Powered by TypePad

« Big Government Springs Into Action | Main | Bloom Boxes »

February 23, 2010



Off topic, but I would like some help from people on this website with an issue.

One of my co-workers is complaining that the Republicans are being disruptive by filibustering "everything". He does not believe that Democrats ever poisoned the well in congress when Republicans had the majority. Are there any studies showing the number of filibusters, or threatened filibusters by year over the last 30 years?



DGS--remind him it took eleven votes before the new Homeland security agency was created post 9/11 because the Dems were insisting those workers be unionized--i.e, impossible to transfer, reassign or fire.


--Are there any studies showing the number of filibusters, or threatened filibusters by year over the last 30 years?--

Don't have time to look, but I might suggest you tell your co-worker that damned straight they're disrupting all this commie schlock and more power to them.

When a government takeover is the question, the party of no is the answer.


The Democrats pioneered the use of the filibuster for judicial nominees. Remind your co-worker about the "Gang of 14" and the threat to use the "nuclear option" to stop the practice.

The filibuster is always hated by a party that has more than 50 and less than 60 votes. Republicans hopefully will hate it next year.


As Michael Barone says all process arguments are bunk.

Captain Hate

DGS, up until the Massachusetts special election the Donkeycrats had a filibuster-proof majority, so the Repubs could only be so "disruptive".

Cecil Turner

Yeah that'll rally 'em.

Sorry TM, but I can't support this post. My favorite short French guy quote comes to mind: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

[Okay, I know I'm not supposed to call Dems "enemies" . . . even though they do it. Sorry.]

Luckily, they're unlikely to listen.


so far, the Republicans have carried out zero, repeat, zero filibusters under President Obama. As Captain Hate points out, until 2 weeks ago they had a filibuster proof majority and there have been none since that event.

My take on the health care bill as Charge of the Light Brigade. LUN.

Jim Glass

The odds fo getting Obamacare via "reconciliation": not so good -- the "three Hs", Hitler, Hoyer and Hennessey all agree.


How reconciliation works (via The New Republic, a pro-reform site):

the problems with reconciliation are legion...

of particular importance to a massive and open-ended bill like health care, the Senate’s PAYGO rule requires 60 votes for any provision that would increase the deficit by more than $5 billion in any ten-year period going all the way out to the year 2059. (You read that correctly: 2059.)...

in the Senate the authors of the Budget Act who drafted this provision back in 1974 neglected to limit the number of amendments that can be offered. This leads to perhaps the Senate’s most stupefying activity (in a chamber chock full of stupefying activity)--"vote-a-rama." ... senators can still offer an unlimited number of amendments ... And by "unlimited," I mean it is never less than dozens but could easily stretch into the hundreds...

reconciliation would give the minority party in the Senate a chance to force a separate roll call vote on every line of the bill...


The requirement that every single provision in a reconciliation bill have budgetary impact means that the bill cannot address regulatory issues, consumer protection issues, or items like abortion.

The open-ended limitations on deficit increases sharply curtail any additional spending in the bill and mean that most changes made by reconciliation that affect spending and revenues must expire in ten years.

And the requirement that congressional committees hold a new two-stage markup process, combined with the usual (if time-limited) floor consideration and conference processes, means that using reconciliation would occupy all of Congress’s attention [for months]..."

That's just excerpts, read the whole thing.


Ooops. Sorry Jim Glass. Thought I'd read that somewhere else. :-)


They don't have the votes for reconciliation - it's a bluff. Obama is trying to save face. What we should be betting on is when he stops talking about it.


AB Stoddard was on with the Fox All-Stars tonight and expressed sincere bewilderment at why the WH would do this. The Democrats don't appear to have the stomach for this either. Obama and his inner circle are just ideologues, plain and simple. They don't care about the national Democrat Party. They're all from Chicago for goodness sake. Look no further than Obama's kindred spirits. He's likely to only surround him with the same.

Even the media wouldn't let the WH off the hook when they said that the GOP had no plan. No only was it linked on their own web site, but a plan has been published online since last fall. It's not going to go well for him tomorrow.


Here's Charlies latest on the Lisa Jackson hearing, in the LUN, it fits with the theme
of the thread:



Narisco...talk about full denial/cya mode.


Obama and his inner circle are just ideologues, plain and simple.

Oh, now, do come on, Barack Hussein assured us that he wasn't an idealouge just a couple of short weeks ago.

Danube of Thought

Actually, DGS, the filibuster has been around for a long time (early 19th century), although it used to take a two-thirds vote for cloture. I think it got its first widespread use by Democrats in order to block civil rights legislation.

But now it only takes 60% to stop it. If you have 60 votes, you can't blame the minority party for not getting what you want.


Obama meditates


What we should be betting on is when he stops talking about it.

This the man who can talk the hind leg off a donkey, and you want us to bet on when he'll *stop* talking?

Melinda Romanoff


that's pretty good, especially the homework line.

Melinda Romanoff

Here's an eye popper, as far as some household holdings go...


There are 16 timely challenges to EPA's proposed rulemaking on AGW. This will be litigated for years with some well financed challengers against the EPA and DoJ counsel.

Carol Herman

Nancy Pelosi must have fallen on her pole vaulting stick. Hoyer must have witnessed something that made her shrink. And, he wants her chair.


Everyone thanks for the ideas so far.

If people have them I would like some direct pointers to filibuster statics by year or by Congress. He had this article showing that in the 110th Congress (2007 - 2008) there were 52 filibusters, an all time high. He then went on a rant about how Republicans are disruptive and can't "play nice". I showed him an write-up I found about the filibusters of judicial appointments, but I don't think it made any impression.

DoT - I do know about the change from 2/3rds to 60 for a filibuster and we talked about it.

Matt - A good point and I will bring it up if he continues the discussion tomorrow. However, I fear it will be like talking to a log. The thing that started the discussion when I arrived this morning was when he pointed out that Scott Brown voted to override the filibuster yesterday. We live in Ma and he was a Coakley supporter.

This guy I'm dealing with is someone who thinks that the increase in filibusters is only due to Republicans, so I need to find something showing that the numerical increase over time is either driven by Democrats (or equally split) or something like the judicial filibusters that shows the "allowed" subjects of filibusters expanded due to Democrats. I've already shown the judicial, so something additional is needed.



I've already shown the judicial, so something additional is needed.


Is it somehow wrong to oppose socialism? Does the guy need a pacifier because he isn't getting his gravy train passed?

Cecil Turner

If people have them I would like some direct pointers to filibuster statics by year or by Congress.

I don't think they exist, and in any event in recent years the threat or implied threat of a filibuster has been sufficient to remove bills from consideration. I don't remember the last time anyone actually talked at length in the Senate, so the record number of filibusters stat sounds to me like nonsense. OTOH, cloture votes are clearly on the rise.

In any event, the effective filibusters are primarily related to party control of the Senate, so for most time frames the GOP is going to be more guilty of filibusters because they have been in control less. Don't see you winning this one.

Danube of Thought

DGS, I would suggest you tell him to shove it up his ass.

Rob Crawford

I showed him an write-up I found about the filibusters of judicial appointments, but I don't think it made any impression.

And nothing will make an impression. He's made up his mind -- the article about the 110th Congress was just reaffirmation, likely from a lefty press outlet that needed to reaffirm its own beliefs.

Give up on him. He's a lost cause.

Or, at the least, do your own homework.

Rick Ballard

Gee, Rob, that's kinda harsh - can't you tell how concerned he is?


Trump ets.

The enemy is us and we have already lost. It's irrecoverable, so why retreat? We need to give 100s of billions more away and we'll be fine; except for the paining, seeing, hearing, etc.

Army of Davids

This meeting Obamamercial on the 25th. Not one doctor.

Tom Coburn needs an invite.

Paul Ryan should get one.

This meeting is more important than people think IMO. It is a political trap to give a fig-leaf of bi-partisan appearance to this legislative joke of a bill.

Till son berg

insurance and utility businesses



Danube of Thought

Coburn and Borasso, both MDs, are attending.

My concern--really--is about the "shape of the table," the issue that held up the Paris peace talks for months. The GOP cannot accept the role of schoolboys raising their hands from the floor, seeking the attention of the schoolmaster presiding from behind an elevated lectern. That way lies disaster.


Hey totally OT, but does anybody want to come to my house and help me unload the 145 cases of girl scout cookies that are out in my van in the driveway?


Cathyf, One troop here--from which we buy--has come up with a fantastic idea. You pay them and they ship the cookies to the troops so you don't have to eat them and the troop doesn't have to deliver them to you.

Frau Vorsicht!

How about the Party of Not So Fast?

From the bit of the WH schedule for Thursday I heard today, the GOP will look like tardy and disobedient school children waiting to hear what the principal is going to do *to* them. The whole thing smells of trap.I'm with DoT on *disaster* in the making.


