U.S. politics 23

[Mad Monkey]

What we should do is poll 20 people over the age of 50, then insist that 12 of them were completely unaware of the sexual connotations, 10 of them were aware of it but only recently, and the remaining 5 were the ones who coined it for the film in the first place. If anyone suggests that there's anything wrong with this statistical analysis, then

[Shryke]

Someone is actually thinking: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/14/tom-harkin-to-introduce-l_n_391188.html

With the news that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) plans to filibuster the current health care bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) options are looking increasingly limited. But one Democratic senator may introduce legislation that would make health care reform a lot easier.

Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa told reporters this weekend that he might reintroduce legislation to end the filibuster, something he first proposed in 1994. The Hawk Eye reports:

"I think, if anything, this health care debate is showing the dangers of unlimited filibuster," Harkin said Thursday during a conference call with reporters. "I think there's a reason for slowing things down ... and getting the public aware of what's happening and maybe even to change public sentiment, but not to just absolutely stop something."

Under Harkin's proposal, debate could be prolonged by the minority -- just not forever.

"You could hold something up for maybe a month, but then, finally you'd come down to 51 votes and a majority would be able to pass," Harkin said. "I may revive that. I pushed it very hard at one time and then things kind of got a little better."

[sologdin]

stretching it over someone's face.

goodness, this is awesome. not to be picayune about definitions of great slang terms, but does this mean to suggest that the rightwing has been hoodwinked by a overstretched ballsack?

[Shryke]

Wow, turns out tons of emails from the Bush White House were "lost": http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/12/22-million-emails-found/

White House computer technicians have found 22 million e-mails that were believed to have been lost during President George W. Bush’s administration, according to the Associated Press.

The discovery was announced Monday by the National Security Archive and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which filed lawsuits against the Executive Office of the President (EOP) in 2007 for the e-mails.

And now they've turned up. I wonder what they say....

[sologdin]

I wonder what they say....

that climate change data were falsified by evil commie scientists, likely.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Someone is actually thinking: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/14/tom-harkin-to-introduce-l_n_391188.html

Problem is that this doesn't have a hope of passing. Republicans will oppose it because it weakens their ability to be obstructionist, Lieberman, Landrieu, Lincoln, Ben Nelson, and company will oppose it because it decreases their leverage with Harry Reid, and Robert Byrd will oppose it because the filibuster's a Grand Old Senate Tradition .

While I am not unsympathetic to scrapping the filibuster altogether, I do think that a huge part of the problem is not so much that the filibuster exists, so much as that it can currently be done non-painlessly. Back in the Old Days, when the likes of Thurmond, Eastland, and company were filibustering the Civil Rights Bill, they had to actually stand up for 24 hours on end, reading the phone-book (something that requires a fair bit of physical effort). Nowadays all McConnell has to do is pick up the phone and say to Harry Reid that the Republicans are filibustering - which is why the Republicans do it so often.

[Shryke]

Problem is that this doesn't have a hope of passing. Republicans will oppose it because it weakens their ability to be obstructionist, Lieberman, Landrieu, Lincoln, Ben Nelson, and company will oppose it because it decreases their leverage with Harry Reid, and Robert Byrd will oppose it because the filibuster's a Grand Old Senate Tradition .

While I am not unsympathetic to scrapping the filibuster altogether, I do think that a huge part of the problem is not so much that the filibuster exists, so much as that it can currently be done non-painlessly. Back in the Old Days, when the likes of Thurmond, Eastland, and company were filibustering the Civil Rights Bill, they had to actually stand up for 24 hours on end, reading the phone-book (something that requires a fair bit of physical effort). Nowadays all McConnell has to do is pick up the phone and say to Harry Reid that the Republicans are filibustering - which is why the Republicans do it so often.

Aye. This all started because a ways back, someone decided that Filibustering just Filibustered that specific bill and thus the Senate could move on to other business. Before that, you couldn't move on till that Filibuster was done or the bill had died.

[Tsavong Lah]

The idea of "cloture" was something used sparingly until just recently. This year we've had more cloture votes than the 60s and 70s combined.

