but if they would just publish the bill like they promised everyone would be able to read and try to understand the bill. She was talking to the National Association of Counties, not other members of the Congress. I read it as she is saying to the counties that we don't need to know what is in the bill till after it is signed and made law.
Both the Senate and the House bills are public documents and have been available for months. The reconciliation between them is a negotiated compromise that can't be published and made available until they agree on it. It will almost certainly be available before it goes to the White House for an executive signature. There is no reason not to. They just can't publish it before they finish revising it.
and now for this... House Democrats looking at 'Slaughter Solution' to pass Obamacare without a vote on Senate bill | Washington Examiner gotta love the maneuvering. I am trying to find more sources but so far there are only 2 (the link and the other is behind a paywall) and then a post on Congressman Boehner's site -- Republican Leader John Boehner | Democrats Prepare ?Slaughter Solution? to Ram Unpopular Health Care Takeover Through Congress Without a Vote
I'm sure this kind of crap has been going on forever, but the advent of the 24hr media cycle and Al Gore's internet makes this a very risky move. I don't understand how the Dems aren't committing political suicide if they resort to anything other than a straight-up vote on this. It's almost good enough for the other side to just sit back, shine a big spotlight on the entire thing, and let them off themselves in public. Maybe somebody can explain to me how this doesn't backfire on them.
Suicide? For doing what politicians do? Everything political has a risk if it fails and an opportunity if it succeeds. What would be suicide would be for Democrats to have spent a year on this, haven already taken any political fallout back home, and then just give drop it because the minority party doesn't like it. Obama would never be able to get anything passed again if he rolled over like that to crying republicans. The partisan obstructionism would continue and get worse. Now they pay the price for refusing to compromise by getting nothing of what they wanted. The GOP has played this game many time in the past decade. Did they think there wouldn't be some payback? Elections have consequences. You're looking at it from the point of view that health reform is bound to fail. What if it doesn't? What if health care reform turns out to be successful and popular? Who will have backfired, then? Taking their dollies and going home may not be the best political strategy for republicans right now.
Certainly if healthcare fails spectacularly it will set the democrats back. On the other hand, if it is a tremendous success, it will set the republicans back. but really, it will take so long to be conclusive that everyone will have moved on to something else and it will all be forgotten. Meanwhile, we'll still have partisanship because this situation surely isn't going to slow that down.
Success or failure won't come quickly enough to save the democrats. They fail to pass it, Obama suffers greatly and so do all the little Indians that could not get anything done with a super majority. They pass it, and Obama watches his party get blown away in November, but he can point and say "we did that". The abomination is in anyone thinking this has anything to do with reform of any kind, or this is the change in the "style of politics/govt" that the majority voted for. It's about power, and expansion of that power. It has never been about anything else. And rarely ever is.
I think you missed my point. I'm talking about the political implications of this effort, not from the results of the effort. The bill won't show any impact on the policy side for a long time. But, politically, it is a very unpopular bill and the dems have given the impression that they will do anything to pass it, including what many perceive as "ignoring" what the public is saying through polling (which I hate) and their representatives (which is the proper voice). By remaining tone deaf, the dems have effectively adopted an all-or-nothing stance on this (again, perceptions are very powerful). If they pass it via something other than a straight up and down vote, it's going to get ugly in the next election cycle. And if it gets ugly in the next election cycle, all those dems (who have survived) who live in non-urban, non-Liberal areas are going to disassociate with the President and Pelosi post haste. Tragedy? Hardly. I've always been a proponent of a balanced (i.e. gridlocked) Congress. My point is - the dems are being stupid and trying to open their agenda (like the Clintons) with a bill so polarizing and poorly developed that it has forced them into a corner. The minute this thing passes in any method other than a straight up vote, the game will be on. And there's nothing the dems can point to (other than promises that won't be fulfilled for a relatively long time) to calm the fears that will be generated. In short - they're being stupid. (I stole that from martin...)
the way i see it, it is pelosi and reid who have adopted the all or nothing. while i am not gonna say obama is not part of this mess, as it was his baby to begin with, i believe he allowed p/r to hijack it the issue and make it even more extreme than what i believe was originally intended. and he allowed reid to make every deal imaginable to "get 'er done". now that he is trying to take the reins back just a bit, that horse is out of the barn and on the next forty. i see more of a split happening within the democratic party, and i hope it is one that dumps p/r and starts bringing the party towards the middle. obama is already fighting with reid on the deals and earmarks to certain senators districts for their votes. one of the few remaining is for louisiana, partially because it is intended to help louisiana recover from katrina, partially because the language extends the goodies to other districts effected by (future) natural disasters. but the fact that it was mccain in a meeting with pubs that called obama out on this and obama's reaction was "i agree", is setting up a showdown with the senators in his own party. never mind that he agreed to these in the first place. all of us "make mistakes" and change our minds when we see we "were wrong" (i expect a mea culpa when called on that) so moving back to the middle on that part, and splitting with reid, could help with the moderates. i personally think the the best thing politically obama could do right now is split with pelosi and reid and set himself up to look more moderate in doing so. if the bill goes down, he can blame them for their refusal to move to the middle, and be viewed as willing to lose the vote rather than go along with those two. if he forces things to the middle and gets it passed, then he looks like the moderate for forcing those two ass-clowns down. but of course, im not his advisor so who knows what will happen.:grin:
