Ah, the politics of fear.

The entire Democratic Senate caucus is headed to the White House on Tuesday afternoon to talk health care with President Obama, just as the administration urges Majority Leader Harry Reid to cut a deal with Sen. Joe Lieberman, who is emerging as the skunk at the party for supporters of the massive package to create a new entitlement.

[snip]

Congressional staff familiar with negotiations said the White House is strongly urging Reid to work with Lieberman to eliminate the Medicare provision.

But Reid and other Democratic lawmakers are said to be furious that Lieberman publicly called for the elimination of the proposal before members received an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on the cost of such a plan.

More accurately, the politics of being afraid.  The White House is afraid that they won’t get something that they can call a win (our B+* President hasn’t actually had many this year); the progressives are afraid that their own base will descend upon them with torches and pitchforks if there is no progress against the hated foe; and Red State Democrats are afraid that if they keep on this course they’ll be interacting with the 112th Congress as lobbyists.  It should be one sockeldanger of a meeting tomorrow.

Moe Lane

*Ahem.  ‘Surprisingly tasty.’

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

(H/T Instapundit) While I see Mickey Kaus’ point in the abstract:

People in the know in Washington appear to have already considered and dismissed the “ping pong” option–the possibility that if the Senate finally passes a compromise health care bill, Pelosi’s House might simply vote “yes” on the exact same bill, avoiding the need for a “conference” to reconcile the House and Senate versions and instead sending the bill directly to the President for his signature. But from outside Washington, out here in the real America, this “ratification” route still looks awfully appealing–especially this week.

…there are pragmatic problems to consider: the House health care rationing bill passed with only two votes to spare, and only because of the Stupak amendment.  The Senate version currently lacks similar language, and it will probably not even get to a vote unless ‘public option’ is removed.  Put another way: for this gambit to work it’ll require no public option and hefty rules against federal funding of abortion.  Put yet another way: this gambit doesn’t just metaphorically gut-shoot progressives.  It requires that progressives metaphorically gut-shoot themselves as part of the process.

I’m not saying that they won’t do it.  Progressive Democratic legislators are quite good at emulating jellyfish.  But this would be above and beyond the usual spinelessness.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

(Via Hot Air Headlines) Avoiding boggling gets harder and harder every day:

Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin admitted Friday that he is “in the dark” about the national health care bill currently under construction by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. In an exchange on the Senate floor, Republican Sen. John McCain asked Durbin, “Should we not at least be informed as to what the proposal is that the Senate Majority Leader is going to propose to the entire Senate?” Durbin’s answer: “I would say to the senator from Arizona that I am in the dark almost as much as he is, and I am in the leadership.” Durbin explained that during a Democratic caucus, Reid and the small group of senators involved in crafting the bill turned to their fellow Democrats and “basically stood and said, ‘We are sorry, we can’t tell you in detail what was involved.’”

Transcript here.

I can say nothing else except that while this is not enough to persuade me to show some sympathy to Dick Durbin (whom I despise for his attacks on minority students), this is still no way to run a railroad.  Or a Congress.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

While others have reported that a bipartisan group of Senators arrived at the current Senate compromise all on their own, Howard Dean says that’s not true. It seems that he’s responsible for the proposal currently being considered in the Senate.

Former Governor Howard Dean helped broker a health care compromise that Senate Democratic leaders say could move the bill forward.

Dean’s proposal is designed to satisfy both supporters and opponents of a “public option” health plan.

VPR’s Bob Kinzel reports.

(Kinzel) While the vast majority of Democrats support the public option, all the Republicans and a few Democrats do not, and this group has threatened to filibuster the bill if the public option is part of the final package.  And it appeared very unlikely that Democratic leaders could find the 60 votes that are needed to break a filibuster.

So Dean outlined a compromise plan to Senate Majority leader Harry Reid as a way to break the deadlock.

Read More →

For all their protestations to the contrary, liberals have an awful habit of trying to tell people of faith, notably the Catholic Church, what their faith means and how it should apply in the political sphere. If you can stomach the irony, let’s take a look at the latest example of this genre, an opinion piece in the Politico by Robert Kennedy’s daughter, former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend.

