« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Likely Causes of the Death of ObamaCare

By: Dan Perrin (Diary)  |  November 11th, 2009 at 04:35 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Robert Costa has written an interesting piece about the many things that could kill ObamaCare in the U.S. Senate.

It’s true, the patient known as ObamaCare is looking blue and convulsing on the table as Senators Reid and Durbin wonder what to do about these many symptoms (per Costa):

1. Time. Costa does not say it, but Senator Coburn is threatening to have the bill read, front to back, all 2,000 pages, prior to each amendment. Hmmm. Costa’s point is time is on the side of ObamaCare’s death by thousands of pages of text.

2. President Obama. Can you say radioactive and toxic for moderate Dems running for re-election — Costa — didn’t say that, I am taking some liberties.

3. GOP Amendments. Guns and immigration, guns and babies, guns and taxes, guns and spending, guns and Medicare cuts, guns and government control of your health care, guns and health care rationing — did I mention guns? (OK, so Costa did not mention guns.)

4. Abortion. (See entire internet on Stupak.) For extra points, see Senator Nelson (D-NE) and Stupak amendment in the U.S. Senate.

5. The public option. Ah, the liberal’s shimmering holy grail — its right there, but oh, I think I see it — but it is elusive isn’t it — See Google for “Senator Lieberman (I-CT) public option.”

Not mentioned by Costa but in play: health care rationing, immigration, death panels, health care databases (guns), privacy, Medicare cuts, taxes and spending.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • AngryMatt

    Don’t be surprised at the force of “win at any cost” by the Dems. They’ve staked their entire reputation of governance on getting this through. They’ll sacrifice any one or several parts of what is in this bill to get something on the scoreboard. What do they have? The stimulus? It’s being torn apart by both conservative economists who see it as a huge disruption in the market and liberal economists who think it wasn’t enough.

    They basically have delivered absolutely nothing to those who voted them into power. I really believe the leadership on the Left basically written off 2010 as a bloodbath, they’re quite willing to sacrifice both sections of this bill and even more of their rank and file in the House by shoving this through.

    What we have to do is try to convince enough of those rank and file that they will survive if they vote against this thing. A very tall order but one I think can be done; perhaps fewer threats that we’ll “target” them if they vote for the bill and more “we’ll focus most of our efforts elsewhere if you vote against this” from our leadership.

    • janis

      fitting that we concoct some straight-faced whoppers to serve them in return. While we here at RedState might just barely be able to restrain ourselves from going all out against the Dems, who’s going to moderate the response from all those angry voters who don’t read here?

      As for the leadership of the GOP being able to convince those same angry voters to follow their lead on this subject and deliver mercy instead of retribution….. uh, yeah, good luck with that. The Dems are looking at a bloodbath of retribution at this point.

    • The_Gadfly

      any of their factions under the bus (UTB) if it will get them enough votes for a bill (well at least any bill except a Republican alternative) to pass. I think the only reason it hasn’t passed yet is because despite the best efforts of their most accomplished liars and their most prolific book cookers, every time they run a new variation UTB they come up short of the number they need.

      Pass the popcorn.

    • Dan Perrin

      starve anyone who votes against of funds — it is a threat that likely will not move those in the Senate who would vote against the bill.

      A win at any cost still means that they need 60 votes — and unless a win at any cost means accepting pro-life language and throwing the public option overboard — and even still, they may not get Nelson even if they do all of that.

      It seems to me that the liberals cannot accept these restrictions.

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        who insist that it not explode the deficit. The problem is that those same blue dawgs can’t stomach the damage the proposals would to to eitehr small buiness, cap gains and the economy overall.

  • bk

    The House can pretty much kill all amendments through their Rules Committee. In the Senate I believe they usually tend to limit by mutual agreement the number of amendments to be offered.

    I’ve got to believe that the GOP will include an amendment for the doc fix, else why would they (and a number of Dems) kill it as a separate bill or as an amendment to some unrelated bill?

    Since it immediately adds $250B to the CBO score, it will help kill the bill.

    • Richard Mullins

      In the house, it’s quite easy to roll members in to voting for legislation. All you need to do is let an amendment that gets you the votes and then shut the door. It doesn’t work that way in the Senate and in the Senate, each member has a trump card, also refered as a fillibuster. The House runs on populism and the Senate doesn’t.

      • Dan Perrin

        n/t

  • Mayhem

    If Coburn is going to have the bill read after every amendment, then won’t Reid just cut off the number of amendments?

