Mike Lux | Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 17:39

As Chris noted, today we lost two amendment votes in the Senate Finance Committee on the public option, one offered by Sen. Rockefeller (8 ayes, 15 nays), and one by Sen. Schumer (10 ayes, 13 nays). Traditional media outlets everywhere are reporting this is a massive defeat for the public option, but I don't see it that way- in fact quite the opposite.

I have said before (most recently here) that the Senate Finance Committee was conservative, in fact the most conservative committee makeup in the Senate, and that we would be likely to lose these votes:

With numbers like this, and with the entire Democratic base mobilized intensely around the issue, you would have to be politically tone deaf as a Democrat to oppose this, but this is the Senate Finance Committee, so public option advocates are likely to lose these votes. The question, though, will be the margin. On a committee this conservative, far more conservative than the Senate as a whole, if we only get seven votes for the public option amendments, that would have to be considered a major political victory, and a sign that the public option can definitely get a majority vote on the floor.

Read the whole story

by: Chris Bowers | Tue Sep 15, 2009 at 14:16

Senator Max Baucus's draft of health care legislation appears to be set for release tomorrow night. The Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to start the "mark-up" process--debate and amendments--on September 23rd. Or, at least that is the latest deadline Baucus is floating:

Baucus (D-Mont.) told the Wall Street Journal that the bill, expected to cost $880 billion over the next decade, is "on track" for debate by the committee starting Sept. 23.

There are going to be a lot of amendments offered by both Democrats and Republicans during the mark-up process. Many of these amendments will be attempts by Democrats on the Finance Committee to improve the bill. Baucus doesn't think they will pass:

Based on the comments by several committee Democrats after a meeting Monday evening, that mark up could be a lengthy one. Baucus acknowledged that the mark-up could prove a busy one but predicted that Democrats would support the package he plans to unveil Wednesday without major changes. "I don't see any deal-breaker amendments," Baucus said. "Put it this way: It's unlikely that any amendments, which basically change the framework, will be accepted."

If there is an amendment to include a public option in the bill, it will go a long way toward clarifying the Senate whip count picture. Five of the Democrats who have been the most difficult to pin down on the public option--Max Baucus, Kent Conrad, Tom Carper, Blanche Lincoln and Bill Nelson--are on the Finance Committee. Another Democrat, Ron Wyden, has expressed that he is open to a public option, but has not firmly committed.

Read the whole story

Editors Note: This is pathetic! Please give this idiot a call!

Mary Landrieu on This Week with George Stephanopoulos defending the "need" to keep the private insurance system in place. Would somebody please ask one of these politicians just what value the industry provides to the American public? They do nothing but move money around and skim 30% off the top for doing it. And then do their best not to pay out benefits after they've got their take. Of course we know why. The amount of money pouring into campaign coffers. That and enriching Wall Street.

Jello Jay Rockefeller still is strongly in favor of having a public option and explains why he thinks it's one way to keep the insurance industries costs in check in this segment. I think we need single payer, but we're going to need to vote out about half the members of Congress for any hope of that ever happening.

Read the whole story and watch the video

by Sean Quinn @ 8:35 PM | 9.10.2009

My initial reaction to reading and then watching President Obama’s speech last night was that it was a very strong speech, one even more effectively delivered than written. There were two notable “show, don’t tell” moments that I thought were particularly helpful on the President’s behalf.

First was the high-profile, notorious Joe Wilson moment, a serious breach of decorum (in the U.S.) that served to underscore the exact point Obama had been making: we’d like to have a substantive contribution from Republicans, not the lying – his word – histrionic nihilism we’ve been seeing. Cue Joe Wilson with lying histrionics. Well done, Joe. It pissed people off, made a money-bomb for his opponent Ron Miller, and was similar to the way Dems (although certainly not Republicans) reacted to Sarah Palin’s acid floor speech at the convention on Sept 2, 2008. We saw the few Republicans who were in field offices last year motivated by Palin’s presence on the ticket but not McCain’s; we also saw many more people showing up to Obama offices in part galvanized by opposition to her sneering speech (and overall Palinosity).

Read the whole story