The Republican Party has a proposal for you. With your hope and change frustrated by their obstruction, they would like you to blame the president, stay depressed instead of volunteering, and forget to vote on November 2nd.

In return, they'll make the entire country into Alabama. Remember the scene in Demolition Man where Sylvester Stallone finds out that in the future, all restaurants are Taco Bells? It will be just like that, and exhibit A is California. Really, I'm not kidding. If you want to see what America will look like should tea party Republicans take Congress, come pay "the Heart of Dixie" a visit.

Much more after the jump...

Continue reading »

This is a real bummer of a day for those of us who really, really wanted to see Dawn Johnsen's nomination confirmed. It's even more of a bummer to realize it was probably Ben Nelson who scuttled it months ago, before Scott Brown was elected and after Al Franken was sworn in. From the Huffington Post:

But the votes, apparently, weren't there. Johnsen had the support of Sen Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) but was regarded skeptically by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) -- primarily for her positions on torture and the investigation of previous administration actions. A filibuster, in the end, was likely sustainable. Faced with this calculus, the White House chose not to appoint Johnsen during Senate recess, which would have circumvented a likely filibuster but would have kept her in the position for less than two years.

I have my doubts about Lugar, to be honest. The Republicans are too dogged in their determination to undermine this administration at every turn to let any of their ranks fall away. And Nelson once again demonstrates his undying loyalty to Republican principles with his "skepticism".

Dawn Johnsen is hardly a six-headed monster. She's a highly regarded lawyer with experience in the OLC's office. She has expertise in the legal questions surrounding executive power and yes, she's known for her views on abortion.

Frankly, I'm getting pretty sick and tired of the Republicans and Ben Nelson using abortion as an excuse for every obstructionist tactic they can throw against a wall. This Congress has done more to undermine women's reproductive rights on spin alone than any other I can recall in recent history.

It would be good for Democrats in particular to remember they ran on a platform that honored a woman's right to choose and make her own reproductive decisions. It's truly time to quit making us the sacrificial lamb for political pokey points.

The American people were once again treated to the sight of the obstructionist Republicans dragging their feet and playing party politics with the people's business - on a bill that's constructed mostly with Republican ideas.

I wonder if this means Sen. Michael Bennet will bring up the public option amendment he promised?

Senate Republicans have successfully identified two minor violations of reconciliation rules in the final piece of the health-care package. The violations will force the Senate to change the reconciliation bill and ship it to the House of Representatives for final passage.

But Democratic leaders said the provisions that will be struck -- from the part of the bill dealing with Pell Grants for college students -- do not significantly affect the student loan program or the health care bill overall.

The corrected legislation most likely will not be subjected to additional challenges when it is sent back to the House, Democratic staffers said, and is expected to receive final approval before the weekend.

"The parliamentarian struck two minor provisions tonight from in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. But this bill's passage in the Senate is a big win for the American people," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

For much of Wednesday and into Thursday morning, Senate Republicans offered dozens of amendments to the bill President Obama signed into law Tuesday. Their goal was to force the legislation that will launch an overhaul of the nation's health-care system back to the House for another vote. But when the Senate began voting shortly after 5 p.m., all 29 amendments were easily rejected.

That means the health-care package survived essentially intact, save for the deletion of the two clauses in the reconciliation bill that were found to violate reconciliation rules, the complicated set of procedures that protected the bill from filibuster.

A senior Democratic aide said one of the problematic items is a "hold-harmless provision," which was designed to prevent reductions in individual student grants if appropriated funds for Pell Grants declines. The second adjustment was described as "a conforming change, to strike obsolete language."

Digby's right. The Villagers are constitutionally incapable of taking in any information that contradicts their consensus narrative, as you'll see in this clip with Terry Moran and David Axelrod on This Week:

MORAN: So according to the president, then, David, health care reform as we know it, that huge bill that Congress labored on for months, is dead, right?

AXELROD: No, that's not true at all, Terry. I think what he's saying is let's take a look at this. There are so many elements of this -- tax breaks for small business, extending the life of Medicare, more assistance for seniors with their prescription drugs, a cap on out-of-pocket expenses, help for people with pre-existing conditions -- that are too important to walk away from. What he's saying is, let's get back to it.

Now, I will -- I must tell you that, if you look at the polling in the Washington Post yesterday on the Massachusetts race, it's very clear, people don't want us to walk away from health care. They want us to address their concerns with the program, and they want Brown to come and work with us and not be obstructionist. That was very clear in the polling.