Kennedy (I use her maiden name because it’s the only thing that gets her published) starts off well enough, with the title “On health care, the bishops have lost their way”. There, we agree; the Bishops have inserted themselves into the health care debate by calling for a national health insurance scheme - including their call for it to cover illegal aliens - that may be well-intentioned but will have many dire practical consequences, and which confuses the individual duty of Christian charity with the power to compel others to give to Caesar. These are not problems of Catholic doctrine, they are problems of practical economics and practical politics, two areas in which the Bishops do not have the most sterling record. Worse yet, as far as their purely political judgment, the Bishops seem unable to understand that positive aspects of the proposed bills - restrictions on funding for abortion, conscience protections for Catholic hospitals - may be necessary for their passage into law, but will forever be subject to unilateral renegotiation by Congress, which when it comes to massive entitlement programs always operates on the principle of Darth Vader at Cloud City: “I am altering the deal. Pray I don’t alter it any further.”

Pray indeed.

But of course, Kennedy wants the Church to agitate for precisely this program; what she objects to is that the Church, having come this far in support of the bill, insists that it can’t support a bill that doesn’t include the Stupak Amendment’s restrictions on abortion funding.

Read More →

What was I saying? Something about the GOP Strategy of offering up amendments, all of which died, with reciprocal amendments from the Dems, was just allowing the Democrats to improve the bill and buy time for 60 votes?

Guess what? That’s what happened.

Now the GOP has a choice — keep up the “messaging amendment” or actually fight. Their choice.

They tabled the amendment that Senator Nelson offered for the health care rationing bill - the one that would have aligned it with the Stupak amendment for the House version - on a largely party-line vote (54/45, with Byrd not voting).  Senator Nelson, despite vowing to filibuster*, is even now revising and extending his remarks:

A few reporters waiting outside the door asked him how it would effect his decision on whether to support the final effort.

“I want to continue to work on this,” he said, not ruling out his support, at least “not at this point in time. I want to continue to work on the project we’re working on… This makes it harder right now [to support the bill]. We’ll have to see if they can make it easier.”

(H/t: Hot Air) The NRLC has already announced that they will now oppose cloture of the health care rationing bill. Mind you, they also promised to score the vote on Nelson-Hatch, and it got tabled anyway.  Nelson’s not up for re-election until 2012 anyway, and the man will be 71 by then; he might decide to just retire.  So don’t rely on him keeping his word.  The Senate is full of Democrats who talk big about their conservative principles, right up to the moment where they have to fight for them.

Moe Lane

Read More →

Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) “categorically” pledged in September to oppose abortion coverage mandates in the health care legislation presently before Congress, but with the Hatch-Nelson amendment on the immediate horizon some now fear the Wisconsin Democrat may hedge on his promise.

“We should not be using health care reform to provide government access to abortion,” said Kohl–who NARAL awarded a 100% pro-choice rating–at a health care forum sponsored by Marquette University Law School.

But of particular consequence for the prescient senior senator from Wisconsin was the concern that Senate leadership would broker a late-night, controversial agreement on federally-subsidized abortion.

Decidedly off-message, Kohl continued, “And I would hope that people from whatever party won’t try and go down that road and put it into a bill in the dead of night and then, lo and behold, wake up the next morning and something that shouldn’t have happened did happen.”

Marquette graduate Dan Zeidler, whose line of questioning on abortion promise to land Kohl in uncertain waters with progressive Democrats, was assured by the Senator the two could work “directly” on a solution to prevent controversial abortion coverage mandates.

After weeks of unresponsiveness, Zeidler penned an open letter to Kohl, copying local Catholic Bishops. The letter (PDF) asks Kohl to reconfirm his commitment to “work directly” with concerned constituents to ensure passage of a similarly-worded House-passed provisions that denies federal coverage for abortion “and the other related life-protective matters, including the rights of conscious.”

An audio recording of the forum confirms Kohl’s account of the event, which was previously unreported.

Read More →

Since coming to Capitol Hill, current Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been recognized by some in the media as a master strategist when it comes to playing the legislative rules for all they’re worth. But, with amendments to the Obama government health care takeover sailing through the Senate almost as quickly as they’re read, some conservative insiders are wondering why the GOP is not taking advantage of Senate rules to slow down the votes and delay the final vote until after Christmas.