I long for going back to actually making the opposition filibuster. Then the word "obstructionist" would be connected to Republican in the mind of every American.

[Watcher]

Well, he couldn't be any plainer.

He also added this worthy gem:

:shocked:

There's a good article in Slate entitled "Are the Republicans series about health care?" That examines the role Republicans had in passing Medicare Part D. How their 2003 bill is everything they are currently protesting. That fiscally irresponsible law vastly expanded the governments role in health care, is paid for solely by deficit spending, its adding 1.2 trillion to the budget over 10 years, does nothing to contain costs (worse it encourages price increases because it prohibits the government from bargaining for the best price). 24 of the 28 Republicans who voted for it are currently in Senate voted for it and they all oppose health care reform despite it being a much better bill then the monstrously they created.

[Lightsnake]

Quite frankly? Fuck the Democrats for compromising to this extent. Is there any goddamn thing left in this bill that resembles real reform?

[Lightsnake]

At this point, I'd just prefer they put SOMETHING through as well. They've let the republicans hold it up too long.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Another good article about Sherrif Joe and the Maricopa County Sherrif Office. Includes many incriminating videos and links. Apparently Sherrif Joe has pulled out RICO against the Maricopa County board of supervisors. He his pet DA Andrew Thomas are basically accusing the entire county government of being a criminal syndicate (which, while in essense true, rings false coming from those two).

[Piper]

Another good article about Sherrif Joe and the Maricopa County Sherrif Office. Includes many incriminating videos and links. Apparently Sherrif Joe has pulled out RICO against the Maricopa County board of supervisors. He his pet DA Andrew Thomas are basically accusing the entire county government of being a criminal syndicate (which, while in essense true, rings false coming from those two).

Isn't RICO a federal law? Is he claiming federal powers now, or is there some state-equivalent racketeering charge he can employ?

[davos]

Ok, the Democrats started out trying to reform health care having already taken the single payer option right off the table. Now, with the Medicare expansion apparently being dropped, they've managed to whittle it down to what amounts to what amounts to a glorified regulatory package. A few issues are addressed but in the end if anything at all passes it will be reform in name only and will likely make health care crisis worse. Depending on what version of the bill would pass mandatory insurance is actually going push more business to the Insurance Companies. People who can't get insurance from their employer and couldn't afford to buy insurance themselves are now going to be faced with either having to find a way to buy insurance with funds they don't have or to have fees and penalties tacked on top of what they already can't pay. Our health care system is a national disgrace. Yet somehow the supposedly liberal party in this country has found a way to take an awful situation and actually make it worse, if they succeed in passing anything at all. Outside of a few discenting voices (thank God for Russ Feingold) the democratic party is devoid of people who are worthy of being called liberal or progressive. I would call for their wholesale removal expect the alternative is the republicans, who if they had their way would toss the whole country, except the rich, to the wolves. Yep, we're all fucked.

[potsherds]

I agree with Davos. I have no idea what's left in this bill that really counts as reform. I don't see whatever passes as doing a lick of good for the country.

Quite frankly, fuck the Democrats in the Congress (and fuck the pres too, but that's another issue).

[Shryke]

Ok, the Democrats started out trying to reform health care having already taken the single payer option right off the table. Now, with the Medicare expansion apparently being dropped, they've managed to whittle it down to what amounts to what amounts to a glorified regulatory package. A few issues are addressed but in the end if anything at all passes it will be reform in name only and will likely make health care crisis worse. Depending on what version of the bill would pass mandatory insurance is actually going push more business to the Insurance Companies. People who can't get insurance from their employer and couldn't afford to buy insurance themselves are now going to be faced with either having to find a way to buy insurance with funds they don't have or to have fees and penalties tacked on top of what they already can't pay. Our health care system is a national disgrace. Yet somehow the supposedly liberal party in this country has found a way to take an awful situation and actually make it worse, if they succeed in passing anything at all. Outside of a few discenting voices (thank God for Russ Feingold) the democratic party is devoid of people who are worthy of being called liberal or progressive. I would call for their wholesale removal expect the alternative is the republicans, who if they had their way would toss the whole country, except the rich, to the wolves. Yep, we're all fucked.

