Health Reform Passes Major Procedural Hurdle

Update [2009-12-21 1:22:22 by Jonathan Singer]: Healthcare reform passed a major procedural hurdle overnight as the Senate invoked cloture on the leadership amendment outlining final agreement on the legislative package. The vote, as expected, was 60 to 40, with every member of the Democratic caucus voting in favor of cutting off debate and every single Republican voting to filibuster. More votes remain, but the vote, occurring after 1:00 AM, signaled that the reform package should have enough support to move out of the Senate this year.

-----

The Senate is moving towards a cloture vote on the leadership's healthcare amendment, a key procedural hurdle on the path towards getting reform through the chamber by Christmas. You can watch on C-SPAN 2 or at C-SPAN.org. Consider this a thread on the healthcare debate, which I'll also be covering over on Twitter @jonathanhsinger...

new TWTR.Widget({ version: 2, type: 'profile', rpp: 4, interval: 6000, width: 250, height: 300, theme: { shell: { background: '#00c4ff', color: '#ffffff' }, tweets: { background: '#ffffff', color: '#000000', links: '#00c4ff' } }, features: { scrollbar: false, loop: false, live: false, hashtags: true, timestamp: true, avatars: false, behavior: 'all' } }).render().setUser('jonathanhsinger').start();

Tags: 111th Congress, healthcare reform (all tags)

Comments

28 Comments

Re: Senate Debate Thread

They just called for cloture: 1:08 am.

by vecky 2009-12-20 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Debate Thread

heh. The official name of the Bill is still some HomeOwners tax Credit thingy.

by vecky 2009-12-20 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Debate Thread

Nelson just voted Aye. So no double-cross...

by vecky 2009-12-20 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Debate Thread

Vote over: anti-climax of the century. Of course this is just a cloture vote on the managers amendment, it's not even "the vote" on the amendment let alone the bill.

by vecky 2009-12-20 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Debate Thread

Nothing's anti-climactic when Joe Lieberman is involved...

by LordMike 2009-12-20 08:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Debate Thread

I love how a bill that is clearly what the WH wanted (now according to Feingold) is something that was just the product of Leiberman. As I said before, convenient foil.

by bruh3 2009-12-20 08:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Senate Debate Thread

Take it to the woodshed chuck. Maybe you missed the Presidents speech before Congress or the Presidents praise for the House Bill, or the original Senate Bill, or even the HELP committee bill, while ignoring Liarmans, Nelsons, Lincolns stance against the PO or the votes on the Schumer and Rockfeller amendments on the SFC.

But the rest of us were paying attention.

by vecky 2009-12-20 08:56PM | 0 recs
Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

I'll take this one.

First, try reading the entire story instead of just the misleading headlines from Ms. Huff 'n Puff Arianna.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) formally announced on Sunday that he would support the Senate's final version of health care reform. But in doing so he cast blame for the loss of a public option for insurance coverage partially on the president's shoulders.

Did the President cease to support it because he knew he couldn't achieve it? Or was it not achieved because the President didn't support it?

You, of course, believe the latter, but there is a great logical disconnect in causality in doing so. You must assume that Joe Lieberman's (and other's) votes were obtainable all along, yet you have no such evidence.

It's so much easier to blame the Rahm Emanuel bogeyman (ooo!) than accept responsibility ourselves that lack of tangible effort by the progressive movement failed to provide political cover for the heavy lift.

by NoFortunateSon 2009-12-20 09:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

I hope the President does not feel too let down by all of us.

by Steve M 2009-12-20 09:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

I think every time he looks across the lawn of the Capitol building and sees dozens of teabaggers and nary a progressive in sight, it hurts inside a little.

by vecky 2009-12-20 09:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

Oh, I'm almost certain that was a key fact in deciding the WH strategy.

by Steve M 2009-12-20 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

We can only fail Obama. He can never fail us. In Obama's name we pray, amen.

by bruh3 2009-12-21 03:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

While I agree with you, the problem is larger than Obama. Lots of factors. One billion over two years spent by healthcare lobbyist. The Baucus bill was in large part written by lobbyists.

by Charles Lemos 2009-12-21 03:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

There is a plenty of blame for all. Whether the enablers who voted for "consumer protection" without an enforcement mechanism or the plutocrats getting their money grub on, they are all part of the same problem.