That would be Harry Reid’s worst nightmare come true. According to the latest Rasmussen Poll, only 41% of Americans now support the Obama health care plan. And if the Senate Democrats are forced to go home and face voter wrath head-on over the Christmas holidays, it could spell the end for the legislation in the 111th Congress.

With that being the case, even some House leaders are wondering why McConnell doesn’t simply require unanimous consent on any, or every, amendment that comes to the floor. The maneuver would force Reid to get 60 votes before proceeding on each amendment. And some of the bill’s opponents are suggesting it could sideline it until next Christmas.

Of course, it is looking more and more likely that Mitch McConnell actually wants the legislation to pass. He seems to be gambling that if it passes, he becomes Senate Majority Leader.

The Mukulski amendment to the health care legislation passed 61-39.

The fixing of the bill has begun.

The GOP strategy is playing right into the hands of the those wanting universal, socialist health care.

From the diaries, by Erick. Rick Scott is the head of Conservatives for Patients’ Rights and knows what he’s talking about.

What are we up to now, six different names for the public option? Let us count the ways desperate Democrats have tried to re-brand, re-tool, re-name or re-invent what is, by all accounts, a plot that will ultimately force millions of Americans into the waiting arms of government health care bureaucrats.

During the 2008 campaign, the public option was described as “government-run plan similar to Medicare.” Whoa…really? The same Medicare plan that cannot now meet its own financial obligations and is projected to be come up short by $38 trillion by the time the youngest Americans will need it? No wonder we haven’t heard that description much lately.

After the presidential inauguration, talk of the public option steadily picked up steam, reaching a fever pitch in August when senior citizens were shouting down their elected officials and canceling their AARP memberships in droves, and while Tea Party activists were getting their fingers bitten off at town hall meetings - all due to strong opposition against any form of government-run health care.

Read More →

Friends, it is as bad as I feared. The Republicans are playing so nice with the Democrats in the Senate that they are improving the health care bill so it can pass.

Here is an email from Don Stewart in Senator Mitch McConnell’s office:

The Leaders just locked in a unanimous consent agreement for four amendment votes tomorrow.

There will be votes on the Mikulski and Murkowski amendments in the morning at 11:45. The McCain motion to commit (on the half-trillion dollars in Medicare cuts), and a Sen. Bennet amendment, will have votes at 2:45.

As Sen. McConnell noted on the floor, Republicans offered to vote on the Mikulski and Murkowski amendments this evening. But despite all the “obstruction” talk from Democrats today, there was an objection on the Democrat side to having those votes tonight.

As Sen. McConnell just said on the floor about the Murkowski/Mikulski amendments: “our side of the aisle, the Republicans side of the aisle, was prepared to vote on both of those amendments tonight, and then a problem developed on the other side.”

Let me know if you need any further information

Why was “The Republican side of the aisle prepared to vote on both of these amendments tonight?” Or tomorrow? Or ever? Why would we help the Democrats pretend to fix their unfixable bill.

The GOP and Democrats are putting up several amendments, all designed to “improve” the bill:

• The Democrat Mikulski amendment purports to ensure mammograms are covered, but actually ensures abortions are covered.
• The Republican Murkowski amendment response to the Mikulski amendment ensures mammograms are not cut and beefs up pro-life protections.
• The Republican McCain vote sends the bill back to Finance Committee to restore funding to medicare.
• The Democrat Bennett amendment responds to the McCain vote by ensuring no one ever loses their medicare.

Whoopideedoo. While I’m glad the Democrats are now fighting it out amongst themselves, the GOP is not really helping the fight for freedom here.

If Mikulski and Bennet pass tomorrow, Democrats will argue that they have fixed the Medicare and mammogram issues. Why are we in such a rush to allow Democrats to vote on their amendments to fix the bill? This is a unanimous consent request. All Senators are responsible for this disaster. Will anyone stand up and say “I object?”

House version (Via Instapundit):

Congressmen John Carter[*] (R-TX) and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) yesterday introduced the Geithner Penalty Waiver Act, requiring that the IRS assess the same penalty against U.S. taxpayers that came forward in the UBS tax fraud investigation as paid by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for failing to pay taxes on his IMF income — zero.

Pretty self-explanatory, isn’t it? I like Rep. Carter. And not just because of his name.

