Will There be a Vote on Health Care Tomorrow?
Nancy Pelosi has assured us that there will be. Of course, the job of House Speaker is much like being a bookie for organized crime… you never take a bet when you don’t know how the game will end. Byron York explains how this is putting a lot of Democrats under the gun.
The House is in the final rush toward passage of a national health care bill, and there’s one thing Speaker Nancy Pelosi absolutely, positively does not want her Democratic lawmakers to do: Go home.
One Democrat who may be having visions of toast these days is Virginia Rep. Tom Perriello, who last year defeated a Republican incumbent by less than one-fifth of one percentage point. In Tuesday’s gubernatorial election, the GOP came roaring back in Perriello’s district, with Republican Bob McDonnell smashing Democrat Creigh Deeds by a 61 to 39 percent margin. The newly energized GOP will definitely be gunning for Perriello next year.
Never mind the fact that Pelosi has gone back on her promise to put any final health care bill up on line for 72 hours before a vote. Given the recent slides in public approval for this plan, combined with the fact that her flock will all be facing the voters’ wrath again next year, there are plenty of nervous nellies in the crowd.
So either they have to face down their constituents or their Speaker. It says something about the power of Congress that a lawmaker fears a party boss more than the people who elected him or her. Somehow, I’m sure that’s not what the founders had in mind for a citizen legislature and the people’s branch of government.
It’s going to be an interesting ride. Either way, stop by Mid Stream Radio tomorrow at 11 a.m. eastern and we’ll be covering the live build-up to either the vote or the lack of one. If there’s one thing worse for Nancy Pelosi than not getting a health bill, it’s calling for a vote and losing.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
21 Responses to “Will There be a Vote on Health Care Tomorrow?”
You better hope not!
Committee Confirms: Comply With Pelosi-Care Or Go To Jail
Never mind the fact that Pelosi has gone back on her promise to put any final health care bill up on line for 72 hours before a vote
Now this is a knee slapper if there was one. 72 hours to read, digest, and completely understand a 2,000 page doorstop?
From your inference can I assume that you're inline with the “NO” (read republican) side.
The republicans intentionally waited until after any possibility of a 72 hour period after a final bill was online before they submitted their version and still vote on it before recess.
Too funny! Jazz Shaw pays attention to what is happening in politics and therefore knows what's actually happening AND still he presents this as if the Democrats are to blame.
Some wonder why the right is out in the cold… It's because they don't realize that BS freezes, too.
I will at least give you credit for being hilarious, Steve.
“The republicans intentionally waited until after any possibility of a 72 hour period after a final bill was online before they submitted their version which they insisted be considered before a vote.“
So the world ends on Saturday? Pelosi schedules the votes for all intents and purposes. If the Republican proposal came on Friday she could schedule it for Tuesday and the GOP couldn't stop her. Nice try,though. Very amusing.
And you get no (read zero) credit for trying to play stupid. The republicans will continue to stall this vote until the holiday recess… till the August recess… till 2011 and you know it.
Your response… “I will at least give you credit for being hilarious, Steve.” speaks volumes.
In reality, this bill changes nothing. There's no real cost control, other than rationing, no increased competition, no breakup of the government created insurance and medical monopolies. It's going to increase costs on all of us, and the AMA, the AARP, and the pharmaceutical companies are laughing all the way to bank.
The Democrats could have surprised us with a small, readable bill that repealed McCarran-Ferguson and eliminated the tax penalty for buying individual plans, then watched the Republicans desperately defend the monopolies and laws that got into this mess. We don't even have time to write letters and get them delivered on time.
Pelosi has shown her hand, and she's got one finger raised.
Anyone who's worked under a manager (whether you liked them or not) understands the word “deadline” and like it or not Nancy Pelosi is now the Manager (Speaker) of the United States House of Representatives. As manager she has the duty and responsibility of coordinating the work done in the House.
Two years ago Jazz and his ilk were constantly berating the Democrats that didn't cooperate with the Republican Speaker but they're playing stupid and just can't understand why the current Speaker should have any say matters at all.
Apparently they don't see the hypocrisy in their change in attitude but guess what?.. Most people do.
comment read
can't understand why the current Speaker should have any say matters at all.
No, they just wonder why she lies through her teeth all the time, and why people like you defend her lies.
The Repubs may not be all that interested in this legislation, but the sad fact is that they are not needed. Every single one of them in both chambers can vote against it. The problem now, as it has been all summer long, is that the Dems cannot get their own party on board:
The apparent problem: Democrats have yet to resolve intraparty disputes over abortion funding and illegal immigrants' access to health care.
Intraparty disputes…If the Dems were truly interested in getting something done, as they have repeatedly said they were, they would tell the Repubs to go to hell and wallow away in the sand for awhile. With people like Bachman leading the opposition, it shouldn't be that hard to get your own party on board.
The republicans have stalled this since 1912….when it was first introduced!!!!! They just dont like the fact that the constitution is 5/6 liberal and or progressive in nature….
comment read
And why did people like you defend Bush when he lied????? But then again when did she lie???
Pelosi isn't an idiot. House leaders do their counting before they call for a vote. I'd be greatly surprised if it doesn't pass this weekend.
We've already covered this. The constitution as intended (see Article I section 8 and federalist paper #41) would allow the states to do what they wanted, but not congress. The constitution as it's currently used (living document, meaning the supreme court will read it as they want) has only a few limitations on either spending or freedom.
AustinRoth defended (she) Bush? When did he do that?
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by pa5fn: Will There be a Vote on Health Care Tomorrow?: Nancy Pelosi has assured us that there will be. Of course, the job of… http://bit.ly/1Y5X2q...
Good going, Jazz (both this thread, and carrying the vote on the air). Priorities!
Assuming this vote is affirmative, it clears the House and throws the issue on the Senate. Much is wrong with what these people are doing, but given how much they've been bungling in their overreach, I'm actually relieved and have even a perverse sense of enjoyment that they're getting out of HUA mode now.
Meanwhile, the Senate is in what mode, not only with health care “reform,” but with “climate” legislation?
HUA.
More follies to come from these clowns! (Though it's not funny that the joke's on America and Americans.)
“72 hours to read, digest, and completely understand a 2,000 page doorstop?”
Well, some among the public have to, even though they're derided for protesting after they learn what's in it, given that Congress and even their staffers are neglecting to read what they're voting on.
[guffaw -- snort, snort]
“that the constitution is 5/6 liberal and or progressive in nature”
“as it's currently used (living document, meaning the supreme court will read it as they want) “
Meaning liberals and “progressives” want the courts to read it as liberals and “progressives” want, rather than what it really says and _means_…
And new mental health benefits included in any federal health care “reform” (takeover) won't cure this problem.
“There's no real cost control, other than rationing, no increased competition, no breakup of the government created insurance and medical monopolies. It's going to increase costs on all of us, and the AMA, the AARP, and the pharmaceutical companies are laughing all the way to bank.”
This never was about reform, which would be easy and simple to implement and doesn't involve the public option. But, of course, the public option is the essence of what is being sought here, for what is being sought here is federal takeover of health care. The public would recoil at prompt federalization of everything (“Medicare for All”), and even extremist stunts like a Medicare buy-in or a throwback to obsolescent 1960s expectations of ever-diminishing retirement age (reversal of reality), with a new age 55 Medicare threshold (or other things like folding Medicaid into Medicare or creating a new Medicare entitlement for children, examples I've long provided as other incrementalist alternatives). Hence the indirect incrementalist “option” approach (rigged “competition” openly intended to displace and, in the future, replace the private insurers and related parties like HMOs).
The problem is that this not only has amounted to overreach, but, like so much sought this year by the lib Dems, is far left of the mainstream and is overreach that is now causing the party to founder and to fracture.
If Pelosi gets this vote done today, it's a public example that she's trying to get at least the House lib Dems to get going and resume making “progress” again. (It also puts pressure on Harry Reid and others in the Senate, obviously.)