There's still quite a few good things left. The fight has all been over the public option stuff. Eliminating discrimination based on "pre-existing conditions" is a big one. It's ain't anywhere close to perfect, but it's the best someones gotten through in .... what, like 30 years?

Also, the people to blame here are the ConservaDem Senators. There's like ... 8 or so of them, or something. But because the Republicans are playing the "Oppose Everything" game, people like Lieberman have ALL the power. There's quite a few decent Democrats, although less so in the horrible shithole that is the Senate.

Oh yeah, and the Democrats also suck at negotiation and hardball. Can't forget that too.

All in all, I'd say it's a bag of suck, but better then nothing.

[Tsavong Lah]

I loved the idea of the Public Option, but anyone who feels that it was the only real "reform" in the bill needs to chill out some. The bill will still do a hell of a lot of good things. Want proof? Even without the public option or the medicare buy in, pretty much every single Republican will vote against it. That's a pretty good endorsement.

But in all seriousness, the Public Option wasn't a silver bullet (especially in any form that it could have been past). The bill will still dramatically increase coverage and will have some effect on lowering premiums.

The thing that upsets me the most is that the bill is now probably going to be a windfall for insurance companies. Way to reward the corrupt. The public option or the medicare buy-in were mechanisms to offer an alternative to private coverage and force more competition. Insurance really isn't being affected, but in many ways the cost of actual health care should be reduced by this bill.

[Shryke]

I loved the idea of the Public Option, but anyone who feels that it was the only real "reform" in the bill needs to chill out some. The bill will still do a hell of a lot of good things. Want proof? Even without the public option or the medicare buy in, pretty much every single Republican will vote against it. That's a pretty good endorsement.

But in all seriousness, the Public Option wasn't a silver bullet (especially in any form that it could have been past). The bill will still dramatically increase coverage and will have some effect on lowering premiums.

The thing that upsets me the most is that the bill is now probably going to be a windfall for insurance companies. Way to reward the corrupt. The public option or the medicare buy-in were mechanisms to offer an alternative to private coverage and force more competition. Insurance really isn't being affected, but in many ways the cost of actual health care should be reduced by this bill.

Is this really surprising though?

Opposition to the bill and donations from Insurance companies to Democratic Senators correlate almost 1:1.

[davos]

I loved the idea of the Public Option, but anyone who feels that it was the only real "reform" in the bill needs to chill out some. The bill will still do a hell of a lot of good things. Want proof? Even without the public option or the medicare buy in, pretty much every single Republican will vote against it. That's a pretty good endorsement.

I'm not saying that its the only real reform. What I am saying is that without a public options those changes that are still in the bill will be hallow and lack any meaningful bite. Yes, we are supposedly going to have discrimination based off of pre-existing conditions regulated. I will believe that is actually going to work when I see it. The insurance companies will find ways around the letter of the regulation within a few years. They maybe forced to cover more people for more conditions but the problem is likely to remain. Yes, a meaningful number of Americans will get access to insurance but many will continue to be stuck on the outside. On top of this the insurance companies will still get to run the show without challenge. Furthermore progressives will loose leverage that they would have if no bill passed to force the issue back onto the table in the near future. If the current bill passes its going to be hard to muster the political force needed to try to bring more comprehensive reform for another 15-20 years, if at all. If the bill fails and pro reform forces are able to frame that failure properly in the public mind the possibility remains that we could return to this debate better prepared to fight for something more complete within a few years. What we are getting is a sell out that that the insurance companies and republicans will be ok with because it will sap the reform movement of any force. Its not worth selling our future for.

[Shryke]

You've got it the wrong way around Davos.

If it passes, the Dems can amend and improve and add to it later, but without as much grand-standing. That's what has happened with tons of other legislation (I believe the Clean Air Act is the generally used example)

If it DOESN'T pass, it will be like a decade before anyone musters the political will to try again. The last pass at Health Care Reform was 16 years ago!