Senate version (Via Don Surber):

In their first shot at the measure this week, Republicans decided to try to strike at the heart of how Democrats plan to pay for the $848 billion measure by attempting to eliminate the proposal’s almost $440 billion in Medicare cuts.

But instead of offering a conventional amendment, they decided to use an esoteric procedural tactic that would send the bill back to committee with instructions to eliminate the cuts. If successful, the GOP’s gambit would force Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to use time-consuming procedures and hold another filibuster-killing vote on whether to restart debate on the bill.

That takes it off the floor, requires another committee vote, delays the bill, and ticks off Senate Democrats.  The ‘delays the bill’ part is probably the most important thing, here: health care rationing just isn’t popular these days.

Moe Lane

PS: Arcane procedural tactics are fun, but they’re no substitute for a Congressional majority. Reverse the Vote.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

This is frustrating.

The Senate Republican Conference is giddy that its first amendment to the health care legislation is to preserve the bloated Medicare bureaucracy. The Senate Democrats want to do what they always accuse the GOP of doing and cut Medicare. The GOP is apparently giddy at the opportunity to rub the Democrats’ noses in their Medicare cuts.

So now the GOP is using its first amendment to reaffirm the Democrat theory that Medicare cannot be cut and cuts even to the rate of growth of Medicare are also wrong.

The GOP could have, by chance, offered up the Stupak language, which has not yet been inserted. The GOP could have offered up an amendment to split the Democrats up front. The GOP could have done nothing and moved on to let cloture fail, thus killing the bill. Instead, Democrats and Republicans will no doubt join hands and vote to put the money back in Medicare, making it a grand bipartisan exercise.

What next? A GOP amendment to guarantee breast cancer screenings in the legislation?

Having started from the presupposition that the health care legislation is going to pass, the GOP seems to be signaling it will work to “improve” the legislation just enough to overcome a filibuster.

The legislation has 57 votes already. The GOP does not need to offer amendments to improve the bill — they need to bring it to a vote and kill it. Preening for cameras and favorable press coverage is going to get the bill to 60 votes and a signing ceremony.

*Yes, I realize these are all motions to recommit the bill to committee, which will never pass. So they aren’t trying to improve the bill, this a pure messaging/posturing exercise, but it doesn’t help to stop the bill. Since I assume we’re trading amendments (one GOP amend vote, then one Dem, and back and forth) every lame GOP recommit amendment we rush to do gives Dems another chance to fix their bill and cobble together 60 votes.

The Wall Street Journal reports Joe Lieberman is digging in his heels. He will filibuster any health care legislation that contains a public option, even if the legislation allows states to opt-out.

Lieberman has been a thorn in the side of the left ever since they decided to challenge him back in 2006. In that year, the left beat Lieberman in the Connecticut Democrat Primary. Lieberman decided to stay in as an independent in the general election and won. With a number of his long time Senate friends endorsing the Democrat in 2006 because the man had a “D” next to his name, Lieberman has been his own man ever since.

Lieberman retains his Senate committee chairmanship and the privileges of being a Democrat member of the Senate. That may change soon as Harry Reid is staking his reputation on passage of the health care legislation.

Back in the old days, people would at least look ashamed when caught being bribed, but not Mary Landrieu. It’s being called the Louisiana Purchase. Senator Harry Reid put a provision on the health care plan that originally called for $100 million to be funneled to Louisiana exclusively.

Mary Landrieu refused to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to the health care debate. Reid raised the offer to $300 million and Mary proved she wasn’t a cheap date after all — she took the increase, voted for cloture, and then bragged about the $300 million bribe.

In a statement sure to be repeated by Republicans endlessly over the coming weeks of Senate health care debate, the senator flaunted the inclusion of the provision. “I will correct something. It’s not $100 million, it’s $300 million, and I’m proud of it and will keep fighting for it,” Landrieu told reporters after her floor speech. “But that is not why I started this health care debate; I started this health care debate for all the reasons I just mentioned in my statement” on the floor.

Sixty Senators voted to proceed to debate health care. There will be another shot at stopping it through filibuster.

Mary Landrieu, after getting $300 million in the bill for Louisiana, voted for it.

Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas not only voted for it, but now favors a public option.

Voters will remember.