I choose Obama because that seems to be the real focus of trying to narrow the blame to Lieberman. Distract from the leader by blaming the court jester. Its entertainment, but not much else.

by bruh3 2009-12-21 04:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

Lieberman and Obama hatched the plan that Lieberman would trash Obama, endorse McCain, defend Palin all that so when Obama was president they could plan to destroy the public option together and nobody would suspect anything!

by Lolis 2009-12-21 05:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

Sorry, I don't speak in the stupid, can you translate from your language why we need to go back to the primaries and general elections in order to discuss the last 10 months?

by bruh3 2009-12-21 05:09AM | 0 recs
You know, I wonder the same thing

"...why we need to go back to the primaries and general elections in order to discuss the last 10 months?"
What she's saying is that there isn't a lot of evidence that Lieberman was working with Obama in one of your conspiracies. In fact, historical evidence points to the opposite.
by NoFortunateSon 2009-12-21 07:48AM | 0 recs
Re: You know, I wonder the same thing

Blah, blah, blah- hater. Blah, blah, blah, conspiracy theory. Blah, blah, blah- hard left. Blah, blah, blah.

by bruh3 2009-12-21 08:04AM | 0 recs
Hey, you're the one obsessing over him

"There is a plenty of blame for all... I choose Obama because..."
Like I said, you're the one with an unhealthy obsession over the man. If you try to pin the blame on one person here, it won't lead to any reform.
by NoFortunateSon 2009-12-21 07:46AM | 0 recs
Blah, blah, blah

Blah, blah, blah. Blah, blah. Blah, blah.  

by bruh3 2009-12-21 08:06AM | 0 recs
Read Krugman's piece on the Senate

If you keep obsessing with Obama through such a narrow prism, you're ignoring several other major problems that the HCR debate has uncovered

Paul Krugman, being an early Hillary supporter and who has always been harsh on Obama, highlights how the Senate body itself, once intended to protect America from radical change now can't allow any change.

Charles has written about Senate as well, and how undemocratic it has become.

If you keep focusing on Obama, not that he doesn't share the blame here as you yourself have said, then you're missing the need for real reform.

by NoFortunateSon 2009-12-21 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Read Krugman's piece on the Senate

blah, blah, blah. Obama. blah, blah, blah. Obama. blah,blah, blah, saying nothing really but want to attack dissent. blah, blah, blah.

by bruh3 2009-12-21 08:33AM | 0 recs
Disagreement =/= Dissent

You need to learn that not every person who disagrees with you is attacking dissent.

It's actually quite egocentric of you; any person who disagrees with you is stifling dissent in this country, as if you represent the whole of dissent.

by NoFortunateSon 2009-12-21 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

That made me laugh.

by orestes 2009-12-21 04:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Ooh! a logical disconnect from the bruh!

Yeah, it is probably easier to ignore them, but sometimes I just want to make fun of the "new age" politics.

by bruh3 2009-12-21 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Health Reform Passes Major Procedural Hurdle

My condolences to everyone here who had hoped for a different outcome. I know how much it must hurt. Wait a minute, no I don't. But my condolences just the same. Good luck in the coming weeks as more opportunities arise to push the passage of HCR legislation down the road a decade or two.

Whatever internal turmoil motivates your crusade, I hope you seek help to deal with it, regardless of how this ultimately turns out. It's my Holiday Wish.

by QTG 2009-12-21 04:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Health Reform Passes Major Procedural Hurdle

That didn't deserve a TR. Perhaps the bruh doesn't get sarcasm...

by NoFortunateSon 2009-12-21 07:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Health Reform Passes Major Procedural Hurdle


Looks as though we'll get a Senate bill, now that unprincipled Senator Nelson and perfidious Senator Lieberman have agreed  to let the Senate do its job and vote. No Republicans would do the right thing for our country. In fact, they complain about rushing this bill through although it has been an endless struggle all year.

The legislation has some reform but has been watered down at the behest of those most influenced by insurance company lobbyists. With 30-40 million new customers mandated to buy health insurance, and no public option, insurance company executives and the lobbyists are toasting each other with the finest champagne.

Also winning are the drug companies. No strong pricing pressure and no importation of reasonably priced drugs from other countries.

Our whole system is strange - and costly. It started innocently enough with employers providing health insurance as a benefit during World War II in order to get around pay restrictions. But this led to most health care availability being dependent on where you worked. Not acceptable.

But why should heath care be dependent on insurance at all?  A nation must provide for the health of its citizens. It's not like insuring against fire, or flood. Everyone has to receive health care. So it's like insuring against the need for food.
The systems resembles a layaway plan, paying in advance for a product with an insurance back--up.

So why should profit making insurance be inserted between a citizen and health care, or between a citizen and food? It's too late to eliminate the present system entirely but these insurance entities should at least be treated as utilities and regulated as such. Like water and electricity. We're moving in that direction,which is good, particularly in the absence of a  single payer system.

homer  www.altara.blogspot.com

by altara 2009-12-21 04:58AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads