Ted Kennedy’s seat, and everyone knows that the US Chamber of Commerce was a big player in getting Scott Brown elected as a populist. Alright. So, largely their goal was how do we take a mainstream party, the Republican Party, and turn it into an agency of the corporate right. And they did that over a period of decades. What’s not talked about as much is that there was a parallel movement that started in the 1980s, which was to take the other major party, the historic party of the people, the Democratic Party, and turn it more toward the corporate right. And what happened in the 1980s—and it was in fear of these same forces—labor unions, new left, antiwar, environmentalist, feminist. There was this sense that the Democratic Party was too allied with these movements, these social movements that were representing millions of people, so the Democratic Leadership Council was set up. It was set up, funded by oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, tobacco companies, some of the biggest companies in the country. It was largely a corporate front inside the Democratic Party to fight the movements in the Democratic Party and move the leadership of the party toward corporate prerogatives. Who were the leaders of it? Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Joe Lieberman. [Emphasis added.]

Obama is just the new and improved model of the same old modern major mole. He’s another in a long line of the damn Robert Rubin apprentices who think becoming Republicans is the best of all possible ways to be successful Dems.

They all creep me out way more than in-your-face fascists. Red Dwarf’s chief protagonist, Dave Lister, would call them crypto-fascists (as a teenage git he would, at least), and I can’t think of a more fit phrase.

And Wishing Hillary is the nominee and gets elected in 2012 does not mean we get 60 Senators in 2012 for her to push through Medicare for all.

Replacing Obama with Hillary would be a waste of time.

Hillary is as bad as Obama. She voted for the Iraq war, and the Patriot Act. If either one of them is the nominee, I’m voting Green.

Because that is what Baucus and the “democratic” senate wanted. Don’t put the horse before the cart

Wrong. Obama and the Republicanized Democrats are really Republicans. This nonsense that somehow they are an “opposition party” is truly absurd. This was going to be the plan that was going to pass to begin with, The Health Insurance Company Preservation Act…………..

Obama is fully admitting the new health care law he pushed is almost identical to a Republican bill in the ’90s, a Heritage Foundation plan from the same time, and a law supported by the man who almost became the Republican Party’s presidential nominee in 2008. Both President Obama and Nancy Pelosi have acknowledged they only passed what was effectively an old Republican proposal.

But of course the Cons demagogued this thing as a SOCIALIST MUSLIM BILL!

And the media went along.

I do not recall if Obama ever expressed any feelings of simpatico for Lieberman. Anyway and on point Connecticut and Mass voters elected Lieberman and Brown. If you suggest that Lamont ran a good general election campaign against Lieberman, I would strongly disagree. If you suggest that Obama supported Lieberman in the general against Lamont, you would be mistaken.

Lieberman and Brown, the progressives’ screw up. If anybody competent had run against these two, not Lamont and Coakley, maybe things would be different.

Obama demonstrated here that he’s fulla shit. His problem is that many of us libruls saw through his bullshit and weren’t falling for his hope and change or it take time message.
Note that it didn’t take any time fork over billions to banking!

And he wonders why he got his hat handed to him last Tuesday. What a joke! He is going to spend the next two years on his knees before we can finally run his kitty kat ass out of office.

I find it illuminating, if illuminating is word I want, that the Punditry lists Lierman in the Dem column v GOP for the new Congress. Sure he “caucuses” with the Dems, such as they are, then lets the GOP on the inside scoop. What putzes.

David Plouffe is probably very pissed right now!

Plouffe now knows, that saving Obama is not going to happen

No poll said that OBAMA should pass a republican health care bill, the 1st 20 months of his term.

Once Obama cuts social security, his political career will be over.

I have a drunken older brother who would do the same thing to his family till they threw him out. He’d go out and buy everyone @ the bar drinks and do whatever for strangers and then go home and punch his wife and kids about. Obama has done the same to his base. He takes care of the wrong people first then abuses his own. We should toss him he’s a loser and he’s going to drag us all down.

it’s so very depressing, buddha, how much power and control the DLC has over the Party. The Democrats have not been the party of FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ for a very, very long time.

If you suggest that Obama supported Lieberman in the general against Lamont, you would be mistaken.