    • Dan Perrin

      he will object to the clerk NOT reading it.

      • Dan Perrin

        Senator Reid cannot cut off amendments, or get past the filibuster of the motion to proceed or get past the filibuster of the actual bill.

        He needs 60 votes, and Lieberman has said he will not vote to cut off debate — or end the filibuster if there is a public option.

        And Senator Nelson has far more conditions, cost, taxes, adding to the deficit, pro-life language and the public option.

        So, unless the Dems cut a deal to get Snowe, then they lose the vote — and this assumes that every other Dem will vote with Reid.

  • roscopico

    I read the original, but your synopsis (especially item 3) buoyed my spirit.

    Thanks for your take, as well as the chuckle.

    I like our odds!

    • Dan Perrin

      it.

      It was too much fun to write.

  • tricianc

    Here’s what they are planning. A devious plan.

    It takes 60 votes to get any bill to the floor. Once to the floor they will water it down and make it seem benign to get the votes they need. The Seantors can then say they didn’t vote for the bad stuff.

    Then when it goes into conference because it has to in order to be put with the house bill, they will add all the stuff back in along with dreams the left has had for years.Then it only needs 51 votes.

    America, our freedom is the envy of the world. We must work together to fight for it once again.

    Call all Senators and tell them NO BILL TO THE FLOOR, PERIODl. Even if they are not your own Senator, call. (I tell them they may not be my state senator but they are deciding for all Americans)

    • IJB

      It’s only budget bills under Reconciliation that can’t be filibustered, IIRC.

      • Dan Perrin

        but see above.

        • Dan Perrin

          conference reports cannot be filibustered.

          • IJB

            From Wiki:

            Conference reports are privileged. And in the Senate, a motion to proceed to a conference report is not debatable, although Senators can generally filibuster the conference report itself. [emphasis mine] The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 limits debate on conference reports on budget resolutions and budget reconciliation bills to 10 hours in the Senate, so Senators cannot filibuster those conference reports. (2 U.S.C. ? 636, 2 U.S.C. ? 641e.)

            So, basically, if the Conference Committee dumps Stupak, and adopts a radicalized version of the House bill, it will definitely be filibustered in the Senate, and will never see the light of day…

          • Illinicon

            because I was unsure about the conference report rules and there is actually nothing in the Constitution about Conference reports. So its just a Senate rule and couldnt be changed. I think we could get 11 dem votes on an amendment like that to the bill.

    • Dan Perrin

      and he needs 60 votes twice.

      Once to end the filibuster of the motion to proceed and 60 votes again to end the filibuster of the bill.

      Senator Lieberman has said that he will not vote to end the filibuster of the bill if there is a public option.

      This does not take into account the effect of any pro-life restrictions, any gun amendments, immigration amendments, tax amendments, amendments to restore the Medicare cuts or any other myriad of possibilities.

      So, Harry Reid is going trick US?

  • Ausonius

    The One cannot fail: his obsessive hatred of American business is matched by Reid’s and Pelosi’s hatred of it. If you have read MAObama’s books, or at least the tomes with his name on them, you know that his hatred of American business is one of his main motivators: businesses oppress people, profits are unfair, if not just plain thievery, and so every business must be taught a lesson!

    And in MAObama’s sick mind insurance companies who feed off sick people are the worst!

    Lying, back-room maneuvering, nuclear option to avoid filibusters, etc. any means will be used. This bill is not D.O.A.

    Reid and company will use any means to pass a FedGov take-over of health insurance. Falling numbers in polls will mean nothing.

    Fight it with all means possible, (I hope my fears are proven wrong), but brace yourselves for defeat and a shock wave throughout the economy…if any economy is left functioning…and a psychological shock wave affecting the future of America.

    And to understand MAObama and why logic or sensible politics will never stop his obsessions…check out those books! To defeat your enemy, know him inside out.

    • Dan Perrin

      basically boils down to — I cannot tell you how it will pass, just that the Dems will do everything they can to pass it.

      60 votes is non-negotiable. They can’t get around it.

      You are right, the bill is not DOA, not until there is a vote on the motion to proceed or cloture on the bill.

      • DavidSage

        I thought the public option was dead, but it was resurrected in both the House and Senate version. I didn’t think it would clear the House, and it did.