Good morning from Dubai!

I am ashamed of myself. I meant to tour the hotel of the murdered Hamas boss and chat with the Hindu bartenders in the cocktail lounge for the real skinny and break it here as an exclusive for my fellow JOMer's. But got sidetracked. (Amazing how that happens).

Anyhow, on arrival our Filipino cabbie plodded thru awful traffic, and as I brought up the recent murder episode, he pointed to the Al Bustan Rotana hotel, scene of the crime, just across the road we were crawling down at a snail's pace. That's when my idea struck me, so after pooltime and a beverage in the glorious afternoon sun-shiney weather, my cohort and I decided to meet in the Lobby at 6 PM and undertake the Mission.

Scheme was a quick snort with dinner, then sleuthing.

This time it was a Bangladeshi cabbie, and somehow, chit chatting about the difference between Natural Disasters in Dhaka and Anchorage, got off on a long tangent about trying to explain what volcano's are to him:

"Mountain's go Boom!."

"Mountain's go boom? How mountains go boom?"

"Well uh, pressure builds up underneath and mountains go KaBoom!"

"KaBoom? Mountain's go Ka Boom? Not Boom? What is Kah Boom?..."

Many unsuccessful efforts and head-scratcher's later, we jumped out at The Irish Village, a big fun pub/restaurant area sort of near the scene of the crime, but immediately adjacent to the Dubai Tennis Stadium. Was startled to see the outdoor courtyards packed with hundreds of very pretty European females, and slowly realized that The Barclay's International Dubai Tennis Championship was ongoing that very minute, just yards from where we stood, and these obviously were "The Beautiful People."

Found an outdoor table with gorgeous scenery, and after a couple pints and world class "Eyeball Liberty" (an old Navy term for ogling!) decided screw the dead guy, you'd probably rather know where to hang out on your next visit to Dubai to watch gorgeous Tennis Groupies cavort in beautiful trendsetting smocks, in magnificent evening weather.

So, not quite the contribution of Charlie's 3 current Instalanches, nor Clarice's current headliners at Pajama's Media and AT I'll admit, but nonetheless a tough job, and somebody's got to do it.

"Mountain's go Boom."


Oh, clarice, we are doing that this year, too. The dad of one of our daisies is deploying in April. We are taking the troop to the National Guard Armory next month, and we are collecting money to buy girl scout cookies which we will ship off to them after they deploy.

Last year our council did this council-wide in coordination with the USO. I took my oldest scout (last year she was a junior in high school) and we went to "Salute the Troops" party that Soldiers Angels was throwing at our VFW. We sold 32 boxes of cookies -- and collected money to send 89 more boxes overseas! People saw our cookies and would say, "oh, I already bought some..." and then we would explain what we were doing and then the $10s and $20s -- even a $50! -- would come out to get thrown in the pot!


and then we would explain what we were doing and then the $10s and $20s -- even a $50! -- would come out to get thrown in the pot!

One of the things that makes our country great.

Jim Glass

Are there any studies showing the number of filibusters, or threatened filibusters by year over the last 30 years?

Yes, but you'll be shocked to learn that Krugman grossly misrepresented it in a recent column! Follow the link....

Dave (in MA)



Fixed your link. Thanks for the info.



Thanks for the pointers. I'll have to do an analysis, but based on a quick look at the numbers I'm not sure I'm going to overwhelmingly win this one. It may be that my best point of attack will be to point out that the Democrats took the filibuster to areas where traditionally it hadn't been used. That and ask him if he wants to get rid of it so it isn't available when Democrats are in the minority.

Cathy, You are getting your Girl Scout cookies awfully late. We have had them around here for months.

Clarice, One of my wife's best friends has shipped the GS cookies directly to troops in Iraq for years. Don't know how long this option has been offered, but it is available. Might be something worked out by individuals or maybe just some GS troops.

You are getting your Girl Scout cookies awfully late. We have had them around here for months.
GS cookies have always been a winter-early-spring fundraiser because it was pretty much a global rule that United-Way-funded organizations could not fundraise in October. We start our fall product sale (candies & nuts) on Nov 1, orders are due Nov 15, product delivered the first week of December, and it is really hard to get all your deliveries done by Christmas. Fall product sale is short and rushed.

Our cookie timeline is that we take orders the last 2-1/2 weeks of January, cookies are delivered this last week of February, order money is due the 3rd week of March, and we do cash-n-carry sales through the months of March and April. 3-1/2 months from the first day of order taking to the end of sales. If we wanted to be finished before the holiday crush and we did cookies in the fall, we'd have to start taking orders in August!