It is a fact that Obama campaigned for Liebermann in the primary. It is also a fact that Lamont received only nominal support from the DSCC and Party in the general. I agree that Lamont did not run a good general campaign, but the Primary effort was extremely effective. If the Repubs had not colluded with Liebermann to convince a viable candidate to drop out (an ex CT LT Gov IIRC)and be replaced by a proto-Tea Partier named Schlesinger with questionable ties to the gaming industry Lamont very likely may have won – he did receive almost 80% of the Dem vote. As it turned out Lieberman ended up w/ 50%, Lamont 40%, and the Repub candidate 10%.

probably should have renamed it “Obama’s Kabuki Negotiating Strategy for Dummies” =)

“Obama again admits his health care law is Republican, not progressive”

Exactly. And they expected us to turn out in droves last Tuesday to keep these assclowns in the majority?

Good grief! He’s actually being honest, for a change. Wonder why…

Hey brutal, whassup? Did you end up voting? Did you end up making yourself count? Or did you sandbag it, only to turn up now saying, “See, told you so!”?

With only 40% turnout, only 20% + 1 vote is needed to jack us all further into this hellscape. And we call this majority rule?! Not-voting is a vote for more of the same.

With compatriots like that, who needs gangs like the damn Hamilton Project or Karl freakin Rove and the Chamber of Horrors to steal our elections, when we’re willing to stay home and forfeit?

If your vote is solely based on foriegn policy then you would be correct to not vote for Hillar as she is not much different from Obama. If you have domestic policy concerns and need a backboned leader on health care and other issues that is well left of center, Hillary fits the bill. Of course there are others more to the left than Hillary on domestic issues, but she seems a socialist in comparison to Obama.

No, Knowbuddhau, I certainly declined Tuesday to give my endorsement to that artificial process. If I had something to choose between besides two groups of conservatives then I would have bothered to show up. Don’t blame me buddy, blame the Democrats for being indistinguishable from the Repubs. I wouldn’t cross the street to take a piss on either of them. Which is worse? Someone who punches you in the face after telling you he’s going to punch you in the face? Or someone who says he’s going to put a cast on your broken leg and then when you’re not looking punches you in the face?

Give me something to choose between, a real choice, and you’ll see me show up at the polling place. Give me “Conservative A” versus “Conservative B disguised unconvincingly as a liberal” and tell me it’s a life-or-death decision and I’ll look at you like you’re out of your mind. From the way the turnout looked it would seem that I had plenty of company. Not saying ‘I told you so’, just saying ‘why bother’?

Of course they won’t do that until after he presumably is re-elected. By then the Democratic Party will be defunct if it isn’t already.

Here’s the story of the past two years in Washington.

1. Republicans propose corporate-aggrandizing policy ideas.
2. Democrats, hoping for “bipartisan” cooperation, get behind Republican proposals.
3. Republicans turn against their own proposals.
4. Democrats pass them anyway (or try to, e.g. cap and trade) without Republican support.
5. Democrats take the heat for bad Republican policies.
6. Corporations donate big money to Republicans.

Oh, he’ll do a lot of damage, no doubt, skeptic. But I see no one in the wings, ready to wear the Progressive mantle. I think O pretty well garotted Progressivism as a force within the Democratic party. And I don’t see anything coming from outside. Yet.

Nailed. I noticed early on that Obama scorns the people he’s sure of and chases after the people who don’t like him. I asked someone whose opinion I respect what was with that and she replied, “Absentee and/or alcoholic father.” Apparently, this is a well known psych phenomenon. Fits Clinton, as well.

Welcome to bipolartisan politics.

Yes and Clinton threw the welfare beneficiaries under the bus in 1996.

I made a mistake by voting for Clinton in the Primaries. I should have voted for Senator Tom Harkin who has more compassion in his finger than the entire RepubliKLAN Party and the Blue Dog Democrats.

I’m writing in Senator Tom Harkin in 2012.

The Liberal Democratic Party of the United States has a message for Democrats and Liberals: If you want a new way to get progressive legislation enacted into law despite the new KLANservative house of Representatives taking over in 2011 then email me, for details.

He hasn’t even had his first real foreign policy disaster yet and since he can’t or won’t end any of the Bush wars, he’s on borrowed time.

“…he’s on borrowed time.”

Spot. On.