        Liberals have been fighting hard for this since day one. It is the MOST important goal in the entire movement, Everything else comes after it. They are willing to compromise anything to get this passed, We can’t underestimate that. I won’t surprised if they’re willing to get rid of the filibuster for good just so they can pass this. I also worry some “Gang of 12″ type group will emerge that will broker a compromise.

        My guess is it will die in the Senate because I don’t see 60 votes, and I think time is the biggest enemy for this, but we need to fight like our lives depend on it.

  • Maelstrom

    Not being a Senate rules guru, I’m having difficulty understanding the 51 votes vs 60 requirement. Can someone please help me out? Can the Dem’s pull a fast one using the lesser requirement of 51 votes in any way, shape or form to RAM this through? Thanks in advance.

    • Dan Perrin

      A) Dems must have 60 votes to end the filibuster of the motion to proceed. If they do not get 60 votes, the bill dies. It is not considered on the Senate floor.

      B) Dems must have 60 votes to end the filibuster of the bill. They cannot move to final passage where they need 51 votes unless they get 60 votes first.

      OK?

      • Maelstrom

        Thanks, Dan – Got it! Just trying to understand HOW sneaky the Dem’s will attempt to get. I’m curious : IF this were to somehow make it through, do you think there would be any lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of it? Thanks again.

      • illinoisconservative

        But, if they water it down enough to get 60 votes to end the filibuster of the bill, it then goes to conference, correct?

        After it comes out of conference, it only take 51 votes to pass at that point?

        How much leeway do they have to reinstate objectionable features in conference? Is it “anything goes”?

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    The first strike should be to have the entire bill read, as Senator Coburn has threatened to. I have written the Georgia Senators Chambliss (*replied at length) and Isakson, asking them to help Sen. Coburn lead in this regard.

    The second strike coming form Erick’s strategy below, is a brilliant strategy once “on the field”. It speaks to Dan’s #3 of this post, but offering meaningful amendments. (From Erick’s diary back on Tuesday, http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/11/10/if-health-care-becomes-about-abortion-or-any-other-issue-but-freedom-we-lose/ )

    “Mandates must come out because government should not force people to purchase health insurance. The public option must come out because it will destroy competition and intentionally undermine contracts between private entities. Triggers must be abandoned because Obama will have every incentive to trigger the trigger. Payment restrictions to doctors must come out because government should not set wages for doctors. It must be a game of subtraction.

    After the GOP is done demanding things come out, not be ameliorated or added, there will be no bill left that the left can support. Additionally, the GOP must orchestrate a strategy to put Democrats up for election in difficult positions ? offering up amendments that the Democrats cannot say no to, but that take away votes from the overall legislation once agreed to.”

    Meanwhile, I’m racking and stacking a target list of those “Aye” votes last Saturday, whittling down The 220 ( http://www.redstate.com/hammer2008/2009/11/08/the-220/ ). Suffice to say, 37 are either Freshman or Sophomore congressmen (a few replacements interim, like NY23′s Owen) and another 13 are more entrenched incumbents who could be defeated lacking the 2008 Obama “coat tails”.

    My full findings should be up on Friday.

  • Dan Perrin

    and yes, killing mandates will also kill the bill

  • sapwolf

    The problem on Obamacare in the Senate is not the BlueDogs.

    It is Graham, Snowe, Collins, and McCain.

    It could pass in a watered-down form with some GOP Senators but be just as devastating to healthcare and the economy/jobs.

  • Maureenthetemp

    They will use budget reconciliation and jam it through. The parliamentarian is a staffer, not a senator, he isn’t going to rule anything out of order. The Dems have publicly had the fix in on this strategy for months, I don’t understand why people think this won’t pass — grabbing 1/6th of the economy is way, way too important a chance for them to pass up. So they lose a couple members, maybe even the House — in the long run, this turns us into Europe forever and will move the country left, the Dems know it, they WILL use budget reconciliation.

  • martyinaz

    , but what makes you think the Republicans will stand steadfast? Some are quite liberal. Some could be bought. Big government gets bigger because big government begets bigger government, and because legislators feel compelled to legislate. We would be better off if we just gave all of them a million dollars each and a 365 day vacation. It would certainly cost the taxpayers less.

    Pelosi and Reid both BELONG to Obama. They will try every trick they can to push this down our throats. And if that means extorting a few votes and buying a few more, then up pops the devil and the bill goes through.

    We hate Osama bin Ladin, We distrust Iran and North Lkorea. Yet we elect as President the most dangerous man on the planet.