LUN a new missile defense logo?????

What's with Obama and his personal logo on everything? He is not a king. It's like he isn't even the President of the United States...he is OBAMA the great leader. A marketing strategy. A human can of Pepsi that is being peddled to us.

Rick Ballard


New Coke - he's got a nose for it.


Yeah...even better Rick. Well, I'm not buying.
I feel such a sadness for our country. Right down to my core.

It'll never go away.

Yeah, and an empty can of New Coke, too.


LAT on Dem plans to pass ObamaCare...The fix appears to be in.


Dubai has increased the number of suspects to a total of 26, but details are lacking.

And then there's a sensational story out that may or may not be related: Son of Hamas founder spied for Israel for more than a decade.

Free your mind.

I see the corner you are boxing your mind into, anduril. Even if it's shown to be Fatah, or Iran, or China, still Mossad dun it.

Rick Ballard

Cantor Disagrees


LUN WaPo article 'God gap'Impedes U.S. Foreign Policy Study Says

Add this to your list of things to keep your eye on. Many "Christian" or religious groups are just fronts for leftists. They throw in Jesus in their sentences, but are really about social justice rather than a relationship with God. Richard Cizik of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good is VERY SKETCHY.
Sorta like J Street isn't really about a good relationship with Israel....well a lot of these religious organizations aren't really about God.


I think hell is thawing a bit, Nir Rosen, is actually more sanguine on Iraq that Tom Ricks,
time to pack it in, Tom

Woof!  ::grin::

Good point and link, Rick. 2012 might be too late for some of those 18. What has Obama done for them lately?

Lizzie Obama's axe slipped in all the Gore

er, posted too fact. I meant the autonym to be 'Forty Whacks'


Alright, I really like 'too fact'.


Well reading the comments with the article maybe there is no problem. The stupid Left blows up if they hear the word religion....they don't realize that a lot of the guys quoted in the article are their allies.


Cizik is a big global warming promoting 'moderate' Janet, unlike the main evangelicals, the point is the reverse of what
they suggest; we don't give any real attention
to Salafi Islam which is the problem

The last line is great.

anduril @ 9:24. Well, to get out of my box, I read your link and I thank you for it.

Tron Johnson

I wouldn't count on House Dems killing this bill. The Senate GOP will need to pull out all of the stops during reconciliation (e.g. points of order & endless amendments). If that doesn't work we are screwed.

However the GOP should say we are now $12T in debt and the death care bill adds another $2T, there is no money to spend. I would not pass any "jobs" bill or any bill until healthcare is dead. Filibuster until the cows come home.

The joke is on us and it ain't the least bit funny.

Yoo in the WSJ pose the problem for us; ultimately, you've got to trust the executive. Two things. In retrospect, Bush was trustworthy though he and Cheney were ridiculously demonized. At present, who trusts Obama, the product of a ridiculous bit of media madness?

I almost put 'Twee' for the rhyme.

Yup, Tron, 'til they come home across the Sands of Dee the Eve of November the Two.

From a commenter who's an acquaintance.

Follow Phil Jones' lead: Stick to the science, come clean, and get rid of the twee fluff.

Michael Mann still doesn't know what hit him.

Now I think Phil Jones' coming clean is a 'modified limited hangout' carefully crafted by lawyers and PR specialists with the BBC, but he is sticking a little better to the science by admitting a lot more uncertainty than has been allowed by alarmists before in their 'settled science'; he has put the Piltdown Mann in the penalty box for misuse of a Crook'd Hockey Stick.

Danube of Thought

The first step in all of this is for the house to pass the senate bill exactly as it is, right?

If they do that, all the delaying in the world on the reconciliation process, or even its outright defeat, won't do us much good. The reconciliation process would only be incorporated to accomplish certain fixes that the house wants. But if those fixes don't occur, the president signs the bill anyway and the ordure hits the fan.


Byron York at the Washington Examiner says:
Dems just don't have the Votes.

Danube of Thought

DGS, ask that fool if he thinks the filibuster is inherently bad. If so, why has the senate had it available as a procedural device for 150 years or so?

And if not, who is entitled to say just how many or how few times it should be used? I for one have been extremely happy with the GOP uses of the device. I imagine Dems feel the same way about their own use. So what?

He made my day.

All hail Dr. David Benke, who isn't sure he's a hero.


Thomas Reed laughs from the clouds.