And I suggest that the Republican Party look at that poll, as well. Their policies were viewed more dimly than -- than Democratic policies. And people were crying out for cooperation instead of obstructionism.

So we're looking forward to working together to pass this on behalf of the American people, who are going to feel greater and greater burden from this -- these health care costs if we don't step up and deal with it.

MORAN: You're looking forward to pass this. Now, this -- the president sounded like he was reducing the scale, let's coalesce around some core elements, insurance reform, cost containment. And -- and are you talking -- what do you think of the idea that is being...

AXELROD: Well, I think what the president...

MORAN: I do have a question here. What do you think of the idea that Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are cooking up that you could essentially strip the Senate bill of a few provisions on a parliamentary maneuver requiring only 51 votes and then getting the bill through the House? Do you, A, think that's possible? And, B, getting the original $800 billion bill that the voters of Massachusetts soundly rejected, do you think that's a good idea?

AXELROD: Terry, again, I think you're misreading the Massachusetts poll. I think people want action on health care. In fact, the bill that the House and the Senate passed, which are largely the same in the main, were patterned in many ways on the Massachusetts health care plan, which is a unique plan in that state. And 68 percent of the people who voted last week said they liked the Massachusetts plan. Senator Brown said he wouldn't change it.

The Senate got past the second filibuster on the compelling video game that is health-care reform, with one level left. While the final vote is theoretically scheduled for Christmas Eve, I saw Sen. Claire McCaskill on my teevee this morning saying that Republicans are trying to drag it out so that members won't be able to spend Christmas with their families.

Now, Claire, while I'm sympathetic to a point (yes, the Republicans are obstructionist scum), if this legislation is really a historic achievement (albeit one that will force many Americans to stretch their finances to the limit to comply), I don't especially care that your holiday schedule is mildly inconvenienced.

But that's just me!

The Senate cleared the second of three key procedural hurdles on President Obama's health-care legislation early Tuesday with another party-line vote, continuing the effort to pass the bill before Christmas.

All 60 members of the Democratic caucus supported the measure to finalize amendments to the health-care package, while 39 Republicans opposed it.

A third procedural vote is expected Wednesday, with final passage of the bill likely to come late Thursday -- Christmas Eve.

Although they lack any obvious way to torpedo the bill at this point, Republicans remain bitterly opposed to the legislation and have shown little indication that they are ready to relent in their increasingly negative standoff with Democrats.

On Monday, hours after a crucial 1 a.m. vote to end a Republican filibuster, the American Medical Association officially endorsed the legislation, while Democratic leaders defended the dealmaking that has brought the $871 billion package to the brink of passage.

Lacking the votes to block the bill, Republicans heaped scorn on the many concessions made to wavering Democrats in the quest to advance the package. GOP critics warned that support for the effort could mean the demise in 2010 of vulnerable incumbents, including Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.).

Watching Kent Conrad proudly read off the list of items that the Senate Finance Committee included or should I say turned over to the conservatives in their bill just to kowtow to the obstructionist minority party is just mind numbing. Why didn't Baucus just let Renzi and Grassley write the bill for the democrats? Didn't John McCain win the election? He's actually proud of what they've done. Republicans should just love this bill. It cuts out all the things that would have an impact on health care reform. Here's Kent Conrad's ode to da republicants.

Mitchell: How did you do? Are you guys going to get any Republicans to join you in this?

Conrad: Well, we certainly hope so. Look, they asked a series of things be excluded.

*They didn't want a public option, it's not in this package. They didn't want an employer mandate, it's not in this package.

*They wanted tax reforms so that the high end Cadillac plans would have a levy on them to discourage over utilization, that's part of the package.

*They didn't want illegals to benefit, many Democrats agreed, that's not in the package. Those here illegally will not benefit.

*They wanted to make certain that federal dollars not be used to support abortion and so they're not.

*There's the beginning of medical malpractice which many wanted to see be included. There's a clear statement on that.

So I hope that they'll see as we go through the process that there's much here that's worthy of their support....

If Mitch McConnell had told the Baucus Dogs that Americans should be required to produce at least three forms of ID to enter hospital emergency rooms, Conrad probably would have included that, too. In that respect I think the Republicans blew it. Luckily for us, Americans, Senators, Republicans and a lot of members of his own committee do not feel the same way.

Republicans don't like it because... it's a health care bill. Democrats don't like it because... it's a bad health care bill designed to kowtow to Republicans who won't even vote for it. Health care advocacy groups don't like it because it "would give a government-subsidized monopoly to the private insurance industry to sell their most profitable plans - high-deductible insurance - without having to face competition from a public health insurer." A good reason not to like it! And unions don't like it because there's no employer mandate and it would "tax health plans."

Even President Obama's response to the bill was terrible:

Despite months of anticipation, the White House on Wednesday stopped well short of endorsing Sen. Max Baucus's (D-Mont.) healthcare bill.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the release of Baucus's Senate Finance Committee healthcare legislation — the last of five committees to unveil a proposal — moved the legislative process along, but President Barack Obama still thinks the bill will change.

Oh, there is one group of people that love the Bacus bill:Insurance companies.

Following Baucus’ announcement, HealthNet shares increased by 3%, United Health Group Inc shares rose by 2.7%, Humana Inc. grew by 2.6%, Wellpoint stock gained 1.7% and Aetna Inc rose 1.6%...

(h/t Heather)

Well the news is percolating something very positive about the White House, health care and the obstructionist-teabagging republicans.

Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority’s cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks.Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans’ purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month’s Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair.The White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said of Republican lawmakers, “Only a handful seem interested in the type of comprehensive reform that so many people believe is necessary to ensure the principles and the goals that the president has laid out.”The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier.

--

Democratic senators might feel more empowered, for example, to define the authority of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives that are emerging as an alternative to a public insurance plan.Republicans have used the Congressional break to dig in hard against the overhaul outline drawn by Democrats.

The Senate’s No. 2 Republican, Jon Kyl of Arizona, is the latest to weigh in strongly, saying Tuesday that the public response lawmakers were seeing over the summer break should persuade Democrats to scrap their approach and start over.“I think it is safe to say there are a huge number of big issues that people have,” Mr. Kyl told reporters in a conference call from Arizona. “There is no way that Republicans are going to support a trillion-dollar-plus bill.”The White House has also interpreted critical comments by Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican negotiator in a crucial Finance Committee effort to reach a bipartisan compromise, as a sign that there is little hope of reaching a deal politically acceptable to both parties.”

We don't trust Rahm and for good reason since he's been the ex-Blue Dog recruiting Congressman, but it seems that they are leaking out this information. If this is true then the Netroots should celebrate because of the pressure we've been putting on the Baucus Dogs and other members of Congress to include the public option or there will be hell to pay. And Republicans have acted in bad faith the entire time as every one of their leadership has attacked anything in the reform that doesn't make the insurance companies richer.

Anderson Cooper of CNN did a report last night that echoes the NY Times piece.

Cooper: After negotiating with republicans, conservative democrats and seemingly themselves over parts of a plan CNN has learned that the administration could be getting closer to a very big change. Namely crafting a health care bill and try to ram it through the Senate even if it passes by only a single vote.

Henry: Well Anderson there is no final decision, but Democrats close to the White House are saying that they are now actively considering the possibility of doing a go it alone strategy. It's a budget maneuver, very obscure known as reconciliation where they would only need a simple majority, 51 votes instead of 60 votes to push through health reform. Republicans would scream that this is a power grab, it's an underhanded move but White House officials privately are already laying out the ground work by saying look, we've been working with republicans for months. If they don't get something done in the next weeks we're going to have to take drastic measures...."If we're going to have to push it through no ones going to remember how messy it is, but they'll remember at the end of the day that we got health care reform done," his ad visors have said, "a win is a win."

The Democratic Party won a mandate in the general election so how can it be a power grab, Ed? If the GOP won, there would be no talk like this by the Ed's of the media. Part of me thinks that it's possible some republicans and Baucus Dogs will then come back to the table and weaken the bill more, but make it appear to be stronger. They will probably go on TV instead and reeve up the teabaggers some more and we'll see fifty caliber cannons strapped to their shoulders and scowls on their faces in the coming days. We'll see how it all shakes out. Why does Ed Henry think reconciliation is an obscure procedure? We've been writing about this for months on our blogs and the media has been reporting on it almost as long. It's like Henry is trying to set up the narrative that the White House just discovered reconciliation in a cigar smoked, dark room and are screwing the American people by using it. They should look to their hero George Bush because he used it for his tax cuts and to open the Arctic Wildlife refuge for domestic oil drilling when he was in office.

And as Media Matters noted:

Republicans used the reconciliation process to pass the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, and the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, among others.

And Ronald Reagan used it to pass his historic tax cuts for the rich.

But when a Republican uses it, that's normal; if Democrats use it, they are being power-hungry dirty f*&king hippies.

I'd also like to thank the teabaggers for acting like complete psychos while Republicans in Congress looked on with glee. They helped the White House accept what we've been saying if it does come down to this. Republicans would never allow true health care reform in any meaningful way and the nuts put an exclamation mark on this big time. Thank you!

So I'm skimming my bookmarked sites for post ideas and on CongressMatters (which, if you don't read regularly, you should), David Waldman blogged about this ridiculously slanted article in today's Washington Post:

Health-Care Activists Targeting Democrats

Sniping Among Liberals May Jeopardize Votes Needed to Pass Bill

By Ceci Connolly

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Hmmmm....interesting spin. It's the liberals' fault. Not the obstructionist Republicans or centrist Democrats standing in the way of what the people want. Of course. It goes on:

Provided that the Democratic legislators in question were actually pressing for, you know, legislation that these constituencies actually agreed with and wanted to see passed. There's nothing "natural" about it, in the sense that support should be assumed or taken for granted. But that's the implication. I'm not the "natural" ally of anyone who insists that something supported by 76% of the population is really just some sort of "left-leaning" nonsense, and that we need to find "centrist" compromise with the other 24%.

But that's the underlying premise of the entire article, helped along by quotes from Democratic lawmakers and staffers who repeat the mantra, especially when it comes to the pressure being put on them (or rather, that they claim is not actually being put on them, because they all "ignore" ads and other "unhelpful" input from the grassroots).

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), for example:

"I do not think this is helpful. It doesn't move me one whit," she said. "They are spending a lot of money on something that is not productive."

That's a hell of a thing for a Member of Congress to say, don't you think? Spending a lot of money on something that is not productive? You don't say! At least it's private money, Senator. Gosh, sorry to bother you, Di!

Next graf:

Much of the sparring centers around whether to create a government-managed health insurance program that would compete with private insurers. Obama supports the concept, dubbed the "public option," but he has been vague on details. Left-of-center activists want a powerful entity with the ability to set prices for doctors and hospitals.

76% support for a public option. But only "left-of-center activists" want it.

But it gets better. Adam Green, with whom we've worked on his "Demand a Public Option" campaign, is one of the few liberals quoted for the article, and Connolly distorts that too:

When asking me about the Progressive Change Campaign Committee's TV ads (which begin airing Monday in DC) holding Senate Dems accountable for taking millions from insurance interests and being on the verge of opposing a public option supported by 76% of Americans, Connolly would ask me ridiculous questions like, "Why are you attacking your friends? Wouldn't you agree that these Democrats are better for you on most health care issues than Republicans?"

I had to patiently explain to her that the public option is the defining issue of the health care debate -- if Senators like Baucus and Nelson aren't with us on that, they are not our friends.

Connolly listened, and then chose to dismiss silly activists who are fighting for what 76% of Americans want:

Activists say they are simply pressing for quick delivery of "true health reform," but the intraparty rift runs the risk of alienating centrist Democrats who will be needed to pass a bill.

As if passing the bill is the goal, regardless of what's in it. Notice how she wrote "Activists say" for the side of an argument representing what 76% of Americans want and simply stated the other side as truth.

But just in case you weren't sure for whom Connolly was advocating:

Connolly then asked me why progressives were picking a political fight on the public option, as opposed to another issue. I guess the fact that it's the #1 domestic issue of the day -- one that affects millions of American families -- wasn't explanation enough.

I figured she was looking for a quote summarizing the political stakes, so I thought for a moment and said, "The public option has become a proxy for the question of whether Democrats will stand on principle and represent their constituents."

I was quite proud of that answer. It summarizes what a lot of people are feeling -- the public option is the "line in the sand" issue for Democrats, something Chris has written about here on OpenLeft several times.

Connolly's take on that quote:

Green, in an interview, was hard-pressed to articulate a substantive argument for the public plan but said that it "has become a proxy for the question of Democrats who stand on principle and represent their constituents."

WHAT? Connolly asked me a question on the politics, and when I gave her an answer on that, she said I didn't answer on the substance?

The Washington Post disinforming the public once again. You can email Ceci Connolly to give her feedback at connollyc@washpost.com or tweet her at @postdailydose.

I do think it's rather silly for the Democratic Party to pledge money and support for (D) Arlen Specter to run in 2010, especially when it involves the Employee Free Choice Act and his career was hanging by a thread. I thoroughly enjoyed yesterday's coverage of the Republicans spinning in circles trying to come up some kind of coherent response to Specter's defection. If you watched FOX News at all they acted like spoiled little children who didn't get their candy as they lined up Bush thug after Bush thug to refute him starting with Karl Rove, Ari Fleischer and so on. They literally were dumbstruck by the fact that he left the GOP behind. A bigger problem I have is that Specter will be given a huge megaphone by the Villagers to voice his "independence" and denounce any policy he so chooses whenever he wants without a second thought about it. He said over and over again that John Kennedy believed the party can ask too much of you. He'll have more power as a new Democratic politician than he ever did as a Republican. As Digby says:

I confess that I'm more than a little bit irked that the Democratic Party has already pledged to support Specter against a primary challenger. It's fundamentally undemocratic, not to mention dumb. Specter now has carte blanche to remain an incoherent obstructionist for the next two years when they could have at least let us pull him to the left with a primary challenge.

My pal Adam Green has a good idea.

On the very day Arlen Specter became a Democrat, he lamented that not enough right-wing Bush judges got confirmed, he opposed workers' right to organize, and he compared himself to Joe Lieberman. The DSCC and Pennsylvania Democratic Party will be supporting Specter in the primary. If there is a potential progressive challenger to Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania, they are probably scratching their head right now asking, "Would I have any chance at all if I ran, or is the fix in?" What can progressives to do create an environment where this person feels they can run?

Continue reading »

Jim Tedisco finally conceded and it's official. The GOP's ship has sunk completely.

GOP congressional candidate Jim Tedisco has conceded the congressional race in the 20th district. Tedisco moments ago called Democrat Scott Murphy to concede and Murphy has declared victory.

Murphy will be issuing a press release shortly, and will organize a press event with volunteers tomorrow in Glens Falls. The location has not yet been determined.

Here's the DCCC's remarks:

“In trying to win the NY-20 special election, the RNC, NRCC, and their Republican allies went all in on the losing gamble that voters would prefer their ‘just say no’ approach to President Obama’s bold plans to get the economy back on track.

“Scott Murphy’s victory in this district where Republicans outnumber Democrats by more than 70,000 represents a rejection of the obstructionist agenda and scare tactics that have become the hallmark of House Republicans.

This race should never have been close, but to think Murphy beat Tedisco in a mostly Republican district is stunning. He was up by over 20 points before they turned into the Limbaugh National Committee and Michael Steele and the GOP started blocking everything President Obama tried to do. Don't forget, there were ads there targeted at Limbaugh and they did not disappoint. As for Steele, has the Death Watch begun? I wrote this a little while ago.

The latest word on the street is that if he fails to deliver NY-20, a Republican district, he will be ousted, but Tedisco has a solid lead in the polls.

According to multiple former high-level RNC staffers familiar with the dynamics involved, Steele is unlikely to survive in the post if favored Republican Jim Tedisco loses his open-seat race to Democrat Scott Murphy. The special election, scheduled for March 31, is to fill a vacancy left when Kirsten Gillibrand took Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat. If Tedisco loses, the ex-staffers said, “Steele is done.” Completely, definitively?

In all likelihood, NY-20 will turn Republican no matter who had won the RNC job, but that won't give Steele a reprieve for very long.

If Tedisco had won, Republicans and the media would be screaming that Obama's leadership caused the win for him and that the Democratic Party is in BIG trouble. The media would have done segment after segment asking the question, Is President Obama's agenda in trouble? And then he would have had to defend himself over and over again. Let's see how it plays out in the media.

And now for the some comedy musings of Rep. Pete Sessions:

Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said that although Tedisco came up short that his message of fiscal discipline provided GOPers a blueprint on which to run next year.

"Since Election Day, we continue to hear the growing chorus of frustrated and concerned citizens who demand more from their government than profligate spending and mountains of debt that will be paid for in higher taxes by our children and grandchildren," said Sessions. "Although Jim was unsuccessful in his hope to change Washington, he has shed light on our Party's efforts to win back the majority in the House."

Chris Cillizza gives a mild response to the outcome, but does say:

As we have said before, the closeness of the result makes it tough to draw too many national conclusions from this race. One thing is for sure: this is an opportunity lost for Republicans.

With the Teabaggers leading the way, Tedisco never had a chance.

Continue reading »