Quote of the Day: Circumstances Inching Democrats Close to Health Care Reform Votes?
Our political Quote of the Day comes from the always-highly-quotable MSNBC First Read team of Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg who suggest that two circumstances may have brought the Democrats two votes closer to health care reform enactment:
*** Dems pick up two votes? Are Democrats having their best health-care day in quite some time? Oddly enough, maybe. Today, it appears they’ve picked up two votes for THEIR effort to pass health-care. First, Rep. Nathan Deal (R) announces his resignation today to concentrate on his bid for Georgia governor. And with Deal’s retirement, that means there are 431 House members, so the magic number to pass health care in the House is now 216 votes, down from last week’s 217. Second, in Arkansas, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter (D) today announced he’s launching a primary challenge against Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D). While Arkansas isn’t Pennsylvania — where Joe Sestak’s primary has pushed Arlen Specter to the left — Halter’s challenge probably ensures that Lincoln ends up voting for reconciliation, assuming that Lincoln wants to remain in the Senate.
On Lincoln they write:
Blanche Lincoln gets primary challenge: With Arkansas’ filing deadline a week from today, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter (D) announced that he will challenge Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) in a Democratic primary. “I’m going to spend the rest of today phoning friends, family and supporters, and making a courtesy call to Sen. Blanche Lincoln,” Halter said in a press release. “I look forward to joining my wife and father tomorrow morning at the state capitol where we’ll make official my campaign to put Arkansans first.” Halter also has this announcement video. The question is whether Lincoln — whose poll numbers are abysmal — decides not to seek re-election with the filing deadline next week. Before this news, it was pretty clear she was focused on running. Assuming she does stay in, this sets up an odd primary fight between the progressive wing of the party and the White House. By the way, this also could be a test of Bill Clinton’s sway, if he chooses to engage; something tells us he’d be itching for this fight.
And a slew of stories are now breaking about Lincoln — whose challenge again underscores how those in the GOP and Democratic party perceived by their party’s dominant ideological factions as not towing the line or too centrist are essentially being weeded out in a 21st century where many partisans now insist on ideological purity.
“WE RSERVE THE RIGHT OF ADMISSION” signs are now being hung up in the tents of both political parties.
Some of the stories and posts now emerging include these:
Check out billhalter.com, and you’ll see instantly why incumbent Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-AR, who was already facing a very rough re-election effort with her abyssmal approval ratings, should be even more worried.
A fresh-faced, charming young lieutenant governor, named Bill Halter, in announcing his bid to take on Lincoln, is actually seen getting out of a pickup truck at one point in the campaign ad (is this the Scott Brown formula??) — and even more astounding, one of the things he touts is healthcare reform. It’s not clear what version, because he rather craftily keeps it general in nature. Halter castigates Washington as “broken” – a place that’s “protecting insurance company profits, instead of protecting patients and lowering healthcare costs.”
Not once does Halter speak the name of his new opponent who grew up on an Arkansas farm and years ago used her own pickup truck to campaign. The two appear to share humble roots and a folksy way, but Halter appears more polished and easygoing — but that’s just a snap judgment from a pre-produced campaign spot. WAY too early to tell, for sure.
Lincoln is definitely vulnerable, though.
The key question: was Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter, a popular Democrat, encouraged to challenge Blanche Lincoln for Senate by any entity other than the liberal blogs? That is — did the White House, or the DNC, or senior Democrats, privately encourage Halter to mount a primary challenge in order to defeat Lincoln, who trails Republicans in the polls, or to toughen her up for the general election?
A senior White House official insists the answer is no — this was Halter’s own ambition. But don’t be surprised if senior Democrats in DC aren’t unhappy about the development.
Halter announced his run in a video this morning. Standing in front of a modest-looking house in North Little Rock, Halter says that he’s “making Washington is no longer working for this neighborhood and all across Washington.” He decries “gridlock, bickering and partisan games while unemployment is at a 25-year high.” He points to “bailouts” without “strings attached.”Halter is running as an outsider, but he has extensive Washington experience, serving as a top economic adviser to Bill Clinton and as deputy head of the Social Security Administration during the Clinton years. Before that, he was a senior economist working for Congress. He is a Rhodes scholar, and has two children.
Halter has hinted about a bid for months, particularly after Lincoln had to bargain to secure her vote in favor of health care reform. Halter helped to organize a free health care clinic in Little Rock, earning him national television coverage.
–The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein:
Conservative Democrat Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), whose obstinacy during the health care reform process was so frustrating to the progressive community, is officially getting a primary challenge.
On Monday morning, Arkansas lieutenant governor, Bill Halter, announced that he would launch a campaign to dislodge Lincoln from her Senate seat. He cited a need to focus on middle class issues, take on Wall Street, and fight back against special interests. Halter, who will call Lincoln personally today and send papers to the state capitol on Tuesday, broke the news of his candidacy through an online video at his site..
–The Arkansas Times has a roundup:
As expected, the Halter announcement is making some national waves.
Here, the liberal Daily Kos has begun fund-raising support for Halter.
Kos readers seem happy at the news. Many of them are not Ark. Dems, however.
Politico says the announcement “complicates” matters for Lincoln. Yup.
Talking Points Memo thinks progressive and “netroots” support could be an advantage for Halter in the fall, something Lincoln couldn’t expect. The counter to that is that Republicans, particularly in Arkansas, love to characterize a candidate as an East Coast liberal symp. This could work a little better against Halter than against, say, a Dale Bumpers, given the number of years Halter was away from the state (including working in the belly of the Washington beast, if at the generally popular Social Security Administration.)
Surprisingly, no Republican snark yet. It ought to arrive any minute…
Now you can follow Joe Gandelman on Twitter.
16 Responses to “Quote of the Day: Circumstances Inching Democrats Close to Health Care Reform Votes?”
I think it's very interesting that the *high* vulnerability to the voters, career-wise, is pushing congresspeople hither and tither, often towards irrational, self-serving or otherwise poor or at least inconsequential and manipulative decisions.
It's like you can't win – either we give voters too little power to whip politicians with, and they huddle together and get themselves fat and cozy. That is bad.
Or we make damn sure they never dare to cross the voters. At which point they turn into wind-sniffing, nervous, conflicted, public-pandering, combative, cunning and nervous philosophical nullities with only career-anxiety as the primary motivation. That is bad.
We are seeing the former case in Europe and many developing countries. We are seeing the latter in the US.
Meanwhile, key Democrats (ones that actually control the process in fact), are saying, on record, that the use of reconciliation just isn't going to fly:
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/02/28/conrad-re…
Apparently Dems are out to prove that they are completely incapable of governing.
They have no authority on the matter – if the opposition isn't in good faith, anything is allowed to sidestep it. These “key democrats” are simply low people and posturing weaklings.
Basically, democrats trying to push the bill through are *both* politically self-serving *and* are actively trying to create a decent bill given the situation.
Opposition to reconciliation is, in congress, simply motivated by rank, crass feelings to a higher degree, and is therefore in less good faith. the bill simply isn't very partisan or left-wing, in context. Tort reform is an inconsequential red herring – buying across state lines will invariably accumulate those “unforeseen consequences” conservatives are supposed to be wary of. This means that reconciliation supporters have the meritocratic high ground, which means that they would have their will in a slightly better society.
Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security are broke, broken, unfair, unstable, full of fraud as is congress and the presidency. They are all train wrecks, they have all come off the tracks, it’s up to us to vote them all out of office. I would not let these people wash my car. It’s been said that random picks from any phone book would make better representative’s, throw the bums out – all of them!!!
shannonlee – I wasn't overly interested in what Hot Air had to say. I was more using it as the link the actual comments made on Face the Nation by Kent Conrad. I don;t read Hot Air myself, but the person who pointed this out to me obviously does!
Yes sure, but, hey, that's whatever you are ranting about for you.
HotAir : blogs :: WaPo : newspapers
“Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security are broke, broken, unfair, unstable”
Everyone knows the medical programs have snowballing costs. Social Security (“the sacred covenant” [snicker]) is the program people view more seriously or (relatively) positively. That program begins to fail in 2016. (That is when the deficits begin and the “trust fund” bonds need to start being redeemed so that benefits can continue to be paid in full. Redemption will require tax increases, more borrowing, or taking money from elsewhere in the federal budget. That is, in other words, when the serious problems begin.)
Eliminating the FICA cap on “wages” (income) for Social Security and adjusting benefits for those who have to pay more tax extends the failure about six years, to 2022, and eliminating the cap without any benefit adjustment (increase) for those having to pay more tax extends it seven years, to 2023. By 2024 the failure is impossible to defer any longer. Forcing a tax increase between now and 2016 is daring for Congress — the Dems have idiotically resisted saving this program that they “own,” and the GOP is content to do nothing at all, largely (there was an attempt to change it to a mutual-fund-based defined contribution plan a few years ago, but what else has the GOP done?). Trying to educate people (on this site, included) is largely fruitless, and nobody in Washington wants to take the political risks. At this point I'm largely consigned to waiting until the 2016 election season or near that time, at which point avoidance is impossible. That's also the time we may be treated to new people in Washington, as the long-term “fixtures” that are part of the problem (along with the federal government's improper encroachment into state and local government affairs, and displacement of the private sector in so many cases) will anticipate the end to absolutely or relatively good times in Washingon and for Washingtonians and will begin retiring en masse.
Lincoln is an ideal candidate to primary. She's a terrible Senator. Her approval ratings are dismal. It is highly unlikely she will win the election. It makes sense for a Democratic candidate, who might actually have a better chance in the general election, to try and beat her. I'm not sure how challenging a bad candidate can be seen as the death knell of moderation.
Nobody has a clue one what the economic situation will be in 2024. No one. Those who think they know (Dow 36,000 !!!) are fools.
“Nobody has a clue one what the economic situation will be in 2024.”
This general remark doesn't negate the obvious about Social Security, as well as more generalities that we know are going to happen and related facts (such as changes in the dependency ratio) here and in the USA from aging of our society and of the Baby Boomers as they affect the market (selling assets to pay for retirements). In no way does that negate the problems with our entitlements; it's illogical to present it as any attempt at a refutation.
We know Social Security will begin failing, in 2016 without its being touched, by 2024 if the tax cap is lifted. In fact, the years were specified by the Social Security Administration, who reported what the effects would be if the tax cap were lifted, with and without adjusting benefits for the tax increases.
Officials in Washington who can do something, and idiotic worshippers of the entitlement programs among the public, nevertheless decline to act now rather than later, which would be better than doing it later, as they fear the unpleasant and the most stupid or demented of them are in denial there is any problem. When they're told what the facts are and they insist on being demented or stupid, that is even worse.
At this point, dementia and stupidity rule and there probably won't be action taken until it is forced several years from now.
DLS, we've been hearing dire warnings about these programs for decades. When the political will is there, we fix them, which we have done under both GOP and Dems. SS is never going broke, nor Medicare. When it comes right down to it, the public will demand these programs be rescued, and they will be.
“we've been hearing dire warnings about these programs for decades”
Not routinely dire, but they have been serious. For poor reasons, many would and do deny them.
It won't be an easy solution. Many will want a means test (Medicare as well as Social Security), and what solution does happen (be it a means test that excludes many partially or fully as beneficiaries, or retention of universality that involves hardship as benefits as well as benefit growth are curtailed or actually reduced, while greatly increased taxes raise opposition among the ever-more-squeezed taxpayers) is going to be unpleasant.
Some prefer denial, though. In large part, with many I'm led to see that it's an effect of the neurosis they possess when it comes to defending these programs or their Something Greater Than Themselves with which they identify if not idolize, the federal government. The real world is far removed from that and from them. Their only consolation (and they're too ignorant to notice — they're in no position to appreciate it) is that support for the programs may grow without trying, for while many Boomers will do fine in retirement, many will not, and while sensibility and looking at the numbers cries for means-test exclusion or benefit reduction, there will develop a desire (not out of Sixties silliness and grandiosity, but out of hardship and sometimes, desperation) a new sense that benefits actually need to be increased. What proportions? We'll just have to see.
I think the public is the problem. For a lot of boomers, it seems like the delay in fixing this is a feature, not a bug. Some are in denial, but others are just hoping they can hurry up and retire before benefits get cut for the next generation. After all, when changes have been made, law makers grandfathered in current beneficiaries. Personally, I think lawmakers are going to wait until things get really bad. Seniors are going to demand to keep their welfare as is. There are going to be plenty of sob stories, on both sides. In the end, I think benefits will be cut and some seniors are going to be forced to come out of retirement.
Inching closer to health care reform?
1. Today's state in the news is ………. New Mexico.
25 per cent increase, regulators say 20% OK, for individual policies.
http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=168347
http://newmexicoindependent.com/48994/nm-indivi…
2. Meanwhile, back in Michigan, is or isn't a rate increase in the works sometime for individual plans?
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100302/BIZ/302…
http://www.emaxhealth.com/1/144/35911/michigan-…