Jon Kyl to Hugh Hewitt last night on Senate Reps ability to impede the reconcilation vote:

HH: Now are you able to offer amendments to anything proposed for reconciliation? Are there ways to delay a reconciliation bill?

JK: Yes, you can offer amendments, but they can prevent debate on the amendments, so that, I mean, there’s only twenty hours of debate allowed, which tells you right off the bat that you’re not really thoroughly debating a subject. And ordinarily what happens is that whatever amendments, you file them, and then after the debate time has expired, you begin voting on the amendments. And you simply vote on them, seriatim. You could vote all night and all day on a list of 200 amendments, but there’s no debate on the amendments. So what kind of process is that?

I don't think the "summit" would have been scheduled and ballyhooed unless the Dem votes in House and Senate were already there. The supposed uncertainty is simply to increase the audience and to showcase "bipartisanship"...among Dems... with progs and blue dogs magnanimously bending, God Bless America, for the sake of the country. Republican impotency will be on display, which will suit Dems fine because the hc battle is very personal for them now.

Evan Bayh said in Dec. he was voting YES because he couldn't stand to see the look of satisfaction on the faces of Republican leaders if the bill failed. I think a Dem "We can't let THEM win" emotionality is the main reason ObamaCare still lives and will likely pass.


DGS--Here's the Dems in 2005 arguing that the "nuclear option" is wrong and violates the founder's intent...LOL Featuring Obama and Clinton.

Mess you gonna.

It's the blindness to their own hypocrisy which most marks the madness for me, Clarice.


Has this ever happened before?

Washington Post Article "blasts fiscal irresponsibility of new Obama health reform".


--The first step in all of this is for the house to pass the senate bill exactly as it is, right?--

I don't believe that is correct DoT.
If the house does that then the bill is sent to the WH unless congress withdraws it.
The reconciliation process is being invoked precisely because they don't have the votes or the desire in the house to pass exactly the Senate version.
So in order for the Senate to pass something palatable to a majority of the Dems in the House they need to come up with a new version which ordinarily would require another vote on cloture in the Senate but which they are attempting to avoid through the improper use of reconciliation.
Perhaps you're conflating conference and reconciliation?
I stand ready to be corrected by the many who know more on this than me.


I don't think the "summit" would have been scheduled and ballyhooed unless the Dem votes in House and Senate were already there.

People thought Obama wouldn't go to Copenhagen for the Olympic committee or the Climate treaty if he hadn't the things locked up. But they weren't locked up, were they?

Maybe along with all his other intellectual shortcomikngs, he can't count either.

Rob Crawford

Evan Bayh said in Dec. he was voting YES because he couldn't stand to see the look of satisfaction on the faces of Republican leaders if the bill failed.

But everyone tells us how bipartisan Bayh is! There's no way he can be that slimy!

He [Saul Alinsky] said, "Sure there's a lot of complexity and gray areas, and sometimes the other side has got some good points, but don't recognize them. Once you take side, accept completely the right of your side and pretend the other side has no argument going for it."

I don't think they have the votes for reconciliation - and I don't think they are even close. It's a bluff. After tomorrow they will blame the republicans and pivot.


From Jane's keyboard to God's ear.


an aside Jane...on local talk radio (N. Virginia) a caller just said they were disappointed in Scott Brown because many Tea Party participants gave money to get him elected....small government, stop spending,...they feel betrayed.


So Dems are casting about for an exit strategy to get out of their healthcare quagmire?

If there is unpleasentness to be attended to do it all at once and do it quickly. Let the House pick up the Senate version and let it die there. Obama can then go oversees and make himself look busy and the house can have more show trials of foreign automaker executives.

Danube of Thought

I defer to you, Ignatz. As you can see, I've become quite confused about this. But I'm pretty sure I saw a scenario laid out on Bret Baer yesterday in which step one was for the house to pass the existing senate bill exactly as is.

Captain Hate

But everyone tells us how bipartisan Bayh is!

Another line of carp brought to you by the MSM


Dot, last night Jon Kyl described the simultaneous two-bills two-step being contemplated:

HH: Do they [Senate Dems] have the 50 votes necessary for a reconciliation vote, Senator Kyl?

JK: I would guess that in the U.S. Senate, they could pass a reconciliation bill “fixing” the Senate bill. But I do not think that they can pass it in the House of Representatives.

HH: And can they pass a reconciliation before the House acts? I mean, is that even Constitutional?