Clinton thre welfare folks under the bus in 96 – no – not really

But that line is a smear the Obama folks sold to take down Hillary – don’t look for logic – there is none.

After 2 veto’s that got some changes – and protected Medicaid – Clinton was told that that there was a 2/3rds majority – veto proof – in both Houses, and he signed.

Tanf reup under Bush in 03/04 may be of interest to you.

Effect of the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act that created TANF is lower numbers on welfare, more education, and a different social attitude. However our safety net always has holes which the no jobs created Bush years have made worse.

But hard to see “under the bus” – unless the intent is to smear Hillary.

I was thinking of Pelosi, but now that you mention him, I’ll consider Harkin. Bernie Sanders is getting some attention, too.

The fact that a Massachusetts republican governor signed into law a healthcare insurance mandate means nothing. Romney was looking to score points on a plan drafted between tax-exempt/anti-trust-exempt heath insurance corporations and a “demortaz” controlled Beacon Hill. President Lincoln emancipated the slaves. A Republican governor seeking a presidential bid simply put the citizens of Massachusetts into a state of servitude to tax-exempt/anti-trust-exempt heath insurance corporations, to score political points. HCR is not reform. It is protection for corporations. A modern day fugitive slave law, where a bounty/premium has been placed on life, itself.

Agreed. But we can leave much to the imagination………..

Thank god other people are seeing this. Check out the great Frontline report called ‘Obama’s Deal’. It lays it all out beautifully.

Predictions:

1. The appetite for Republicans to roll back the HCR bill will fade quickly.

2. The Republican Cong will impeach BHO. It’s only a matter of seeing if they can wait
until ’12 to see if he wins and they take the Senate or if their impatience and hate drive them
to it before ’12.

OK, rmwarnick, you hit that one out of here. It’s nearly perfect for the Republicans. The Dems pass their (Republican) bills and the Dems get blamed. Game set match Republicans.

You may be right on BHOs willingness to destroy SSec. If that’s the case and the Republics know it, it may nullify my #2 (impeachment) above. He may be their useful fool.

I hate to admit this, but I think almost anyone else in the Democratic party could do better than Obummer. True, they’re not progressive, but the bar just isn’t that high anymore.

I wish it was the Oren offer in 93 – but that did not give a big enough welfare check to the health care industry.

By “Oren” do you mean Orrin Hatch? Are you referring to the Chaffee individual mandate bill or some other bill?

Yeah, and never mind that the old system was going to destroy the public and private purse even faster.
And never mind the Republican completely unpaid for Medicare D.

Hey, all you have to do is mention Old Lady McConnell and suddenly BHO looks better again! ;>)

Ding, dingn ding…. Say it again, say it often. Well put!

I can only think of the doctors and nurses who went to jail bcz they dared to request that single payor advocates be allowed at the table and I imagine how Obama and his cabinet must have snickered at the fools who believed in him. He is admitting how he has sabotaged our efforts from the very start. The ironic thing is that he passed a republican bill and is catching hell from the republicans and tea party for passing it. He deserves all the crap he is getting.

Told you Ezra and Matty were going to be leading Republicans some day. Keep pushing them in the proper direction.

Exactly, and the insurance mafiosi protection law puts everyone into slavery.

Here’s a quote from the ’93 republican plan:

“Subtitle F: Universal Coverage – Requires each citizen or lawful permanent resident to be covered under a qualified health plan or equivalent health care program by January 1, 2005.”

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2010/February/23/GOP-1993-health-reform-bill.aspx

Socialist law, my ass.

“Any proposal that sticks with our current dependence on for-profit private insurers … will not be sustainable. And the new law will not get us to universal coverage ….” — T.R. Reid, “The Healing of America”

Obama is fully admitting the new health care law he pushed is almost identical to a Republican bill in the ’90s, a Heritage Foundation plan

Please remember that not one Republican participated in this AHIP & Pharma Welfare Bill and voted for it. So lets lay blame where it lies.

This bill was too toxic and FAR RIGHT even for Republicans when they had ample opportunities to pass it under GWB who never used Veto language except for Stem Cell Research as far as I remember. Nobody passes Individual Mandates for For-profit, Private Corporations and which is against Universal Human Values of making a Free Choice or at-least a choice with representation as in single payer.