Along the way, there seems to be divisions shaping up within the Democratic Party. Amendments will be offered to try to patch up differences.

Republicans should exploit this. Drag out consideration of the bill as those divisions grow, then offer amendments to exploit the divisions.

As I have said before, if Republicans work to improve the legislation, they presuppose its passage. Instead, the GOP should plan for the destruction of the bill by offering amendments designed to divide and fracture the Democrat coalition.

If you’re wondering where health care dollars go in this country, the invaluable Phil Klein reminds us:

Raymond Raad, a resident in psychiatry at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center and co-author of a new Cato study, presented evidence showing that the United States leads the world in the development of drugs, medical devices, and other advanced treatments. For instance, between 1969 and 2008, 57 of the 97 Nobel Prizes in medicine and physiology — or nearly 60 percent — were awarded to people who did their research in the U.S., and nine of the top 10 medical innovations between 1975 and 2000 were developed here. But … once these products are developed in the U.S., they become widely available and improve health care outcomes around the world.

Read the whole thing, and remember: that’s the system the Democrats are trying to tear down and replace with one more like the European countries that depend almost as heavily on American medical and pharmaceutical innovations as they do on American military protection. In both cases, the arguments for the superiority of a European model that is unsustainable on its own depend on somebody else assuming the role of America. And nobody’s volunteering for the job.

From the diaries, by Erick. Call 202-224-3121 right now.

People. Today should be a busy day since the Statists have once again scheduled a cowardly, nightime, weekend vote on healthcare.

Contact your Senators today urging them to vote ‘No’ tomorrow night to even begin debate. We can kill this thing tomorrow night if they can’t get 60 votes.

I just sent this to Senator Webb in Virginia, who being a veteran who fought for liberty and freedom I hope would still be open minded about this bill.

Senator Webb,

I am writing you to encourage you to vote ‘No’ on the Senate health care coming up for debate tomorrow night.

Vote ‘No’ so debate cannot proceed.

Vote ‘No’ to end debate should debate proceed.

Vote ‘No’ on the bill should it ever come up for a final vote.

You see, this bill is simply un-Constitutional. Nowhere in the founding document does it empower Congress to mandate the free (for now) citizens of this great country to purchase a product or service. Not the Commerce Clause. Not the ‘general welfare’ language. Nothing.

Not.A.Word.

I would encourage you and the junior Senator from our great Commonwealth to look back in time to 2 1/2 weeks ago, where the people of this great state overwhelmingly voted against the leftist policies of the junior Senator when he was Governor, and Gov. Kaine, and President Obama. The people of this country want MORE freedom not less. MORE opportunity not less and this health care bill robs the people who are the engine of this economy their ability and desire and means to produce and grow our economy. People want to be free and independent. You, of all people being a decorated veteran, should know this since you bravely fought for the very freedoms and liberties this bill would take away.

Resist the urge to vote with your leftist colleagues. Vote with the people you represent. Vote to kill this bill.

The people will not forget a ‘Yes’ vote in 2012.

Thank you.
Stephen Halsey

There is a study out today that is damaging to the Democrats efforts to pass health care in the Senate.

On Saturday, when constituents cannot contact their Senators’ offices because they’ll be closed, the United States Senate will vote on a cloture motion to debate the health care legislation.

This is important — a vote in favor of cloture on the motion to proceed (a parliamentary issue) is, in effect, a vote for the health care legislation. Why? Because Harry Reid has enough votes to pass the health care legislation by a simple majority, but he does not have the 60 votes necessary to proceed to debate, any Senator voting for cloture is voting for the health care plan.

Roll Call reports that according to the Congressional Research Service, “[a] study of Senate voting patterns shows the chamber has approved more than 97 percent of all bills subject to a cloture motion to begin debate — a finding that could undercut Democratic efforts to paint a key health care vote on Saturday as procedural.”

In fact, “since 1999 the Senate has approved 97.6 percent of all bills when lawmakers first voted to begin debate.”

Some Senators, like Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, want the health care legislation to pass, but know politically she would lose if she voted for it. So unless pressure is brought to bear on her and others, she may vote “yes” on cloture for the motion to proceed and then try to hide behind a no vote later.

We cannot let that happen. Call your two Senators all day today and demand they vote no on the motion to proceed. The phone number to call is 202-224-3121.