JK: No, well, this has never been done before where you basically amend a bill before it’s a law. In other words, what could happen is I think the chief advisor to Speaker Pelosi said look, it’s a trick, but we think we can do it. And here’s what he said they would try to do. First of all, they would pass a fix up bill, a reconciliation bill to the Senate bill. They would fix the things that are wrong, in their view, with the Senate bill. Then, they would pass the Senate bill. Then, they would send over to the Senate the fix up bill, the reconciliation bill, and the Senate would pass that. Both bills would then be sent to the President, the President would sign the Senate bill first, then the reconciliation bill, which amends the Senate bill.

Kyl's many "theys" are confusing. Maybe someone could translate Kyl into a sentence or two.


I don't think the "summit" would have been scheduled and ballyhooed unless the Dem votes in House and Senate were already there.

I have the opposite reaction - what would be the need for the summit if the votes *were* there? It would have been a done deal by now. This is a last ditch PR attempt to rally the base and establish the GOP as scapegoats when it fails.

  There's a barge at Stratford.

Heh, Rich, if 'twere done, 'twere well 'twere done quickly.

Captain Hate

Porch is right; this is an attempt to razzle-dazzle the Donk holdouts and the squishy Repukes with the willing complicity of the MSM. The votes aren't presently there otherwise it would've happened.


I really liked Yoo's response in the WSJ today on Margolis dropping the ridiculous investigation Obama wouldn't let die. If only we had members of the bar like Yoo & Bybee still at Justice, instead of the bias fluff they have now.

LUN-well,nevermind, miss illiterate tried to link-but it's at
wsjonline.com-Opinion:My Gift to the Obama Presidency

Old Lurker

I saw the sequence as DoT described it too. Senate Bill first untouched and gets signed into law. Fixit Bill second passed by reconciliation then signed into law. Maybe flipping the sequence is because the House does not trust the Senate to pass the Fixit Bill.


Deb - First of all, the House would pass a fix up bill correcting the things that are wrong, in their view, with the Senate bill. Then, the House would pass the Senate bill. Then, the House would send over to the Senate the fix up bill, and the Senate would pass that. Both bills would then be sent to the President, the President would sign the Senate bill first, then the fix up bill, which amends the Senate bill.


I'm on the side of those who think if the Dems coulda they woulda by now.

Fresh Air

A pre-sequenced series of bill fixes and signings would make the whole thing even more toxic for Mediacrats. If they are going to pass it, this is calculated to do the most damage. I think they should go ahead and do it. But, by all means, take the next six months to talk about it, so all the voters, whose confidence in the economy is now at 26-year low, will be reminded what their priorities are.


Thanks for the translation, bgates.


kudos to kim, today n always



I thought one of the more offensive portions of the bill was the Calladic tax in the Senate version, which would have to be fixed at the House first anyway. That would make them even more popular back home I bet.

So where are we at in the quagmire: The House and Senate versions are too far apart for a conference reconciliation (with the threat of reconciliation don't they have to have a merged bill already-and Obama's talking points don't count). And the House doesn't have the votes to pass the Senate version.

I'm at a loss to figure out any reason that the Dems would be dragging around the carcass of Obamacare. Let the House bury it with a 300+ - 180+ loss and move on to other business. I don't get the politics (where is the moveon left going to go?) nor the process (all they are doing is making more of their caucaus sweat, while business is hunkering down until Washington gets done, and international pressures are building for the second leg of the recession [riots in Greece today]).

Danube of Thought

BGates and Kyl (per Deb) have set forth what I understand to be the plan.

Given that sequence, the risk to the house Dems is that they pass the Senate bill, then the fixup bill fails either because the GOP can obstruct it or the Senate Dems decide they're happy with what is on the president's desk. But either way the GOP and the country are screwed.

Seems to me there could be a real game of chicken going on with respect to the house passing the Senate bill. (I assume that if and when they do, it goes to the pres for signature even if no fixup bill gets passed.)

Danube of Thought

I also am at a loss to figure what the Dems political calculation may be.


So what's the new Obama bill for, then? It's not the fix-it bill, is it?



House Democrats are farther away from securing the votes to pass a government health care bill today than they have ever been. Fact.
about 1 hour ago via web

Danube of Thought

"So what's the new Obama bill for, then?"

If my understanding of what they're planning is correct, it is nothing more than a foil they can use to beat up the Repubs after they follow through with their strategy. The GOP complains; the Dems say "Obama offered to make nice, but you wouldn't budge."

The comments to this entry are closed.